Both Wyler classics about ordinary people dealing with the extraordinary effects of war. Which do you prefer? I'm going with The Best Years of Our Lives. I loved Mrs. Miniver, and I think both films are excellent, but I just prefer the latter. What about you?
No, not the bore worms! http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=8093247
[deleted]
Just watched 'Mrs. Miniver', but I've seen 'The Best Years of Our Lives' several times. They are both fine films and can both be considered 'propaganda' movies delivering important messages to the public; however, I prefer Mrs. Miniver, as I think some of "The Best Years of Our Lives' is a bit maudlin (still a good picture).
"What do you want me to do, draw a picture? Spell it out!"
Definitely the Best years of Our Lives. I love Mrs. Miniver, but the sense of realism of TBYOOL is amazing. The cinematography is amazing. TBYOOL has some wonderful and compelling secondary characters, like Hoagy Carmichael and Gladys George. It has so many fine touches, like the scene with the isolationist at the lunch counter.
Greer Garson vs Myrna Loy -- that's a close one! Such a conundrum!
I really disliked Mrs. Miniver. I found it understandably contrived, a propaganda film where character development was a laugh. It's "Downton Abbey" to a "T" (including the unexpected death of one major character, when the death of almost every other major character would be more likely). If this film had been about Mr. Ballard, or about a poor family in a non-air-conditioned bunker, I am positive I would have liked it. But the first twenty minutes are devoted to the purchase of an expensive hat and an expensive car. This film isn't even remotely in the same league as TBYOOL in its depiction of suffering.
shareThe problem with war is that it brings "unexpected death" to civilians as well as soldiers.
My husband considers BYOOL depressing but I watch it every time it airs (and actually have it on DVD). I'm watching Mrs. Miniver right now for the first time in years. I've usually avoided it since I remember it being too sentimental for me. My favorite WWII film is actually Journey for Margaret which ends a little differently than the book but was based on a real child's story.
Other posters have replied that it is like "comparing apples and oranges." I would not go quite that far, because they are both dramas about family life at home, directly related to WW2, and focused on the effects of the war on broader cultural life. However, one takes place during the early part of the war when England is alone and losing, while the other takes place after the Allies have won, but the impact of the war on home life is still evolving. Also, while they are both films made in America by mostly American born and raised cast and crew, one is set in England and about British subjects while the other is set in and about Americans. These differences make for very different movies in theme and story arc. They are definitely not parallel.
I prefer BYOOL, but I enjoy both. Part of what I like about MM is the depiction of the class differences in England and how these class differences were expressed even during the war and how the war started eroding them. Both films offer good education not only about their subject matter, but also about the time they were made.
It's worth noting that William Wyler was born in Alsace, a German possession until the end of World War One; he came to America at the age of 18. Also - he served in the Army's film production unit in WW II, creating for example, the documentary 'The Memphis Belle' which he filmed on missions over Europe - and lost much of his hearing as a result.
Having said all that, 'Mrs. Miniver' was an outstanding portrayal of the English people at war, alone, in the early years of the war - keyed to the Miracle of Dunkirk and then the Battle of Britain. These mean little to some viewers today, almost 75 years later, but the English resolve in fact held the line against Nazi tyranny, standing virtually alone until the US entered the conflict.
Five years later, Wyler came home having seen the horrors of bombing runs over Europe and lost team members trying to record the experiences of the Army Air Corps crews. For TBYOOL, his experiences in combat and with thousands of American soldiers ensured that this film would truly capture the challenges of coming home from the war for three very different veterans, all scarred in different ways.
So, each film is better than the other - for the year and world in which it was made. They reflect a reality, and probably a director, that changed completely in five years.
*Everything happens to me! Now Im shot by a child! (T.Chaney)
I like your points and your take on the movies, Steve. We have a tendency to forget in these modern times that "traditional" Americans are descended mostly from the British. A lot of our hardheadedness comes from that background.
Every culture that has been mixed into our "melting pot," or "salad," has contributed to the whole. But, if the amalgamation erodes the resilience and "stiff upper lip" that we partly inherited from the British we will lose a quality that I think is highly valuable.
I think, fortunately, that our most recent experience along the lines of wartime suffering, 9/11, showed that we still have that stiff resolve. It also showed that we still have our very American impatience to get the show on and over with.