MovieChat Forums > Portrait of Jennie (1949) Discussion > eeeeewwwww!

eeeeewwwww!

posted 12 years ago by stevezodiacxl5
39 replies | jump to latest

I'm still trying to fight down my dinner after seeing this one. High octane pretentious glurge, about as deep as unicorns with anime eyes or a Walter Keane waif.

I will say it took a while for nausea to set in. I missed the beginning so the byzantine nature of the script had me thinking it might just be something out of the ordinary for the 40's Hollywood schtick. Alas, it just got goopier and more weird. The fact that Jennifer Jones looked EXACTLY THE SAME AGE throughout all her "aging" sequences was more than confusing.

How much narration can you jam INTO a movie? This is a really dull audiobook read by Joseph Cotten. And speaking of, I was wondering why they cast Cotten as the terminally platonic artiste Eben in this thing when it called for an actor a bit lighter on his feet. Then the TCM outro pointed out that Selznick hired him because he was happily married and hence unlikely to hit on Jones, Selznick's main squeeze at the time. Now THERE'S a creepy boyfriend for ya.

Favorite bit: David Wayne closeup playing the harp and singing a droopy tune, pull back to see it's the guys hanging out together on a Friday night. "Hey, Mick, wanna come over and croon softly to me while I stare mopily into the distance? Bring your axe."

By the time everything turned green I was in the same state.

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

Thank you for the rant. I agree. Nothing really happens, it is a mood piece but the mood is - boredom. What you say about the endless narration is the one dreadful aspect I couldn't put my finger on. You are so right. It is one of the most dated contrived stilted 'classic movies' of all time. I love classic movies, even not very good classic movies but this was celluloid chloraform. One other classic everyone loves that I can't stand is 'Harvey'. But that's another post.

[–] stevezodiacxl5 12 years ago

"I love classic movies, even not very good classic movies "

While this one misses the "so bad it's good" category by a mile, it has some potential as a "so bad it's fun to rip on" candidate.

[–] stevezodiacxl5 12 years ago

Come to think, there may even be a drinking game in this one. Every time someone delivers a line in it, they are obliged to pause, stare off onto the distance, aaaaannnnnd....line.

Stop, stare, line. Take a shot.

[–] giverny98 10 years ago

Don't get me started on Harvey. There's not one good thing I can say about that movie, and I love Jimmy Stewart. I just can't stomach it.

[–] poetcomic1 10 years ago

Can you believe it was a big stage hit and a hit movie? Taste really change, occasionally for the better!

[–] aciolino 12 years ago

CONGRATULATIONS!

You, and your group, have just been awarded, the "Biggest Loser Clowns In The Universe" Award!!!

Yes, you! With your absolutely incomprehensible analysis of this film, your childish mockery, your inability to put two cohesive sentences together, but most of all for not having the 8th grade mentality to see the inherent beauty of this film!!!

CONGRATULATIONS!!!

[–] poetcomic1 12 years ago

Duh. We did not like it. We are not alone. It is considered by critics as vastly over-rated in its day.

[–] AssetsonFire 11 years ago

Congrats, your statement is simultaneously idiotic and nonsensical.

~.~
I WANT THE TRUTH! http://www.imdb.com/list/ze4EduNaQ-s/

[–] TheWanderingFish 11 years ago

It is considered by critics as vastly over-rated in its day.

[Citation needed]

I would never question or insult someone for disliking a film - there's no movie that's universally loved. I too found the film somewhat uneven - and perhaps a bit too "corny" (I hate that word) at times - though, overall, I found the whole to be significantly better than the sum of its parts.

However, the "critics now consider it vastly over-rated" bit is probably not quite true. The film, like a lot of great works, actually received a pretty mixed-to-negative reception when it first came out. Its reputation has only increased over time, amongst critics and lovers of the classic era of film.

Besides all that, even if it were true that it's not as highly regarded as it used to be - "critics now think it's overrated" would still be a pretty weak appeal to authority. Which critics? And why should we care what they think?

Once again, please don't read this as an attack on your opinion - your response to the film is just as valid as anyone else's response. I'm just questioning that one line.

I suppose on a clear day you can see the class struggle from here

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

How was this film overrated!! It was a flop in its day!

