Best Picture: "You Can't Take It with You," 1938

Movie Stats:

Released 1938 (France) [Don’t ask me, that’s what IMDB says.]

American, in English

Director – Frank Capra

Stars – Jimmy Stewart, Jean Arthur, Lionel Barrymore, and a whole bunch of other people you’ll recognize if you’ve ever watched movies from the 1930s and 40s

Plot Summary:

Stenographer Alice Sycamore (Jean Arthur) works at a bank, where she falls in love with Tony Kirby (Jimmy Stewart), VP & son of the bank president. There’s just one problem: Alice comes from an eccentric, middle-class family, while Tony was born into uptight, snobby wealth. When the two families meet, will love prevail? And which family’s way of life will prove to be more meaningful? Lionel Barrymore plays Alice’s grandpa, Martin Vanderhof, the patriarch of the family.

Bad Stuff:

The central message of this movie – money isn’t everything – is extremely heavy-handed. Ironically, I’d be the last person to disagree with such a message. I feel that American culture in particular, and human culture in general, is far too obsessed with monetary wealth, to a point that is unhealthy. However, I don’t need my movies to bludgeon me over the head with their messages. A little subtlety goes a long way. I was turned off by the preachiness (I seriously rolled my eyes at some points).

There was a certain naïveté to it that grated on my nerves. Again, I’m the last person to disagree with the idea that people should get to do what they want with their lives. Go ahead and quit your 9-to-5 job to pursue your dreams, but don’t expect things to be all sunshine and puppies from there on out. And people aren’t always going to be nice to you and help you out just because you’re a good person. I know, I know, it’s just a movie, but I guess I expect my Oscar winners to contain a little more realism.

Good Stuff:

Man, was it nice to watch an Oscar winner that wasn’t a melodrama (the only other non-melodrama so far has been “It Happened One Night,” also a Capra movie). There is a lot here that’s just plain fun.

One of the subtler messages was one that I really enjoyed: that family – either the one we’re born into or the one we create – is our most valuable asset.

All of the actors had great chemistry with one another. They looked like they had a blast making this movie, and that made it more fun to watch.

This was the first of these older Oscar winners I’ve seen where I thought the varying messages (rich vs. poor, monetary success vs. happiness, etc.) would resonate with modern-day people. It’s always fascinating to me to look back and see that we’ve been talking about many of the same issues for decades (or perhaps centuries). It seems to me that it really is true: the more things change, the more they stay the same.

The Verdict:

I have a tremendous amount of respect for Frank Capra. He directed a lot of well-loved movies, including one of my all-time favorites, “Arsenic and Old Lace.” Since this movie is based on a play, and the screenplay wasn’t written by Capra, I won’t blame the heavy-handedness on him. However, it put a serious damper on my enjoyment of the film.

In this day and age, I don’t think a movie like this would even be considered for a Best Picture Oscar. I can imagine why it was beloved in its day, though. Released while the country was still deeply mired in the Great Depression, I can see why its message would have resonated with a lot of people. At a time when most people didn’t have a lot, it must have been nice to hear that it didn’t matter, that as long as you have the people you love, everything will be all right. It’s a comforting message.

I should probably note that I’ve been in an emotional cul de sac lately, really down in the dumps. It’s possible that my review would be less prickly if I were feeling better. As much as I may sound like I hated it, though, I really didn’t. It was an enjoyable piece of fluff, although not one I’m likely to ever watch again (unlike “Arsenic and Old Lace,” which I’ve seen about a billion times).

I give this movie 3 stars.