And that takes care of that movie.
Let's get right to it.
Marlon Brando and Vivien Leigh were both outstanding. The characters they played (Stanley and Blanche) are crazy. They both did an outstanding job at it. Kim Hunter (Stella) was also pretty good in the supporting role. Karl Malden (Mitch) wasn't bad but I don't see how he won an Oscar for that. I mean, he didn't do anything wrong but his part seemed pretty small. I thought Brando was the best out of all of them so I don't get why he didn't win. Someone must have done a pretty good job that year....
...in 1951 the Oscar goes to - Humphrey Bogart,
The African Queen. He was pretty good, too so I guess that seems about right.
Back to this movie. The plot was nothing special, but it didn't seem to matter. Normally a mediocre at best plot would be very damaging to a movie but it doesn't seem to matter here. Whatever points this lost for an unspectacular plot are very minimal. This movie was all about the acting and it was great.
Also, this movie also benefits from being shot in black and white. Blanche is almost always shown in the dark to conceal who she is and those dark shots just wouldn't be the same in color. The version I watched had yellow subtitles (in English...for an English-speaking movie) which were mildly irritating, but that won't affect the film's score since on a non-downloaded copy that wouldn't be an issue.
As a final thought, Stanley is said to be Polish and he has a fairly heavy accent. He reveals later in the movie that he's born in the USA. The actor portraying him, Marlon Brando, is also born in the United States (Nebraska) so I don't know what that accent was. Maybe he always has it or maybe it's an Eastern European one. Either way it doesn't really matter. I thought this film was pretty good.
86.5
BUP NEXT:
The Birds as part of a Hitchcock marathon on Turner Classic Movies.
_________________
Coming Soon: A better signature!