Best Screenplay 1947

1927/28 through 1997
Post Reply

What were the best Original and Adapted Screenplyas of 1947?

The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer (Sidney Sheldon)
1
3%
Body and Soul (Abraham Polonsky)
2
7%
A Double Life (Ruth Gordon, Garson Kanin)
1
3%
Monsieur Verdoux (Charles Chaplin)
6
21%
Shoeshine (Sergio Amidei, Adolfo Franci, C.G. Viola, Cesare Zavvatini)
5
17%
Boomerang! (Richard Murphy)
0
No votes
Crossfire (John Paxton)
3
10%
Gentleman's Agreement (Moss Hart)
3
10%
Great Expectations (Anthony Havelock-Allan, David Lean, Ronald Neame)
7
24%
Miracle on 34th Street (George Seaton)
1
3%
 
Total votes: 29

Heksagon
Adjunct
Posts: 1229
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:39 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Heksagon »

I can only vote in Original, and it's a choice between two exceptional films, Sciuscià, one of the best films that Italian neo-realism had to offer, and Monsieur Verdoux, a film unlike anything Charlie Chaplin did before, but which is still very distinctly in Chaplin's style. I decided to go with the former.

Body and Soul and A Double Life are both respectable, but far from great, films. Body and Soul struggles to bring originality to the worn-out boxing-film genre. Admittedly, (as others have said) the clichéd storyline became over-used only later on, but considering how very simple the story is, I have my doubts about how innovative the film was even back when it was released.

A Double Life at least aims to be original and clever, but it doesn't build up the suspense as well as I'd hope. I'd be willing to forgive the somewhat silly premise if it was executed better.

I have seen Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer but I remember very little about it. But I figure I'll be better off not trying to re-watch it, as I can confidently say it's my least favorite film here in any case.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by The Original BJ »

I assumed I would find The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer trivial, but I don't think I was adequately prepared for just how dumb it would be. The set-up leads to a groan-worthy (and wholly predictable) plot, individual set pieces are gruesomely unfunny (especially the picnic sequence, and the dinner date), and much of the dialogue is of the "THAT was the punchline?" variety. I think making this a Screenplay winner was a disgraceful choice.

If it makes any sense to say this about a drama, A Double Life is kind of a one-joke movie. Although now that I think about it, I wonder if the movie might have worked BETTER as a comedy. Because the premise isn't bad, and it's easy to imagine the loony directions someone like Preston Sturges might have taken it in some kind of satire about the artistic process. But as a drama played this deadly serious, it just comes off as hysterical in the wrong ways.

It's probably not fair to fault Body and Soul for being too archetypal -- at this stage in movie history, many of the elements we find trope-ish now were fresh then. And, in general, it's a sensitively handled movie throughout, focusing far more on realistic grit than Hollywood cheese. But I can only report my honest reaction in 2016, which is that the plot just feels too square and humdrum for me to want it to win writing prizes.

My vote comes down to the remaining two movies, and I think both would make strong choices. Shoeshine is certainly the less polished piece of writing -- The Bicycle Thief, among other later neorealist efforts, feels more precise in its plotting -- but it depicts with brutal specificity the way one unfortunate circumstance can spiral out of control to lead to increasingly greater tragedy. It's a grand portrait of economic strife in postwar Italy as well as a more intimate account of the lives of two boys doomed by their environment. It's a very solid runner-up.

But I'll join the group that picked Monsieur Verdoux, for embodying the one-of-a-kind qualities that the best Original Screenplay winners should. The script is a very special blend of genres -- it's often frighteningly suspenseful, wickedly funny, and heartbreakingly tragic, yet always feels of a piece. And this is the most biting work of Chaplin's career. Although his films, even beginning with the silent shorts, always had a strong element of social critique, they were also filled with sentiment that helped the pill go down more easily. This isn't to denigrate his earlier work, much of which I like a lot, only to point out that Verdoux feels like the creation of an even more mature writer, with a bitter streak that feels way ahead of its time. Sadly, the Academy didn't give us too many opportunities to vote for Chaplin, but this provides me an enthusiastic place to mark his filmmaking career.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by The Original BJ »

Among Adapted alternates, I would certainly have included Out of the Past, and maybe Black Narcissus, though that film's strengths are clearly more visual than verbal.

