Never Understood - Bell Book and Candle (1958) Discussion

[–] kyrat 18 years ago

If you read some of the comments you'll see that a lot of people felt the film had potential but something just wasn't quite right.
I have to agree. It was cute but it just didn't quite grab me.

Various reasons have been posited:
Not enough chemistry (those eyebrows of Novak's would've scared me off!), the age difference, not believable enough, the dialogue wasn't snappy enough, no real displays of magic which one kind of expects, the rather anti-feminist message of woman giving up her power(strength, independence, etc.) for love, etc.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] semperscriptira 17 years ago

Yeah, I agree...it was slightly lacking in that mystical quality.

And I agree with kyrat on some pts, but age difference? I don't quite think so. In Vertigo, the two had incredible chemistry. They made me believe everything. I don't think the anti-feminist message was intentional, like it was a message or anything. It's just what happens when people are in love; they tend to do anything for it. It wasn't saying that women being independent was bad or anything, if I get what you mean. I guess it did make Gill look weak, which was disappointing, but I don't feel that it was sending out a message to the audience regarding how women should act.

"Stars" -Switchfoot

reply

[–] J_Carls 15 years ago

Yes, there are many, many movies that can be viewed with modern eyes and seen as bigoted in some way. The label is both true and not true, in that they reflect what many people thought was "normal" in a time that had not woken up to the subtler forms of social constrictions. Others recognized the bigotry and integrated clever subversiveness. For a humdinger of an example, keep in mind that Val Lewton intended for no panther to actually appear in the 1942 "Cat People" (except in the zoo) and watch it with suppressed lesbianism in mind instead of shape-changing.

"Bell Book and Candle" reminded me of another Jimmy Stewart movie I just watched, "The Shop Around the Corner." Great movie, but its main plot line suffered because so much time was given to great supporting performances that prevented a fuller development even as they essentially saved the movie. Kim Novak's witch was excellent, cold and really spooky, but with a touch of unrealized humanity. But her falling in love needed one more set piece to become believably developed, perhaps seeing her, months after the breakup, switch her shop to ocean curiosities by making her current inventory explode from her frustration — starting with the mask associated with James Stewart in the title sequence. That would also add that missing bit of magical excitement some have wanted. Alas, a missed opportunity...

reply

[–] wilmawilcat 17 years ago

kyrat, I really like this movie; but I think the problem with it's popularity is due to viewers' discomfort. The subculture is never really made charming enough for people to admire it or feel cozy about it. You leave the movie thinking they are still strange. This might have been on purpose.

reply

[–] hooper-xxx 15 years ago

I couldn't agree more. Kim Novak comes off as creepy and the age difference is ridiculous (not quite as horrid as a decrepit Fred Astaire cast as the love interest of a young daisy fresh Audrey Hepburn, but still offputting.)

I concur with the antifeminist interpretation, but to me there is something even more insidious afoot. It strikes me--as Bewitched always has--as racist the way the protagonist witch is so self-loathing and hellbent on assimilating into mundane WASPdom.

reply

[–] eden_echo 18 years ago

Hmmm, I loved it!! Like in "Vertigo" these two have some of the best chemistry I've ever seen on-screen! It was funny, cute, just an overall great movie imho!

"I promise you, before I die I'll surely come to your doorstep"

reply

[–] MissSugarKane 18 years ago

I loved this film! Not just because Jack Lemmon is my favourite ever, but it's just a cute little comedy. And when people "get lost into the film world when they put a DVD on", I just feel a part of the movie.

If that makes sense.

Jack Lemmon: America's Sweetheart
"It's Magic Time"

reply

[–] ethan1138 18 years ago

For some reason when I watch this film I get a great sense of nostalgia, of course this doesn't make sense because I wasn't born until 25 years after the film was made.

http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/HitchcockVertigo

reply

[–] lolarites 13 years ago

Yea, me too. I love seeing NY in the late 50's, especially at Christmas.

reply

[–] eden_echo 18 years ago

And when people "get lost into the film world when they put a DVD on", I just feel a part of the movie.

If that makes sense.

It makes perfect sense, I get that a lot as well!

