Ocean’s 11: Rat Pack in action

The world portrayed in Ocean’s 11 is characterized by bachelorhood and obsession with money. I couldn’t help but think of cocky fraternity brothers who had never grown up when Frank Sinatra’s character (Danny Ocean) and Peter Lawford’s character (Jimmy Foster) were lounging in the posh room with unnammed beautiful performing massages. Ocean and Foster lacked the maturity which should have been expected for men of their age. The lack of deep conversation and the concern for adrenaline and reuniting with past military buddies isolated the men from the outside world and their responsibilities. The viewer got to have a glimpse of the former wives of Ocean as well as Tony Bergdorf who could not sustain their relationships with the men because they were too inconsiderate of how much they hurt their wives through their illicit activities. A common thread between all of the men was an interest in money. Several men had wives who they wanted to better support. Foster sought to obtain financial independence from his mother who had sheltered him and kept him close and dependent. Women, children, and their ordinary jobs seemed to be hindering the success of the men so they believed that an escape and adventure which could yield a massive amount of cash was the answer to their issues.

The film had very few female characters which contributed to the plotline. If they did contribute, they seemed to be forces which pushed the men to desire the financial reward from the robbery. Also, women contributed to the mobster, soon to be father in law of Foster, finding out who had been the culprits in the robbery of five large casinos. Women seemed to be hurting the men and the men ended up empty-handed at the end of the film. The only money which was stolen and retained was given to the son of a dead member who wanted to the money for his son to go to college. Females were in nearly every scene as props but they did not actively do anything. The combination of bachelorhood, drinking, the Las Vegas lifestyle and women made it seem like the men were playboys, however their lifestyles varied and all seemed to be lacking or shallow. They were acting as playboys as a sort of escapism.

Some Came Running: Desperate and Lonely Sinatra

In Some Came Running, Frank Sinatra’s character—David Hirsch—represented the lonely soldier who had just returned exhausted and cynical from war, relying on alcohol as well as the company of gaudy females to provide companionship. The first scene featured David waking up on the bus as he had reached his hometown destination. It became immediately apparent that he had blacked out and smooth-talked Ginnie, a floozy of a woman, into following him to his hometown. No one came to welcome him in the small town and he set himself up in a rented room rather than contacting family or friends. Upon arriving, he focused more on getting another drink than having a quality conversation. Sinatra was completely alone, drinking anytime in the morning or night. Despite seeming like a deadbeat, David was warmly remembered by the former candy shop owner, thus the viewer gets the first glimpse of his heart. David Hirsch fluctuated between being a character seen as a loving or callous man throughout the film. With his niece, he adopted the proper mentoring role. With women generally, he was extremely forward to the point of being forceful; perhaps that force was due to his feeling of desperation in the face of deeper feelings. With his brother, he remained distant and bonded only over discussing his brother’s attractive secretary. Gambling and alcohol functioned as his escape mechanisms in the beginning of the film; but, as he fell in love with the school teacher who was his biggest fan, he decided to revisit writing as an outlet. Even though he was obstinate, David truly wanted to feel like he had a niche with his talents and he yearned for acceptance and love. His marriage to Ginnie cinched that he most wanted someone who desired him and would do anything for him.

Comparing Sinatra’s roles in to The Manchurian Candidate to Some Came Running, there were a few things in common but more differed. Both Major Bennett Marco and David Hirsch were coping with returning to normal life after wartime. However, Marco’s instability was due to his service commitment and Hirsch’s behavior seemed to stem more from his past—before his service commitment—and his personality. Both men attracted women even though the women caught glimpses of them at their worst. Major Bennett Marco was undergoing a mental breakdown when approached by an interested woman. David Hirsch repeatedly talked down to Ginnie and even hurled insults at her before proposing to her. The eagerness and force with which David pursued the schoolteacher and proclaimed his love for her would have been uncharacteristic of Major Marco. Also, the plotlines are very different because The Manchurian Candidate features Marco only in one situation and Some Came Running provides a more thorough glimpse of David in multiple contexts and with more people. The fact that David Hirsch had a family (even though slightly estranged) and friends allowed his character to seem more realistic than Major Bennett Marco.

In relation to the Playboy discourse, the model of masculinity represented by David Hirsch failed to meet the standards. He represented the playboy gone wrong. Fitting in with the playboy characteristics, David had his own apartment, could sweet talk women, enjoyed drinking, and held fast to the single life. Gambling was one of his interests and there was seldom a scene with David which did not involve alcohol. Even if he wasn’t drinking alcohol, it surrounded him. He also had the power to have some easier women, such as Ginnie, swoon and adore him. However, David failed as a playboy. He would drink alone and drank more than was attractive. A playboy is seen as being social, yet David had many anti-social tendencies. Perhaps the most staggering contrast is exemplified by how David pursues the schoolteacher. The first time David met her, he pulled her too close and kept trying to persuade her to spend more of the night with him. He seemed desperate. That desperation was even more apparent when he saw her for the second time and confessed his love for her. The degree to which David was infatuated with the schoolteacher exceeded how much a playboy should like any one girl exclusively. After being rejected after meeting up for a third time, David responded by proposing to a woman who he did not love but one who would love him unconditionally. David settled in order to have one person love him and sex was not the prime motivation, contrasting with the playboy ideal.

