0:00

At Kroger, we want our fresh produce

0:02

to meet your expectations. To

0:04

make sure a bad apple won't spoil the

0:06

whole bunch, we do up to a 27-point

0:09

inspection on our fruits and veggies. We

0:11

check for things like sunburns and scarring,

0:13

making sure you only get the crunchiest apples.

0:16

In fact, only the best produce like juicy

0:18

pears, zesty oranges, and crisp

0:21

carrots reach our shelves. Because when it

0:23

comes to fresh, our higher standards

0:25

mean fresher produce. Kroger,

0:27

fresh for everyone.

0:42

I'm Max Baril and this is Classic

0:45

Movie Musts, where every week we

0:47

break down a classic movie while looking

0:49

to provide artistic insight and historical

0:52

context.

0:53

At the very least, We'll talk about what makes

0:55

these movies classics. Classic

0:58

movie must releases every Friday, ready

1:00

to complement your weekend movie viewing plans.

1:03

Thank

1:03

you for joining me this week as we discuss

1:06

Sullivan's Travels. In

1:08

this episode, in our feature presentation, Ted

1:10

Walsh joins me to help break

1:13

down the lofty goals of

1:15

this film. But first, let's

1:17

get into our opening credits.

1:27

Our film this week is Sullivan's Travels,

1:30

which was directed by Preston Sturgis

1:32

and was released in 1941.

1:35

Sullivan's Travels stars Joel McRae

1:37

and Veronica Lake.

1:40

L. Sullivan is a popular young

1:42

Hollywood director of profitable

1:45

but shallow comedies. Dissatisfied

1:48

with making such films as Ants in

1:50

Your Plants, he tells his

1:52

studio boss, Mr. Le Brand that

1:54

he wants his next project to be a serious

1:57

exploration of the plight of the downtrodden.

2:00

based

2:00

on the novel Oh Brother Where Art

2:02

Thou? Lebrand wants him

2:04

to direct another lucrative comedy instead,

2:07

but Sullivan refuses. He wants

2:09

to no trouble first hand and

2:11

plans to travel as a tramp so he

2:13

can make a film that truly depicts the

2:15

sorrows of humanity.

2:17

His British butler and valet both

2:19

openly question the wisdom of his plan.

2:22

Sullivan dresses as a hobo

2:25

and takes to the road, followed by

2:27

a staff in a bus imposed on him

2:29

for his own safety by the studio.

2:31

Neither party is happy with the arrangement and

2:34

Sullivan, after trying to lose the bus in

2:36

a fast-paced car chase, eventually

2:38

persuades his guardians to leave him alone

2:41

and arranges to rendezvous with them later

2:43

in Las Vegas.

2:44

However, he soon returns to Los Angeles.

2:47

There, in a diner, Sullivan meets a

2:49

struggling young actress who has failed to make it in

2:52

Hollywood and is about to give it up and

2:54

go home.

2:55

She believes he is a penniless tramp and

2:57

buys him breakfast.

2:59

In return for her kindness, Sullivan retrieves

3:01

his car from his estate and gives her a ride.

3:04

He neglects to tell his servants that he has returned,

3:06

however, so they report the car as

3:08

stolen.

3:09

Sullivan and the girl are briefly apprehended

3:12

by police, but let free.

3:14

He and the girl return to his palatial

3:16

mansion.

3:17

After seeing how wealthy he is, the girl shoves

3:19

him into a swimming pool for deceiving her. However,

3:22

when he insists on ongoing out again, she goes

3:25

with him over his objections, disguised

3:27

as a boy. This time, Sullivan

3:29

succeeds. After riding in a cattle

3:32

car, eating in soup kitchens, and

3:34

sleeping in homeless shelters with the girl,

3:36

where someone steals his shoes, Sullivan

3:39

finally decides he has had enough. His

3:41

experiment is publicized by the studio

3:44

as a huge success. The girl wants

3:46

to stay with him, but Sullivan reveals to

3:48

her that he is married, lovelessly to

3:50

someone else, having entered into the

3:52

union solely to reduce his income taxes.

3:55

Worse, the plan has backfired, with

3:57

Sullivan's joint returns higher than when he was

3:59

single. and his wife having an affair with

4:01

his business manager.

4:03

Sullivan decided to thank the homeless for

4:05

the insights he gained by handing out $5 bills,

4:08

but is knocked unconscious,

4:11

has his money stolen, and is stuffed

4:13

into a box car leaving the city by

4:15

the assailant. The

4:16

thief then gets run over by another train,

4:19

sending $5 bills raining everywhere.

4:22

When the mangled body is found, a

4:24

special ID card his valet had

4:26

sewn into Sullivan's shoes is discovered

4:28

in the soul of the pair that the man

4:31

has on, identifying him as Sullivan.

4:34

Great woe in Hollywood follows.

4:37

Meanwhile, Sullivan wakes up in another

4:39

city with no memory of who he is

4:41

or how he got there.

4:43

A yard bull finds him and it costs

4:45

him for illegally entering the rail yard. In

4:47

his confused state, Sullivan hits

4:49

the man with a rock, badly injuring

4:52

him and earning a six-year sentence of hard

4:54

labor in a work camp. He

4:56

gradually regains his memory.

4:58

In the camp, he attends a showing of Walt

5:01

Disney's 1934 playful

5:03

Pluto cartoon, a rare treat

5:05

for the prisoners, and is surprised to find

5:07

himself laughing along with them.

5:10

Unable to convince anybody that he is Sullivan

5:13

or communicate with the outside world, he

5:15

comes up with a solution.

