The Best Films I Have Never Seen Before: Two for the Road (1967)

Two for the Road (1967) *** ½
Directed by: Stanley Donen.
Written by: Frederic Raphael.
Starring: Audrey Hepburn (Joanna Wallace), Albert Finney (Mark Wallace), Eleanor Bron (Cathy Manchester), William Daniels (Howard Manchester), Gabrielle Middleton (Ruth Manchester), Claude Dauphin (Maurice Dalbret), Nadia Gray (Francoise Dalbret), Georges Descrières (David), Jacqueline Bisset (Jackie), Judy Cornwell (Pat), Irène Hilda (Yvonne de Florac), Dominique Joos (Sylvia).

Out of all the decades, I think it is the films of the 1960s that have aged the most. Since the studio system was in the midst of collapse, directors had more freedom to experiment that ever before – and in some cases they made masterpieces. But when I watch films like Tom Jones (1963) or Charly (1968) to name just two films, films that were popular and critically acclaimed at the time of their release, they seem hopelessly dated now – drowning in strange directorial tricks that now seem downright silly. There are moments in Stanley Donne’s Two for the Road (1967) that reminded me of those films – a strange scene played in fast forward and the famous closing shot that shows the cars the bickering couple at the heart of the movie split apart and come back together again. These scenes seem out of place in the film, that otherwise is a surprisingly frank and modern look at marriage – and all the good and bad that comes along with it. Perhaps Donne, an old school Hollywood filmmaker (behind such films as Singing’ in the Rain and Funny Face) added these touches in just to make his film fit in with everything around it. He needn’t have bothered – there is more than enough in the film to make it relevant.

The film is about Mark and Joanna Wallace (Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn). They have been married for 12 years, have a daughter and are constantly at each other’s throats. The movie flashes back in forth in time to show this couple on several trips together – from them hitchhiking across Europe after meeting each other for the first time, to a trip in a rundown car when he is still struggling as a architect but they are happy, to an insufferable trip with another couple and their annoying daughter they refuse to discipline, to one where Mark’s boss, who has made them rich, places unrealistic demands on him, to finally the one they are currently on, and which may well be their last.

Donen was a director who loved his films to look good – and aside from his little forays into 1960s style I mentioned in the first paragraph – Two for the Road looks good at all times. The cinematography is beautiful at times – showing us the splendor of Europe, without stooping to just showing off landmarks. The costumes are immaculate, showing us the passage in time, in styles, in social standing so that we orient ourselves immediately to what trip we are actually seeing at that time. Albert Finney and Audrey Hepburn are both attractive, likable actors. For a while, we are lulled into thinking that this will be another storybook, Hollywood romance. But gradually it becomes something deeper than that – something darker. The couple, who always bickered playfully, continue to bicker but lose the playfulness. The child that comes is a weight on them, even though they love her. Infidelity rears its head – first with him in a fling that means nothing, and then with her in a fling that most assuredly does. The young, idealistic couple we meet at the beginning are barely visible in the people they end up being 12 years later.

And yet Two for the Road still made the AFI’s list of the 100 Greatest Movie Romances. Why? Because underneath everything these two do to each other, there is love. Most movie romances end where in real life the going gets tough. Romantic comedies are built on the basic concept of keeping the two people everyone knows should be together apart for the whole movie, so they can come together in the final reel and kiss – often in the rain or an airport – and the audience can cheer because we know they’ll live “happily ever after”. But life doesn’t work that way. Marriage is hard and requires work. Real married couples are not incandescently happy every moment of everyday.

This is the reality that Two for the Road explores. It gives us the Hollywood style romance at the beginning of the film, but as the movie goes along, we see less of that happy couple full of naïve hope, and more of the couple who bicker. And yet, in a very strange way, Mark and Joanna are meant for each other. They fit together, and in a strange way make each other happy, even when they are making each other miserable. Finney is a charming actor, and I am always somewhat surprised to see how good looking he was in the 1960s – I have a vision in my head of the aging man in Erin Brockovich, but with that deep voice, he really was attractive back then. Of Audrey Hepburn, nothing needs to be said about her fragile beauty. These two were stars back in 1967 – the could have made whatever they chose, but the fact that they chose to make this movie shows a little daring on their part – and both are rewarded with one of the best roles of their careers. Hepburn in particular is great in the film. Perhaps after so many cinematic romances – Roman Holiday, Sabrina, Funny Face, Breakfast at Tiffany’s, My Fair Lady, etc – she wanted to show a different, more honest portrait of love, and in that she succeeds wonderfully well. Like the best cinematic romances, Two for the Road understands that love is not easy.

