Review: Yankee Doodle Dandy

First of all how incredible was the Golden Globes? I stayed up to watch it as its on very late at night for the UK viewers, but I loved it. Oh and we've had a makeover on Peppermint Friday, what do you think it took me on and off all week, but I'm finally happy with it for now it might change it might not, but at the moment I love it!

Anyway back to the post this week is such a long time coming as I love these men so so much.  Particularly Jimmy, he is amazing but more on the individuals in Wednesday's post. 

Yankee Doodle Dandy is musical biopic of George M Cohan he was a vaudevillian superstar, the best way I can describe him is the old version of Neil Patrick Harris. He was amazing basically he wrote his own songs, he was very business oriented this film is about his family act called 'The Four Cohans' and his career. 

James Cagney (or I call him Jimmy) plays the George and he is brilliant, Jimmy mainly known for being this tough gangster guy but in this film he is a tap dancing, singing charismatic gentlemen. And Jimmy has always had charisma in all his roles regardless of the agenda and typecast of them. Thats one of the reasons as to why I love him so much, I mean Jimmy used to dance as a child, but he is so good everyone needs to see this side of Jimmy.

The songs are so catchy and brilliantly sung, I adore 'Harrigan', 'You're a Grand Old Flag', and of course 'Yankee Doodle Dandy' the film also has a lot of serious bits where George's sister Mary decides she wants to get married and stop performing, and so does their father. At that point in the film its really hard as it just shows that it was George who was the driving force of it all, and had the business behind it all so for him it was a slap in the face of 'oh its all me I have noone to give encouragement too' and in some ways it could be like 'oh yay I'm on my own, and I can bigger and have much more freedom'. As it was George writing all the songs for the shows they were all in. 

I think its an underrated musical as it has very catchy songs, the acting is brilliant and the story touches on some key issues that can be related to any walk of life. Although there are better musicals that have done much better and I can understand why its not done on stage or in schools as the music is yes good but its also seen as abit old fashioned.

Not to say its awful because 'an oldie can be a goldie' which segways perfectly onto the next point of the film which I'm going to talk about and thats being seen as a 'has been' during the end of George's career he is in his garden and they are teenagers nearby and they're talking about music and George mentions he did music all long time ago. The teenagers have no idea who he is and George says well maybe your parents talked about me, and the teenagers still don't know. Its just about being relevant and the worry that not even the people who listen and watch him remember who he is. 

But I adore this film and Jimmy's dancing, and more people should know who is he and love him. Because he is brilliant, charismatic, charming gentlemen he always has been and for those who only know Jimmy for his brilliant badass-ery watch this film, and still be blown away but in a different way. 

Chaplin Vs Keaton

I thought for a change I'd talk about one of the loves in my life, and that is Classic Film Stars & Actors. 

These are 2 very interesting Comics, Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin where they're very similar but complete opposites, we'll start with them at the beginning.

One similarity they both have is that they both started around the same time, and they were amazing writers, directors, actors and comics. 

Chaplin was bought up in East End London, it was just him and his Brother Sydney who then went ton later to become his manager, and his mother who had a mental breakdown and got sent to a mental institute. So for him he felt he had to have money because he had no choice but to be independent for himself and family.
Whereas with Keaton he was pretty much bought up on the Vaudeville Circuit, as his parents were Performers and he was part of his Family Act. So for him he felt that not having wasn't a big issue for him.

For Chaplin in terms of Comedy and a Career he wrote and directed alot of his films, and also he used a character for pretty much most of his films, 'The Tramp'. Which is very clever but also The Tramp was a particular character where he's very silly and doesn't take himself seriously and has a way of doing things, and its an iconic character he created, because he made films around The Tramp until he made 'The Great Dictator' but I mean The Tramp was who he was.

With Keaton he did things a little bit more spontaneous where he didn't really have a set character, but he always had a particular way of playing with Comedy.He always had a very serious, deadpanned face. As he did Physical Comedy with this character persona he had, its very interesting to watch. 

Both of them do Physical Comedy, both do it very well, but also they have such a Diversity in Comedy, where they both have such a vulnerability in there films. Also both are known for the parody they bought to film, Chaplin did 'The Great Dictator' which I wouldn't say is a parody at the time, but it is a parody of Adolf Hitler, however after that film and during that time he was involved in alot of controversy. Keaton did parodies aswell but his were alot less controversial than Chaplin as he just took out of films and other creative things. 

In personal life, they are very much different. As Chaplin had wife after wife, and even then they were very young girls, so young where he had to go to Mexico just to marry them. But even then he had not very goo marriages with them as he just forgot about them, which is very upsetting. Keaton however married the sister in law of his boss, so he was quite lucky I guess, he children with her, then he couldn't see them anymore which really affected him as unlike Chaplin he wanted to have his children around him. I mean Chaplin didn't hate his kids, he just didn't have time for them thus neglecting them and his wives.  Keaton also was known for a heavy drinker, but then again it wasn't that big of a 'Oh my god I can't believe that' because at the time, everyone drank, and also as him and his character it was too shocking where it was more of a sad thing. 

A difference in the 2 but a complete similarity is that both have a massive sense of creativity but in different ways, for Chaplin he did films with a beautiful story, but in some of his films his always had this story that wanted to come across, with 'Modern Times' for instance he wanted a story to come across as he felt for the people in hard times, he really got a feel of what was happening, rather than, being in a fantasy, make believe world, of 'oh lets be funny all the time'. It was funny but sometimes with a sense of realism. Keaton did things abit more creativity and without thinking of the real world issues, but at the same time it can be more creative to do films with real world issues. Because you're breaking the mold and thats what he did. 

Although at the end of this there really isn't a competition as they're both pretty much the same I guess, I mean in terms of success, and you know I'm not a huge fan of the whole 'Who's better than who?' as I feel both of them are equally as amazing. With saying that however I prefer Chaplin as I've just liked him longer, and I've watched hundreds of Chaplin documentarys, whereas for Keaton I've only watch 1 or 2. I guess you could also say that Chaplin is much more commercially known, partly because of the controversy he lead in his life. I mean you can make up your mind of what you want out of it.