Boomerang! is a solidly structured courtroom drama, but not one with much resonance beyond that. I actually saw the film within the past 2-3 years, and had to look up the plot summary online just to remind myself what it was about. It's engaging for what it is, but for me it's clearly the lesser of the two Kazan films in this lineup.

Somehow, I didn't manage to see Miracle on 34th Street until my adulthood (though I do remember seeing the '90's remake in theaters as a child), so my opinion of it isn't complicated by any sentimental childhood attachment. I think it's a charming movie, with an ending that's pretty hard to resist. But it clearly lacks the complexity or invention of something like It's a Wonderful Life, making it more a seasonal favorite rather than an all-time great, like the latter.

Gentleman's Agreement is a film with both obvious strengths and flaws. From a scripted standpoint, it's actually pretty solid as drama, with a strong narrative spine and a lot of crackling dialogue. And I do think the movie has one grabber of an idea that remains fresh even today, as it argues that Dorothy McGuire's character can still easily exhibit prejudiced behavior even when not intending to act with malice; even a lot of contemporary films that touch on discrimination are afraid to cloak bigotry in such otherwise human characters. But at the same time, it's still so clearly an "issue" movie -- I don't even think the dialogue has much subtext to it, as the characters all put into words their opinions on the exact issues the film is tackling, and so many decades later, it just doesn't have the bite I imagine it did back in 1947.

My vote comes down to the remaining two movies, and I actually did strongly consider Crossfire here. The mystery plot is pretty well-structured, a lot of interesting characters pop up along the way, and it weaves its socially relevant messages into its compact story without ever being heavy-handed about it. This is a script with the zing of film noir but the weight of a social issue drama, and even though that issue has been softened for the time (swapping out the book's critique of homophobia for the more palatable critique of anti-Semitism), it remains a powerful film about the personal and social costs of prejudice.

But there were a lot of good noirs in this era -- even in this year. However, literary adaptations which feel like vital pieces of cinema were far more rare in the 1940s, which is perhaps what pushes me toward honoring Great Expectations. Many classic lit adaptations of the time -- heck, even today -- have an embalmed quality to them, as if the screenwriter were dutifully checking off story elements rather than translating the film to a different form. But even knowing the plot already, I was completely engrossed by Lean's film, and I think the way the script streamlines Dickens's text while still making it feel rich in detail is a very admirable feat. And when compared to earlier film versions of Dickens's works -- even respected ones like David Copperfield or A Tale of Two Cities -- it sparkles even more brightly. It gets my vote.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Big Magilla »

Mister Tee wrote: The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer can stand alongside Pillow Talk as a screenplay that won an Oscar despite being the least distinguished nominee in its category. A thoroughly innocuous comedy, it sadly gives later best-selling shlockmeister Sidney Sheldon the right to call himself an Oscar winner.
So, so true.

Was Dead of Night Oscar eligible in 1947? It opened in New York at the Winter Garden in June, 1946 but there was often a disparity between New York and L.A. opening dates, especially for imported works, so it could have been. The U.S. release version featured just three of the five stories. The most famous one, The Ventriloquist's Dummy, was, of course, included. It would have been considered an adaptation as there are separate credits for "original story" and "screenplay".
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Mister Tee »

The Original BJ wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:I discussed Body and Soul in the original story thread. It’s a good film, but it’s outshone by the two remaining contenders.
For what it's worth, I think you're mis-remembering -- it wasn't a nominee in that category.
Wow, you're right. I think I must have mixed it up with talking about Champion in the '49 thread. I'll edit tomorrow.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by The Original BJ »

Mister Tee wrote:I discussed Body and Soul in the original story thread. It’s a good film, but it’s outshone by the two remaining contenders.
For what it's worth, I think you're mis-remembering -- it wasn't a nominee in that category.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Mister Tee »

Suggested additions/substitutions: Odd Man Out appears to be an original (though maybe not by the labyrinthine rules of the era), and, while the film somewhat collapses down the stretch (after Robert Newton’s appearance), for much of the way it’s a compelling piece. Dead of Night is a mess of credits – a whole lot of people are down for “original story” -- but, wherever it belongs, it’s a worthy contender for a slot.

