Gone with the Wind (DVD)

Connect to Facebook/Twitter, recommend via email and much more.

---

Here it is again, folks, the great granddaddy of all blockbusters, David O. Selznick's 1939 production of Margaret Mitchell's epic story of the Civil War and the Old South, "Gone With the Wind."

"Birth of a Nation" may have preceded it as the first true superspectacular, and "Titanic" may have come after it as the biggest moneymaking film of all time, but I predict that fifty years from now, when "Nation" is almost forgotten and the waters of time have settled down around the big sinking boat, "Gone With the Wind" will still be most people's idea of THE big-scale movie. Understand, I'm not suggesting it's the best film ever made, or even my favorite film, but it must be ranked among the most deservedly popular films ever created. After all, it does continue to hold the record for being the best-attended movie of all time.

Besides, for good or for bad it's probably the film more people have talked about over the years than any other. The American Film Institute voted it the fourth best American movie ever made. Entertainment Weekly" placed it eighth on their list of "The 100 Greatest Movies of All Time." "Variety" called it "One of the truly great films." Roger Ebert claims "it is still a great film, above all because it tells a great story." The "Daily Mirror" said it was "still pure gold." And Leonard Maltin asserted, "If not the greatest movie ever made, certainly one of the greatest examples of storytelling on film, maintaining interest for nearly four hours." On the other hand, critic Franz Hoellering wrote in "The Nation" that the film was "a major event in the history of the industry but only a minor event in motion picture art." The London "Sunday Times" drama critic James Agate said "Shakespeare's 'Taming of the Shrew' seems to have got mixed up with one of the novels of Ethel M. Dell." And "Time Out" magazine called it "perhaps the key plantation movie."

Maybe producer Irving Thalberg said it best when he remarked to Louis B. Mayer in 1936, "Forget it, Louis, no Civil War picture ever made a nickel." Controversy then; controversy now. Well, the movie did make over a nickel, but it's still got its detractors, most notably those who claim, not unjustifiably, that it's is the most glorified soap opera ever made.

Based on novelist Mitchell's sprawling Civil War melodrama, the on-again off-again love story of Scarlett O'Hara (Vivien Leigh) and Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) hardly needs to be recounted. Suffice it to say that the movie is melodrama at its best, with enough romance and adventure to have satisfied audiences for over sixty years. But it was not an easy production, and it's a wonder it came off as coherently as it did considering the number of directors called upon to complete it, among them George Cukor, Sam Wood, and production designer William Cameron Menzies. However, the director most credited for the film's success is Victor Fleming, whose name appears in the credits. He and the others managed to fashion a piece of timeless storytelling, aided by a fine supporting cast headed up by Olivia de Havilland, Leslie Howard, Thomas Mitchell, Hattie McDaniel, and Butterfly McQueen. Together, they tell a story of huge proportions, one that spans many years and encompasses spectacles like the siege and burning of Atlanta that continue to impress today.

Why has it remained so popular? I suspect that in addition to the film's spectacle--the picnic at Twelve Oaks, the lavish balls, the great crane shot of War victims sprawled for miles, the burning of Atlanta, the ravishing matte paintings--it's all about the cast and the casting. Gable's Rhett is among the screen's most enduring heroes, right up there with Bogart's Rick, Connery's Bond, Ford's Indy, and the AFI's Gregory Peck in "To Kill a Mockingbird." Leigh's Scarlett is more problematical, a spiteful, spoiled brat, she nevertheless shows a determination that has been awe-inspiring for decades. Ms. de Havilland's Melanie is probably a character too good to be true, but, hey, she, too, has continued to be an inspiration for good. The weak point may be Howard's Ashley, a rather weak-kneed stuffed shirt and a wimp where Scarlett is concerned. Fortunately, there's also McDaniel's strong-willed nursemaid, Mammy, a role that helped McDaniel become the first African-American to win an Academy Award; Mitchell's convincing Pa O'Hara; and McQueen's endearingly harebrained house servant, Prissy.

It amazes me that the film can maintain my attention for nearly four hours, despite my having seen it a dozen times since childhood. OK, I have to admit I always start to tire in the second half, but, thankfully, the DVD makes it easier than ever to come and go in the story. Has it dated at all? Not a bit. It's as fresh today as the night it premiered, thanks in part to its new restoration. The film won eight Academy Awards, for Best Picture, Director, Actress, Supporting Actress, Writing, Art Direction, Cinematography, and Film Editing. "Gone With the Wind" was producer David O. Selznick's crowning achievement and a film that stands up as one of the screen's finest classics.

Anyway, after its first release as a no-frills DVD set, it makes its appearance this time in all the splendor of a big, new Warner Brothers, sixty-fifth anniversary, four-disc Collector's Edition box set, with a ton of extras and a restored picture that surely never looked so good even in a first-run movie house.

Video:
Warner Bros. have digitally restored and remastered film, and it continues to be nothing short of astonishing for a film of its age. This time out, the image is better than ever and transferred to disc at a higher bit rate than in its previous DVD edition, ensuring even more lifelike hues. The newly color-aligned Technicolor is vivid and lifelike, now more than ever producing natural, realistic facial tones, rich, textured colors, and deep black contrasts, with delineation as sharp as it could ever be imagined on a standard-definition disc. The earlier DVD picture seemed a tad darker and deeper, but, as I say, the newer one appears more true-to-life. There is nothing about the film that betrays its age save possibly the fact that it was never produced in widescreen (although for its 1967 theatrical rerelease, it was matted for 2.20:1 widescreen exhibition, cutting off huge chunks of the top and bottom of the screen, destroying the visual composition of the scenes, and enraging film buffs everywhere). Today, the whole movie radiates a freshness and beauty hard to imagine in a source so old. Furthermore, its 1.33:1 screen size is almost the width of its first theatrical presentation (1.37:1) and amply displays all of the film's spectacle and scope.