Wild River

[JackFavell]

That's funny.

I think Remick is better than many actresses of that time. I see a character actress stuck inside the really gorgeous body and face of a screen starlet. I would place her somewhat above Taylor, Gardner,and Novak, acting wise, but maybe just below Joanne Woodward, Patricia Neal and Sophia Loren. She is one of those actresses who strove for something different, maybe it was simply more challenging roles. She seemed to be trying to go against type, and I find her performances more easy to identify with than Jean Simmons, another who tried working outside the box of her beauty.

I think she is kind of a bridge between two different time periods. Without her and a few other actresses who strove for more deeply felt work than starlet roles, women in the sixties would have had no chance to portray anything but bimbos, princesses and bombshells. I like her tremendously, and find her much more interesting than Grace Kelly or Audrey Hepburn, two other delicate beauties of similar type. She is more modern.

[jdb1]

Interesting is the word, all right. It really is interesting how differently we see what's up on the screen.

I think I'd add a "not!" to just about every sentence you wrote about Remick. I don't think she's all that great an actress, and I'd hardly describe her hard-edged, desperate cheerleader looks as "delicate." She looks like the school's mean girl, and that's wasn't always appropriate casting. I don't see her as going against type -- as far as I can determine, she pretty much played the same type of character over and over, and not all that remarkably. I personally don't think she's anywhere close to the class of the other actresses you mention. I've always thought of Remick as the Elizabeth Montgomery of the big screen, only I think Montgomery had more range when she got a chance to play something other than Samantha Stephens. I believe the only movie with Remick in it that I have been able to sit through without annoyance is Telefon --she was a good match for Charles Bronson.

But then again there are so many actors spoken about here with great enthusiasm who I find less than compelling, and in some cases downright repellant. If they were all exactly alike, it wouldn't be much fun for us to watch them, would it?

[Sue Sue Applegate]

I really must reiterate the comments made my kingrat and charliechaplinfan.

Wild River is a completely compelling film for me. I have traveled in the area with my mom, and we stopped and read several historical markers concerning the TVA and the Army Corp of Engineers.

I had recently read Montgomery Clift's biography and because of some of the comments, one that it was Kazan's favorite film, I couldn't wait until I saw Wild River. The first time for me was at the TCM Festival, and I was able to enjoy that film on the big screen, with one of its greatest fans, kingrat.

Nominated for the Golden Bear at Berlin in 1960, Kazan did receive some recognition. But his choice as his favorite must have had something to do with the theme, and how much rich experience he was able to draw from his actors.
One of the miracles of this film is Jo Van Fleet, who was 40 at the time she played 80 something Ella Garth.
Her portrayal is amazing, not only for the transformation, but also for the poignant, nuanced performance she
gave. It is her best, in my opinion, and highly underrated.

The following from imdb under Lee Remick:

I find it terribly depressing that 54 million people watch "The Beverly Hillbillies" (1962) - just about the same number who didn't take the trouble to vote in the Presidential election.

[on Wild River (1960)] It's the kind of movie I love, a major subject done in a personal way...it was the best work I had done and I think it stands up well today.

[on Montgomery Clift] He did inspire in me, as he did in most women I suppose, the feeling of wanting to look after him. He was like a wounded bird -- so vulnerable.

My interpretation of the role in Wild River (1960) was the truest in my experience, and it was Kazan who enabled me to make it true.

Remick's ditzy cheerleader in A Face in the Crowd belies her capabilities here in Wild River. Any starlet in a cookie cutter could have walked through that part. A Face in the Crowd came three years earlier than Remick's riveting perforemance in Wild River, , and her knockout performance in The Days of WIne and Roses two years later reveals the spectrum of her flowering talents.

I was awestruck by the cinematography of Ellsworth Fredericks, and I feel Kingrat feels the same way. The last shot at the end sums up the struggle, the revelations, and the sense of connectedness to time and place.

Even consummate character actor Albert Salmi, Daniel Boone's sidekick in the Fess Parker television series of the same name, is menacingly heartless as the heavy.

I hope everyone will give this film a second or third chance.

[charliechaplinfan]

Thanks Christy, I'm still amazed that I hadn't really heard of this movie, despite enjoying other movies that Kazan had made, particularly his films with Marlon, I felt I stumbled upon a real gem when watching this movie for the first time.

[Sue Sue Applegate]

Even though I saw this film in April, I keep remembering the final scene. It was one of the greatest codas on film in my memory. ( No spoiler here, though!) It has just stayed with me As well as certain moments of Clift's, Remick's, and Van Fleet's performances.

I highly recommend this film. The evocative nature of the characters and the setting is overwhelming.