Jump to content

Recommended Posts

When I was in my mid-20s (maybe in the late 80s), "The Manchurian Candidate" made a revival on the big screen, and I saw it, and really enjoyed it while also thinking it was something almost campy.

Now that I've seen it a second time, I realize that I was too uneducated to appreciate the film - this was an incredibly well-done movie, somehow able to take the absolutely unbelievable - bordering on the ridiculous - and make it seem positively realistic and possible. 

For me, The Manchurian Candidate is almost like a "Greatest Hits" album of actors, and I cannot imagine how Frank Sinatra - and for that matter, Lawrence Harvey - weren't nominated for Best Actor (the great Angela Lansbury was nominated for Best Supporting Actress, which is reasonable, but she was outperformed by both of these men).

It says a lot that The Manchurian Candidate would speak louder and more clearly, and also be more believable, to an educated 55-year-old man than an enthusiastic, but ultimately ignorant 24-year-old boy. Back in the 1980s, I considered myself very knowledgeable about film for an amateur; what I wasn't knowledgeable about was life itself.

Back then, I distinctly remember talking with a Vietnam Veteran, who made an off-the-cuff remark to the extent of, "I really have trouble watching that stuff, because it messes with my mind," and I can easily see how he thought that ... now; back then, I didn't really understand.

I just cannot get over how this movie managed to make something so utterly implausible seem so incredibly realistic and possible.

Although I had no memory of how the film ended, I did manage to guess the ending sequence with a high degree of accuracy, but though I knew what was coming (or thought I did), nothing was ruined or compromised - the film ended exactly how it needed to - it was a heart-wrenching, but beautiful, ending to a heart-wrenching film. The Manchurian Candidate is a *big* film, with *big*, *bold* ideas and messages, and it succeeds on that level, but what makes it truly great is the individual-level, human tragedy that unfolds before our eyes. The irony of a sabotage-themed work invoking such strong feelings of patriotism - all without overtly manipulating the viewer in that regard - is amazing in-and-of itself.

I'm not sure how "good" this film is rated by critics, but this is absolutely one of the most important Cold War movies I've ever seen. Sadly, people who are any younger than I am will simply not be able to relate to this in the way that I can, as my formative years were spent during the apogee of the Cold War - in elementary school, we'd crawl under our desks to simulate how we'd act in case of a nuclear-bomb attack. Although I suppose this generation of children has their own cross to bear, with being trained how to deal with school shootings - the more things change, the more they stay the same.

There is a *ton* of symbolism in this movie - much of it obvious, some of it more subtle, but it's probably nearly impossible to pick it all out. You could watch this film a second time, just looking for symbols, and not waste your time.

An absolutely classic film in several regards, and the best work I've ever seen from both Frank Sinatra and Lawrence Harvey.

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this film, and have probably watched it five times and could easily watch it another five. Laurence Harvey was not a very good actor, but his performance in this just totally clicked. The always-underappreciated James Gregory (as Sen. Iselin), a fixture on 50s and 60s television, gave a typically workman-like, canny performance in what was ostensibly the title role, obviously based on Joe McCarthy, and the perhaps equally always-underappreciated John McGiver gave an endearing, wonderfully conceived performance as Senator Jordan, based on I don't know who. I never really liked Sinatra as a film actor, but you couldn't ask for much better than he gave here. The real puzzle is what the hell was Janet Leigh doing in this movie? Anyway, a great script, beautifully realized, maybe one of my favorite movies.

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Hersch said:

Laurence Harvey was not a very good actor, but his performance in this just totally clicked. 

If you think Lawrence Harvey wasn't a very good actor, I *urge* you to watch the "Night Gallery" episode, "The Caterpillar" (Season 2, Episode 22, Part 1). Don't read about it before you watch it (you can read my review (at the above link), but don't click on the link inside to reveal the plot).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...