Konterr Brilliant and touching

Srakumsatic A-maz-ing

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

bkoganbing Even with 3 Oscar nominations Lady In The Dark was by all accounts a grave disappointment for the movie going public. For one thing the film did not retain Kurt Weill's and Ira Gershwin's score save for the two primary numbers My Ship and The Saga Of Jenny. But worse than that, Gertrude Lawrence was not brought to Hollywood to make the film. Lady In The Dark more than most was a personal star vehicle and rumor has it that that particular star was furious at being left out. Listen to her recordings of those two songs I mentioned and you'll agree with me. Ginger Rogers the star in the film was ruthlessly compared with Gertrude Lawrence and not for the better. Sad because Ginger does do a decent job in the part. Lady In The Dark is about psychoanalysis and the subject is the lead character Liza Elliott successful career woman and editor of Allure Magazine. But she's in analysis now because of persistent headaches and recurring daydreams that the medical profession can't find a reason for. So she's on Dr. Barry Sullivan's couch for sessions while trying to put out her magazine.Her problem seems to be the men in her life and they include assistant editor Ray Milland, publisher Warner Baxter who just can't quite break up his marriage for her, and visiting movie star Jon Hall. So Ginger Rogers like her role model Jenny takes the whole to finally make up her mind.The strength of Lady In The Dark is the elaborate sets used for the various dream/fantasy sequences from the show. No surprise here because director Mitchell Leisen started out as a set designer. Art Direction was one of the nominations Lady In The Dark got as well as for musical scoring and color cinematography. It might have won one or two, but in 1944 Paramount was putting its big publicity guns out for Going My Way because the studio meal ticket Bing Crosby was the star.Lady In The Dark is also a great example of the gay cinema in some very repressive years. Mischa Auer plays the flamboyant fashion photographer Russell Paxton in a role Danny Kaye originated on Broadway. See how Auer effervesces over the person of Jon Hall when his film star character comes to the offices. On Broadway Kaye had the song Tschaikowsky interpolated into the score for him. It was written by his wife Sylvia Fine. Auer doesn't do that, but in every other way he repeats Kaye's characterization with I'm sure a few touches of his own.Fans of both Gertrude Lawrence and the music of Kurt Weill were disappointed then and still today.

radodge I like this movie. It is confusing and difficult, but you can't help but like it. Ginger Rogers plays a fashion magazine editor...and she finds herself having headaches and feeling dissatisfied. This makes no sense, as she has an exceptional job (especially for 1940) three suitors, and conscious and unconscious lives that are fabulously costumed. She goes to her doctor who recommends a psychiatrist...a drastic move for the time...which she promptly declines...but then does finally go to. Ginger undergoes a great deal of stress in this film,and keeping a bottle of aspirin at hand might be wise. As she makes progress with her shrink...her dream sequences become more and more lavish. The film is beautifully costumed...even clothes left lying on a chair...are fabulous. And there are HATS. HATS. Hats... mousey through military...lots of hats...and FURS...Ginger has one dress with a floor length mink skirt...lined with gold and scarlet sequins, two or three fur coats, a muff, and several other dresses trimmed with fur. Pull the shades and make certain that no one from PETA is around when you run this film. The dream sequences are the real meat of this...they are very beautiful and very surreal. In the end, of course, Ginger selects one of the men (no, not the married one) and seems to be on the road to recovery. You get the feeling that a lot got left out...and I don't know what (yet). I know Danny Kaye was 'discovered' in the Broadway show...and that he had special material. Danny was under contract to Sam Goldwyn by the time this was made...so neither he nor any of his special material made the transition into this film. This film is a visual knock out...and a restored print should be made and hi-def DVD's struck...so we can watch this from time to time. It cannot help but remain dated and politically incorrect....that is the legacy of its 1940 dateline.. but it will certainly always be stunning to look at.

claudecat I was looking forward to seeing this film, because I had heard the wonderful Weill/Gershwin songs from the Broadway version. Much to my dismay, all but one-and-a-half of the songs were cut, and the storyline is one of the top-ten most sexist I have ever seen on the screen. I'm very surprised that only one other reviewer commented on that aspect of it! Ginger plays a publishing executive who [THIS IS PROBABLY A SPOILER BUT I MUST WRITE IT] "needs" to learn that she should dress up prettier (though her costumes are by Edith Head!), and let a man take over her business, otherwise she'll continue on her downward spiral toward insanity. Seriously. Ray Milland plays a jerk of the first water; I have never forgiven him. I was glad to hear from another reviewer that the Broadway show isn't this bad, but the movie should be avoided if this sort of thing upsets you at all. If you can laugh about it, you might enjoy the colors, the wacky 40's sets, and the foolish scenes where Ginger visits her idiot of a psychiatrist.

marcslope Great score mutilated, interesting stage libretto turned into an anti-feminist tract: It seems that our heroine, a successful and independent woman, needs a man to dominate her to be happy. (The stage version had the same basic story, but the rhetoric wasn't so vehemently misogynistic.) Ginger was more than a singer-dancer -- she could act, and had an Oscar to prove it -- but here her playing is dull and unimaginative. She, the art and costume and make-up departments, and the director seem concerned with two things only: the look of Ginger, and the look of the film. She looks fine, and the gaudy production design is a Technicolor riot, if not in the best of taste. The visual splendor makes the film worth seeing, but you'll have to tune a lot of nonsense out.