DVD

"Ginger" bastard...

By August 4, 2009No Comments

…not really. The sub­ject of this week’s Foreign Region DVD Report is Irvin Kershner’s 1964 The Luck of Ginger Coffey, a Montréal-set tale of an Irish né’er-do-well played with pitch-perfect integ­rity by the late, great Robert Shaw. Among the many things to recom­mend it is a rel­at­ively rare cine­mat­ic turn by the also late, also great Mary Ure, Shaw’s wife at the time. (Her pre­vi­ous hus­band had been the fam­ously obnox­ious play­wright John Osborne. The woman cer­tainly got put through the wringer.) 

Ginger SCR

Ginger is both a ter­rific­ally acted and beau­ti­fully observed pic­ture, the sort of thing that made you believe that Irvin Kershner had the stuff to become a really major dir­ect­or instead of the merely inter­mit­tently inter­est­ing one he turned out to be. Anyhoo, there’s more to be said about it at The Auteurs’, as usual. 

No Comments

  • I haven’t seen “The Young Captives” or “Face in the Rain”, but Kershner would prob­ably be bet­ter eval­u­ated if his films through “Loving” were more avail­able on DVD. I’m puzzled as to why Fox has yet to release a DVD ver­sion of “The Flim Flam Man”.

  • slutsky says:

    As a Montréal film crit­ic I have to say I’m ashamed I have nev­er seen this. Thanks for the piece.
    Also worth mentioning…
    “As far as social com­ment­ary is con­cerned, one char­ac­ter sar­castic­ally com­plains that while the native-born French speak­ers of the city make the effort to learn English, the English-speaking inter­lopers nev­er both­er to learn French. (The situ­ation has changed sub­stant­ively since the book was writ­ten and the film was made.”
    You actu­ally still hear this all the time. Not entirely without jus­ti­fic­a­tion. Plus ça change.

  • giles edwards says:

    Nice! Thanks for the review Glenn. I work for Metrodome and it’s good to know even these obscure little gems are find­ing the right people.

  • Stephanie says:

    Thank you. I’m embar­rassed to say I did­n’t even know Ginger Coffey was made into a movie, and I like Kershner’s work.
    Ure was lovely and tal­en­ted. Not enough range, I sup­pose, and not a strong enough per­son­al­ity. She was well cast as Alison in Look Back in Anger, mak­ing a hope­less noodle of a char­ac­ter most sym­path­et­ic, but is upstaged at every turn by Burton in top form and Claire Bloom as Helena, and it’s really not hard to see why. She has a spe­cial vul­ner­able qual­ity, though. Richard Murphy wrote a nice poem named for her.
    If I had to choose between Osborne and Shaw, a Scylla and Charybdis dilemma if ever there was one, I’d opt for Osborne, who could be charm­ing when it was called for, reportedly. He was way­ward, moody, and chron­ic­ally unfaith­ful but at least he wouldn’t put a bun in your oven every eight­een months or so. I nev­er liked Shaw, thought he was pro­foundly second-rate. If he’s bet­ter in Ginger Coffey I’ll be glad to alter that opinion.

  • matty says:

    I abso­lutely don’t want to hijack this thread or turn it into some kind of non­sense “Star Wars” debate. That said, no love for “The Empire Strikes Back”? I’m also par­tial to “Eyes of Laura Mars”, but that’s mostly the Carpenter script.

  • Glenn Kenny says:

    I think “Empire” is, in many respects, the best-made of the ori­gin­al tri­logy, but aside from its dark tone does­n’t really have the hall­marks of Kershner’s earli­er work. “Laura Mars” is some­thing I’d love to see again soon.

  • Olga says:

    Hi, I have enjoyed vis­it­ing you and read­ing your blog. Check out my movie label: http://whereareyouolga.blogspot.com/search/label/movies