Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

The third and final version...?


TopBilled
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, I'm not talking about A STAR IS BORN since that star keeps being reborn and there will be 33 more versions.

The wiki page for SMILIN' THROUGH (1941) calls it the third and final version. Why final? Why not just say third version. Are we that sure nobody will ever remake that story again?

Are some classic film stories so dated and so locked in the past they can't ever be revisited by future filmmakes...?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smilin'_Through_(1941_film)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Odd....

Any info I try for does mention it being a third  film version of the play, but NOT any other film version but the '32 flick.

I'd venture a guess as to the '41 film being a MUSICAL, and for years(and out of some twisted respect) not wishing to mess with ANY JEANETTE MacDONALD(sic?) movie, film makers left it alone until it got to the point where many thought it WAS originally a musical, and for some reason couldn't figure out a way to "update" the musical aspect of it sufficiently for whichever "modern-day" audience might be out there.

I've never seen ANY version of it, but when reading the plot line, didn't see anything really "dated" about the story.  So, the mystery is confounding.

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:

Odd....

Any info I try for does mention it being a third  film version of the play, but NOT any other film version but the '32 flick.

I'd venture a guess as to the '41 film being a MUSICAL, and for years(and out of some twisted respect) not wishing to mess with ANY JEANETTE MacDONALD(sic?) movie, film makers left it alone until it got to the point where many thought it WAS originally a musical, and for some reason couldn't figure out a way to "update" the musical aspect of it sufficiently for whichever "modern-day" audience might be out there.

I've never seen ANY version of it, but when reading the plot line, didn't see anything really "dated" about the story.  So, the mystery is confounding.

Sepiatone

The first version, a silent film produced in 1922, had Norma Talmadge in the lead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smilin'_Through_(1922_film)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a big MacDonald fan but I don't think I've seen this one yet. Either way, I agree that calling it the "final" is really presumptuous . Though I'd guess that due to the operetta style repertoire of MacDonald that it won't get another version any time soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

I'm a big MacDonald fan but I don't think I've seen this one yet. Either way, I agree that calling it the "final" is really presumptuous . Though I'd guess that due to the operetta style repertoire of MacDonald that it won't get another version any time soon.

TCM airs SMILIN' THROUGH (1941) at least once a year, so keep checking the schedule. Brian Aherne and Gene Raymond play the male leads. MacDonald and Raymond were married, and it's the only film they did together.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody knows if "Smilin' Through" will ever be filmed again, so I don't know why someone would say anything is a "final" version. It has a story line that could be adapted to present day.  A bit OT, but I get nervous when individuals write that something is "their final entry". How do they know that? How do they know they will not stop being bored with something and come back to it later?

In June 2010 a guy said that would be his last review, and then the next day committed suicide by setting himself on fire. It is a pretty common internet story so I won't go into it. There was a woman whose blog I read who in October of this year - after seven years of posting - said that "this would be her final entry". She also detailed a littany of illnesses in that final post that are probably irreversible. I just hope that she did not go the way of the guy who set himself on fire. However, I do not know her entire name so I can't google and find out if she is OK. This sort of thing is worrisome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

With some remade titles, it does seem like they have reached the end of the line, e.g. I am pretty positive that many younger audiences would understand the reason for all the scandal in Madame X that couses the main character to begin her long downward spiral....

Did you mean to say 'audiences would NOT understand the reason"?  

I ask because most states in the USA are community property states and therefore a spouse couldn't just kick out a cheater leaving them with nothing and not allowing them to see their child.    (if the plot of said 'remake' is based on the 1908 play).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jamesjazzguitar said:

Did you mean to say 'audiences would NOT understand the reason"?  

I ask because most states in the USA are community property states and therefore a spouse couldn't just kick out a cheater leaving them with nothing and not allowing them to see their child.    (if the plot of said 'remake' is based on the 1908 play).

 

 

I meant to say not, just a typo on my end. Sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

I meant to say not, just a typo on my end. Sorry about that.

Madame X was an interesting (and useful) example.   Look at all the adaptations that have been done with many subsequent ones having made major plot changes from the original 1908 French play.    They were changed due to being 'dated' (concepts like a husband being allowed to kick out his wife with nothing for cheating),  that wouldn't be relevant to the targeted audience  at the time.

But these producers still wished to use the Madame X 'brand' to market their work. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Madame X story appealed to filmmakers because of it being about a mother's suffering. That is a timeless element of the tale, despite the more dated specifics of the original plot. So it's something they often chose to remake. And actresses looking for an Oscar might be able to render a powerful and moving performance with the material.

Olivia de Havilland's Oscar for TO EACH HIS OWN is sort of built on this whole concept, this whole drama of the mother sacrificing for her child. And Jane Wyman explored similar territory in THE BLUE VEIL, which netted her a Best Actress Oscar nomination and a Golden Globe win.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...