The Joker Is Wild: Sinatra As Tragic Comic

Throughout Sinatra’s films, alcohol is inextricably linked to bringing people closer together and social situations. This film, however, acknowledges how alcoholism can develop as a means to self-medicate. After having a short-lived success as a singer due to his injury dealt by his mobster boss, Joe E. Lewis feels a loss of identity, turning to isolation and alcohol in order to cope. After his piano playing friend Austin finds Joe, he pressures Joe to pursue performing again. Joe reacts with joking and elicits a good response from the audience. Letty Page, a beautiful and wealthy woman, was watching the show, approached Joe and proposed that he pursue comedy. They began their romance but Joe depended more upon his alcohol than her as an emotional outlet. After acknowledging his problem with alcohol and commitment issues, they moved apart and finally she married another man. Joe, depending more and more upon alcohol as an outlet, enjoyed great success with his comedic act but it seemed hollow. He then pursued a marriage with Martha who was his chorus girl in order to gain some stability in his life. With her work schedule, the marriage didn’t include the intimacy that he needed in order to have the strength to give up his addiction. His acts got sloppier and his drinking did too. The film concluded with Joe E. Lewis being completely alone walking down the street. His two lovers had left him and his friend had finally left him as well. His reflection called him out in the window and challenged him to give up alcohol, not for others but for himself. He couldn’t move forward with the addiction. The scene then closes and the film ends.

Sinatra’s portrayal of Joe E. Lewis has many parallels to how he played Frankie Machine in The Man With the Golden Arm. Both characters were addicted to a substance—alcohol and heroin respectively. They both had women who were romantically involved who urged him to stop abusing the substance. Both addictions were intended to provide escapes for the characters. Joe E. Lewis felt a dependence upon alcohol as well in order to perform as a standup comic and even the content of his act largely drew upon his alcoholism. Frankie Machine used drugs when working and also as an escape from the situation with his crippled and nagging wife. Joe E. Lewis actually lost two women who loved him because he could not reign in his addiction. Frankie Machine’s addiction may have actually brought him closer to his lover because she was taking care of him and succeeded. The end result of both movies was vastly different. Joe E. Lewis ended up completely alone and still drunk but decided that he would give up drinking for himself. In The Man With the Golden Arm, Frankie Machine concluded the film with a girl and a new sobriety. Exiting after watching both films, I felt both movies were somber because they displayed how tragic addiction can be.

In comparison to earlier film roles, Joe also represents a form of flawed masculinity. He had in his earliest films been boyish or shy with girls which contrasted with the confident and mature ideal man of that era. The disturbed or withdrawn guy which comes across in several films such as The Manchurian Candidate or The Man With the Golden Arm also falls short of the more solid and dependable breadwinner ideal of masculinity. Joe’s self-destructive behavior which manifested itself through alcoholism actually harmed his friends much more than the other films. His two wives and his pianist who was his best friend all suffered due to Joe’s substance abuse. Also, this was the only film in which Sinatra’s character ended up completely alone and supported by no one. Even in From Here to Eternity, Sinatra’s character had friends who tried to help him out of his situation with the prison ward.

Sinatra’s recording persona closely relates to the character of Joe E. Lewis, but Sinatra’s problems were not as extreme as Joe’s. Joe and Sinatra both rely on alcohol and the Las Vegas lifestyle to shape their images. Sinatra, however, appeared to have a more moderate drinking behavior. Also, a reliance on a sense of humor was evident with both but that was Joe’s main attraction. A large difference between the two is that Sinatra was not abandoned by all people. Even in the time of his downfall, he had a relationship with Eva Gardner. That feeling of being completely abandoned did not occur with Sinatra but he did face rejection when he had his downfall in the late 1940s. Sinatra had a supportive group of males friends who surrounded him; whereas, Joe lacked that consistent group of male friends.

The Tender Trap: Trapping Sinatra into Marriage

Viewers get a much different Sinatra in The Tender Trap (1955) than in most of his films, including those after his 1950s comeback. The most staggering differences are with how adept Sinatra seems to be with women in the film and also how his image of the bachelor is dependent upon his financial independence and security. Sinatra’s role as Charlie Reader from the start positions himself as a wealthy and successful theater agent who is constantly surrounded by women who fawn over him and pursue relationships—mostly physical but emotional as well. Charlie’s relationship with Joe, his best friend from his school days, however, does mimic many of Sinatra’s films in which there is an ideal male character who is a friend to Sinatra and highlights the flaws or shortcomings of Sinatra--pushing Sinatra to grow.

