Touches You

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Let's be realistic.

Highly Overrated But Still Good

A Hal Wallis Production. (Available on an excellent Paramount DVD). Copyright 1956 by Hal Wallis Productions. Released through Paramount Pictures. New York opening at the Astor: 12 December 1956. U.S. release: February 1957. U.K. release: 18 March 1957. Australian release: 25 July 1957. Sydney opening at the Prince Edward: 26 July 1957 (despite an enormous publicity blitz, ran only 3 weeks). 10,921 feet. 122 minutes.SYNOPSIS: An engaging confidence man brings back life to a drought- stricken countryside and to a charming but self-deprecating spinster.COMMENT: Paramount's publicity department took enormous pains to conceal the fact that The Rainmaker began life as a television play. Broadcast on CBS "Philco Playhouse" on 16 August 1953, it starred Darren McGavin. Broadway producer Ethel Linder Reiner saw the TV play as a likely stage vehicle for Geraldine Page. Author Nash needed little persuasion to adapt his play for Broadway where it opened at the Cort on 28 October 1954, running a satisfactory 125 performances. McGavin repeated the title role and in addition to Page the cast included Prud'homme (who reprized his part for the film), Richard Coogan and Albert Salmi. The director was the mysterious Joseph Anthony who I believe is the same Joseph Anthony who had a few small parts in Hollywood in the early 1940s. Presumably he then enlisted and when discharged turned to television and stage directing. The Rainmaker is his first film. The Matchmaker, Career, All in a Night's Work, Conquered City followed. A young actress named Yvonne Lime also makes her debut in The Rainmaker, but aside from Untamed Youth in 1957, she was never heard from again."The Rainmaker" is a small play. So how to transfer it to a big screen? Dress it up with VistaVision and Technicolor for a starter. And then? Wisely I believe (though many critics disagreed with me), it was decided to keep most of the "exterior" scenes within the confines of obvious stage sets, so that the viewer often has the impression of watching an actual Broadway play. The interior sets are by contrast highly realistic, but the change doesn't work because there's too much talk and there's nothing else the viewer can look at but the actors. Mind you, a lot of people liked this over-concentration, for Katharine Hepburn was nominated for Hollywood's most prestigious award for Best Actress (losing to Ingrid Bergman's Anastasia). But I found a lot of the dialogue too verbose, too repetitive, too obvious, too pretentious, too over- emphasized.Oddly, neither the often picturesque sets nor the skilfully atmospheric color photography were nominated for awards, though Alex North deservedly received a nod for his music score (losing in the Drama or Comedy category to Around the World in 80 Days).For all its expertise, both in front of and behind the camera, I thought The Rainmaker's whimsical little plot too slight to sustain its appeal over more than two hours. And in my opinion Wendell Corey (although hampered by close-ups of such intensity his facial make-up was obvious) came out of it best.There's a postscript to prove you just can't keep a middling play down. In 1963 author Nash turned it into a Broadway musical called "110 in the Shade". Inga Swenson, Robert Horton, Stephen Douglas and Will Geer starred. So Nash has made a fortune from this one idea, including $350,000 just for the movie rights.OTHER VIEWS: Here is Katharine Hepburn as an introspective spinster who, while still hoping for a husband, has secretly written herself off as a lost cause. Again she finds romance during a heat-baked dusty summer. But there the resemblance to "Summer Madness" ends.The setting this time is not an opulent Venice, but a dreary Western town caught in the throes of a drought. In a ranch on the outskirts of town, two brothers and their father scheme away, trying to marry off the un-wedded housekeeper daughter (Katharine Hepburn)."The Rainmaker" is an excellent piece of theater. It concentrates on six characters, providing meaty opportunities for the two leads and all four support players, makes forceful use of its one set, and keeps a basically simple story fired up within a tight time frame. Another plus is that it's difficult to categorize (a fantasy? a bucolic comedy? a sentimental romance?) and thus can be all things to all theater- goers. On the other hand, the cinema, alas, has a more searching eye than either the stage or television. My personal opinion (certainly borne out by the film's box-office failure in almost every country where "Summer Madness" was a huge success) is that "The Rainmaker" is so down-to-earth, it simply has no bond with the average, entertainment-seeking movie-goer. — JHR writing as George Addison.

