Katharine Hepburn: Dragon Seed (1944)

Heavy-handed sentiment and political messages never make for a great movie, and terms like “Important Film”, “World War II Propaganda”, and “Interesting Failure” come to mind when Dragon Seed (1944) is mentioned, but it’s no less a fascinating experiment. Based on the Pearl S. Buck novel, it’s the story of Ling-Tan (Walter Huston) and his family, the simile-and metaphor-spouting denizens of a Chinese village and the impact the Sino-Japanese War has on them.

Putting aside the whole controversy of westerners playing Asians, Kate gives an unremarkable performance even though the role of Jade was an opportunity for her to spout her independent, proto-feminist beliefs as well as a chance to publicize the Chinese war effort. The Chinese portrayed here would later be Communists and not exactly a United States ally, but that would be the case with the Soviet Union, too; it’s funny how politics work: your ally becomes your enemy and your enemy becomes…okay, you get the idea.


Still, this was 1944 and World War II was well under way. The war in China had been raging full on since 1937 (or 1931 if you count the conflict in Manchuria), when this film takes place, and China was suffering massive casualties while under siege from Imperial Japan since 1937. Hollywood tends to act years after the fact, just as they did in the production of For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943), though the republican faction in Spain had long since been vanquished by Franco’s forces. With Dragon Seed, at least the struggle continued in China and perhaps the film could bring attention to this ally in the East. There was great sympathy for China and the Soviet Union during the war, and when watching Dragon Seed it’s best to keep that context in mind. The film is interesting more for its historical context than its dramatic power. It is also regrettable that the westerners portraying Asians is a distraction, even to those of us who dwell among the anointed ones flowing over with much wisdom. Sorry, I’ve been watching Dragon Seed…

Katharine Hepburn receives top billing as Jade, the curious and free-thinking wife of Ling-Tan’s middle son Lao (Turhan Bey) and who wants to stand up to the invading Japanese. Or to be more specific it’s Katharine Hepburn playing herself in Asian-style makeup. You have to give Kate a ton of credit for trying vastly different roles; in our previous Hepburn performance review, she played a boy (in disguise). Jade longs to become educated and is interested in world events, especially the Japanese invasion. Hepburn’s first scene is at a propaganda film showing with what is probably a communist political officer narrating a newsreel of Japanese atrocities and is imploring the complacent Chinese farmers to act.

Hepburn is unremarkable in the role though she earnestly tries to become the character; but it just doesn’t work. She’s alternately coy, evasive, and downright flaky! There are some genuinely bizarre facial expressions, too which I found to be distracting. Jade is supposed to be shy in her admissions in wanting to be “of the new” and the modern and she’s full of so many deep, meaningful thoughts: “My thoughts are like a chain and one is fast to the other.” See? Jade is complex! She contains multitudes! Unfortunately, Kate delivers much of her dialogue as if she were in an opium-induced trance. I’d love to know what Hepburn did to prepare for this movie.

Dragon Seed, despite some manipulative yet effective scenes, is more a historical curiosity, one that was borne of public conscience and war aims rather than cinematic achievement. It was perhaps more important for Katharine Hepburn to be associated with this film’s purpose—the support of China—than it was to give a memorable performance. She lent her name and her presence to the project but she’s off the screen for long stretches, one as long as thirty minutes. Much of that time in the film is spent on showing the Japanese pillaging and destroying and being evil. It’s easy to rail against the depiction of the Japanese in the film, but this was after all the same campaign that brought The Rape of Nanking.

Dragon Seed airs on Turner Classic Movies June 23 @ 6am EST.

Joan Crawford was Hot in the '30s!

Indeed she was. Just a quick pic to touch base again. This is my favorite Joan Crawford photograph. We'll be back with more of the usual next week...

Golden Age Comic Strip: Steve Canyon

Okay, 1947 is a bit outside the Golden Age, but how's this for a 1940s pin up? The sketch is a preliminary drawing for the Steve Canyon comic strip, which was created by artist/writer Milton Caniff. Caniff (1907-1988), whose nickname was "The Rembrandt of the Comic Strip" because of his influential inking style, began the Steve Canyon comic strip in 1947 because he wanted complete ownership of the property. His previous creation, Terry and the Pirates, was a popular comic through the 1930s and made Caniff a household name. Caniff wrote and drew Steve Canyon for forty-one years. The strip ended with his death in 1988. However, the comics have been reprinted in multiple volumes and are widely available.

The illustration was based on Gary Cooper, whose long, lean fame served as the inspiration to the thoughtful, patriotic man of action, Steve Canyon.

Another element of the comic was Caniff's various female villains. Glamorous, dangerous, and attractive, a "Caniff Woman" like Copper Calhoun was a wondrous creation, indeed.

Katharine Hepburn: Sylvia Scarlett (1935)

Sylvia Scarlett concerns the sensitive title character (Kate) who’s saddled with a dopey father, a recent widower who also gambled away money he “borrowed” from his company. The two leave their home in France and head for England, with Sylvia disguised as “Sylvester Scarlett” to avoid capture by the authorities. They meet Cary Grant—who steals every scene he’s in—and form a traveling entertainment troupe after their initial con game doesn’t meet with goodhearted Sylvia’s approval.

Sylvia Scarlett is the semi-legendary cult movie known for two things: It’s the film where Cary Grant “discovered his Cary Grantness”, and it’s Katharine Hepburn disguising herself as a boy.

So is this a comedy or drama, or a mixture of both? Director George Cukor worked wonders with the comedy/drama mixture in both Holiday and The Philadelphia Story, but with Sylvia Scarlett even Cukor’s considerable powers can’t keep the movie from floundering, despite some fine comedic moments from Hepburn and Grant. The review here mainly concerns the film itself, as Hepburn is just fine but there’s just not that much for her to do except look androgynous.

The main problem with the film is that it never settles on a tone. It veers from melodrama to comedy and back again. I get the feeling that director George Cukor tried to blend the serious drama (of the novel?) with the more amusing antics seen between Hepburn and Grant but could never find a consistent tone. The story is promising, but takes two steps back for every one step forward. There are also some ineffective supporting actors, especially the Maudie character, played by Dennie Moore (no relation to an untalented actress from another generation, Demi Moore) who’s supposed to have a cockney accent but instead sounds like Edith Bunker; she’s just awful. The movie also boasts a rare cruddy music score by RKO stalwart Roy Webb, who was uninspired enough to spackle the film with a cloying theme that stays in your head long after the movie ends; it plays over the DVD menu, so beware.

Katharine Hepburn’s performance is her usual effective self but even her characterization loses steam when she’s not in “Sylvester Scarlett” mode! As Sylvester, she’s tough and gutsy, showing a strength that vanishes when she reverts back to being Sylvia. The ultra-feminine Sylvia is a morose crybaby, weak and pathetic and who’s never developed as well as her “boy alter ego” is.

It’s difficult not to sound like Freud when discussing this movie.

I’m not sure if Hepburn’s character differences were intended, but since the movie is an unfocused melodrama that lacks a decent script, effective editing, and a huge missed opportunity to play up the gender roles for comedic purposes. So while Hepburn is quite good in this, the movie has earned its longstanding reputation as an intriguing failure; even though it never truly delivers the dramatic and comedic potential of the gender bending that Sylvia Scarlett is (barely) remembered for.