Beginning with the first scene, Charlie is necking with a beautiful woman on his couch. This is very notable because it sets the tone for his interaction with women and establishes that he has the ability to get women and that he has an interest in them. In all of Sinatra’s early films--such as On the Town, Anchors Aweigh, and It Happened in Brooklyn, Sinatra either was awkward with women and could not speak adequately to those he desired or he seemed to be oblivious at first to women. Even in films after the shift of his image—such as The Manchurian Candidate and High Society, he didn’t seem to have a way with speaking to women with the hope of pursuing them. Also different from earlier or later films, it seems as though Charlie fills the void which could make him lonely with women. In other films, he has his friends surrounding him who are generally male and women tend to be used for fulfilling emotional and sexual needs. Women in The Tender Trap tend to be the primary visitors to his home and they keep him from being lonely even socially. This observation may be a bit skewed because many of his other films cast Sinatra as a serviceman and that would determine his surrounding comrades to be primarily male. Another similar movie to Tender Trap in this way would be High Society—but Sinatra is also isolated from his normal living situation so it doesn't fit as well. Also, in the film, when love is first mentioned with the romance between Charlie and Julie, it is Julie who initiates the discussion. Julie is the vulnerable one instead of Charlie.

Besides his relationships with women in The Tender Trap, another noticeable difference between Sinatra’s role in this film with other films is that he is very comfortable in regards to his finances. Although Charlie doesn’t appear to have a high class background, he is wealthy enough to support his social lifestyle, his clothing, and his spacious apartment by himself. Sinatra is generally financially secure in his films when he is in the military because he is supported by the military; however, that dependence upon the military does not allow him to be as free with spending it and using it to create a particular lifestyle and image. In other films, such as Guys and Dolls and The Joker Is Wild, Sinatra’s character is depending upon illegal practices to support himself and others. In those movies has a fear that he will be entirely without money or that he would run into a bind. Money is not an issue in The Tender Trap. This abundance of money actually attracts the women to him and enables him to financially support his numerous romances.

As the plot develops and Charlie’s flaws seem more apparent, there are more similarities to Sinatra’s roles in other films. Charlie definitely looks up to his friend Joe and greets him with a great deal of excitement. How he looks at Joe seems similar to how Sinatra’s characters looked to Gene Kelly in Anchors Aweigh and Marlon Brando in Guys and Dolls. Situated next to Joe who represents the ideal gentleman, Charlie seems like a weaker man who lacks consideration and is infinitely less attractive. Also, about mid-way through the film, the women start ignoring Charlie and the audience sees that it is not his personal qualities or knowledge of women that generates the harem around him, but rather it is that they have a lack of options for available and more respectable men. Charlie didn’t understand women after all. His bravado and smooth talking skills which he had used for almost the entire movie vanished in the last scene when he finally got the girl by making a legitimate marriage proposal to Julie—the woman he loves. Charlie fully gets the girl when he resorts to the meek and honest Sinatra of his earlier films.

In relation to his recording persona, The Tender Trap can be easily compared. There are many more similarities than differences. On the surface level, Charlie and Sinatra are both in the music or performance business and have been successful. They both have women attracted to them and must have a relationship—even though it may be shallow—as a form of validation. Being social is very related to drinking in Sinatra’s persona as well Charlie’s. The fear of being lonely is filled by being surrounded by others. Sinatra’s persona depends more upon his male counterparts whereas Charlie seems to have more females. There is a sense of hero worship which Charlie has for Joe and his lifestyle throughout the film, and that parallels Sinatra’s fascination with other male friends in his life. The ending of the film seems to contrast the most with Sinatra’s persona. Charlie ends up with the very traditional girl and will adopt her ideal lifestyle and take on the more emasculated role. Sinatra would have been more likely to be fascinated by a less traditional woman and he would not have given up his career to pursue that breadwinner ideal.

The Man With the Golden Arm

Frank Sinatra had a breakout role in The Man With the Golden Arm because it depended so heavily upon him truly getting lost in his role as a heroin addict. His twitches and eye movement throughout the film reflected his junkie status and his desperation came through on the screen. His acting when in an altered state did not seem unnatural. For instance, stumbling out of the card game and then auditioning for the drum position, Sinatra seemed to be sweating and disheveled with unsteady hands and an even less steady head. I was a bit skeptical of how accurate Sinatra's scene while trapped in the apartment and allowing the drug to leave his body was; but, I also do not have the knowledge of how one would act in that situation. This role required a high level of maturity in acting on the part of Sinatra. The early Sinatra could never have played such a disturbed role.