5:16

After learning of his unsolved killing on the

5:19

the front page of an old newspaper, he

5:21

confesses to being the murderer.

5:23

When his picture makes the front page, he is recognized

5:25

by friends and released. His widow

5:27

has already married his business manager, meaning

5:30

she'll have to give him a divorce or be charged with bigamy.

5:33

Sullivan's boss finally tells him he can make, oh

5:36

brother where art thou. Sullivan says that

5:38

he has changed his mind. He wants to continue

5:40

making comedies, having learned the value

5:42

they contribute to society, especially

5:45

to those who have too little else to

5:47

bring them joy.

5:49

Sullivan's Travels had a budget of $678,000 and it brought

5:51

in $1.2 million at the box office.

5:56

adjusted for inflation. That

5:58

is a budget of 12.

6:00

$12.6 million and a box

6:02

office haul of $22.3 million.

6:05

Now, let's get into our feature

6:07

presentation.

6:09

At Kroger, we want our fresh produce

6:11

to meet your expectations. To

6:13

make sure a bad apple won't spoil the

6:15

whole bunch, we do up to a 27 point

6:18

inspection on our fruits and veggies. We

6:20

check for things like sunburns and scarring,

6:22

making sure you only get the crunchiest apples.

6:25

In fact, only the best produce like juicy

6:27

pears, Zesty oranges and crisp

6:29

carrots reach our shelves, because when it

6:31

comes to fresh, our higher standards

6:34

mean fresher produce.

6:36

Kroger, fresh for everyone.

6:39

["The Joining

6:45

us for today's feature presentation,

6:48

none other than Ted Walsh. Ted, how are

6:50

you today? I am very well. It's a beautiful

6:52

day and it's good to be with you, Max. It's

6:54

good to be with you. we are talking about

6:57

Sullivan's travels. And

6:59

I'm very much looking forward to this conversation

7:02

because, gosh,

7:04

this movie is just filled with contradictions

7:07

and oppositions.

7:09

It's a complex movie

7:11

from a man, Preston

7:13

Sturgis,

7:15

a genius of his time. But

7:20

complexity is the word we usually

7:22

think of we usually think of when we think

7:24

of Preston Sturgis. I'm not quite sure that's the

7:27

pinpoint I would use. What about you?

7:29

And in the instance of this

7:31

movie, Max, a reevaluation

7:34

upon reevaluation upon reevaluation, I

7:38

gathered that when the movie came out, it

7:40

was mixed success critically and popularly,

7:43

and over time has been proclaimed one

7:46

of the masterpieces in film history.

7:49

And I would like to say at the

7:51

current moment, at least in my world,

7:53

has somewhat

7:56

landed a little below

7:58

that in my own world. is my

8:00

way of looking at it. So we're

8:03

getting a chance to look

8:05

at this movie with, I hope,

8:07

fresh eyes. I got to look at it with fresh eyes

8:09

thanks to your invitation

8:12

for me to join you in this conversation

8:15

because I

8:16

knew I liked the movie a lot, but

8:19

I hadn't looked at it in

8:21

some time. I just was

8:23

counting on my memories of it. And

8:26

returning to it,

8:27

I realized that, A, my memories weren't always accurate,

8:31

and that my enthusiasm

8:33

was sometimes moderated on

8:35

the one hand, and then on the other hand,

8:38

sometimes accelerated. So I have

8:40

some very nuanced feelings about

8:42

this film. I think I come down in a similar

8:45

place as you do. I

8:47

think this

8:48

is gonna be an episode where we talk a lot

8:50

about the things that this film does very well,

8:53

the things it tries to do, and some

8:55

of the areas where

8:57

At least we can have a conversation of does it miss

8:59

the mark? Because I'm not entirely convinced

9:02

one way or the other. Let me put

9:04

it this way. This is a film about

9:07

Hollywood struggling,

9:09

you know, a Hollywood mainstream director struggling

9:12

with, you know, the desire

9:15

or the compulsion to make

9:17

popular mass media and

9:20

then this desire to

9:22

make a message driven

9:25

film.

9:26

And then obviously, this

9:28

film is doing

9:30

all of those things. It is walking

9:33

that same line that the story is trying

9:35

to figure out. Preston Sturgis,

9:37

a director associated with lighthearted comedies,

9:40

is making both a comedy and a

9:42

message-driven film. And I

9:45

couldn't help but feel watching this movie that more

9:48

so than anything else I could think of, is

9:50

this a movie

9:52

that is both trying to have its cake

9:54

and eat it too? But

9:56

the question I have for you, Ted, is

9:58

does it manage to suck? somehow

10:00

just managed to have its cake and

10:02

eat it too or not quite. And

10:05

I'm open to being convinced. That,

10:08

you put your finger on the question.

10:11

I'm going to come down with, and I may feel

10:14

different about this by the end of our conversation,

10:17

I'm going to come down with

10:20

that it is so

10:22

near amiss that it succeeds.

10:25

And I know that sounds like I'm trying to have my cake

10:27

and eat it too, but just live with that. The

10:30

other thing is, and I think this is where

10:32

we need to go to

10:35

clearly, I assume, what inspired

10:37

the title, and that is that book

10:39

that so many of us had to read in

10:42

college, namely Gulliver's Travels.

10:45

And the primary

10:46

purpose of Gulliver's Travels was wicked

10:49

satire. Well, is

10:52

the purpose of this film satiric?

