Review of Cavalcade (1933) by Steve G — 04 Mar 2018

Basically, to England what Cimarron was to the old West. The Academy ate this kind of film up. A decades-spanning look at the changes of life in a particular society. However, unlike Cimarron, this doesn't display a hint of moral self-importance. It seems far more sprawling than it actually is. It feels like a 3-hour epic, but it's actually not long at all. Shorter even than Cimarron. And the characters are far more interesting. Strong performances. Somewhat melodramatic, but that's okay, because the drama is compelling. It's almost a precursor to Downton Abbey, in some ways. The film itself is fascinating as a historical relic. A moment, frozen in time. History is not so remotely distant after all.

I have heard the claim that it is slightly formulaic. One grand tragic event after another, showcasing some kind of constant (character) throughout, dealing & learning to live with the ramifications. I understand the criticism, & it has merit. The compounding of tragedies gets to be much (I thought the Joey thing was completely unnecessary). But that's reductionistic. I could say that about every film that portrays an extensive time period. The alternative being to only make movies that are in real time, where everything happens in 2 hours?

In regard to the war, it wasn't pro & it wasn't anti. It was honest. I appreciated that. The whole film is sort of an affront to modernism during the Depression era. A cry for hope.

The only real qualm is that it was difficult to follow because of exceedingly poor video quality, & very strong accents speaking very quickly . A little too obvious foreshadowing on the Titanic.

Overall, a spectacular achievement. At its core, it's a wonderful love story.

*(There was a dance sequence called 'Take me Back to Yorkshire' that I believe was the origination of break-dancing).

* Not sure why he's missing his mustache on the cover.