Glen or Glenda (1953)

Jesus, where to begin.

The story of Christine Jorgensen, a US Army vet who had sex reassignment surgery in Denmark, was quite the buzz in 1952 and Producer George Weiss wanted to make a film about her. Edward Wood, despite having almost no film experience, begged to direct. He confided that he was a cross dresser, which could have gotten him arrested. Weiss agreed and Wood did more than direct, he also wrote and starred in it. Nobody wrote dialog quite like Ed Wood.

But rather than concentrate on Jorgensen, Wood focuses on cross dressing, initially on a man who committed suicide because the law would not allow him to live the life he wanted. Jorgensen and sex reassignment gets brief coverage in the third act.

There were a few take-aways. First, Wood takes a surprisingly compassionate tone. Surprising for 1953, that is. Also, he asserts that there is no connection between transvestites and homosexuality. I plead ignorance on the subject. Additionally, he claimed Jorgensen was a “pseudohemaphrodite”, which I learned was a common belief at the time, not that Jorgensen ever said. A biological component may have made the story easier to handle back then.

Wood’s film came back at around 50 minutes. Too short to be considered a feature, so Weiss added a bizarre fourteen minute dream sequence that did not add to the barely-there narrative. Also bizarre is Bela Lugosi’s role in the film. Titled just “Scientist”, dressed like Dracula, he just repeats strange lines from a traditional gothic horror set piece. Broke and suffering from substance abuse at the time, Bela took any role offered.

Glen or Glenda is a prime example of poor storytelling. While wondering where the story is going, the viewer is confronted with yet more exposition. In parts the acting is laughingly bad, but pay attention to the dialog. It’s just confoundingly terrible. But, at a brisk 65 minutes, it’s surprisingly watchable. How many films can you say were a completely unique viewing experience? And for those who feel “this whole transgender thing” appeared out of nowhere in the past ten years, here is exhibit A from 1953. AMRU 3.

Monty Python’s Life of Brian (1979)

The chronicles of Brian of Nazareth, whose life parallels his better known neighbor, Jesus.

You are either a Python fan or you’re not. The second of four feature films (if you include Live at the Hollywood Bowl) under the Python banner took religious satire to a new level. Annoyed by being repeatedly asked what’s next, Eric Idle sarcastically replied “Jesus Christ: Lust for Glory”. While considering a movie about Jesus, they didn’t find much humor in it. Rather, they created Brian, born at the same time and mistaken for the messiah. Christian conservatives were not amused.

Because of the sensitive subject matter, financier EMI backed out. Private funding came from, of all people, George Harrison. When asked why he did this, his response was “I wanted to see the movie”. Terry Jones, who directed, joked it was the world’s most expensive cinema ticket.

Life of Brian faced widespread protests, and bans that lasted decades. And despite this, it was a huge commercial success, out earning The Holy Grail seven fold. The group argued quite correctly that the film does not satirize theology, but dogma. Depictions of Jesus were handled with respect. It’s everyone else that is skewered. The various anti-Roman separatist groups fighting amongst themselves rather than fighting the Romans, their propensity to endlessly debate rather than take to action, and the people following Brian not agreeing what his message actually was.

But the message, plainly stated, is that you don’t have to follow anyone. You need to make decisions for yourself. This leads to quite possibly one of funniest scenes in any film, where Brian confronts his followers with the above message and they reply in unison “Yes, we are all individuals”.

The Holy Grail may be the troop’s most accessible film, but Life of Brian exceeds it in social and political satire, and is arguably the funnier film. AMRU 5.

"I'm not"

At War with the Army (1950)

Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis are in the army. Antics ensue. Set before the war, there are a few sub-plots (for lack of a better term), one involving a young woman who is apparently with child.

This is the first of fourteen Martin and Lewis comedy films over seven years, not including comic relief cameos. Their lucrative partnership lasted exactly ten years and would end in bitter acrimony. The two would not speak for twenty years.

The comedian + singer buddy comedy genre was proven successful with the Hope and Crosby road movies. Each pair would cameo in the other’s films. Director Hal Walker even worked on two of them.

At War with the Army is a fairly meh comedy with few giggles, if any. If you find Lewis cross-dressing and sarcastically saying “Oh, big man!” funny, then you might have something. It is the lowest rated of the pair’s films, so that’s encouraging. AMRU 2.5.

Clash by Night (1952)

World-weary Mae Doyle (Barbara Stanwyck) returns to her hometown, defeated by the past ten years. Now just wanting to be safe, she agrees to marry nice guy fisherman Jerry (Paul Douglas). Mae hates Jerry’s boorish, arrogant friend Earl (Robert Ryan), so predictably, they have an affair.

Marilyn Monroe plays the girlfriend of Mae’s little brother. On loan from 20th Century Fox, this was her first sizable role. Back-handed compliments aside, her performance earned her better roles. Old friend J. Carrol Naish played Uncle Vince. A very different role for him.