[–] Royalcourtier 9 years ago

This is a brilliant movie. If you do not appreciate it you probably lack intelligence and depth.

[–] poetcomic1 9 years ago

Many top reviwers and serious film critiques have savaged this. What you are saying if you don't agree with ME you lack intelligence and depth. I think not.

[–] vranger 9 years ago

I don't think there is any such thing as a "serious film critic" who has any idea of what a good movie is, and they only get it right by random chance. LOL

[–] aciolino 7 years ago

Losers.

[–] pan-10 11 years ago

Thank you, Aciolino. This is my most beloved movie. The fact that sub-humans find it "boring" and "eeeewwww" just enhances its otherworldy specialness.

[–] walkinginrain 11 years ago

Where are their hearts? Should stick to their Stallone movies.
Why waste all that time posting - children basically! Everyone who voted for this movie is WRONG and the children are right!!!

Such a small love. Such a little tear.

[–] HoferPM-1 10 years ago

Thank you, You are so wise ! I saw this in 1948 when I was 10 and did not understand it and was also bored, probably because I was way too young to see the beauty of this film and a love that was truly beautiful. I never miss it now when I see it on TV. I also have a copy of it !

[–] HeywoodJablomy 11 years ago

Agree with you on all points. I think this movie really sucks, and was shocked by the high rating (7.6?????????)

[–] mam13143 10 years ago

Watching it now and really have a hard time staying interested. In the beginning you wonder where it is going - at this point I no longer care. Cotten is always a boring actor, and Jones comes and goes to the point of pointlessness. If you like romance for the sake of romance then this is for you. Otherwise, not so much.

[–] jeanettert 10 years ago

When I saw your subject line, I thought you may have had a similar reaction to the movie that I did. I agree with much of what you say here, but my main problem with the movie is the first meeting of the couple. when Eben meets Jennie, it is obviously an adult woman in children's clothing talking to him while on her knees. Ew! He becomes obsessed with her. Yuck! They took a lovely, romantic notion and made it creepy. I wish it had been handled better because the movie does have some good points. I loved Ethel Barrymore and the special effects are fun but the music is too sentimental and I couldn't get over the disturbing first meeting.

[–] USAFmedicVET 10 years ago

I kept waiting for SOMETHING (anything) to happen in this movie!
It's one of those films where the credits roll and the viewer is left wondering what just happened?
The entire film from beginning to end made no sense! It made no sense why she showed up in his life, who she was, even what she 'represented' to him made no sense.
I kept thinking Ethyl Barrymore character might explain something - but NOTHING there either!
I'm a Classic Movie fan: Drama, Romance, Mystery, Film Noir, you name it, but this movie is none of those!
But I'm open to suggestions as just what did happen in this film...

"But we in it, shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few, We Band of Brothers"
~ W.S.

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

What do you mean waiting for something to happen??

The guy is being visited by a strange girl constantly out of the blue, isn't that "something??"

And that big hurricane at the end was super booooring. Jesus you people are used to watching Steven Segall movies where stuff is blowing up 90% of the time.

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

If you love old movies so much then why is your entire time spent on IMDB bashing them?? Looking at your posting history, you have nothing but horrible things to say about classic films.

Sounds to me like someone wants some attention..

And pretentious? This is coming from someone who uses words like byzantine….

She's the same age throughout the film because Jennie is a ghost, ghosts don't age.

[–] USAFmedicVET 10 years ago

@FelixtheCat50:
You obviously have me confused with someone else!
I haven't "criticized" any movie, you couldn't pay me to watch a Stallone movie - with the exception of the original 'Rocky', and I certainly never used the word 'Byzantine'!
In regards to 'Portrait of Jennie, IMO, nothing happened to explain the story, as I clearly stated in my post.

Get off your high horse!

We in it shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
~ W.S.

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

USAFmedicVET-I believe you are confused, my post was meant toward the OP, stevezodiacxl5.

Hope that clears things up.

n regards to 'Portrait of Jennie, IMO, nothing happened to explain the story, as I clearly stated in my post.

Get off your high horse!

High horse?? You're the one with the snide attitude. If nothing happened then there wouldn't be a movie, would there genius??