10:55

Is it meditative,

10:57

as in I'm a director and I'm trying to figure

10:59

out what I'm doing with my life, when

11:02

you get titles like Ants in Your Plants,

11:05

which is very funny and

11:07

at the same time a very cheap joke,

11:12

you sense, I sense that Sturgis

11:15

is actually, as he is working

11:18

on and making this movie trying himself

11:21

to define the terms of his

11:23

intentions. And I

11:26

don't think it's, I think it's way too easy

11:28

and I think it's wrong to say this

11:30

movie is meant to be a satiric treatment

11:33

of Hollywood. I do not think that. I

11:35

do think it is meant to be

11:38

Hollywood asking itself

11:41

some questions. And

11:44

the question that he asks is a very

11:46

important question. Are

11:48

we here to

11:50

really educate and send messages

11:52

and tell the truth about things or are

11:54

we here merely to entertain? Or

11:57

can we do both at the same time?

12:00

And we know from all of Sturgis'

12:02

films that he wants to do both at the same

12:04

time, and so he's talking about that

12:07

struggle.

12:08

At the same time, he's upping the stakes

12:11

in this movie. This movie tries

12:14

to be thoughtful

12:16

in a way, that's

12:17

not the best word, but I use it, in

12:19

a way that some of his other movies perhaps are

12:22

not quite so intellectually

12:25

interesting. And so I enjoyed

12:27

the movie this time thinking of

12:30

Sturgis

12:31

trying to figure out the game as

12:33

he's playing the game. It feels that way.

12:36

It totally feels that way that he's

12:38

grappling with these issues every day on

12:40

set. Almost that

12:42

you feel,

12:45

did he pivot at various points

12:47

making the film and say, well, actually I wanna go in this

12:49

new direction because I mean, tonally

12:52

obviously the film is takes some

12:55

hard turns and then turns

12:57

back again equally hard. There's

13:01

no question when you watch the beginning of this movie,

13:05

you think, yeah, okay, this is

13:07

sturges, poking fun at Hollywood,

13:09

having fun with satire, and

13:12

it's true to that mold

13:15

and it's charming.

13:17

And then, obviously,

13:20

when we reach the point in the film where things get very

13:22

dark, you say, okay, well that was clearly,

13:25

that's a change in expectations.

13:28

But even those early parts, when we just wanna look at the

13:30

sat, or the humorous

13:33

part at the beginning, and you

13:35

have some of Sturgis

13:37

at his very best, and it's when people

13:40

are

13:41

talking, for lack

13:43

of a better word, but I mean, those conversations

13:45

coming out of that initial screening, that

13:47

little, the joke that starts off the

13:50

film that we are at the end right at the very

13:52

beginning. And then we enter the

13:54

studio heads office and we're having this conversation

13:56

about what the movie's gonna be, but with a little sex

13:59

in it, but I don't wanna. stress

14:00

it, but a little sex. You

14:03

have those kind of scenes or you'll

14:05

have these conversations

14:08

with the butlers or whatever, and you say,

14:10

God, this is, he's just firing

14:12

on all cylinders.

14:14

And then at the same time, I don't know how you feel

14:16

about it, you'll have these prolonged comedic

14:19

sequences like the bus chase

14:21

and scenes

14:22

that, or the

14:24

pool sequence. I

14:26

mean, those two really jump out at me, these

14:29

very slapstick scenes that

14:31

really exhaust their humor in

14:34

the

14:35

first time the joke is made.

14:40

And then very quickly tire

14:42

themselves out. And you say,

14:44

well, hmm, is Sturgis

14:46

missing the mark here? Or at

14:48

the same time, is he already planting

14:51

the seed of

14:53

slapstick comedy can only take you

14:55

so far? That's a great

14:58

thought. And you've

15:00

actually helped me think

15:04

more fully about those moments. Because

15:08

as you intimate, and

15:10

let me go just one step further, this

15:14

film, you are in the world

15:16

of the poor. He

15:19

has entered that world. And just as soon

15:22

as you start to inhabit it in some interesting

15:24

way, We then detour

15:26

back to Hollywood or back to the good

15:28

life or back to the land

15:31

yacht in Las Vegas

15:33

parked conveniently near the

15:36

little donut stand, et

15:38

cetera, et cetera. And you go, wait

15:40

a minute, are you having

15:43

trouble, you Preston Sergis, are you having trouble

15:46

living in one world too long that

15:48

you feel you have to go back? Or, and

15:50

let's, okay, let's give him the maximum

15:53

praise and credit and assume he

15:56

knows exactly what he's doing. He

15:58

is doing precise.

16:00

this. This

16:03

is as long as I know how at this moment

16:06

to live in that world I need

16:08

to go back into my

16:10

comfortable world to mull

16:13

some things over again before I re-enter.

16:17

I think I'm right about this but you correct me

16:19

if I'm wrong. That each time

16:21

we go into the world

16:24

that he is inhabiting as a fraudulent

16:26

character, the

16:28

stakes get a little bit higher each time.

16:31

I think it's safe

16:33

to say, because the darkest moment,

16:35

which we know occurs very

16:37

near the end of the film in terms

16:40

of that, the way it's shot,

16:42

everything about it gets very, very scary.

16:45

Speaking by the way, Max, of the way it gets shot,

16:48

do you feel that there is any

16:51

intentional comment being

16:53

made that that whole

16:56

first sequence after the end at

16:58

the beginning

17:00

is shot without a cut? It is

17:02

one very long take.

17:05

Yes, it is.

