Our Vines Have Tender Grapes

Image via Wikipedia

To the best of my mother's memory, Our Vines Have Tender Grapes was the first movie I ever watched.  I was four years old.  To this day it is one of my favorites, and I believe that this movie is so good that it may be the best film that was ever made.  


I really mean it, so I'll say it again.  Our Vines Have Tender Grapes may be the best film that was ever made.  


I use the word "may" because I recognize that no consensus has ever been or will ever be reached on any matter of this sort, but I believe that the people who have seen the movie (not many) would be able to agree on its greatness.  It is truly remarkable.


Imagine, if you will, a step away from the computer generated effects, a pause from the deep rumbling of sound effects, a break from fantasy and imagination and busyness and clatter.  What would it be like to view a film that very simply, beautifully, peacefully, enchantingly, but realistically told a story? What if that story were about characters so genuine, so human, and so sympathetic that you could relate to them better than to your neighbors?  And if that story packed a punch so strong that it took you by the collar and held your rapt attention in its commanding grip for a full 105 minutes, at four years old?... That film would be Our Vines Have Tender Grapes. 


Why?  Because this film is the definitive masterpiece of filmmaking at its finest.  Filmmaking, at its essence, is the art of telling stories; it is the simple act of committing to a reel of film (digitally these days) a story. Storytelling is the art of telling a story, and "story" has been defined as "a narrative, either true or fictitious, in prose or verse, designed to interest, amuse, or instruct the hearer or reader; tale."  I can't think of any story that has been more successful at interesting, amusing, and instructing the viewer than this film.  It is the triple threat of filmmaking. And the key to its greatness is simply this: its moral instruction.  

Edward G. Robinson with
"daughter"Margaret O'Brien and
"nephew" Jackie"Butch" Jenkins

Most movies express some kind of moral.  Sometimes they are obvious, sometimes you have extrapolate them, and some movies are so stupid they don't have one at all (and in those cases the moral of the story is found in the act of watching it). Our Vines Have Tender Grapes does not have a moral; it is a series of moral lessons, from start to finish.  Subtly, gem after moral gem shimmers and gleams, then fades, through the dialogue and action of the story.  


The beautiful and morally exceptional thing about this is that it is up to you, the viewer, to grasp them. You are not being hit over the head with them; there are no significant pauses or "looks exchanged."  The act of moral instruction is only valuable when the one being instructed is an active participant in gleaning the teachings, and if you are engaged while watching this movie, you will be surprised how much is packed into it. 


"A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels." - Proverbs 1:5


Incomparable acting, pretty scenery, entertaining and comedic moments, timeless lessons and truths.  Our Vines Have Tender Grapes.


The Basics
Directed by Roy Rowland and based on the novel by George Victor Martin (many, many thanks go to him), this 1945 release stars Edward G. Robinson (famous for his gangster roles but unmatched in this tender performance), Margaret O'Brien (the world's best child star), Agnes Moorehead (later Endora of Bewitched), Jackie "Butch" Jenkins (the typical boy), James Craig, and Francis Gifford.  Produced by MGM in black and white at 105 minutes running time. 


The Plot
Martinius and Bruna Jacobson (Robinson and Moorehead) are raising their daughter, Selma (O'Brien) in the Norwegian community of rural Wisconsin.  She and her cousin, Arnold (Jenkins), learn life's lessons and share life's joys throughout the summer, fall, winter, and spring of 1944-1945 in the small town of Benson Junction.  

Martinius and Selma spend quality time
together over a game of checkers.

Martinius, a farmer, day dreams of a new barn over his evening pipe. Bruna, the gentle housewife with a spirit of iron, wants to see her husband happy, but fears that the stress of constructing a new bar, and the debt it would incur, would be too burdensome for him.


Arnold is too young for school and is lost when his principal playmate and cousin, Selma, begins the first grade. 


The editor of the local paper sees it as his duty to enlist.  A young school teacher from the big city learns to love the virtues of the small town.


The community learns the meaning of true generosity and pours out blessings on an unfortunate neighbor.  And it is all to do with Selma, the little girl with a heart of gold and a stubborn streak who learns wisdom from her pa and increases in understanding under his guidance. 


It is a sight to behold.

David and Bathsheba

We watched this film in two days.  That's not because it's monsterously long or because we were insanely busy, but because the power went out, right in the middle of the stoning of the adultress.  It happened just as I was changing my postion on the couch, so my natural reaction was, "what did I just do?"  Well, the power company said it would take four hours to fix, and the aparment got so hot so fast that we had to evacuate and go to my parents' house for the night, leaving Bathsheba behind.  But that was alright because, let me just say, this one is an eye-roller. 