"I promise you, before I die I'll surely come to your doorstep"

reply

[–] lizardkxng 18 years ago

As a Novak-addic this is not one of her better movies IMO. I thought Jack Lemmon showed why him became a big star here.

reply

[–] catma 17 years ago

I think it might have had something to do with the time the movie was released. In general, I think people then were much more uncomfortable about the supernatural/occult than they are now. I was very young when it came out, and at that time there was a very serious take on religion. Today you see churchgoers having brunch at Carrows after Sunday services. Back then, very, very few places were open on Sunday, people were serious about that day being the sabbath and a day of rest. When I was young, network TV sometimes aired unsold pilots during summer months. In the mid-sixties there was one of these pilots about a little girl who finds a book of spells in the attic. The little girl was about my age and I thought it was great; my mother just about had a cow that I thought so. I remember even a few years after that, in junior high, classmates said you would go to hell if you saw "Rosemary's Baby". And this was in regular old public school.

reply

[–] Error_PC_LOAD_LETTER 17 years ago

I remember that one, too! In the late 1970s it was a common belief in my public school, (as late as 1976-1980) that if you saw the film Rosemary's Baby, you would go to hell.

And 'cause' never was the reason for the evening,
--Or the Tropic of Sir Galahad.

reply

[–] AliciaHuberman59 16 years ago

Just watched it again last night and noticed especially the scene when Gillian goes to Shep's office to confess her "idiosyncracy" and he asks her if she's "engaged in un-American activities"...brought to mind the McCarthy "witch hunt" a few years earlier, so maybe audiences were somewhat uncomfortable with the witch/supernatural aspect, if only subliminally/by conflation.

reply

[–] taylorje 15 years ago

Oh, me too, when I was growing up nothing was open on Sundays. If you ran out of something, you had to wait until Monday to get it. There was one drugstore open on Sunday afternoon, but we did not do any shopping unless it was an emergency.

reply

[–] Molly-31 16 years ago

Some reviewers who were familiar with the stage play felt Kim was miscast. Not sure why.

I'm all right, I'm alllll right!

reply

[–] JuanMacready 16 years ago

Stewart was miscast because he was far too old for the part. He looked more like Kim Novak's father than her lover. Wearing that gray wig was a bad mistake.

reply

[–] Blondfashionisto 15 years ago

I think Cary Grant would have been better in the part of Shep. He is very good at this type of satire (i.e. Arsynic & Old Lace). But, he's just as old as Jimmy Stewart. But, I do think Kim Novac is excellent in her part. She's remnicent of Simone Simon in 'The Cat People'.

Christopher

'There’s a name for you ladies, but it’s not used…Outside a kennel! (Crystal Allen)'

reply

[–] entertainme5 15 years ago

Well, Gillian (Novak) wasn't trying to fall in love with Shep. She wanted more of a friend. And she had never been "in" love so why would she think she could, now? I think the casting of Stewart was perfect and I know the success of 'Vertigo' also had part in it. And it's not a weird thing because it's common for young woman to date older men.

"I have no memories I'm prepared to share with you."- Peter O'Toole

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] PSVillas 14 years ago

Wow, I always thought this film was fine as it was and I think it may be one of Kim Novak's best performances. She brings a great quality of mystery and grace. The way she uses her body is very sexy.

I don't know if I agree with the idea the supernatural angle was a turn off to the general public. Certainly horror films had a following then and there had even been a few previous comedies such as "I married a Witch", "The Ghost and Mrs. Muir", and "The Time of Their Lives".

reply

[–] Tashtago 14 years ago

I agree with the first post. This movie gets better each time I see it. Jack Lemmon is hilarious and it has a great cast. Although not really a Christmas movie the setting is around Christmas so I always watch it then.

reply

[–] cantchangeit2 14 years ago

When I was a kid, this was one of my favorite movies. Today at the market, I saw a copy for $9.99 and snapped it up. I haven't watched it in years. I still love it, but the atmosphere didn't quite live up to my memories of it.

Did anyone else notice Kim's drawn on eyebrows? Why did they do that to her? She didn't need any enhancements. She was beautiful naturally.

Hermione should have been used more. What a character she was.

Funny about Jimmy Stewart. He was never one of my favorite actors, but he was the star of several of my all-time favorite films: Bell, Book, and Candle, Vertigo and Rear Window.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] amsdragons-2 14 years ago

her eyebrows made her a little bit more "witchy-looking"

and another problem w/ this one is that it's not really all that funny, not much comedy in the long run.

The universe has to move forward. Pain and loss, they define us as much as happiness or love. SJS

reply