17:07

Do you think that that is saying,

17:09

okay, I love the long

17:12

take, but I'm also gonna

17:14

enter the jagged world of montage

17:19

when I need to. Do you think, am I

17:21

going too far there? No, well, but I think that's,

17:24

again, it speaks to the core

17:26

of kind of the oppositions of

17:28

this movie where it leaves you feeling

17:31

somewhat unsettled, where you have a long

17:34

take, this pristine, smooth

17:38

take. With a little sex in it. With a little sex

17:40

in it, and some great dialogue,

17:42

and you say, okay, like this feels

17:45

right.

17:46

It feels very good. And then

17:48

yeah, but then we can enter into these

17:50

worlds of very jagged montage. And

17:55

it's not, I don't know if I would go as far as to

17:57

say as far as to say that. Sturgis

18:01

is associating a style of cinema

18:04

to a specific style, you know,

18:06

story as much as he's, you

18:08

know, creating these, certainly

18:11

that these two worlds are different and

18:14

as polar opposite

18:16

as they can be, but

18:17

also just this, almost

18:20

this sense of bringing different

18:23

styles to bear just to create

18:25

more, you know, unease in

18:27

the viewer. Yeah and I think

18:29

we would definitely agree, not

18:32

that we're disagreeing about anything here we're agreeing, but

18:35

that that scene, the one that has done

18:37

in one long take, is

18:39

quintessential Sturgis

18:42

at his best. The dialogue

18:44

is snappy, it's funny, you

18:47

know you are in the world

18:49

that you pay for when you go to a Preston Sturgis

18:51

movie. It's almost as good

18:53

as his masterpiece the Lady Eve and

18:55

I think you and I would agree that that is

18:58

hands down

18:59

one of the great films ever made period Amen

19:02

but you win this world and

19:04

the actor whose name I always forget who never takes

19:06

the cigar out of his mouth who just keeps

19:09

talking through his cigar those

19:11

actors are

19:13

brilliant but they are given brilliant dialogue

19:15

and it's like Sturgis saying okay

19:18

this is what I really do well,

19:21

now let's take a journey. Yeah,

19:24

and I agree with you. And

19:26

again, just coming back again to the, I

19:28

do think it's perhaps more calculated

19:31

than maybe sometimes I give it credit for

19:33

because, you know, yes, when

19:35

you look at the titles

19:37

as you already started to point out of the films that

19:40

they're poking front of from Sullivan's past,

19:42

and it's, you know, Ants in Your Pants, and it's

19:45

so long, Sarong, And

19:47

it's, I'm missing one other

19:49

one. Hey, hey, hey. Oh, hey, hey in the hayloft. How can

19:51

I forget, hey, hey in the hayloft? Which obviously

19:54

we need to take a quick pause to say, which

19:56

of those movies are you most excited to

19:58

see, Ted?

19:59

answering your. Oh really? For

20:01

me, I want to know what's so

20:03

long Sarong is about. That feels

20:05

like something with more than

20:07

just a little sex in it. I

20:10

think it's got a lot of sex in it. A lot of it. I'm

20:12

excited for that one.

20:14

No, but anyway, you look at those titles

20:17

and I love the scene when he's talking

20:20

with Veronica Lake in the car and she's recounting

20:22

the scene from Hey Hey and the Halof and he's like,

20:24

yes, I remember it very well. And then the The pig

20:26

comes out, of course. It's

20:28

great and the acting is charming as can

20:30

be.

20:32

But these are clearly comedies based

20:34

on sex. But

20:37

Sullivan is saying, no, these are

20:40

derivative and what else is there?

20:42

They're not contributing anything to

20:44

society. And then at the same time,

20:48

Sturgis is there in the bus chase

20:50

scene and he's flipping the the poor female reporter,

20:53

like not just once, I mean it's like a half

20:55

a dozen times that her dress is falling

20:57

down to her head and we're seeing her garters

21:00

and this and that. And you say, okay.

21:02

And then

21:04

you go to the pool sequence and

21:07

Veronica's legs are

21:10

the chief instrument of a joke that

21:13

isn't very funny.

21:14

And you say, okay, well, so Surgis is doing

21:17

the things that he's, and

21:20

he's just too smart of a guy

21:23

to not see the connection. But

21:25

it's also not very funny.

21:28

And so it begs the question,

21:31

is he prepared to almost make

21:33

that sacrifice in that moment

21:35

to say, I know this isn't that funny?