The Basics:
Made in 1951, David and Bathsheba was directed by Henry King in Technicolor. Starring Gregory Peck as David, Susan Hayward as Bathsheba, and Raymond Massey as Nathan, with a run-time of 116 minutes, the film was promoted with this tagline: "For this woman... he broke God's own commandment!"  The woman, of course, is Bathsheba, which is not pronounced the way  you are hearing it in your head as you read this.  It's Baaath-shiba, with the emphasis on the bath.  Additionally, the Philistines are now the Phil-iss-tins, with the emphasis on the second syllable.  Now that you've got that down, you're ready to hear the plot.

The Plot:
Oh, don't you know the plot?  Well, perhaps not as Hollywood tells it, for what was the story of a man's morbid lusts of the flesh is now portrayed as the doomed affair of the star-crossed lovers.  2 Samuel 11 describes David looking out and seeing Bathsheba washing herself on the roof of a neighboring house.  According to the scriptures, "David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (She had purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she went back home.  The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, 'I am pregnant.'"

According to Henry King's version, David sends for Bathsheba.  He finds out that she is unhappy in her marriage; only then does he suggest to her what is on his mind, with a kiss for her virtue. 
     Bathsheba: "The King does what he must.  His needs are the kingdom's."
     David: "Not all of them." 
Okaaay then... 
Well, when Bathsheba seems unwilling, David's pride is wounded, and he starts to send her away, taking consolation that her modesty matches her beauty.  What happens next is shocking, with Bathsheba making a startling confession.  Watch below.

An interesting exchange and interesting development in Bathsheba's character, to say the least. 

So together they stay and together enter a second adolescence, frolicking through fields of sheep and taking romantic picnics and camping trips.  How sweet.  When Bathsheba becomes pregnant, David tries to hide their sins from Uriah, Bathsheba's husband, who is uncooperative.  When Uriah cannot see an honorable reason for going to his wife, David argues with him from a almost feminist point of view, stressing the value of appreciating a woman's feelings, and trying to get Uriah to look at the situation from his wife's point of view.  The way the whole thing comes off is almost funny. 

Uriah does not comply, so he must be offed, but Hollywood softens the blow by having Uriah beg David to order him to the front of the hottest battle so that he may prove his honor.  And in one fell swoop the production crew steals away David's creative genius! 

In other deviations:

• Bathsheba momentarily refuses to marry David because he did not visit her during her time of mourning.
• Their son dies before Nathan foretells it from the Lord.
• An angry mob enters the palace with Nathan and demands that Bathsheba be brought out for judgment under the Law of Moses.  This leads to an amusing scene in which David throws together a quick plan for fleeing the palace on fast horses, before he realizes that it is surrounded.
• After David refuses to deliver Bathsheba to her accusers he marches out of the city to the tent of the Ark of the Covenant to deal directly with God in the Holy of Holies.  He prays, lays his hands on the Ark, and low and behold: the miraculous resolution of all of his problems!  The rains begin to fall, his people pay him homage, and Bathsheba is evidently forgiven.

The film ends in the resolute victory of their love that survived against all odds!  Hurrah!!

Analysis:
I have two truly nice things to say about the film.  One is that Gregory Peck's acting was quite good.  The second is that Raymond Massey also did a sound job in the role of Nathan.  Susan Hayward wasn't bad, until she had to pretend she was crying about her child's death.  This film is probably among the best and most faithful Biblical films ever made by Hollywood, but that's not saying much.  The script is still infused with a good deal of typical humanistic Hollywood undertones.  At least they are undertones and not in-your-face.

This was made in 1951, so we don't get the nudity and graphic bedroom scenes we would expect if this were made today, and of course the portrayal of her bath is conservative, even if having the camera focused on David's face magnifies the creepiness of the whole thing. There is a flashback memory scene of David fighting Goliath, which is fun.  And it is always entertaining to hear an East Coast accent coming out of Israelite soldiers. 

So for some reasons this film is worth looking into.  It is interesting to see how they handled David's attitude toward and interaction with God - in the Holy of Holies and throughout the film.  I think the vast majority of old films are worth watching, and this is no exception, but I would not call this a masterpiece, and I won't cheer for it.  I'm not rooting for the Phil-iss-tins either, though, so I'll call it even. :)