I'm sorry. My summary isn't really a summary but a strong feeling that kept coming to mind as I watched this film. As Mrs. Wingfield talked and talked and talked and fussed and controlled the daylights out of her grown children, I kept having a fantasy of Arthur Kennedy (Tom Wingfield) punching the garrulous old bat in the mouth! This is NOT a complaint about the play or the film--after all, Tennessee Williams was deliberately crafting a portrait of a terminally controlling and annoying lady. I assume it was a form of exorcism--a way for him to let go of people in his past who annoyed him practically to death! As I already mentioned, the single parent Mrs. Wingfield is a terribly annoying person. Despite this, her two grown children still live with her! You can understand, perhaps, the daughter living with her. Laura (Jane Wyman) has a severe limp and has trouble getting around--perhaps this explains why she never left. As for Tom, he's the real puzzler. Unlike Laura, he is more open in his disdain for his mother and her annoying ways...yet he eventually does what she wants AND is still at home though he looks to be in his 30s.
Throughout most of the film, Mrs. Wingfield mostly talks AT her children. In particular, she always is pushing Laura to meet a nice man and marry and is badgering Tom to bring home a man for Laura. Although it never was explicitly stated in the film or play, when Tom talked about going to the movies, some took this to be his excuse to get out of the house (and away from mom) but I took it to be that he was possibly out cruising for men. Considering this is a Tennessee Williams play being dramatized, it's not hard to make this assumption--especially since homosexuality is a theme in several of his other plays AND since Williams was gay. Either interpretation is valid, I think, but lead you in very different directions in your thinking.
There is a heck of a lot more I could say about the film and the Wingfields, though frankly you'd probably do a lot better reading a critical analysis or more in-depth summary. Instead, let's get to the movie itself. Like the Tennessee Williams films of the 50s and 60s, the plays were butchered to get by censors. While this one wasn't as badly butchered as some (such as SWEET BIRD OF YOUTH where the castration scene was changed to a nose-breaking scene!), the film is pretty tame and they changed the ending--making it more upbeat! Based on what they were allowed to say and do in 1950, it's pretty good and the performances were excellent--though it is odd that Amanda Wingfield's children DON'T have the accent that she has. I love Arthur Kennedy and Jane Wyman--but were they really the best choices for the roles? As far as the indifference to his mother's blathering goes, I guess Kennedy WAS a good choice--as this fits his screen persona pretty well.
Overall, a well worth watching film but not among my favorite Williams plays. Interesting, yes, but lacking the spark and vicious interactions that Williams fans have come to love! Plus, I deducted a point for the "happy ending"--it wasn't true to the story at all. Tennessee Williams is NOT supposed to make you happy or optimistic!!!
Throughout most of the film, Mrs. Wingfield mostly talks AT her children. In particular, she always is pushing Laura to meet a nice man and marry and is badgering Tom to bring home a man for Laura. Although it never was explicitly stated in the film or play, when Tom talked about going to the movies, some took this to be his excuse to get out of the house (and away from mom) but I took it to be that he was possibly out cruising for men. Considering this is a Tennessee Williams play being dramatized, it's not hard to make this assumption--especially since homosexuality is a theme in several of his other plays AND since Williams was gay. Either interpretation is valid, I think, but lead you in very different directions in your thinking.
There is a heck of a lot more I could say about the film and the Wingfields, though frankly you'd probably do a lot better reading a critical analysis or more in-depth summary. Instead, let's get to the movie itself. Like the Tennessee Williams films of the 50s and 60s, the plays were butchered to get by censors. While this one wasn't as badly butchered as some (such as SWEET BIRD OF YOUTH where the castration scene was changed to a nose-breaking scene!), the film is pretty tame and they changed the ending--making it more upbeat! Based on what they were allowed to say and do in 1950, it's pretty good and the performances were excellent--though it is odd that Amanda Wingfield's children DON'T have the accent that she has. I love Arthur Kennedy and Jane Wyman--but were they really the best choices for the roles? As far as the indifference to his mother's blathering goes, I guess Kennedy WAS a good choice--as this fits his screen persona pretty well.
Overall, a well worth watching film but not among my favorite Williams plays. Interesting, yes, but lacking the spark and vicious interactions that Williams fans have come to love! Plus, I deducted a point for the "happy ending"--it wasn't true to the story at all. Tennessee Williams is NOT supposed to make you happy or optimistic!!!