The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer can stand alongside Pillow Talk as a screenplay that won an Oscar despite being the least distinguished nominee in its category. A thoroughly innocuous comedy, it sadly gives later best-selling shlockmeister Sidney Sheldon the right to call himself an Oscar winner.

A Double Life always seemed a bit silly to me: taking method acting way more seriously than even its most devoted practitioners would. (And, as Michael Gebert notes, rendering the whole thing pointless by casting maybe the farthest from a method actor as you could get.) I’ve never understood why this film was taken seriously (including by the directing branch).

(EDITED, THANKS TO BJ's ALERTNESS) Body and Soul contains many of what we now view as the cliches of the boxing genre, but 1) it was early enough in the cycle that some of those cliches were still rather fresh, and 2) Polonsky's fatalistic script had enough extra-genre details to give the film life beyond the ring. It’s a good film -- though I think it’s outshone by the two remaining contenders.

Shoeshine is certainly a worthy choice (one I see some people have made). It’s got a raw quality that rings even truer than The Bicycle Thief, and it’s a heartbreaking story of young friends stuck in a milieu where betrayal becomes almost inevitable. It’s a very strong movie, and in many years would be my choice.

But Monsieur Verdoux is an even more special favorite of mine – in fact, my top film of 1947. I went into it with low expectation – I’d never liked Chaplin’s films to the extent I was supposed to – but I was completely bowled over by the biting venom of Chaplin’s societal critique. Many of the plot machinations are quite clever, ranging from the very funny (everything with Martha Raye) to the surprisingly moving (the sudden decision to spare the young girl). The dialogue is eloquent, especially in Verdoux’s scathing late indictment of the modern world. And Chaplin’s clear ambivalence about Verdoux – not labeling him specifically either predator or victim – was a far more complex approach than what was offered in typical films of the era. I just think this is a knockout of a film, and it’s my easy choice for this category.

The adaptation slate is fairly strong as is, but I’ll note several solid pieces that might also have qualified: the dissection of the fading Boston Brahmin class in The Late George Apley, the seminal noir of Out of the Past, the under-your-skin-creepiness that’s Nightmare Alley, and the effective early Graham Greene in Brighton Rock.

Gentleman’s Agreement suffers the fate of all social issues movies whose time has passed (not to say anti-Semitism is erased today, but it’s no longer a too-scorching-for-the-screen topic): a tepid quality now hangs over it. But it’s certainly a decent effort, with a great many effective scenes and snappy dialogue (especially from Celeste Holm). Put it this way: if I run across the film on TCM, I don’t automatically switch the channel. But I won’t be voting for it.

I discussed Miracle on 34th Street in the original story thread, and have nothing much further to say, except that, while there it was the clear class of the group, here it competes with a decently impressive set of contenders.

Boomerang! is basically a courtroom procedural, and largely absorbing on that level. Kazan brought a freshness to the acting scenes that might not have all been there in the writing, but the script at the very least provides the sturdy skeleton that makes the film hold together. On that basis, it rates this nomination, though not the win.

Crossfire stands the test of time better than Gentleman’s Agreement, simply because the noir/whodunit-ish framework still gives narrative pleasure, even while the embedded social message has lost some of its fizz. Ryan’s character’s ugliness is still pretty brutal to watch, and his fellow soldiers are interestingly characterized: they’re repelled by Ryan’s behavior, but betraying a mate doesn’t come easy to them. A pretty engrossing effort.

But Great Expectations is no doubt the best film in this bunch, and, though much of that is due to Lean’s authentic recreation of the Dickensian England environment, no small part of the film’s success stems from the graceful way the script distills Dickens’ massive work into a clear, gripping narrative. All the characters – Magwich, Estella, Miss Havisham – emerge full-bodied, and the story, with its gothic touches (the memorable graveyard opening) and bitter romance, is as engaging for audiences even today as it was for Dickens’ readers a century and a half back. As fine an adaptation as one could hope for, and the best choice from this relatively strong slate.
Last edited by Mister Tee on Mon Jul 04, 2016 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Big Magilla »

Voted for Shoeshine and Great Expectations.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Best Screenplay 1947

Post by Big Magilla »

The poll is open.
Post Reply

Return to “The Damien Bona Memorial Oscar History Thread”