016. A Woman's Face, 1941

What’s The Story? Ann Holm (our Joan) is on trial in Stockholm for murder. In the courtroom, we see flashback after flashback as witnesses spin the story of how Torsten (Conrad Veidt) falls into the orbit of Anna. In the first flashback, we hear about a dinner party hosted by the profligate businessman Torsten (played ably by Conrad Veidt). After the extravagant meal is over, Torsten’s credit is rejected. He then goes to ask the manager for help.

Turns out Anna and her scar are running a big blackmail ring in Stockholm and a couple of Torsten’s guests are some of her targets, including Vera (Osa Messan) who is cheating on her plastic surgeon husband Gustaf (Melvin Douglas, every bit Joan’s equal). Anna comes to Vera’s and Gustaf’s home to bargain over Vera’s love letters to her beau.

Gustaf arrives home and Anna twists her ankle trying to escape. Gustaf offers to fix her scar in exchange for going straight. Anna admits she got her scar during a fire that killed her father when she was 6. However, Torsten blackmails her into a scheme to kill his 4 year-old cousin Lars-Erik so he can inherit the family fortune. Lots of witty banter, intrigue and line dancing follows as Anna lies her way into becoming Lars-Erik’s nanny and feels conflicted about what she’s to do. I’ll steer away from spoilers here, but a lot of it revolves around the odd ethics of Lars-Erik’s housekeeper (played stiffly by Marjorie Main).

It’s a shame that A Woman’s Face isn’t as well-known as some of her other films because it’s a fun thriller. Director George Cukor (who had directed Joan in both The Women and Susan and God) does a bang up job unfolding the story and teasing the tension out of every scene. The film is very engaging, the camerawork is stellar and the production design is luxurious.

Oh, And How’s Joan? She is marvelous. This kind of role allows for her to play all of her strengths: the steely resolve, the blue collar background, glamour, pathos and humor. The two clips above really show her range. The scene alone with Osa where Joan goes from being powerful to cruel to coy to vulnerable to violent is some of her best work. She is really hitting her stride in this film. She’s dynamite and she is working off of a great ensemble as well.

Should I See It? Absolutely. It’s a treat. It would make a good double bill with Midsommar, showing the creepier sides of Sweden (outside of some Dragon Tattoos).

How Can I See It? It plays on TCM but it’s also available for rent on Amazon, Google Play, iTunes, and Vudu.

011. Susan And God, 1940

What’s The Story? Rich lady about town Susan (our miss Joan) is due back any minute from a long trip to Europe. Her boozy estranged husband Barrie (Frederic March) is none too happy about this. Susan has alienated their daughter Blossom (Ruth Quigley, NOT Mayim Bialik) who gets into a crying fit over being sent to yet another summer camp and just wants her family to get back together. Susan’s good friends Irene, Clyde, Leonora, Charlotte and Hutchie are all at sixes and sevens as well, what with two of them prevented from being together by a lack of divorce and another couple longing for each other but one of them is inconveniently married.

Susan’s (and Joan’s) arrival in the film is on the bow of a speedboat, hurtling towards the group at breakneck speed. While she doesn’t crash into the pier, Susan definitely crashes into her friends’ lives. Talking a mile a minute, Susan waxes about the new religion she learned while in Europe, like she does with Leonora (Rita Hayworth) and her ex boyfriend. (Video can't be embedded, sorry) And Susan’s truth-telling has major consequences for her life and for those around her.

Based on Rachel Crother’s play, Susan And God starts out as a Noel Coward-esque satire on religious fads and superficial spirituality. And the first half of the movie delivers on this. Susan is about as deep as a pancake, and uses this new religion to try to deflect responsibility in her life while insisting it in her friends. There’s a lot of rat-a-tat dialogue which is delivered well by an able cast. But the film turns very serious in its second half, almost losing all of its comedy and bite where Susan tries to make things work with her family and all but forgets about the new religion. The film makes less sense at it goes on. It’s a forgotten part of Crawford’s filmography and it’s easy to see why.

Oh, And How’s Joan? Joan delivers most of the time. Paired again with her director from The Women George Cukor, Joan proves two films in a row that can can deliver funny dialogue while playing the pathos underneath. Her scenes with Frederic March sparkle. But the story goes off the rails and there’s little Joan can do about it. Joan got the role after Norma Shearer (her main rival at MGM) turned down the role. The film was a financial disappointment and started a run of films which ended in MGM not renewing her contract.

Should I Watch It? Eh. Maybe? She’s fine in it, but she’s way better in The Women (which I will cover later). If you are a completionist, sure give this a whirl. But I think your time will be better suited watching other films of hers.

Where Can I Watch It? I recorded it off of TCM, but you can buy the DVD of it here.

002. Humoresque, 1946

What’s The Story? John Garfield plays a poor but very talented classical violinist in early 30s New York who meets wealthy arts patron Helen Wright (our Joan) at one of her cocktail parties. She tries at first to break him down like all of the men in her orbit but, well, Garfield isn’t having it.

The sparks continue to fly as the younger brash artist and his wealthy but troubled — and unhappily married — benefactor fall in love. It’s a sweeping film that very grounded; that’s not only a tribute to director Jean Negulesco but also Garfield’s and Crawford’s performances. (More on Joan below) It’s a gorgeous film - everyone is shot very lovingly and handsomely. The story is engaging and you do root for them to be together even though you know it’s not going to work out. (Spoiler) It serves as a good parallel to “The Fountainhead” which will come out 3 years later. Both feature younger handsome artists who are bound to their craft and the difficult women who fall for them. “Humoresque” works a lot better because it draws their main characters more three dimensionally than Ayn Rand’s work and also lacks Rand’s right wing politics and gonzo camp. Also, there is a lot of classical music on display here and it all sounds amazing.

Joan and John Garfield share equal billing for a reason. Joan doesn’t appear until 33 minutes in. Before that, it’s all about Garfield’s character’s history with falling in love with violin and his difficult relationship with his parents. Garfield is great and so is Oscar Levant as his wise-cracking best friend. If you are coming in looking for Joan, just be patient.

Side note: John Garfield is hella sexy in this. I wasn’t familiar with Garfield until hearing about him on “You Must Remember This.” If you want to know more about his history — and how he got screwed over during the Black List — you can listen to the “You Must Remember This” episode about him right here.

Oh, And How’s Joan? “Humoresque” was Joan’s first film after winning the Oscar (and revitalizing her career) with “Mildred Pierce” and she is at the height of her powers. She’s in her most iconic of looks — arched eyebrows, Adrian-designed gowns with the big shoulder-mah-pads, bold lipsticks. But it’s her acting that is so impressive. Joan had a very difficult childhood — growing up poor, having to work her way through both boarding school and college. This background gave her a core of steel, which is something she brings to all of her characters. As beautiful as she was, you always bought that she was tough. As the counter-balance to that, she was also quite vulnerable. Both of these dovetail beautifully with her portrayal of Helen. She’s tough, a bit bitter but longing for true love can connection. And watching her swoon as she listens to Garfield playing Mozart or Dvorak, you feel how the music is affecting her. She really nails that. (Which also serves as a dry run of her 6 minute reaction in “Sudden Fear” which we’ll cover later.) She knows exactly what she’s doing; she’s showing us sides to a character in a way that doesn’t feel manufactured or stagy.

Should You See It? Absolutely. This was my first time seeing “Humoresque” and I’m kicking myself for waiting this long. See this. It’s great.

How Can I See It? I got my DVD copy from the LA library (a great resource) but you can rent it streaming on YouTube, Amazon Prime, Google Play, iTunes and Vudu.