Frankie Machine, who was played by Sinatra, would classify as an anti-hero because he obviously was a good person at heart yet his flaws and weaknesses kept him from embodying a hero-type role. One can make assumptions about him being a quality being because of his relationships with his supposedly handicapped wife, his quirky but loyal best friend and his close female friend--Molly. He tried to be understanding towards his wife and did not leave her initially because he felt a sense of duty. He also showed that he had a soft spot for his quirky but loving friend. His relationship with Molly when clean displayed his potential as a person. However, his weakness for heroin as an escape and his inability to detect dishonesty in his wife seem very unheroic. Throughout the film, Molly, not Frankie, stands out as being the biggest hero of the film. Molly encouraged Frankie to pursue music and ditch drugs, and she also had the ability to communicate in extremely tense situations. Molly saved Franie's life.

The Manchurian Candidate--A Critical Look At Institutions

The Manchurian Candidate, a film which encouraged viewers to take a critical look at their governmental officials and the legitimacy of the Red Scare, radically differed from Frank Sinatra's earlier films such as From Here to Eternity as well as Kings Go Forth which held political messages. The plot of The Manchurian Candidate could have caused viewers to fear the government and see corruption which not only existed in the government but also through the ranks of the military. Surprisingly seldom in many earlier wartime movies are soldiers shown as what they can be at their most basic--killing machines. By having the main character be brainwashed into being an assassin who murdered people without guilt or fear, viewers saw the government and the United States as being more fragile and much more easily manipulated than they may have believed. From Here to Eternity also takes a deeper look at military life and highlights the corruption which could occur with higher ranking officers, yet the corruption and the injustice is shown as being from an individual person rather than the institution. Therefore, From Here to Eternity addresses the flaws in an organization and the organization's failure to recognize corrupt leaders, but the institution is not called into question and isn't subject to manipulation. Kings Go Forth reveals very little about the military and the government; instead, Kings Go Forth highlights the social issue of racism and how much it can impact one's decisions with relationships. Of all three films, The Manchurian Candidate was the most radical of the three films. Introducing the possibility of conspiracy theories in the government and the military during a period of heightened tension and the fear of nuclear attack would be the most likely to scare the population at the time.

In regards to the politics of the film, The Manchurian Candidate would qualify as a more leftist film because it called into question the institutions of the government and the military which citizens would hope was far less corrupt than portrayed in the film; however, it did demonize the woman who sought to control the government and institute radical changes which may have been similar to Communism. Sinatra's character played the role of the seemingly psychologically troubled and critical major in the military. If one were to determine if his character had leftist overtones, it would be necessary to define "leftist". If it were defined as wanting the radical changes in the government and wanting change, then no, he would not be considered leftist. He wanted to preserve and protect the institutions, riding them of corruption--which seemed to be coming from the newer politicians. If being critical of political leaders and rebelling against his being sidelined for apparent mental issues designated him as more leftist, then Sinatra's character could be considered leftist. Since many good films which would be considered dramas provoke questioning of the status quo and institutions, most controversial films could be considered more leftist.

Sinatra's acting in his war films depends more upon his ability to convey meaning through calculated pauses and body movement than his ability to sing or his ability to crack jokes. In all three of the aforementioned war films, he talks less and does not seem to have a dominant personality. His ability to understand and win a woman is not integral to his role like it is in his musical roles. Perhaps because of the nature of musicals, Sinatra tends to come across as more of a character and more exaggerated than he does in his war films. Interestingly, he often is seen as a man in uniform in his earlier musicals yet his previous time in the service does not seem to change his temperament. He still retains his innocence in the musicals. In contrast, Sinatra's roles in his war films carry psychological and emotional burdens of being in the service. There is a much darker mood and an infusion of realism in Sinatra's war movies.

None But the Brave

SKIP FOR NOW...TWO MIDTERMS TOMORROW

Kings Go Forth: Addressing Racism

Before tackling the issue of race in this film, I want to first look at Sinatra’s role as Sam and how he seems more or less appealing with regards to masculinity in this film due to his relationship with Monique. Monique (played by Natalie Wood) fell head over heels for the much more dynamic yet dishonest Britt Harris (played by Tony Curtis). Even though Monique chose Britt over Sam (played by Frank Sinatra), the audience does not feel she made the better choice. The scene in which Britt breaks up the date between Sam and Britt gives the audience a glimpse of Britt’s flawed character. Britt literally steals the girl as if he had snatched the prize from his superior’s grasp. Sam seemed helpless to the situation yet skeptical of Britt’s intentions from the start. While one could interpret that Sam was portrayed as less attractive in this film because the film did not finish with his romantic future sealed, I believe that the audience was rooting for him throughout and his character seemed that much more attractive when situated next to Britt. Sam was a catch despite putting himself down, but Monique was naive. Perhaps contributing to the appeal of Sam’s character was how he was highly respected amongst his male peers for his leadership and honesty. Sam also showed a more sensitive side by such small things as stopping to take a drink from the old woman in the beginning of the film to show gratitude and acknowledging that he wept after hearing he was promoted during a conversation with Monique. Sam’s masculinity was much more complex because he was a sensitive and caring individual yet he had the strength to lead others when faced with death. His role seems like it would fit most closely to the ideal sensitive yet strong man that many women desire today.