[–] overseer-3 10 years ago

I've loved this movie since childhood. Of course you have to be a true romantic in order to love it so deeply. I also loved Robert Nathan's novella upon which it was based. I don't find it pretentious, I don't think it's boring, I think it has a nice, gentle story of love that was perfect for Jennifer Jones and Joseph Cotton.

[–] Felixthecat34213 10 years ago

I've loved this movie since childhood. Of course you have to be a true romantic in order to love it so deeply. I also loved Robert Nathan's novella upon which it was based. I don't find it pretentious, I don't think it's boring, I think it has a nice, gentle story of love that was perfect for Jennifer Jones and Joseph Cotton.

It does have a gentle way of unravelling the story for us, doesn't it? I especially loved the use of Debussy's Nuages, Girl with the Flaxen Hair, and Arabesque.

I actually just saw it a couple years ago and I'm really not a Romance fan. I actually can't stomach the entire genre for some reason. But I liked this movie because I didn't think it was necessarily about Romance as much as it was about loneliness.

[–] hodie 10 years ago

Maybe I love this film because I loved the book as a girl.
I don't get the notion that Eban was a pervert, any more than Father Ralph was a pervert in The Thorn Birds when he was drawn to the child Meggie.
People are just so jaded and cynical now. And if it matters, I hated The Notebook.
And I love Joseph Cotten.

[–] panson1 10 years ago

Absolutely agree; it's a beautiful movie and obviously lost on a generation of cliff note, "punch in your face" "I need it spelled out" younger audiences. Only people who read books and novels could appreciate the stylization of this movie from the 1940"s. You must take into account the values and sensibilities of the time, which of course, some of these earlier posters haven't. EEEEEEWWWWW....really? Go back to your reality shows and wallow there.

[–] vranger 9 years ago

I'm a guy and not particularly a romantic, but I found the film interesting. I'm also a sucker for ghost stories, though. LOL

And yes, it is a relaxed story that requires some thought from the viewer. That sort of movie hasn't been "in" for a really long time. But that sort of movie is why I'm a fan of classic films. I enjoy having to pay attention and figure out things about a story, rather than just have it spit popcorn at me in machine-gun fashion.

Not that I don't like action films too, but I have room in my stable of interests for many sorts of movies. Having grown up watching a lot of cerebral films, I find it sad that I continually have to go back a few decades to find them, other than a rare modern exception.

What I don't understand is why people waste their time:
a) watching movies in genres they obviously know they don't like, and
b) bashing those movies in places where they know fans of the movie will discuss it

Seems a bit trollish to me ...

[–] newguyindc2001 9 years ago

This is one of the most hilarious reviews I've read on imdb.

[–] NewtonFigg 9 years ago

... Mr. Selznick and the people who worked with him on this film apparently recognized its frailties and figured to hide them with some noisy spectacles. ... Their method was to load the sound-track, whenever the make-believe gets thick, with heavy accompaniments of music, rhetoric, clatter and bang. Bosley Crowther, NY Times review, March 30, 1949.

Not much I can add to that. Nice shots of the Cloisters though.

[–] andeven 9 years ago

Can't all the knockers (sorry) on this thread understand....it's a fantasy film. It's a daft piece of hokum by Hollywood at its daftest but that doesn't mean that it's bad. Suspend your disbelief, accept that Joseph Cotton was a tad too old for the role, that the Oirish whimsy was a bit overstressed and that there were some inconsistencies and just accept it for what it is. Incidentally, if the OP was really reduced to the need to vomit, rather than to pretend to to make a rather childish point, perhaps he/she should see a doctor.

[–] RicksterC 9 years ago

Bosley Crowther also did not like Orson Welles' Falstaff (Chimes at Midnight), which says something about his inability to recognize classic cinema. No critic is perfect, and Crother was simply wrong about that movie as well as about Portrait of Jennie.

William Dieterle made some very good films, including two of my favorites The Hunchback of Notre Dame and A Midsummer's Night Dream. Portrait of Jennie is as good as or better than both of them.

[–] NewtonFigg 9 years ago

Chimes at Midnight is kind of incoherent. The whole is less than the sum of its parts. Except for the tawdry slapstick bits, the battle scene was very impressive, but seemed to have been dragged in from another movie.

[–] jeangabin1 8 years ago

I really enjoyed it, but thoroughly enjoyed your review as well!