21 Days Together

Of all the dramas that have ever graced the Silver Screen, some are better than others. Save for the very noteworthy cast, I don't know that there's anything so remarkable about '21 days' as to demand viewership. Yet its tale is suitably compelling to keep one watching, with surprising variety and balance squeezed into only 72 minutes. I didn't necessarily expect much when I sat to watch, but ultimately I find myself quite pleased with just how good this is.

Weirdly enough all the most significant characters are sympathetic in one fashion to another, if to different degrees: Wanda, the innocent romantic; Larry, the conflicted lover; Keith, the upstanding citizen and loyal brother; John Evan, the extraordinarily guilt-ridden vagrant. The dynamics between these characters, and the law's investigation of a homicide, provide all the fuel necessary for a slight but delicious film. Even outside those principle characters, other supporting figures are given delightful quirks to help them stand out. The dialogue is quite smart at points, as is the scene writing, and the narrative at large offers a tad more complexity than one might commonly assume of titles form this era, especially those of such relatively abbreviated length. Through to the very end '21 days' rather successfully inculcates minor airs of tension and suspense. My commendations to director Basil Dean and co-writer Graham Greene, for their adapted screenplay is richer than I supposed from the outside looking in.

True, there are tinges of ham-handedness at points that are a little excessive. The transitions that the editors employ are a bit needlessly embellished. Yet these seem like such minor considerations in the grand scheme of things, especially when the whole is broadly so engaging and satisfying. Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier have splendid chemistry and give noteworthy performances in what are the two chief roles; Leslie Banks and other co-stars are steady presences. Dean's direction is firm and mindful, neatly complementing his writing, and all facets of the production contributed from behind the scenes are just swell. This may be a picture in which the storytelling is specifically the key, but no one involved was a slouch by any means.

Again, this may not be an absolute must-see, or something to go out of your way to see. It's entertaining and very deserving, but perhaps not so grabbing as to be an essential drama. All the same, I'm pleasantly surprised by how well done the feature is, and how enjoyable. If you do have the chance to check out '21 days, then as far as I'm concerned this is well worth a mere 72 minutes of one's time.

There are many barriers to love, most can be overcome, but is murder one such obstacle, can a couple allow an innocent man to take the blame for their crime?

It's not as good as some of the movies I've seen from this era and in the same genre, but it is good, it's very watchable, and let's be honest, anything that features Vivian Leigh is worth watching.

It's perhaps a lack of suspense that is the stumbling block, you're left in no doubt as to the ending.

It's a good watch though, nicely made, and very well acted, 6/10.

Apparently this is one of those Galsworthy dilemma stories. In it Olivier, early in his career inadvertently kills a man, the estranged husband of his new love. He is faced with the considerable struggle with conscience because a man has been blamed for the act and will face the music. What to do. What to do. We are put in the position of hoping all will somehow work out. I won't spoil the ending, but I will say that Olivier's character could have been sent to the gallows for terminal boredom. At no point did I really care one way or the other. He is selfish in many ways and rather cowardly. While the victim is made to have no redeeming qualities, his death really serves nothing other than that of a plot element. I suppose there is some of that stiff upper lip stuff going on, but at no time did I sit on the edge of my seat. Contrast this to the pain of Jean Valjean who faces a similar question. In that we all need to look inward. This just didn't ask much of me, and I was also greatly disappointed with the conclusion.

Although released in 1940 this picture was made in 1937, well before Leigh and Olivier were married. Producer Alexander Korda intended it as a career-boosting role for Leigh but, for whatever reasons, it was put-aside. Columbia bought the property in 1939 and released it after Leigh's success in "Gone with the wind".

The 1937 date explains what must seem to be an anomaly for modern audiences - the sympathetic treatment of the "Axis" characters, ie the German landlord and the Italian grocer.

Well-worth watching - the depth of talent in the supporting roles (Francis L Sullivan, Hay Petrie, Robert Newton etc) is notable.

he film begins with two happy lovers (Laurence Olivier and Vivian Leigh) returning to her home. There, waiting for her is her husband--a man who she hasn't seen in three years. He demands money and then attacks Olivier--trying to stab him. In self-defense, Olivier kills the husband and dumps his body in an alley. He then visits his brother, a respected judge (Leslie Banks) and confesses. However, the brother surprisingly does NOT want him to go the police--which is odd, since it was a case of self-defense. It seems that he doesn't want this dirty laundry to be aired in public. For a time, things appear fine...until some other guy is arrested for the killing. Olivier cannot allow this to happen but his brother encourages him to be quiet--the defendant is sure to be found innocent. But, as the trial progresses, things look worse and worse for the defendant. And, all the while his brother, a respected judge, encourages the couple to leave the country and forget about the case. The problem is that Olivier's character has character--much more than his supposedly upright and respectable brother.

While the story is very simple and relatively easy to predict (though the ending was a bit of a twist), I liked the idea of two brothers who appear one way but are the opposite. Olivier's character is a bit of a rotter--gambling and living a rather frivolous life--but down deep, he has a conscience. His proper brother, however, is truly evil and can live with an innocent man being convicted and hung! Because it is a very good film, it is perplexing why Gainsborough Pictures shelved this movie for three years before finally releasing it. I'd love to know why.