Truly Dreadful Film

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

It's good enough when a movie can impress me with an excellent performance delivered from an actor whom I didn't think had the chops to do so, now multiply that by three and you've got The Country Girl.I had only previously seen Bing Crosby in several musicals and comedies. He's never struck me as an enigmatic screen presence but serviceable none the less. Thus surprise performance # 1 in The Country Girl. Why didn't Crosby do more dramatic roles in his career? This is one of most powerful performances I've ever seen as a washed up alcoholic performer who has hit rock bottom. Like Ray Milland in The Lost Weekend and Jack Lemon in Days of Wine and Roses, Crosby's performance has helped convince me never to start drinking (or at least that would be the case since I've never had any intention of starting). Yet I would still say he's outdone by William Holden, surprise performance #2. I've found Holden to be very hit or miss as an actor, possibly relying on great directors to get a good performance out of him otherwise he comes off to me as forgettable. The jury is still out on his abilities as an actor but never less after watching The Country Girl again I can say this is my favourite performance I've seen him deliver giving so much raw energy as a driven stage producer.Finally in the triangle of surprise is Grace Kelly. Prior to watching The Country Girl I was becoming increasingly anti-Grace Kelly, questioning if she was even a very good actress. Here in this dowdy, playing against type role, my opinion of her changed. I have a rule when it comes to reviewing not to talk about Oscars as I see complaining about awards to be futile and cliché. Yet this is one exception in which I'm forced to break it due to the controversy surrounding her win. Judy Garland's role in A Star Is Born is one of my favourite film performances of all time and should have won her the Oscar that year however if The Country Girl had been released most other years I would have been more than happy to see Grace Kelly get the Oscar. Without delving into a mindless praise fest I really was left flabbergasted by this trio of performers aided with the help of the film's unforgettable sense of atmosphere as Grace Kelly puts best herself: "There's nothing quite so mysterious and silent as a dark theatre, a night without a star."

Years ago, Frank Elgin (Bing Crosby) was a successful singer and actor, but a tragedy turned him in to an alcoholic loser and his wife, Georgie (Grace Kelly), into a bitter shrew. A young Broadway director (William Holden) wants Frank to star in his new show, but Frank's drinking and his uncooperative wife may spell disaster. This stark and touching drama has both Bing and Grace playing against type and they're both wonderful. Bing plays the weak has-been with utter sincerity and Grace drabs it up to play the nagging wife. She won Best Actress and he was nominated for Best Actor. The two reunited two years later in "High Society," playing carefree socialites, showing their versatility. William Holden is excellent as the demanding director who pulls a good performance out of Frank and shakes up the angry Georgie. The script draws on the themes of guilt, alcoholism, and redemption and the black and white photography emphasizes Frank and Georgie's misery. It's a very good and thought-provoking film.

This film is about a down-and-out performer (Bing Crosby) who has sunk into alcoholism and self-pity. However, out of the blue, he's received a huge break--to star in a Broadway show! Can the guy hold it together and rise to the occasion or will be return to the bottle and despair?! Although this idea is interesting, what is truly original is what happens with Crosby--how he copes with all this responsibility. Again and again, he manages to make it appear as if his wife (Grace Kelly) is a domineering woman who is trying to push him to fall on his face--when actually she is doing the opposite. She tries to help him from falling and, behind her back, he manipulates things so that the producer (William Holden) thinks SHE is the problem. Like many alcoholics, he has a great need to appear confident and capable AND to make excuses for when he does hit the bottle once again--'it's all her fault' is his excuse waiting to happen! Eventually, Crosby's manipulations result in Holden confronting Kelly for her supposedly undermining Crosby! He wants her to leave and return home so that Crosby will supposedly be free from distractions and her wicked clutches! Simply put, he's an alcoholic--a manipulative and insincere drunk. Now when I saw the film as a kid, I thought Kelly was a nice and innocent woman who meant well. Now, however, I see that by sticking with him, Kelly plays an enabler--a well-intentioned one but an enabler nevertheless. This, too, is interesting--creating a nice portrait of a drunk AND his partner.The film is original and cleverly written--plus it's one of the better films about addiction from this era. Grace Kelly received the Oscar for Best Actress for this performance. I used to think this was unmerited, though in seeing the film again I see what an exceptional job she did. Plus 1955 was a particularly weak year and she was better than the competition. Crosby was also nominated for an Oscar but considering Brando's performance in "On the Waterfront", it's not surprising he lost--though this is perhaps Crosby's greatest acting of his long career. Now this does not mean the film was perfect or problem-free. I cannot understand the casting as Kelly just seemed too young and glamorous (even when they gave her a very subdued makeup job)--I would have picked someone older considering Kelly was 51 and Kelly was 25! Although the part was to have been played by someone younger--perhaps in her mid-30s or older would have worked better. Otherwise, though, it's a very good film nevertheless. The other problem was the inexplicable relationship that sprang up between Holden and Kelly near the end....where the heck did THAT come from?!?! (yes, I know I ended this sentence with a preposition...deal with it. After 9600+ reviews I think I am entitled to one dangling preposition.)

Seaton's film doesn't hold up as well on repeated viewings. I first watched this last year and was very impressed with the film, and its three central performances from Bing Crosby, Grace Kelly (who controversially won the Oscar over Judy Garland) and William Holden. While I still remain impressed by the engaging performances, I find much of what surrounds the three stars to be flat. The musical numbers in the play-within-a-film, "The Land Around Us" are very ordinary. No wonder Crosby's Frank Elgin receives bad reviews. Seaton doesn't really try to open up the film, adapted from the award-winning Clifford Odets play, and the result is a visually tired film. On subsequent viewings the Odets dialogue is still powerful but several exchanges feel incredibly fake. When Grace Kelly says "The theatre is mysterious" it goes against the grain of what we have already seen of her character. I seem to be bagging the film quite a lot, but I do enjoy it. Holden is excellent and gives the best performance of the film. Crosby is also very good, and Kelly, for all the criticism over her winning the Oscar gong over Garland, does a very admirable job with a difficult character. Watch it for the three stars.