Hollywood Bedlam: Classic Screwball Comedies

by William K. Everson

Book by Everson, William K.

Genres: Film

253 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 1994

About the author

William Keith Everson was an English-American archivist, author, critic, educator, collector, and film historian.

Reviews

[Sally Sugarman]

This is a history and review of the Screwball comedy which the author claims was a result of the Depression and the Production Code which made it necessary to deal with the battle of the sexes with wit and humor, rather than directly. The characteristics which Everson says are typical of the screwball comedy are the battle of the sexes, disguise or masquerade, rebellion against conformity. An offshoot of these comedies is the lunatic family. Knowledgeably written, Everson after all is a familiar writer about film, the book presents many wonderful still pictures as well as general information and a more detailed analysis of significant examples of the genre. His standards seem exacting and he is able to indicate the differences in actors' performances e.g. his discussion of Carole Lombard's work is interesting. He made me want to get a copy of The 20th Century with Barrymore and Lombard. He discusses why some classics have not been remade and the failures of most of the remakes and why they failed. Despite visual gags, screwball comedy depended a great deal on literate writers and audiences. Everson gives one a sense of how a movie was perceived when it first appeared without the future history of specific players like Cary Grant being known. He also talks about why some movies were critically reviewed differently then than now in both directions, both over and under-appreciated. The opulence of the settings was very much a response to the Depression. People wanted to enjoy an escape when they went to the movies. He discusses the career of Preston Sturges whose movies I really need to see more of. Like Film Noir which is more a forties rather than a thirties, genre screwball comedies had studios, directors and actors who were more adept at this form than other performers or studios were. The work of the set directors is also is recognized. I find film history fascinating because unfortunately unlike theatre history, films are able to be viewed again. Of course, there are many lost films, but there are enough of them to do a book like this. These films give us somewhat of a view of the values of a society much as television does today. Actually, the movies did much to diffuse some of the conflict between the classes by ridiculing the upper classes, making them figures of fun rather than of oppression. Everson points out how anti-communist movies were from the very beginning. They did not like their workers organizing. So even before McCarthy times, there were movies which ridiculed communism and made all who believed in it somehow buffoons. Even Everson says that there might even have been serious social thinkers who were communists. The movies as a reactionary social ideology could certainly be pursued further. Movies would rarely challenge the status quo. The madcap heiress not only put down wealth, but put down the New Woman as well. Ridicule was a way of dealing with disturbing social phenomena. How do know our culture through the media? There is a look that we recognize for the different decades and much like the work done in children's literature as a reflection of the culture, we can, by looking at many or reading many works, get a sense of the past and the ideology that shapes people's views. Everson says that it is going to be harder to do this kind of research on contemporary movies because there are so few stills made of movies now than there were in the earlier periods of the cinema where theatres displayed many stills from the movies being shown.