Mike Leigh’s Naked, to take one example, features an even more repellent main character, but the movie does not excuse his behavior or play it as light comedy; his behavior is horrifying, and we are meant to be horrified. At the same time, we see the character’s woundedness, his fragility, and we can (hopefully) identify with his isolation and pain.

Henry Higgins, on the other hand, was just a common jerk, and I could find no way “in” to his character. I was just… repelled.

This film has been re-done a number of times. Obviously, the most popular, or well known version is “My Fair Lady” which, if I recall right – won the Best Picture Oscar. I’m sure it’s been re-made, re-configured and if I was pressed, I would say my favorite version is “Educating Rita” which is similar in a lot of ways and certainly not a re-make but containing similar themes.

“Pygmalion” is a pretty enjoyable film on a lot of levels. Based on a stage play I really had to take my hat off for the opening scene and the “pull back to reveal” a chaotic street scene. One of those cinematic moments that took my breath away – especially for a 1938 film and being shot on a soundstage, too. Almost as impressive as the soundstage scene at the end of “A Spy Who Loved Me” – very similar to “Pygmalion” if you change Henry Higgins to James Bond and turn Catherine Bach into the Eliza Doolittle role…but lets not do that.

Do to the success of the remakes – I won’t necessarily bore you to tears with my recap. I’ll assume that Jason did his, once again, masterful job of telling you all you need to know about the story/plot development/murder/cannibalism and the large production number. So no sense going over those here…but here’s what I will say:

There are moments in this movie that made me laugh out loud and there were moments that made me cringe like a five year-old school girl in front of a garter snake.

The worthy moments (besides the impressive opening shot) were contained in the times that Eliza was trying out her new style of speaking. Her first encounter at a lunch and then the: “Will she be found out?!” grand engagement with royalty. For those moments the film was especially wonderful. I also found, during the end, to relish other moments of the film. The sly way that George Bernard Shaw took on the questions of Class, Royalty, Privilege. The dialogue is fantastic and there were a couple lines that hit me really strongly – including the line “He treats me like I’m a lady because he’s always seen me as a lady whereas you have always seen me as someone from the gutter.” (or something like that)

Where this film fails to me is in the character of Henry Higgins. Though wonderfully played by Terrance Howard and all that – the distance the character has from Ms. Doolittle never seems to cross the bridge. I would have liked to have seen some HINT of compassion, some moment of longing or love from the character. Alas even something that could be referred to as character arc from the character. But, sadly…that never comes forward so I continued to find him both distant, a boor, and an uncaring lout. So when the transformation happens at the 89th minute of a 90 minute film – it, well, doesn’t really happen…so…why should I care?

So, then, let me clarify in my normal standard:

WHAT I LIKED!

I liked the cinematography and there were some brilliant moments of comedy that I felt really raised this film. The actress who played Eliza played her very well. All the actors were very good in their parts – though I take issue with the Henry Higgins character in that I didn’t really give a shit about him…at all…ever.

WHAT I DISLIKED!

The Henry Higgins character. Again, I realize he’s supposed to be a book-wormy professor who’s a bit of a “stick-in-the-mud” but if you’re going to show love/change/arc whatever you want to call it – you’ve got to plant the seed or it rings false. Jason may have had a different opinion – but I found it to be false (sort of the way that Pepe Le Moko was willing to risk his life just for the love of someone he spent very little time with).

BOTTOM LINE:

Has it’s moments. Not many. Those moments are worth seeing the film.

SIDE NOTE:

Maybe it’s just me – but it seems like I’ve seen 3 or 4 films in a row now where there seems to be an underlying current that a “woman needs to be smacked to be put in her place.” Much like I was disgusted and saddened by the “heads of animals montage” in “Colonel Blimp” – I’m getting increasingly disgusted by the occasional: “A smack is what’s good for ya!” (said by man to woman) Or, worse yet: “I probably deserve to be smacked and I’m surprised you haven’t yet.” (said by woman to man). Why it disgusts me (or saddens me) is that at some point there was (or seemed) to be a prevailing attitude that if, God FORBID, a woman challenge a man on his authority she was going to get smacked for it. Just like the fact that there was some point where killing animals and slapping their heads on a wall was “jolly good fun ol’ boy!” Now, maybe I’m supposed to compartmentalize this all into the “time frame” and “differing attitudes” and “what not” – but it’s getting harder for me to ignore some these overtly spoken chastisements towards women (and some scenes of outright violence towards women).

Stepping off soap box now. Thank you for listening.