This statement at Matt Yglesias’s Slow Boring Substack made me sit up and take notice:
Sasha Gusev: Political films seem to mostly fall into two tracks: the ideologically pure protagonist is corrupted by politics or always was (The Candidate, The Ides of March, A Face in the Crowd, Primary Colors, Wag The Dog, In The Loop), or the ideologically pure protagonist stands on his principles and wins (Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, The American President).
I could only wonder whether Sasha Gusev had ever seen Frank Capra’s 1939 movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington? Yes, Jefferson Smith is “ideologically pure”. He’s preternaturally ideologically pure. That’s in stark contrast with Claude Raines’s Senator Paine. That character and portrayal strike me as quite accurate (and typical).
Does Jeff Smith “win”? He has maintained his principles but he has not won. He is physically and emotionally a wreck. He is disillusioned at the real nature of politics. There is no bright future ahead for him. It’s hard to see what’s ahead for him. He certainly doesn’t get the girl and ride off into the sunset.
In MSGTW it is the people who have won.
Similarly, what happens at the end of It’s a Wonderful Life? The sense in which George Bailey “wins” is that he is no longer suicidal and has newfound appreciation of his family. His business is still a wreck and he has all the other problems he had at the start of the picture. The real winners are the people of Bedford Falls.
That’s actually pretty typical of Capra pictures. It’s one of the things that sets them apart. Consider Meet John Doe or Mr. Deeds Goes to Town. It Happened One Night is one of the rare cases of a Capra picture in which the “hero gets the girl” but even there I don’t think that’s actually what happened. I think that Clark Gable’s anti-hero “gets the girl” and she’s a spoiled rich girl who isn’t that much of a prize. Maybe her experiences have changed her but probably not.
I watched Mr. Smith for the first time a few months ago and while I thought it was better and darker than I had expected, I can’t remember the ending. A quick google suggests the ending is quite abrupt, so if i can speculate what happens: Mr. Smith leaves Washington realizing that the legislative _process_ involves more than he thought and required him to be more like Senator Paine than he would ever wish to try. In some sense, Senator Paine is the winner, he redeems himself, but at the cost of everything.
I’m currently watching or rewatching at a very casual pace the “political” films listed below discussed on the (British) Past, Present, Future podcast. I think a problem with the “polticial” as a descriptor of movies is sometimes “political” has politics (elections and governance) front and center, but some times the term is used to describe social conditions depicted in a way that explain or seek to motivate political change. Also many of the movies are not American, or may not be examples of “moderate” politics.
La Grande Illusion (1937)
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939)
Citizen Kane (1941)
The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943)
High Noon (1952)
The Manchurian Candidate (1962)
The Leopard (1963)
Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Fail Safe (1964)
The Battle of Algiers (1966)
Z (1969)
The Candidate (1972)
Do the Right Thing (1984)
Fight Club (1999)
There Will be Blood (2007)
STILL TO WATCH OR REWATCH:
Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975)
Network (1976)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Kagemusha (1980)
Shoah (1985)
In the Loop (2009)
The Social Network (2010)
Zero Dark Thirty (2012)
The Zone of Interest (2023)
The possibility of me watching a ten hour, intense documentary on the Holocaust (Shoah) is probably small. “High Noon” was covered mostly to discuss why it’s the favorite movie of so many U.S. Presidents.
Since everything is political it’s hard to know where to draw the line.
I’ve seen most of the movies on that list. Since Powell and Pressburger pictures are favorites of mine I liked The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp quite a bit. I think Citizen Kane is a bit over-rated. It’s a good picture but I don’t think it’s the greatest movie ever made (which some do).
I liked Kagemusha quite a bit, too. It’s based on a Greek story.
I think I’ve enjoyed all the ones listed that I’ve watched recently with the possible exception of Fail Safe, and that maybe because it was watched along with Dr. Strangelove. I’m keeping on open mind on those I plan to rewatch. I didn’t like Network whenever I saw it; maybe I’ll appreciate it more today or whenever I get around to it.
The Manchurian Candidate seemed like the most relevant to our current situation, not so much for the main plot thread, but in how Lansbury’s character controls the media discussion by having her husband say outrageous things that get everyone talking about whatever she wants the focus to be on.