Carrie boards the train to Chicago with big ambitions. She gets a job stitching shoes and her sister's husband takes almost all of her pay for room and board. Then she injures a finger and ... See full summary »
When four men rob a bank, one is killed and the other three escape into the desert where they lose their horses in a storm. Finding a woman who gives birth, they are made godfathers only to... See full summary »
Carrie boards the train to Chicago with big ambitions. She gets a job stitching shoes and her sister's husband takes almost all of her pay for room and board. Then she injures a finger and is fired. This is the 1890s. Charles Drouet, a salesman she met on the train, comes to her rescue, invites her to dine at Fitzgerald's where the manager George Hurstwood sends over a bottle of champagne. Stay in Drouet's apartment. He will be on the road 10 days. When she leaves the apartment many months later -- on a train bound for New York -- her traveling companion is Hurstwood. Why is he in such a hurry? Written by
Dale O'Connor <firstname.lastname@example.org>
A Splendid Recreation of Another Era: Oliver At His Best, Jones Tamped Down To "Real"
This is a curious little sleeper from 1952, a grim, objective look at the upward mobility of a country girl who first adapts to the needs of the men around her, and then moves on to a successful stage career on her own, leaving one of the men in abject poverty.
Today Carrie succeeds not only because of it's splendid recreation of a time, but as one of the few American vehicles where the legendary Laurence Olivier, (who often walked through a character role for the paycheck) performs to his best advantage, evolving from an assured man of the world to a pathetic morsel at the bottom of the heap, a restrained and beautifully measured performance given 13 years later than his dynamic Heathcliff for the same directer in 1939's Wuthering Heights.
Jennifer Jones, too, is a good deal less hysterical and florid than usual; the music score by David Raksin underscores without bombast, and the supporting cast provide excellent contrast. This is definitely not a cheerer-upper, but a picture neatly tuning into it's original author's concerns. It deserves another look, and as time goes by, will be considered one of Wyler's significant contributions.
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?