Remember, no man is a failure who has friends.

Cafe Society
41

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
I liked the SNL skit with the “deleted ending” – somebody figures out what happened to the $8,000, and George and all his friends run over to Potter’s house and beat him to death.
[/QUOTE]

Yup - see post 17.

I never saw the movie or even heard of it until I was at my college, where, I learned, it was shown every Christmas season (and maybe still is). I fell for it hard, and still love it. Great cast, beautiful cinematography, humor mixed with pathos, etc. The movie does send a mixed message to an early 21st-century audience, and George sacrifices an awful lot, but it’s all for the best. He’s still married to Donna Reed (yowza!) with a pack o’ cute kids, esteemed by everyone in town, helping others. I like to think that George and wife eventually get to travel the world together… maybe when their own kids are in college?

I remember a WSJ article from the early '90s in which Robert McFarlane, Reagan’s former national security advisor, said he had sunk into a deep depression after the Iran-Contra Affair. A friend gave him a videotape of It’s a Wonderful Life, which he credited with helping him find a way back from a suicidal brink.

42

[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir]
I remember a WSJ article from the early '90s in which Robert McFarlane, Reagan’s former national security advisor, said he had sunk into a deep depression after the Iran-Contra Affair. A friend gave him a videotape of It’s a Wonderful Life, which he credited with helping him find a way back from a suicidal brink.
[/QUOTE]

How would considering what the world would have been like without him make a Reagan advisor less suicidal?!

43

[QUOTE=Walloon]
An FBI analyst wrote and submitted a memo, without comment, recording an FBI source in the movie industry who said that about the film.
[/QUOTE]
WARNING: don’t know about anyone else, but when I clicked that link, it didn’t go where it was meant to, and I ended up instead with some dodgy “virus scanner” site that resized my browser and replicated a Windows Vista security interface.

44

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
How would considering what the world would have been like without him make a Reagan advisor less suicidal?!
[/QUOTE]

A fair question… but I’m only reporting what I read! :wink:

45

[QUOTE=JohnT]
Well, not only that, but George didn’t put his “honeymoon” money into the bank so that everybody could withdraw it, he put his own money into his own business to keep it afloat.

His choice was to go on a vacation or to keep the family business a going concern. What good is a “vacation” if you know that the act of taking it is going to cost you your job? How relaxing is that?
[/QUOTE]

If the Honeymoon debacle had been one thing, instead of one thing in a long line of events like this, then the whole situation would have wonderfully demonstrated Bailey’s integrity, as well as the stark reality of the Depression-era. People were frightened, people were losing money, people wanted to panic and make the situation worse, and George Baily was not going to let his town, his business, and his neighbors be consumed by that fear. Wonderful stuff. On its own, it’s a really touching event.

But it’s not on its own. In fact, it’s not even privileged in the film. At that point it’s, “Oh, look, George is happy about something. I wonder what will happen to destroy that happiness? Ah. There’s a mob forming at the S&L. Great.”

I don’t think the “little” sacrifices he made were terribly “little” and so the big reveal at the end–that he’s the only one keeping his community together–isn’t terribly shocking or emotional. What I saw was a kid who would risk his life and risk his job and health to save his little brother and that old guy (I’m forgetting everybody’s names) and then the risks and the sacrifices just sort of snow-balled from there. They weren’t little sacrifices, and I don’t care if it marks me as a kid of the 80s or I can be labeled as the most selfish person in existence, your dreams, passions, life-goals, and happiness are not “little things.” And George Bailey was not a happy man–except at the end when everybody decided he shouldn’t go to jail.

Maybe my ultimate objection is that the manipulation is so over-the-top and heavy-handed that we’re invited to think George was taken advantage of a little bit. Otherwise, when he’s in the bar and at the bridge, it wouldn’t be quite so heart-breaking. “After all he’s done, this is how the town is going to repay him? What a bunch of twats!” But of course, that’s not how the town is going to repay him at all! Huzzah! Now we can all feel good about ourselves, and humanity in general! Well, I didn’t feel good. I felt bad for Mr. Bailey.

46

I have the same feelings as pepperlandgirl.

Harry ought to have mortally ashamed of himself for even considering taking that job with Ruth’s father before fulfilling his obligation to take over the S&L while George went to college. Or since he was now Joe College himself, he could have brainstormed for a way to find someone else to buy it. What, nobody ever sold a business in the 40s? There were no other enterprising honest young men in his college class just itching to take a mediocre business and figure out how to turn it around? Every time I watch the movie I can’t believe George just lets him walk away into his fairytale life while he keeps slogging away yet again.

But I have watched that movie about 50 times and will watch it 50 more. Just certain parts annoy the hell out of me.