The Best Movies I've Never Seen Before: Funny Face (1957)

Funny Face (1957) ***
Directed by: Stanley Donen.
Written by: Leonard Gershe.
Starring: Audrey Hepburn (Jo Stockton), Fred Astaire (Dick Avery), Kay Thompson (Maggie Prescott), Michel Auclair (Prof. Emile Flostre), Robert Flemyng (Paul Duval), Dovima (Marion).

I love Fred Astaire. Just like there are Elvis people and Beatles people, or Buster Keaton people and Charlie Chaplin people, there seems to be a divide among lovers of Hollywood musicals. You are either a Fred Astaire person or a Gene Kelly person. Put me down firmly in the Astaire column. Having said that, the 1957 film Funny Face, despite the presence of a dancing Astaire, despite the direction of musical legend Stanley Donen (Singin’ in the Rain among others), and despite the performance by Audrey Hepburn left me a little let down. It’s not that it’s not a fine film – it is – it’s just that despite the presence of these three legends, I think that they have all done much better work in their careers. Funny Face is amusing and fun – but not really memorable.

The story is classic Hollywood musical stuff. Astaire plays Dick Avery, a famed fashion photographer, working for a high end magazine that dictates the style American women wear every day. The magazine wants a fresh, new face for a new campaign they are doing – and they happen to stumble upon humble Jo Stockton (Hepburn) working in a bookstore. She despises fashion, but longs to travel to Paris to study under Professor Emie Flostre, who has come up with a new philosophy Empathism. The opportunity to travel to Paris, all expenses paid, is too much for her to pass up – even if she does have to degrade herself by becoming a model. You get no bonus points for guessing that Astaire and Hepburn fall in love – but that there are complications.

Funny Face is amongst the most colorful musicals I have ever seen. From its opening sequence, where everything is painted pink, right through to the end, Funny Face is a non-stop burst of color. It’s so colorful in fact that at times, it is almost blinding. But you cannot fault the wonderful cinematography, art direction or costume design – all of which helps to create a visually exciting artificial playground for the characters to go in.

You cannot really fault the performances either. Astaire had essentially been playing a version of this role his entire career – yet you never catch him sleepwalking through it. He is fun, funny, charming and playful throughout the movie. And Hepburn has played similar roles as well, but here she seems to be having a blast in her role. While it’s true that Hepburn didn’t have the greatest singing voice, hence why the dubbed her singing in My Fair Lady (1964), she has the chops to the pull off what is asked of her here. Personally, I thought the much praised work by Kay Thompson, playing a kinder, gentler version of Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada, was a little too far over the top – even by musical standards.

If there is a failing to this movie, sadly, I think it’s the music. To be perfectly honest with you, even though it’s only been a few days since I’ve seen the movie, I really cannot recall any of the songs in the movie. Yes, they are written by George and Ira Gershwin, but can any of them even compare to their best work – songs like Embraceable You, I Got Rhythm, The Man I Love, They Can’t Take That Away From Me or Someone to Watch Over Me? I don’t think that any of the songs in Funny Face even come close.

There are two wonderful musical sequences in the film though. Both are dance numbers. One featuring Fred Astaire dancing in a deserted square for Hepburn who watches from her balcony. It is a lovely scene, and shows that even though Astaire was aging at this point (he was 58), he could still move. No, it doesn’t compare to the great work he did in the 1930s – or even just a few years before in The Band Wagon (1953), but it wonderful just the same. The one truly brilliant segment in the movie surprising involves Hepburn – and its her now infamous Bohemian routine in the coffee shop, which somehow manages to mock the pretentiousness of the routine, while still being a wonderful one. Hepburn plays this to the hilt, and it is truly an unforgettable movie moment.

But it also highlights what is missing from the rest of Funny Face – truly memorable moments. I enjoyed Funny Face quite a bit as I watched it. Over the past few years, I think have truly gotten over my previous aversion to movie musicals, and can now fully embrace them for the artificial fun they were meant to be. Yet, even by those standards, Funny Face felt a little too by the numbers for me to truly love. The great musicals are no less clichéd than Funny Face, but they don’t feel as clichéd – or at least they get past that by having numerous great musical numbers. This one doesn’t offer that. Instead, Funny Face is, to me anyway, simply a fun, enjoyable musical – a good way to kill a couple of hours. There are worse things that it could be – but there are also better things.