The Rainmaker is directed by Joseph Anthony and written by N. Richard Nash. It stars Burt Lancaster, Katharine Hepburn, Wendell Corey, Lloyd Bridges, Cameron Prud'Homme and Earl Holliman. Music is by Alex North and VistaVision/Technicolor cinematography is by Charles Lang.Starbuck (Lancaster) is a conman who arrives in the little town of Threepoint and promises to deliver the rain to end the town's crippling drought problem. More telling, perhaps, will be his impact on the Curry family...N. Richard Nash wrote it as a television play and would then see it hit the Broadway stage, so he was the logical choice for screenplay duties here. The film very much feels like a play, with very pronounced acting and sharp dialogue, it's also - at just over two hours in length - far too long for a talky based production. Thirty minutes could quite easily have been shaved off here. There's also the contentious casting of the Oscar Nominated Hepburn, who in many people's eyes - myself included - is miscast and just doesn't sit right in the role, leaving it to Lancaster to bring the flight and breeze to light up the piece.However, to enjoy the art of acting brings some rewards, it's also a pic of crafty humour and features a story of considerable humane substance. That one man, a scallywag, can have such a positive impact on a sterile backwater family, builds nicely to an ending that is a complete joy, a real smile raiser. It's also handsomely photographed by Lang, the colour lensing so smooth, and the production design, backed up by North's most appealing musical score, ensures you know that the makers cared about what they were doing. Relationships on set were initially rocky, but the principal stars would come to be friends and speak fondly of their time on the film. 6/10Footnote: The material would also be turned into a musical titled 110 in the Shade.

This was Katharine Hepburn best performance.She plays Lizzy Curry, a forty-something spinster living on a ranch with her father and two brothers during the drought in Kansas. When we meet her she has just come back from visiting relatives to a home she shares with the three men in her life, father H.C. (Cameron Prud'Homme), and her brothers, the overbearing Noah (Lloyd Bridges) and soft-headed Jim (Earl Holliman). Lizzy is a smart woman with a big heart and a lot of love to give but believes that her plain looks will make her an old maid.She would like to be courted by the town sheriff, File (Wendall Corey), but is so lacking in confidence, that her father and brothers go into town and ask him over for dinner. He reluctantly agrees but when Lizzy tries to downplay her own intelligence so not to make him feel intimidated, she makes a mess of the whole dinner. When he leaves, we get a sense of where some of her self-loathing comes from as her brother Noah heartlessly reminds her that she is plain and no man will ever love her.Onto the ranch comes Starbuck (Burt Lancaster), a fast-talking traveling huckster who makes a living selling a lightening-rod device that is supposed to prevent tornadoes. He has a gift for spinning pretty words just as a concert pianist makes beautiful music. He works his magic on H.C., convincing him that he can end the drought by making it rain – for a meager charge of $100. Lizzy is on to him and berates him for fooling her father with such a scheme, but then he turns his magic on her, convincing her of her own worth and in the process, falling in love with her. She is charmed by this man and a tender, but brief, romance ensues. Starbuck is able to convince Lizzy of the power of her own worth, that she is beautiful and that any man would be glad to have a woman with a heart as big as hers.The beauty of their scenes together come from the fact that, while we know Starbuck is a trickster, his approach to Lizzy is quite genuine. He is able to bring sunshine into her life and in her heart that she has kept bottled up for years. When, in the end, it does start to rain, it is as if the dammed up emotion in Lizzy's heart has come spilling over. Her drought has ended, just as it has for the land.I am glad that Hepburn was nominated for this performance; it is one of her best. As I have mentioned before, I did not like any of the four performances that brought her Oscars because they seem (three at least) to be just dutiful housewives who stand beside their men. I, too, have chosen Hepburn four times for her performances as Alice Adams in Alice Adams, Tracy Lord in The Philadelphia Story, Jane Hudson in Summertime and now as Lizzy in The Rainmaker. What these four women have in common is that they all have big hearts but desire the physical beauty or the confidence to be loved on their own merits. They stand for women born without great physical beauty, who have to work a little harder to find someone special.Through Hepburn's expressive face, we understand the pain within and the need to express love and to be loved, to feel needed. Of the four performances I have chosen from Hepburn's career, Lizzy may be the most complete, because she comes full circle and we sense, in the end, that her happiness won't be temporary.

I absolutely love this production! Missed it in the movie theatre so long ago, and was delighted when it was released on DVD. This version of the Broadway play was perfectly cast with an ensemble of wonderful actors who delivered well of their individual roles.Nobody could do it better than Burt Lancaster, as he was always bigger than life itself--a true Hollywood star! Katharine Hepburn acquitted the role of Lizzie perfectly, as well. Young Earl Holliman made a great enthusiastic younger brother and Lloyd Bridges the stern and controlling older brother was fine, too.The only change I would desire would be to film it on location, as it was so obviously filmed on a sound stage or back lot; however, back when it was produced, only really big budget movies were filmed elsewhere.What I liked most was the recurrent theme that ran through the entire story--the importance of believing in oneself. That theme touched all of the cast except for Lizzie's father and the nearby aging town sheriff. All in all, this is a warm-hearted family movie with a little comedy sprinkled over it for good measure. Sit back and enjoy the stars of the past and the good side of Hollywood.