21:37

And that's the point? That's a great question,

21:39

Max. Or is he hoping it's funny

21:41

enough? I just, I don't know. I don't

21:43

know either, but I love the fact that you've raised the

21:46

question. And in fact, if

21:48

we wanted to give him,

21:50

and I'm always disposed to do this, maximum

21:53

credit and praise, let's

21:56

say he is doing precisely that, and

21:58

if he is, Bravo. That

22:01

is risky business

22:04

and you are doing something almost

22:06

meta. I hate that word, but we use it a lot

22:08

these days, so it's fun to throw around. In

22:11

a self-reflexive movie, it's always

22:13

meta. Thank you. Here's one

22:15

thing I want to add to this conversation, and

22:17

it is Joel McCrae's performance

22:19

because I love Joel McCrae. He brings

22:22

exactly the right

22:24

tone so that you you and I

22:26

can have this conversation. By this

22:28

I mean, sometimes you go, how

22:31

serious is Sullivan about this or is

22:33

it a mood of the moment? When

22:36

for instance he puts on the costume

22:38

and is trying it out in that great shot where

22:40

he's walking along trying to look like a hobo. And

22:43

McCray just gets, McCray is

22:46

often underrated and I'm a big,

22:49

big fan of Joel McCray's. And

22:53

he's exactly the right guy

22:55

to walk this line

22:59

that you and I, I believe, quite

23:01

correctly have set up. May I

23:03

go back to something that I want to

23:05

talk about at some point, and I think you... I

23:07

think we're... Yeah, I think I know what you're about to say,

23:10

and let's do it. It begins in the

23:12

chase scene, or that ridiculous,

23:14

and it's so overdone. And

23:17

first of all, the fact that that little

23:20

thing, that little

23:22

thing that the 13-year-old has, what do they call

23:24

those things? I don't know, anyway,

23:26

could go that fast. But anyway, anyway, anyway. So

23:29

not only did the girls' legs go up, but the cheap,

23:31

cheap,

23:33

racially insensitive, hugely

23:35

racially insensitive gag of

23:38

having the chef,

23:40

the black chef end up in

23:43

white face. And you

23:45

say, okay, when it first happens, you

23:47

go, oof, I'm uncomfortable. And

23:50

then it gets

23:52

recalled at the end of the

23:54

whole thing when he just is hovering above the whole

23:56

thing in white face. Isn't that funny?

23:59

That's

24:00

same time we

24:02

know from our research that

24:06

Walter White, the head of the

24:08

National Association for the Advancement of Colored

24:10

People, praised in

24:13

written form Preston

24:16

Sturgis for his beautifully

24:18

sensitive treatment of a black congregation,

24:21

oh thank you so much. And in fact

24:24

when you read that letter I find it embarrassing

24:27

also today. It's like, oh,

24:29

thank you, white savior,

24:32

for being so kind to us

24:35

poor black people. The whole

24:37

thing troubles me. But

24:39

then I have to go back to the time. That

24:42

kind of gag

24:43

was used over and over again. You and I have talked

24:46

about many movies that we would otherwise love

24:48

to talk about. Then we get to those moments. We go,

24:51

oh, this really is unfortunate

24:54

that we have to talk. But we need

24:56

to acknowledge it. We absolutely

24:58

need to acknowledge it. And that last

25:01

scene with the colored congregation, as

25:03

they would have called it in the day, is beautiful.

25:07

And the singing of Go Down Moses is beautiful.

25:11

And so if you take that polarity of

25:13

the white face gag at

25:15

the beginning and that beautiful

25:18

Go Down Moses, maybe let's

25:20

give Preston Sturgis 100% credit. Let's

25:25

say he is as aware as we are

25:27

today. I don't think he was, but let's

25:29

just say he is. It is that

25:32

tension that

25:34

tells us something about this

25:37

movie that I think makes it even

25:40

more interesting than

25:42

simply entertaining. I

25:44

mean, yeah, that's perhaps

25:48

the prime example of kind

25:50

of

25:51

the nuance, the contradiction that that exists in this

25:53

movie that you can have the cheapest

25:56

of jokes. that was like a cheap joke then

25:59

and is...

26:00

you know, hugely

26:02

racist in hindsight. And,

26:06

you know, and it follows the same mold as all

26:08

those other jokes that I just mentioned, which is that

26:10

you see it for a half a second, and you say, and

26:13

then he returns to it for this prolonged period

26:15

of time, absolutely running the

26:17

joke in quotes into

26:19

the ground.

26:20

And then you have these, you know,

26:23

what is a hugely powerful

26:25

sequence at the end. And

26:28

you just you don't quite know where to come

26:30

down on it and again it just comes back to this idea

26:32

like are you trying to have your cake and eat it too

26:35

which is that you're you

26:37

know you want the both the jokes and

26:39

the sentiment or are you

26:41

trying to say are you trying to highlight

26:45

the cheapness of the jokes to then

26:47

reinforce the power of the sentiment and

26:50

it's just it's not

26:52

entirely clear

26:54

and that's not to say and And of course, as

26:57

you say, you can give that a certain amount of credit

26:59

for 1941 and at the

27:01

same time be in 2021 and say, yeah,

27:04

well, it's not worth making the cheap joke

27:06

just for the sake of the sentiment later.

27:08

Max, I'm going to go out on a limb

27:10

and I'm going to stay there. We

27:14

know from his other work, particularly

27:16

the Lady Eve, that he

27:18

runs no joke into the ground. The

27:22

Lady Eve is absolutely

27:25

brilliant for the restraint

27:27

of the jokes. That horse

27:30

just nibbles long enough.

27:33

So let's go,

27:36

let's say this is intentional. Let's

27:38

give him the credit that he is actually

27:41

having,

27:43

he is asking us to

27:45

take a journey into

27:48

what Hollywood does at its best and

27:50

at its worst. And everything

27:54

in between, as Sullivan

27:56

takes his journey, By the way, as

27:58

Gulliver takes his. we

28:01

gain more wisdom about the human condition.

28:04

So that then raises the question, is

28:07

the wisdom that we gain about the human condition

28:10

and about the way that Hollywood presents

28:12

the human condition, is that

28:14

wisdom

28:15

apparent by the

28:17

end of the film? And we don't have to go

28:19

to the end yet, but I'm just saying, does

28:23

it finally work or is it the

28:25

near miss that finally works or is it the

28:27

thing that finally works that is a near miss or

28:29

maybe it doesn't work at all. What's your take? Well,

28:31

so I wanna start

28:33

getting into the,

28:35

you know, the first really hard pivot

28:37

of tone in the movie. Great. And

28:41

because I agree with you,

28:42

we've seen enough Preston Sturgis,

28:44

we know, we hold him at his place on

28:46

the pedestal for his comedic

28:49

genius. And this is, as you say, this is not a man

28:51

who runs jokes into the ground. So then

28:53

you have to say to yourself, incredibly brave for

28:56

you to,

28:57

for a comedian to craft

29:00

a joke so

29:02

that it misses

29:05

the mark. Maybe not for everybody, because I bet

29:07

there are people who laughed

29:10

a lot. But him also saying,

29:12

I'm pulling a comedic punch for the sake

29:15

of the project because I have somewhere

29:17

bigger I'm going. Wow, that is,

29:19

that's something, okay.