47

[QUOTE=pepperlandgirl]
I really don’t like the movie. I don’t walk away thinking George Bailey is a success or rich in friends. He sacrificed his entire life for his family, and his friends, and that stupid town. He put his dreams on hold again and again and again until they utterly disappeared. He was completely taken advantage of, and throughout the entire film, it’s never clear that the people around him understand or appreciate what they’re doing to him. And yeah, he’s to blame for some of this. But he is inherently a good guy, and the people who knew him knew that, and so they thought there was nothing wrong with taking advantage of him…And this is a cheerful Christmas story? It makes ME suicidal. The “this is what the world would be like without you” was completely manipulative, and let’s face it, just a reminder of how co-dependent everybody in George Bailey’s life is.
[/QUOTE]
At least there is one light of sanity in the darkness. However, you fail to note what, for me, is the most galling aspect of the story–little brother Harry. George Bailey hangs around to run the Bedford Falls Building & Loan so that his younger brother can go off and get himself educated with the implicit (or perhaps explicit) promise that he’ll come back and take over the business while George takes his much-delayed chance to go to college. Only, Harry shows up married to some tramp on his arm and takes a job out of town without so much as a by-your-leave, leaving George stuck taking someone’s castoff child-squirting girlfriend, a rickety house that is so drafty his children are perpetually sick, and an unsecured Building & Loan that is going to go belly up in the 1980s S&L scandal, leaving him without a retirement income. Fucking Harry, the little twerp, needs to be dragged back to town by his ears and nailed into the B&L president’s chair while George gets his long-overdue relief. Og, that pisses me off every time I see it. That little shit needs a horse-whipping.

But then, my film-watching plan for Christmas is the trifecta of Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, with The Apartment if I decide I want some non-violent cynicism.

Stranger

48

I too have mixed feelings about this movie. A lot of it depends on where I am in my life at the moment. Sometimes when I’m wondering if my life has had any meaning I find the “look how much of a difference you’ve made in other people’s lives” message encouraging. Other times, when I’m feeling like my responsibilities are weighing me down, I find the “why does George have to give up his dreams” question really annoying.

49

[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train]
At least there is one light of sanity in the darkness. However, you fail to note what, for me, is the most galling aspect of the story–little brother Harry. George Bailey hangs around to run the Bedford Falls Building & Loan so that his younger brother can go off and get himself educated with the implicit (or perhaps explicit) promise that he’ll come back and take over the business while George takes his much-delayed chance to go to college. Only, Harry shows up married to some tramp on his arm and takes a job out of town without so much as a by-your-leave, leaving George stuck taking someone’s castoff child-squirting girlfriend, a rickety house that is so drafty his children are perpetually sick, and an unsecured Building & Loan that is going to go belly up in the 1980s S&L scandal, leaving him without a retirement income. Fucking Harry, the little twerp, needs to be dragged back to town by his ears and nailed into the B&L president’s chair while George gets his long-overdue relief. Og, that pisses me off every time I see it. That little shit needs a horse-whipping.

But then, my film-watching plan for Christmas is the trifecta of Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, with The Apartment if I decide I want some non-violent cynicism.

Stranger
[/QUOTE]

Actually, I keep thinking about that scene where Harry shows up with his little wife and getting angrier and angrier, lol. I’m not sure why I didn’t mention it. I think it is the most egregious part of the movie. Harry is extremely selfish. But of course, Capra needed a reason to keep George in town, so it’s pretty egregious character-wise and structure-wise.

50

Ah, yes, the Frank Capra film about the bank manager who is willing to give others a chance despite the advice of other bankers and who, when faced with ruin, has all his friends show up and give him the money he needs to be solvent.

American Madness.

Capra badly self-plagiarized from the film (and from Richard Rossen) in IAWL. It’s exactly the same plot except for the angel.

As far as IAWL is concerned, my impression of the film is colored by my experience (unique on the SDMB): I’m one of the few people alive who read the story “The Greatest Gift” (on which the movie is based) and actually read it before I saw the movie. In addition, the first time I saw it (after having to be on the alert to find it, as it was just an obscure Frank Capra title at the time), it was in August, and I never associated it with Christmas.

The movie is far less subtle and hits all its points with a sledgehammer. For instance, George in the story isn’t the president of an S&L; he’s a low-level clerk. That certainly gives him a much better reason to feel like suicide, and cleverly shows that even if you have an unimportant job, you can still make a difference.

In the alternate version, George didn’t get the clerk’s job, but the guy who did embezzled from the bank and it went under. By merely being there and doing a routine job,
George made a big difference.

And, face it – George is a wimp and a patsy. It does grow tiresome to see him getting dumped on time and again without protest, and it’s hard to believe he could suddenly turn to suicide.

That said, the movie is OK, with some nice scenes in it, but if you want Capra, you’re better off watching Mr. Deeds Goes to Town or even American Madness.

51

[QUOTE=pepperlandgirl]
Actually, I keep thinking about that scene where Harry shows up with his little wife and getting angrier and angrier, lol. I’m not sure why I didn’t mention it. I think it is the most egregious part of the movie. Harry is extremely selfish. But of course, Capra needed a reason to keep George in town, so it’s pretty egregious character-wise and structure-wise.
[/QUOTE]

But, Harry offers to take over George’s job so George can go to college, even though his wife has other plans for him. What’s “selfish” about him? He had no reason not to get married, did he?