In regards to the issue of race, I found Kings Go Forth to deliver the message with much more honesty and emotion than The House I Live In. This could be partly because Sinatra’s character in Kings Go Forth actually encounters the issue of race in his life and how he reacts to it could alter his life path. In The House I Live In, Frank Sinatra preaches about race to little kids. One film admits that racism is deeply ingrained in society and letting it go would be life-altering. The other short film however mentions racism under the larger umbrella of unjust discrimination and asserts that it is irrational; then, people are led to believe that they can just decide with a snap of their fingers that racism can just be undone, ignoring society’s racist ingrained beliefs at that period of history. The House I Live In reminds me of some Disney segment attempting to address racial inequality and racism; the message seems more commercialized and cheapened—less real. In both films, no characters were noticeably of color. The children were all white and were fighting over religion and racism got little mention in The House I Live In. Monique, who was supposedly half-black, had porcelain skin and dark eyes as well as hair. She apparently represented a hidden blackness; whereas all other characters were playing the parts of whites. Perhaps the casting of actual black actors or actresses would make the issue seem too real for the audience. In both films, Sinatra either mentioned or referred to his Italian American identity and how it gave him a different perspective on race. In Kings Go Forth, it added complexity to his decision to overcome his racist feelings towards Monique; Italian Americans pitted themselves against African Americans where he had grown up. In contrast, Sinatra reflected on his racial background and how it helped him understand how hurtful and unnecessary racial divides were in The House I Live In.

High Society: The Crooners Unite

First of all, The Philadelphia Story—the non-musical version of this film—competes for my favorite movie of all time so my analysis of High Society is colored. The precedent for embodying the roles had already been set by a star-studded cast, complete with Katherine Hepburn, Cary Grant, and Jimmy Stewart. In High Society, Frank Sinatra played the role which had been Jimmy Stewart’s in The Philadelphia Story. Sinatra was a comfortable and witty character who was naive in his being oblivious to his love for the photographer and his quick plunge into love for the troubled yet beautiful socialite. This role reminds fans that Sinatra could balance his confidence and humor with his persona as the average guy who falls for a girl out of his league and is rejected. His confidence is highlighted especially when he sits down in the family room and witnesses the masquerade which the bride-to-be puts on and also whenever he relates to other people in the film. Sinatra lacks awkwardness. His confusion about his attraction towards Tracy Lord—played by Grace Kelly—seems to be one of his only moments when he doesn’t operate with as much social ease. That unstated confidence which Sinatra displays on the screen seems to match more closely the persona which he developed off-screen after his comeback.

Bing Crosby’s role in the film as the wise-cracking but loving singer who ultimately gets the girl reinforces his identity in relation to Sinatra. Bing Crosby was the original crooner and functioned as a sort of “godfather” in the industry when Sinatra was trying to emerge on the scene. His role in the film was much more dominant than Sinatra’s. Bing Crosby seemed more associated with a jazz singer role in the film, which made him more legitimate and more of an innovator. Sinatra’s function for singing was to croon and get the girl and also to play up the comedic portion of his role. When singing together, Bing seems older and more knowledgeable yet they both maintain a certain respect for each other. Bing tries to diffuse conflict whenever Sinatra and Kelly run into Kelly’s fiancé while scantily clad and very intoxicated. Even though Sinatra croons to Kelly in the bar and she nearly falls over and obviously struggles against her temptation, Crosby still ends up with her. The rivalry has changed by the time of the film and Sinatra has forged his own musical niche and identity that admitting defeat to Bing Crosby doesn’t create bad feelings. They are almost jokingly going through the motions of competing with each other.

Guys and Dolls: Frank Playing the Well-Meaning Deadbeat

The differences between Frank Sinatra's acting as Nathan Detroit versus Marlon Brando as Sky Masterson are night and day. In addition to the characters being inherently radically different, the combination of poise and disposition which each actor contributes to his role is unique. Marlon Brando inhabits the role of the gangster who in his own way is ethical, keeping his word and not backing down from a challenge. Instead of fidgeting or looking around to determine how to behave, Brando maintains a suave front--and is much more calculated and confident with his body language. Whereas, Frank Sinatra plays the lovable deadbeat who is fighting to survive with his job as the facilitator of gambling games--he isn't legitimate enough to even play the games. When watching his typical body language, Sinatra looks down or around at his peers more due to his self-conscious attitude coupled with his disposition to fail or be pushed around. Looking at them separately, even more distinctions become apparent. Besides both seeming like good guys at their cores, having an active affiliation with mobsters, and falling in love with theirrespective "dolls", there are very few similarities between the two roles.