29:21

That's, I mean, that's bold for a comedian.

29:24

And then you

29:25

have this film and then it runs its course in

29:27

the first half and he's gonna now go give his $5,000 worth of $5 bills

29:31

to all the homeless people to thank them for his contribution

29:33

with the most patronizing, like, but

29:36

you also say to yourself, gosh,

29:40

if you padded out the first half of this

29:42

movie and it ended with him going around and giving,

29:45

like, that's a movie you would totally buy Hollywood

29:47

making in the 30s and 40s of

29:50

a director and he went out and he got this life

29:52

lesson and he went and gave out a lot of money and everyone

29:54

was so grateful. And then he went back and

29:57

he made his movie, and that's the end. and he got

29:59

the girl and it was.

30:00

It's all great. And you say, okay,

30:02

that's a movie right there. But no,

30:05

Sturgis takes a dark, hard

30:08

right turn at that point in the film.

30:11

And we get this,

30:14

you know, now we are in the world of

30:16

a message movie

30:18

about poverty.

30:20

And the movie is unrecognizable

30:22

to what we've seen up until this point. I

30:24

mean, unrecognizable. And to your

30:27

point, now we get into this world of

30:29

montage and it's stark

30:31

and it's dark and it's gritty and it's scary.

30:35

And it

30:36

is, it's so

30:39

effective that

30:41

it somewhat proves the point of the film

30:43

where you say, God, I'm not really enjoying this anymore.

30:48

And so then

30:50

where are you left? Where you're saying,

30:53

but this is a Sturgis movie And

30:55

I kind of came to laugh.

30:58

And now we're halfway or more in, and

31:00

it's a message movie,

31:02

and it's depressing. And

31:05

what do I do with that? Oh,

31:08

I don't know. What do you do with it, Ted? Oh,

31:11

wow. I, here's

31:15

what I do with it. I go, and we're

31:18

gonna stick to my guns here. I go with

31:22

the man himself, Preston

31:25

Sturgis, trying to

31:27

work all this out as

31:29

he's making the movie. I think maybe this

31:31

is a, and I didn't think this 30 minutes

31:35

ago, I think maybe this is

31:37

a braver movie

31:39

than I thought. I think maybe it's a more nuanced

31:41

and interesting self

31:44

investigation. And

31:47

one of the reasons maybe I think that is

31:49

that let's look at that short

31:51

clip at the very beginning of the

31:53

film of Labor struggling with

31:56

capital. Thank you. It's

32:00

great fun. It's exactly

32:02

like the end of every serial

32:05

I saw when I was

32:08

a kid. When I was a kid, we

32:10

had serials at the movie. You had episodics,

32:13

and they all ended with a cliffhanger. And that looks

32:15

like it's gonna end with a cliffhanger, and then they both go

32:18

over the cliff as it were. In this case,

32:20

the railroad trestle into the water, and we

32:22

get the end, and we go, oh wow,

32:25

that's kind of fun. And so

32:28

if he's establishing that as, okay,

32:30

this is what Hollywood does reflexively,

32:33

and then they talk about

32:36

movies with a little sex in it, and da da da da da,

32:38

and why this guy's the

32:41

successful

32:42

filmmaker that he is, and then

32:44

we take the journey, I'm

32:46

going to go with, we're taking

32:48

the journey, and Sturgis

32:50

is saying to himself, I'm gonna take

32:53

the journey, and I'm gonna look at what I do,

32:56

and what others around me do, and

32:58

I'm going to explore the

33:00

strengths and weaknesses of what they

33:03

do, the good and the bad. I'm even

33:05

gonna milk a

33:07

joke way too long to show

33:09

you how that doesn't work. And

33:12

I'm not gonna insult you, I'm

33:14

gonna ask you to

33:16

look at everything you're seeing

33:18

here in two

33:21

ways. One, just what's happening,

33:24

and then another way I want you to step back think

33:26

about it. And so that

33:28

when we get to the end and that extremely

33:31

dark section which is

33:33

so disruptive

33:35

to our way as you correctly

33:37

identify everything about the way it's shot

33:39

all the feet all the darkness

33:42

all the montage and

33:44

and you go oh Lord what is

33:46

happening here and

33:50

then I'm going to raise this

33:53

question with you now. Is

33:56

the very, very end, as in and

34:00

everybody laughing at

34:02

the cartoon. And by the way, did you know

34:04

that they'd hoped for Chaplin, but he wouldn't

34:07

provide them,

34:09

he wouldn't give them stuff. Did you read about

34:11

that? I did not know that. And so

34:14

that is interesting. I'm curious

34:16

to you because the first time I saw this movie, I was

34:18

sure that this was gonna be the case. I

34:20

don't know if it was ever under consideration. I don't know if it

34:22

would have been too expensive. And I don't know if it

34:24

would have been the right move. Because

34:27

I don't think it would have been, but it would have been interesting

34:29

nonetheless. I for

34:32

sure the first time thought that we were gonna see

34:34

a

34:35

scene from Hey, Hey, and the Hey Loft or

34:38

one of those- Or ants in the plants. Exactly.

