Product: Holiday (1938)
Rating: 5.0
Relevant Classic about Central Conflict of American Dream
Holiday is a movie about the war between prosperity and freedom that lies at the heart of the American Dream disguised as a witty romantic comedy, a theme especially relevant in our time of economic uncertainty and confusion. Depression Era films often depicted the rich and not just any rich but those so rich that wealth changed their relationship to society. At a time when things were tight even for the employed and thousands stood in breadlines or wandered the west in search of agricultural work seeing the unrealistic rich was escapist comfort.Holiday, starring Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn and Doris Nolan is a romantic comedy with an obvious message and a hidden question. Grant, here playing Johnny Case, a self-made man who has been working since the age of ten meets and falls in love with Julia (Doris Nolan) during the only vacation of his life. He calls on her when they return to New York to discuss their impending marriage and discovers that she is the daughter of a robber baron industrialist. Johnny's fondest dream is to make enough money in business to support himself in comfort while he takes the 'holiday' of the title and simply enjoys what life has to offer. And here is the conflict of the film as Julia is a conformist and wants Johnny to fulfill his potential in the business world and become a millionaire in his own rite.Julia has a sister, a brother and a father, all of whom react differently to the impending nuptials and the question of Johnny's future. The father wants Johnny to advance in the business world. The sister, Linda (Katherine Hepburn) understands Johnny's dream and supports it, trying to get Julia on board. The brother is a frustrated musician, forcibly employed in the family business who has taken refuge in the bottle. Johnny's guardians, the Potters, are horrified by the plans for Johnny and entranced by Linda, quickly realizing that Linda is the right sister for Johnny. During the course of the film, Johnny's brilliant leveraged buy-out of a utility makes both his success in business and his freedom from work a possibility. Which will he choose? Julia and wealth or Linda and freedom?The happy ending is predictable but affecting and Johnny ends up sailing away with Linda to escape the drudgery of materialism and capitalism. But, is this really what happens? Underneath the 'communist claptrap' that another reviewer labeled the film is a question about the balance between materialism and freedom. Johnny is not just a man who works because he must, but has the ability to be brilliant in business. He just chooses not to be, or chooses to quit when he has enough. There is a conflict of values here that Phillip Barry (playwright) may not have been aware of. Indeed, Johnny's success in the business world is the very thing that buys him the freedom and the leisure he craves. There is a mixed message in that; freedom is desirable, but is unfortunately a function of our material circumstances. The entire movie is spent in the company of the wealthy or at the very least, the middle class. Johnny's guardians, portrayed as the last word in populism, are in fact a college professor and a rich girl who married for love rather than money. The real American underclass and their suffering is nowhere in evidence. The playwright also leaves Johnny with an out. "Even if the holiday idea is one I go off of in three months or grow cold on, I still want to do it." The possibility of him returning to business is always open. And, no matter which sister he marries, he is allying himself to a wealthy family, so money will never be a problem. Another conflict in values. Its easy to be free when all of your basic AND luxury needs are met.For me, the movie raised questions, rather than answering them and for these reasons I love it. I also love Holiday for the witty dialogue, the intense emotion, the great acting and the seemingly happy ending. What is the balance between freedom and materialism and how do we address these questions when they have stopped being discussed? We are physical creatures and as such materialism is a fact of our life. Greed is to be guarded against but healthy materialism is a basic need. Perennial questions, especially for Americans make this a subtly topical film.One final note, even though he is a supporting character, Lew Ayres's acting is the most heartbreaking in the film. His defeated retreat to the comfort of the bottle because he can't bear to even look for a balance between freedom and materialism is the most heart-piercing and subtle performance in the movie. He is the wise, wry, beaten observer and Ayres brings a quiet despair to the role that makes his the most complex character in the film. I am also a fan of the great character actor Edward Everett Horton, who plays Professor Potter and it is always a joy to see his humble brilliance and comedic timing.Highly recommended and make sure to look beneath the glossy and earnest surface to the important questions that lie at the heart of this classic film.