First, I shall look at Sinatra's role. From the start, Sinatra's role embraces a certain comedic element and self-awareness which enabled him to poke fun at himself and his weight. He struggles to keep his job, peer pressure and the need for money fueling his drive to set up gambling games. He is surrounded by male friends and acquaintances, and he tries to seem more in-charge of his life and situation because of that. His tendencies to look around at other men's reactions to him indicate his dependence on others to dictate his own behavior. Sinatra's treatment of his romance reveales much to the audience about his character. His fourteen year engagement and tendency to depend upon his fiance's income highlights how stagnant his life seems and how he lacks agency or pride. His exaggerated motions with his hands and jumpiness indicate his fear of ineptitude. The fact that he sings more often for the benefit of men also shows his desire to fit in with the guys--being a guy's guy. His masculinity suffers because his fiancee seems to be taking care of him and he assumes a slightly whipped relationship with her. One scene stuck out due to Sinatra's character being well-intentioned and comedic but weak. When coordinating the game to take place in the sewage system, he gets pressured into losing all of his money over a bet with dice with no spots and he gawkily handles a gun when Brando throws it to him. Frank's role meshes more with the typical, inept yet lovable portrayal of masculinity.

Marlon Brando, on the other hand, remains cool and collected throughout the movie--the person to look towards and emulate. His only moments of real vulnerability are when he puts his emotions on the line with his female interest--especially in moments of song. In comparison to Sinatra, his character was played up and seen as respectable long before delivering his first lines in the film. That buildup allows the audience to separate themselves from him and put him on a pedestal for being a gambler worthy of respect and not easily taken advantage of. His effortless approach towards other men and most women contributes to the illusion that he is almost always in control of the situation. Brando's usage of his body to make people more aware of his strong and dominating presence are minimal because the lack of fidgeting; using his body too much in expression would make him seem like he cares too much about what others think. He is wise and articulate---causing even the most buttoned up girl to be submissive. He could fight but could also play up his romantic side--both of which contribute to his being a heartthrob-like character in the film. In essence, Sinatra was endearing yet Brando was captivating and powerful.

From Here to Eternity: The Breakout Role

After playing the role of the boyish, innocent, and fairly oblivious sailor multiple times, Frank Sinatra proved himself to have the talent and depth necessary for taking up a role of Maggio in From Here to Eternity. He was established as a kind-hearted yet hot-headed little guy who loved his drink and cringed at flagrant injustice. His character added a hint of comedy to the film, playing a believable best friend in the service. His portrayal allowed the audience to find him endearing and fall in love with him again after abandoning him and believing his star had fallen. Perhaps, more than his excellence in portraying the drunkard and funny guy parts, his small stature but strong character and resolve made this a stand out role for Sinatra. His previous characters in Anchors Aweigh, It Happened In Brooklyn, and On the Town all lacked the toughness and masculine (even though at times comedic) qualities that were so evident in From Here to Eternity. Instead of trying so hard to follow other people's rules and playing the system straight like he tended to do in his aforementioned films, Sinatra's internal moral compass, his sense of right and wrong, governed his behavior.

One very stark difference between this film and his musicals is his complete lack of singing or association with music. Even though there were several scenes which incorporated a song, Sinatra did not sing. He also did not have a significant female interest, even though he adopted the role of being very interested in girls--chasing girls for the first time as he had at the club. Since Sinatra did not sing, he lacked the secret weapon to woo his women. His costars, Burt Lancaster and Montgomery Clift, were much more physically appealing than Sinatra, which is highlighted in the film when they appear shirtless or are wearing tank tops. This acceptance of Sinatra as a scrawny guy next to the muscular stars epitomised the supporting actor role; he was used as a prop to show the audience the superior characters of the other men and proved himself to be tough in the meantime. He was still clearly meant to be Italian and also donned the uniform, so there remained some similarities between his past films and From Here to Eternity.

The real testament to his acting was that he made the plot line believable. In the film, Maggio almost gets into a fight with the prison warden and then ends up secretly getting beat up to the point of near death. His escape attempt led to his death. His death led to the murder of the prison warden by Burt Lancaster's character and also indirectly led to Burt Lancaster's death. Only a serious and respected character could be the cause of so much upheaval and have the audience believe that the revenge for his death was necessary--even in hindsight. Sinatra's character was too good of a person and too valuable to see die without repercussions.

Sinatra Week on American Idol

American Idol tends to have weeks that are dedicated to a particular style of music or a specific artist. Michael Jackson, Elvis, and Sinatra are only a few of the artists whose songs have been imitated or reworked on the show with some good and some god-awful renditions . There are several things to watch for in the clip. Notice: the crowd's response to Tina and Nancy's appearance on the show (a genuine respect for the legend), Simon's obvious hero-worship and respect towards Sinatra when receiving a monogrammed handkerchief, the singer's strained approach to "Fly Me to the Moon", and Simon's description of qualities which were distinctly Sinatra. This clip reminds me that sometimes it is beneficial to see someone imitate in order to gain a better perception of what makes the original so special and unique. Enjoy!

Here's the clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALvYOmN6gXg

On the Town--Sinatra's Innocence Still Fairly Intact

It seems to be a trend that Sinatra needs an aggressive, opinionated, cute (but not drop dead gorgeous) girl to pair up with. This actually makes him more endearing and seemingly in reach for the girls in the audience pining after Frank. In Anchors Aweigh, It Happened In Brooklyn, and On the Town, Sinatra ends up with a blonde, boisterous, Brooklyn girl. This phenomenon is especially obvious in On the Town, when the female cabbie pulls over and nearly jumps Sinatra--something in which he seems disinterested. Thinking over it, while Sinatra eventually reciprocates the love or attraction, he at firsts seems either oblivious to the glaring signals or feels like he has better things to do with his time. Just when the audience could believe that Sinatra either failed to hit puberty and like girls or that he may be more interested in the Gene Kellys than the Katherine Graysons, Sinatra kisses the girl and shows some passion!

On the Town has all the workings of a cheesy yet cute musical. Start off with three attractive (or at least attractive enough) sailors on leave and add in three women to pair them off. There are several hard to get sequences, but there is no doubt in the audience's mind that the blunt taxi driver would win over Sinatra and Gene Kelly would get a date with Ivy Smith. Ozzie (Jules Munshin), the third and most comedic sailor of the trio, was paired with the over-the-top, boy-crazy and nerdy Claire (Anne Miller). The women characters were all perfectly crafted to complement the models of masculinity which Sinatra, Kelly, and Munshin portrayed.

When first getting off the boat, the boys all sing together and sight-see together. Not until they take a rest and start talking do the differences in personality and interests become apparent. Kelly proclaimed himself the female-expert, seemingly invincible and unstoppable when pursuing a woman. As typical for his characters, Kelly seemed to puff up his own reputation and it only faltered when he realized that it wouldn't get the girl. Kelly was the strong, wolf-like character, chasing his woman who was perched on a pedestal around town. If the girl were easy to get, Kelly wouldn't want her (most likely). Sinatra's preoccupation with sightseeing even when having the option of spending time alone with a more than willing female in her apartment made him seem oblivious to the allure of females. He kept being obstinate and even ticked off by the cabbie attempting to seduce him (as if he had a better usage of his time). Finally his will was broken and he also gave into temptation (which I didn't know he harbored until then)when he started passionately kissing the cabbie in the apartment. Sinatra seemed to have come of age in the middle of the film and his song on the top of the Empire State Building exemplified that, while Sinatra was endearing, his characters tended to lack the smooth technique of Kelly. Lastly, Jules seemed to fit into the comedic role in the film. He wanted a girl and Ann lusted after the male gender, so they inevitably fell together and began their romance with no delay. Jules's quirky personality needed some female who shared that slight odd-ness with him. Out of all of the men, and even though he was the first one to have something physical happen with a girl on the trip, he seemed to be the least attractive and his role was purely to provide laughs, not to induce the swooning.

The Rat Pack...Bro-Love at It's Finest!

This clip of the Rat Pack captures the effortlessly cool, talented, and hilarious nature of the guys. Instead of the word for word scripted nature of many shows today, the Rat Pack bantered, sang,and drank on-stage. I feel like this clip shows how far Sinatra really came from his early years. This is the Sinatra which warrants his fame and legacy.

Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grPyyTYjLHw&feature=related

It Happened In Brooklyn: Slightly Stronger Sinatra Emerges

There are quite a few obvious parallels between Anchors Aweigh and It Happened In Brooklyn. Frank Sinatra opens in both movies possessing few social skills and little presence amongst his peers. The first time that he seems comfortable, commanding attention as well as respect, is when he sings. Katherine Grayson plays the part in both films of the beautiful aspiring opera singer—a yet to be discovered gem for talent scouts and the male population. Sinatra losses the girl once again to the darker and more handsome male co-star (played by Gene Kelly in Anchors Aweigh and Peter Lawford in It Happened In Brooklyn). The end of the movie even ended with Sinatra figuring out that he truly loved a blonde, sassy Brooklyn girl, not Grayson. Saying that the storyline was predictable is an understatement.

Within the first few minutes of the movie when Peter Lawford flashes onto the screen, the audience knows that Frank will inevitably lose the battle for the girl. Next to Lawford, Sinatra seems to possess more confidence and a more dynamic character, but Lawford’s character seemed much like Grayson’s character—both were striking and had a musical gift and dream which they were about to abandon. Unlike in Anchors Aweigh, Sinatra served as the leader of the pack, made the decisions, and seemed more self-aware in It Happened In Brooklyn; however, physically, Frank could not compete with the stature and face of Peter Lawford.

One distinct difference between his role from Anchors Aweigh is that his character has more agency, furthering along the plot. It seems like nothing could have happened without Frank’s involvement in the film. He was discovered and obtained his job at the record store. He helped Lawford’s character have success with composing by getting his music published. He befriended the lonely janitor played by Jimmy Durante and encouraged Durante's character to dream and feel important by introducing the old man to royalty. By introducing Lawford to Grayson, Frank warmed up Grayson’s voice, poising her for greater success in the opera realm, and encouraged Lawford to shrug off his fear of talking to women. Even though he didn’t seem like a masculine or powerful individual in the film, Sinatra seemed to orchestrate nearly everything, even if he was unaware.

One common theme in It Happened In Brooklyn was the deeply rooted belief that with hard work and determination, talent could be discovered and rewarded. The American Dream prevailed. This theme mirrors Sinatra’s progress in show business up until that point. Sinatra’s character comes home to Brooklyn with a optimism and pure love for his past homestead, hinting at Sinatra’s status as son of Italian immigrants. His character had an initial fear of auditioning but is discovered by the owner of the shop and offered an attractive job when merely singing for fun. The undiscovered talent of the teenage pianist soon gains the attention and respect of critics as well as a board which grants scholarships. Not only does the boy get seen, the scholarship board actually amends restrictions on age in order to offer the scholarship and schooling to the boy. The film remains overly optimistic throughout. Even though Sinatra’s character is rejected by the girl, the viewers are led to believe that he will end up with the approachable yet feisty girl from his hometown, making Sinatra seem that much more attainable by his audience. Finally, although Sinatra did not have formal singing training, he was cast alongside Katherine Grayson—obviously touting years of vocal training. The opera duet which they perform in the Italian restaurant highlights the differences in style and training, reminding the audience that Frank had literally made himself, functioning as living proof of the American Dream.

Anchors Aweigh (1945): Sinatra as Awkward yet Endearing Sailor

Two young sailors on leave in Los Angeles, Clarence Doolittle (Frank Sinatra) and Joseph Brady (Gene Kelly) end up unexpectedly spending the duration of their leave together pursuing the strikingly beautiful aspiring singer, Susan Abbott (Kathryn Grayson). Having watched several films with a slightly older and more seasoned Sinatra, I was shocked by Sinatra’s role and performance in the film. Sinatra’s character lacked the confidence and prowess which came to be associated with him as a star, spending more time and effort fawning over Kelly’s character in a sort of hero worship than over Grayson’s character. Sinatra spends many scenes just watching Kelly work his magic with the ladies and witnessing Kelly spin his juicy stories for fellow sailors. Few moves which Sinatra makes are done without a glance seeking approval from Kelly. Consistently throughout the movie, Kelly leads and Sinatra follows, trying to mimic Kelly but having his attempts seem awkward and out of character instead. To be clear, Sinatra's ability to act is not under question but it is the role and how he inhabits that particular role at which I am looking.

Kelly’s charisma and charm had the power to seduce the female audience; whereas the male audience either begrudgingly admired his smooth talking or outwardly wished they could have the same power. In the scene in which he called his lady friend on the phone in front of the rest of the sailors, his flashing dimples and suggestive voice set the tone for his masculine dominance and established his character in the film. He was funny, sweet, good-hearted and had an overall dominating presence. The little boy who wished with all his heart to be a sailor looked up to Kelly as the ultimate sailor. Kelly’s character flourished in the midst of women and men and he seemed like a leader even though the viewers could see his tendency to embellish the truth and they could also witness his vulnerabilities.

In contrast, Sinatra came on the screen as a bumbling and skinny sailor who retained the innocence and awkwardness that comes with childhood. He looks up to Kelly so much throughout the film that the viewers tend to follow his stare and join in on looking at Kelly. Only when smiling or singing a ballad did Sinatra steal the show and give the audience a glimpse of the dynamic and confident entertainer he would grow into. Sinatra’s painful shyness in the role of Clarence kept him from truly talking to Grayson’s character. When combining his lack of the ability to speak to pretty girls with his gawky frame (in comparison to Kelly), Frank had to end up with another female--hence the Brooklyn character. Grayson’s character was out of his league.

The relationship between Sinatra and Kelly’s characters bordered on homosexual in how physically close they would get to each other in conversations and also the distance between their faces and facial expressions. This was especially apparent in the scene when Kelly is sitting on the couch in the little boy’s house, talking on the phone with his lady friend. Sinatra listens in and cuddles onto the back of Kelly. They also get very close when singing and bragging about their falsified night on the town with their fellow sailors. By the end of the movie, while Sinatra does sing and end up with a girl, he seems to be closer in character and maturity to the little aspiring sailor boy than Kelly’s character. This casting could not have occurred later in Sinatra's career when he was more established as the lead man. Sinatra's character was endearing but not a threat to Kelly's dominant presence.