34:40

Right, since I'm a horticulturalist and I'm not.

34:42

But so- I think it would have been a little

34:44

too self-congratulatory to Sullivan

34:47

himself that his movie is in fact the movie

34:49

that gets people out of their doldrums.

34:51

Because when I knew we

34:53

were gonna do this movie, brain

34:55

goes, oh, that's when we learned

34:58

that it's important during the depression

35:01

to remember to laugh.

35:03

Actually, I think this movie is way more than that.

35:07

Although that laughter scene and the way it's cut

35:10

and the back and forth between the cartoon

35:12

and the audience and the,

35:14

and here's another thing, that

35:16

laughter is

35:18

more than that laughter would have been.

35:22

That is a, I've sat in audiences

35:24

with cartoons, people are going wild, they're

35:27

going beyond wild. They're,

35:29

it's, and yet their own

35:31

existence is so painful, we

35:34

buy that, but every

35:36

time that we go overboard in

35:38

this movie,

35:39

and you are, thank you for that, you

35:41

know, particularly with the legs and the air

35:44

jokes with the

35:46

girl,

35:47

every time we go overboard, I think we're asked

35:50

to look at it just as, and I'm gonna

35:52

get way nerdy and intellectual here because

35:54

I was an English major, in Gulliver's

35:57

Travels.

35:59

That's That's what Swift does. Swift

36:02

always goes overboard. There

36:06

are, forgive my, I'll say

36:08

this discreetly, there are characters

36:10

in Gulliver's travels

36:13

who defecate on people from

36:15

trees.

36:17

That's going overboard. Maybe

36:20

Sullivan's travels is trying that same

36:22

language. there's more to

36:25

the

36:27

use of that title. I

36:31

had no idea I was gonna say all this today, but

36:33

there it is, and I'm gonna stand by

36:35

it.

36:36

I mean, that is the

36:38

kind of the question of what you're supposed

36:41

to take away from it at the end. I

36:43

mean, I think perhaps my favorite detail of the

36:45

second half of this movie, because it's

36:47

certainly not paying lip service to a message

36:50

movie. Sturgis has clearly

36:52

studied the aesthetic

36:54

and the reality, as

36:58

much as you might wanna infer him

37:00

saying, well, I wanna make a movie about poverty,

37:02

but I don't know enough about poverty. No,

37:04

I mean, we see some really

37:07

grim detail and the

37:09

cinematography that accompanies it is

37:12

in that mold. And then the

37:14

thing that I think really shows his understanding

37:17

and it speaks to the montage, because the montage

37:19

does stand out as being like, This is long. And

37:22

I think it's Sturgis saying, I

37:25

don't even trust myself

37:28

to put dialogue in. I'm

37:31

too funny. It's almost like the comedy

37:35

is at the beginning and that is, it is

37:37

a comedy of banter.

37:40

I can't even risk it slipping

37:42

in or being confused with or

37:45

any of it. So just put it

37:47

all aside.

37:48

Yeah, and there's that extended scene

37:50

where it's almost

37:53

a, it's not a send up, but it's a comment

37:55

on how silent movies worked

37:58

well.

37:59

end. but then he ups the game, you're

38:02

seeing an extended rather grim

38:05

sequence with blaring

38:07

music so that you hear no

38:09

dialogue whatsoever.

38:11

And that kind of weird disconnect

38:14

between this very

38:17

in-your-face music with

38:20

that even needs to hide what

38:23

is the clear sadness

38:27

and interior

38:30

melancholy of the scene in question.

38:33

And again, stylistically, and

38:35

I'm going to go back to the long take and da da da, I

38:38

think he's also playing a lot with style in this

38:40

movie and I'd like, at some point, thanks

38:43

to this conversation, I

38:45

want to go back in this movie and

38:48

try to look at that with a microscope?

38:51

I think I mean because it does it's

38:54

it's it's just clearly calculated

38:57

and the question is I

38:58

think

38:59

does it land because it's certainly a fascinating

39:03

case study

39:04

of

39:05

trying to navigate all of these different elements

39:07

the question ultimately is successful because it is

39:10

comes to your question that you just posed Ted which is what

39:12

is the takeaway at the end of all of this because

39:15

he has his brilliant idea at

39:17

the end to take

39:19

credit for the murder of John L. Sullivan, and

39:22

it works just the way he thought it would.

39:24

And we get, you know, coming out of this

39:27

prolonged, depressing

39:29

message film now, which feels like it was,

39:31

you know, longer than anything

39:33

else we've watched in the movie, and

39:35

then we come to the girl

39:38

and her reaction of the newspaper, and we

39:40

get this the most

39:42

cartoonish sound effect known

39:45

to man

39:46

of her reacting to the good

39:48

news and then barreling through

39:50

the entire studio set in her ridiculous

39:53

dress, knocking people over left

39:55

and right. And Sturgis

39:57

is now from this point forward, We are now back.

