I remember seeing both the Steve Martin version of FATHER OF THE BRIDE and its sequel in the movie theaters back when they came out, and I liked both of them. I was always vaguely aware they were remakes of older movies but never got around to seeing the 1950 original until now.
Spencer Tracy stars as the titular FATHER and Elizabeth Taylor is on hand as the titular BRIDE. It's quite a star-studded combination. The story of course involves a put-upon father struggling with the idea of giving up his little girl who has decided to get married. His wife (Joan Bennett) takes to wedding planning easily, but obstacles stand in the way, like money, guest lists, future in-laws, etc.
The movie's cute and funny but I couldn't help getting preoccupied with just how rich and privileged these people are. It doesn't ultimately matter to the plot, I guess, and it's a fairly common trait of old Hollywood movies, and I guess even current ones, to feature characters and families and homes that stand in as wish fulfillment for the viewers. I guess the idea is it's more fun to see big fancy houses than working class ones. Now that I'm thinking it over I guess one thing that separates this movie from other similar ones is that the family's wealth is incidental to the plot. Somehow that makes it stick out more.
So, the drama (even though it's comedic) is mitigated, I think, because these people are suffering from first world problems. Ultimately who cares if a rich lawyer is awake at night worrying about his daughter's impending marriage to a guy who seems perfectly fine?
This stuff didn't bug me in the Steve Martin version. I don't know if it's because I was younger when I saw the movie or what. Probably.
Monday, February 20, 2017
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment