Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Micransix Crappy film

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

MisterWhiplash I'd have to look up the stats to make sure, but I believe that Joan Crawford may be one of the only actors, certainly the only major star I can recall off the top of my head, who starred in two completely different films with the same title. This must have occurred to Crawford at the time, but it's also interesting to see just how different the films are while at the same time there *is* one aspect that is similar, though unintentional, and separated by not only a decade and a half but the technology of cinema itself. Also, both are good films, if not quite great landmarks (and this one featuring a couple of memorable scenes I'll get to shortly) Unlike the 1947 Possessed, where Crawford was a woman who is found wandering the streets totally nutter and while half in shell-shock tells the story about her dashed hopes of love with Van Heflin, the 1931 Possessed, directed by Clarence Brown and featuring Crawford's oft-MGM co-star (and occasional lover) Clark Gable, is a simple little movie with a strong dramatic core about a young woman who leaves her dispiriting midwest small-town working-class life to make something of herself in New York City, finds well-to-do political aspiration-filled Gable, three years go by, and they may get married... until the man from before in that small town she was with reenters the picture. The 47 film was a little more sophisticated in some of its filmmaking craft by the sheer fact that it was so many years into the (classic Golden-age) Hollywood sound era, not to mention some film-noir aesthetic, while Brown is still seeing what can be done with this darn sound technology, and the script reflects this simplicity as well.This doesn't make it bad at all, on the contrary the interest in watching this film is to see how these two stars play off one another - it's a drama but there's real chemistry between them, and Gable especially shows his acting chops in the last twenty minutes or so of the film - and that once this love triangle starts to unfold, Brown puts in a few touches to make it visually striking. There's one moment where Marian and Wallace Ford as Al Manning where he proposes to her while they're on a merry-go-round (who knew adults did that back then, guess I'm the fool to think otherwise), and while the background keeps moving, we're focused on these two actors as Crawford's face changes to concern (and her words try to mask this) and Ford is just a happy-go-lucky kind of guy. And the way Brown uses close-ups is strong too, like when Marian is uncertain about things involving Mark Whitney.The two memorable set pieces are contrasts in how we see a character react to the world around them; Crawford's Marian very early in the film (this is after expressing her uncertainty to Al that she wants to stick around in town and live *this* life he wants for her) sees a train going by slowly, and she sees into the cars. Inside the train cars is exuberance, people dancing, champagne flowing, and the way the train cars are going by it seems like she's getting a vision into another place in time, or even her desires and dreams manifested (are they real? who cares? they're there). This scene, by the way, was later used as a good example of what desiring things in visual terms means in The Pervert's Guide to Cinema.The other memorable portion is the climax and ending, where Mark Whitney is giving a political speech - he's running for governor and a number of things have happened up to this point for him to run, which I won't get in to as it reveals a spoiler I'd rather leave free for you to see in regards of the love triangle - and Marian is there in the crowd (though Mark doesn't know it). How Brown cuts around to some of these faces, how we see this giant space, how a certain stack of papers are thrown out asking who the "Mrs. Whitney" is, and then when Crawford stands up, this shows some excellent editing and pacing on Brown's part and makes for a dynamic conclusion - a sad one, as well, though I won't say why that is either.There are a few creaky parts to the film, and the script may be *so* simple as that one might wish it were a little longer - it runs a very slim 76 minutes, and there's a time jump of around three years from 1928 to 1931, and, surprisingly (and I'd think audiences at the time, who did make this a hit, would've wanted to see something of this), there's not a single mention of the depression, or if it affected Whitney and his political/business affairs. But the draw of the film is Crawford and Gable (and Ford isn't too bad either, though his character makes him fairly one note until his last scene), and they're excellent either together or apart. Just that scene alone where they meet for the first time, where Marian is first trying to ask the man she met in her town (the only one she knows) about any work or opportunities and he tells her to shove off, she sticks around in the hallway and then comes back in and asks Gable's Mark out... wow does that have a good charge.So, no, they're not quite the same movies - we never see Marian go totally cuckoo like her character in the 47 film - but they are both women who want some kind of status in society, and it involves then men that, at the time, made it so they had little recourse else (in one film she's a nurse and that's about it, in the other she's... well, what would she do without the men in her life there?)

secondtake Possessed (1931)A wonderful Joan Crawford film not to be confused with her second, completely unrelated, also wonderful movie of the same title (yes) from 1947. This one, to be sure, also stars Clark Gable, and it dates from the years when Gable and Crawford had an intermittent, steamy affair. The chemistry is good, the filming excellent (and sometimes breathtaking), and the overall story a lively pre-code, Depression-era tale of succeeding.But success at what cost? That's the key. You love Crawford's rise, and her methods are sincere even if not as sweet and homespun as the first scene would imply. It's not that she's corrupted, but that she discovers the excitement of the big city, and the truth that there really is sincerity there as much as in the little town she came from.Gable represents every girl's dream, of course. He's suave, warm, funny. And rich. Their interactions are natural throughout, and the pace lively (as most of the famous pre-Code films are).The filming is excellent, including a somewhat famous long take of Crawford, near the beginning, watching a train slowly amble by as a parade of different scenes unfolds through each window. It's worth seeing just for that scene alone (if you like great cinematography, and the aura of old Hollywood).Clarence Brown is the uncredited (!) director here, and he's terrific. See "A Free Soul" made at the same time for another (even better) film showing off his ability to make dialogs crisp and true. (He's more famous for his many movies with Garbo, but he did a slew with Crawford.) If you think there is a predictability here, you're going to be partly wrong. See this one, not because it's a classic, but because it's very very good, and forgotten. You will have trouble finding a good version, however. The one I found was on iTunes and it was so terrible (harsh tones, highlights so washed out you couldn't see their faces in many scenes) I don't recommend it. (I wrote to complain and got a quick refund, an apology, and a promise to look into it. I don't know if that fixed the problem, however, in Spring 2014.) Anyway, find a good copy somehow. Do it.

JoeKarlosi I came by this movie when someone I know at work gave me a still-sealed copy from the Warner Archive Collection; they'd sent him two of the same title by mistake. Since it was Clark Gable and Joan Crawford I decided I'd give it a chance. Joan plays a factory worker who gets tired of the hum-drum life she leads and isn't interested in the man who's longed to marry her since they were kids (Wallace Ford) so she leaves it all and travels to New York City where she plays mistress to a wealthy lawyer (Gable) to get the kind of high living she wants. Three years later, Ford still wants to marry her, and Gable intends to run for Governor but his chances may be jeopardized by living with a woman. This pre-code film was nothing earth shattering, but had good performances from Crawford and Gable, and for me an added surprise bonus with a strong turn by Wallace Ford. I think through this movie it's easy to see Crawford's talents and how Gable was destined to become a big star. Director Clarence Brown has a nice touch, and some shots are very impressive. The one which stood out most for me is early on where Joan longingly observes well-to-do people interacting on a slow-moving train, as we see them through the windows of each passing car. When I see artistic flourishes like this in so many early '30s pictures (and many silents), my old defense of Tod Browning's Dracula for being dull due to it being an early talkie certainly falls flat. **1/2 out of ****

whpratt1 Always enjoy the Classic Films of the 1930's and great stars like Clark Gable,(Mark Whitney),"But Not For Me",'59, who plays a charming, trim and young looking successful lawyer who runs into a very tricky and ambitious young lady. The young lady is, Joan Crawford,(Marian Martin),"Journey to Murder",'72, (who was at the top of her career in Hollywood) manages to leave a boring life, and a boring husband to find a richer field of endeavor in NYC with very wealthy people whom she is able to con into doing anything she wants. If you like a young looking Clark Gable and Joan Crawford and would like to see how films were made in the early 30's, this is the film for YOU!!