40:00

the

40:00

comedy we have left that sadness behind

40:02

is going to be a happy ending and

40:04

i think it's easy to

40:07

say and and even it has

40:09

been said that this is a movie and new

40:11

the stop the message is you

40:13

know what what it is at the end laughter

40:15

is important and it's such a trite message

40:17

that we've heard time and again that like

40:20

or yeah and times we don't need

40:22

more depressing things we need comedy

40:25

you know i mean look at it i

40:27

mean you know but we did busby berkeley

40:29

music all right exactly i mean

40:31

you know

40:32

that and is that the take

40:34

away i don't think so sturgis is

40:37

is he's clearly to

40:39

he's been he's been too deep into this other

40:42

world now for that to be the take

40:44

away of just what laughter is the best

40:46

medicine ah no

40:49

but

40:49

is

40:55

is the message he's going for the one

40:57

that ultimately lands you know i think

41:00

to your point got this is going thing in a

41:02

conversation back a little bit here it's

41:04

not the

41:09

sturgis his goal is not to have

41:13

us

41:13

just be sad about

41:15

poverty which is what his what

41:17

prolonged sequence certainly doesn't he's very depressing

41:20

the goal of message it films in general

41:23

is to create change and

41:25

this

41:26

this movie ends in a place of

41:29

a wig i gave you the comedy but then i showed

41:31

you the reality laughter

41:32

is important but

41:34

has he created it enough

41:36

opposition not enough juxtaposition

41:39

that people are leaving all they're saying

41:43

what

41:43

know you know that there are deeper

41:45

issues that need grappling with and

41:47

i'm not quite sure it that's where he did

41:49

the film lands either

41:51

i'm going to come down and just

41:53

say this today and if we ever recorded

41:56

another podcast about

41:58

this movie i might land differently.

42:00

I'm going to say

42:02

that this movie lands by saying, okay,

42:04

we looked at all this. We looked at it

42:06

stylistically. We looked at it thematically.

42:09

We looked at it in terms of the performances.

42:11

We looked at it in terms of, can

42:14

you exaggerate this? Can you underplay that?

42:17

And finally, folks, I'm here

42:19

to say, since I'm in the business,

42:23

we try what we I try, but finally

42:26

I'm not all that sure that

42:28

Hollywood's going to get much

42:30

better at this. And

42:33

I mean, I

42:34

think also at the same time when you look

42:36

at this and you look at all the characters and a lot

42:39

of the voiced message of the film, it's

42:41

easy to take away some sense of, well,

42:45

what is your place

42:47

in all of this?

42:49

And I think

42:52

if anything perhaps at the end, Sturgis is really

42:54

saying, well we need comedians to

42:56

be funny

42:57

and we need social activists

43:00

to make change.

43:01

And he views himself

43:04

closer to one than the other. I

43:06

am a comedian but I want to at least try

43:10

to move the conversation forward.

43:13

And so if anything, he's like, you know,

43:15

everyone needs their place and I'm the person

43:18

who perhaps doesn't have a place, but

43:20

at the same time, maybe it's a little grandiose

43:22

on his part, but at the same time, he goes from here

43:25

and makes more comedies. So maybe that's him

43:27

saying, look,

43:28

I tried to make my mark, but I'm the comedian,

43:31

this isn't me.

43:32

I think you need those people. I think you say that

43:34

exactly right. And

43:37

I'll just add this, I Preston Sturgis,

43:41

am doing what I do well

43:44

as well as I know how to do it, and I'm going to

43:46

continue to do it well, but I want

43:48

you also to know that there

43:50

are these things that I'm thinking about

43:53

that we all need to be thinking

43:55

about and maybe in time

43:58

will come to do. that better.

44:02

I

44:03

don't think what I'm doing is bad, I think what I'm

44:05

doing is good. And

44:07

I just want you to

44:09

know that I

44:12

care about these things and

44:15

I'm gonna offer you here a film

44:17

that's a little messy,

44:19

sometimes even sloppy, sometimes even

44:21

a bit confused, but

44:24

I'm really working some stuff out

44:27

in my own head

44:28

using the craft that

44:30

I have in front of me and a craft that I dearly

44:33

love. And the result is a

44:35

film that as you and I said at the very beginning

44:37

has been much talked about.

44:40

Much praised, sometimes more

44:43

so, sometimes less so, but

44:46

it is a film that is extremely

44:48

important in the canon

44:50

of great American comedies.

44:53

And

44:55

to get to talk about it in this way,

44:57

one of the things, Max, I'm going to

44:59

blow some smoke in your direction, is

45:01

that you've created a podcast where

45:04

you can actually have a conversation about

45:06

something

45:07

that you didn't even know was going

45:10

to take you where it

45:12

takes you. And that's what

45:14

conversation should be. I had

45:16

no idea, thinking ahead

45:19

today, to what we might talk about,

45:21

that this is what this conversation would

45:24

be like. And I just feel wiser

45:26

and I feel wiser because of the questions

45:29

you posed and the latitude

45:31

that you provide people

45:33

that have conversations with you about film to

45:36

talk about them in an interesting way. So thank

45:39

you. Oh, well, thank you, Ted. And there's

45:41

something, something tremendous to

45:43

be said for the films that are,

45:45

as you say,

45:46

can be messy, sloppy, unclear,

45:49

but are

45:52

really trying to do something interesting.

45:55

And this is certainly one of those films. So it's an

45:57

honor, as always, to talk about it with you, Ted. Thank

45:59

you.

46:07

That concludes our episode on Sullivan's

46:09

travels. I'd love to hear what you think of this classic

46:11

movie must. Feel free to tweet at movie

46:13

must spot or email me at classic movie

46:16

musts at gmail.com. Remember

46:18

episodes release every Friday on the

46:20

podcast service of your choosing. On

46:22

next week's episode we are discussing City

46:25

Lights. Thank

46:26

you so much for listening. Until the next

46:28

episode, episode, Keep Up with your classics.