Commonly labeled film-noir, Clash by Night certainly has a noir title. It also has a noir cast and director, and the tone is fairly pessimistic, but It seems to just miss. Even TCM’s Eddie Muller seems to waffle on the subject.

Clash by Night is a domestic drama populated by fully flushed out characters. The setting feels very ‘lived in’, probably because it was based on a successful play. Robert Ryan performed in the play as Joe Doyle. Maybe not noir, but excellent performances make it an entertaining watch. AMRU 3.5.

What Else I Watched, 2026Q2

Not a lot, it would appear.

Airplane! (1980) was a top-ten comedy for me as a lad. Much of it holds up, but not all. It was fun to revisit an old friend. It wasn’t included as a stand-alone post because it’s a film I’ve watched very many times, including in recent years. The rules for my 1980 cut-off gets fuzzier and fuzzier.

A Night at the Opera (1935)
Genuinely funny bits interrupted by tiresome musical numbers. This is my stand on most of Marx Brother’s movies. I had poor transfers for many of their films the first time through. This time I watched a restored version, which made it more enjoyable. Unfortunately, it didn’t help the musical interludes.

Ninotchka (1939)
It gets better each time I see it. Crisp dialog, excellent performances, and a solid story.

Filmmakers for the Prosecution (2021)
I recorded it then forgot why. When I started watching, I thought it had something to do with Witness for the Prosecution (1957). It was, in fact, about the people who collected and assembled video evidence of Nazi war crimes after World War II. Like today, people needed conclusive, visual proof of the dangers of fascism. It was very thought provoking.

I’ve found it difficult to find time for movie watching in recent months. I have watched a lot of TV series like Stranger Things for the first time (it’s more enjoyable if you ignore the wonky logic) and The Doctor Blake Mysteries. It was good enough. The show and lead actor were cancelled by #himtoo. Also watching the latest season of the live action Avatar: The Last Airbender. Not terrible, not great. I don’t see why it needed to exist. It’ll be forgotten as soon as it’s finished.

I bet I forgot a movie.

Caged (1950)

Pretty Marie (Eleanor Parker) is sent to prison as an accessory to her husband’s robbery attempt. I sure hope everyone is nice to her.

Caged is by no means the first Women in Prison film, but it is a seminal one. Produced by a major studio during the code area, it had positive reviews while containing much of what we expect from the genre. Within the confines of the time, mind you. The shower scenes were strictly knee and down. Producer Jerry Wald wanted to do for women’s prisons what I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932) did twenty years earlier.

Bette Davis was offered the lead, but she declined, calling it a “dyke movie”. Joan Crawford was also offered a role. Eleanor Parker is quite sympathetic as the pregnant 19 year old widow. Three times Oscar nominated, it’s interesting I haven’t seen more of her. She was the Baroness in The Sound of Music (1965).

Mercury Theatre alum Agnes Moorehead plays the warden. Against type and stereotype, she plays a mostly sympathetic character. Ellen Corby (Grandma Walton) is one of the cell mates. Six foot two Hope Emerson is a quite imposing prison guard.

Caged is an interesting character drama, but don’t confuse it for exploitation. Although exploitation can be a problematic genre label, technically encompassing all horror films. I prefer to use a “I know it when I see it” benchmark. AMRU 3.5.

The Canterville Ghost (1944)

Sir Simon de Canterville (Charles Laughton), called to defend the honor of his brother, chickens out. For his cowardice he is walled up inside the castle. His spirit will never become free until one of his descendants does something brave in his name. Unfortunately, all of his descendants are also cowards. It’s World War II and an American army unit is being housed in the once-grand Canterville castle. I wonder if one of those brave Yanks is a Canterville.

Six year old Margaret O’Brien plays Lady Jessica. She seems especially brave, but apparently curses are strictly misogynistic. O’Brien was very memorable in Meet Me in St. Louis that same year. As an adult she almost completely transitioned to television. Curious how she would have fared as a Hollywood leading lady.

It's very curious how the film clearly outlines the problem to be solved and the conditions that must be met to solve it. Because of this we are not surprised that G.I. Cuffy Williams (Robert Young) has the exact same birthmark as our spirit. That was the classic Hollywood version of 23 and me. Reginald Owen (A Christmas Carol) plays Sir Simon's less than forgiving father and Rat Packer Peter Lawford is his undefended brother. Una O'Connor has a disappointingly small role.

I’m certain I’ve confused this film with A Canterbury Tale more than once. Both were released in 1944, set in rural England, and involve the US Army. Not sure the Nazis were actually operating in rural England, but both films say otherwise. That said, the films aren’t terribly similar. This is a very Hollywood production while A Canterbury Tale is, well, not.

Based on an Oscar Wilde story, it has been adapted a great many times, twenty eight by my count. This appears to be the earliest. I know little of the source material, but I do know that sir Simon was guilty of far more than just failing to defend his brother's honor.

The Canterville Ghost isn’t a bad watch, but predictable and unimaginative. AMRU 3.