52

To my mind, he sure didn’t offer hard enough.

53

[QUOTE=Sunspace]
Are you me?
[/QUOTE]
Don’t think so. I’m not a Canadian, f’rinstance.

Whoa, there! Sure, Harry’s a jerk, the house is a dump, and the B&L will be better off once they put Uncle Billy out to pasture, but Mary cast herself off Sam, not the other way around. And I don’t know about you, but I’d happily impregnate Donna Reed whenever she wanted. Or go through the motions.

All the money collected at the end is lovely, but the original $8000 is still missing and the bank inspector knows it. How does George stay out of jail?

54

[QUOTE=missbunny]
To my mind, he sure didn’t offer hard enough.
[/QUOTE]

Sheesh. Harry said he’d do the job and let George go on his way. George heard that there was more potential in Harry’s job and made teh decsion to let him out of teh agreement. There was no scene showing Harry just up and leaving saying see ya sucker. For all you know the two brothers had a knock down drag out fight until Harry relented.

Each and every time George gives up his dreams he makes teh conscious choice. He could have let teh S&L go to Potter, he could have gone to college or go on his honeymoon but instead he chose to do the right thing. If you’re pissed because he didn’t become a selfish jerk and say screw you well too bad. It was only when he learned how he made a difference does he see that the dreams he had (Being famous building big structures and living thehighlife) weren’t as fufilling as what he had all along.

Hee Haw and Merry Christmas

55

[QUOTE=dropzone]
…I’d happily impregnate Donna Reed whenever she wanted. Or go through the motions…
[/QUOTE]

Heh. I can easily envision “the motions.” Hell, I’m envisioning them right now!

Ahem.

…I’ll be in my bunk.

56

[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir]
Heh. I can easily envision “the motions.” Hell, I’m envisioning them right now!

Ahem.

…I’ll be in my bunk.
[/QUOTE]

With dropzone? Kinky!

57

[QUOTE=dropzone]
All the money collected at the end is lovely, but the original $8000 is still missing and the bank inspector knows it. How does George stay out of jail?
[/QUOTE]
:confused: Once the neighbors make up the shortfall, it won’t be missing any more.

To be sure, if George had been embezzling the money and blowing it on hookers and booze, he’d still be in trouble. But he wasn’t. He lost the money. The auditor can go over George’s finances with a fine-toothed comb, and he won’t find any unreported income (except maybe for the collect phone call).

The question then becomes, when his scheme to put George out of business collapses, will Potter return the money? He’s not the type of person who would do so for ethical reasons, but there’s a chance that dotty old Uncle Billy will eventually remember that he dropped the money in Potter’s lap, and a reputation as a man who steals from his customers would be really bad for business. And if he spends the money himself, and doesn’t report it, he’ll be committing tax fraud.

58

[QUOTE=Equipoise]
With dropzone? Kinky!
[/QUOTE]

No, just me and dear, sweet Donna. =Sigh=

59

[QUOTE=Freddy the Pig]
…The question then becomes, when his scheme to put George out of business collapses, will Potter return the money?..
[/QUOTE]

I read an interview with Frank Capra many years later; he was bemused by how people always asked him what became of the eight grand. He said he thought Mr. Potter probably kept it, but plainly thought that was beside the point of the movie.

60

[QUOTE=kingpengvin]
Each and every time George gives up his dreams he makes teh conscious choice. He could have let teh S&L go to Potter, he could have gone to college or go on his honeymoon but instead he chose to do the right thing. If you’re pissed because he didn’t become a selfish jerk and say screw you well too bad. It was only when he learned how he made a difference does he see that the dreams he had (Being famous building big structures and living thehighlife) weren’t as fufilling as what he had all along.
[/QUOTE]
What he had was fulfilling? Because it seems to me that he has what is pretty much a dead end job, a family he’s not all that crazy about, a house that is literally falling apart, and neighbors and customers who largely take him for granted. Sure, George made the choice to stay and stay again, but always out of guilt over what would happen if he didn’t step up. There’s no saying that George wouldn’t have been just as happy having gone to college and become an architect, and if Mary wants to pine away and become a spinster in his absence, that’s her own hard luck. He’s supposed to relive the trials of Job for what? So his neighbors can come and bail him out of a cash shortfall that was due to Uncle Billy’s blundering? Ufck that noise; he should have taken the cash from Potter when he could and up and gone someplace where he could use his talents rather than wasting away time bailing out the Building & Loan. Old Man Potter is such a characture, too; it wasn’t enough to make him merely greedy, so he also has to be maliciously avaricious as well.

The film is more twisted and overwrought than a medieval morality play, a gruesome study in the manipulation of viewers for fun and profit.

Stranger