I guess you could write a case study on the way that a society deals with tragedy. Take, for example, the First World War. For years after the conflict - at least until the conflict that followed it – those left behind tried to deal with it any way they could. That's where the arts are so important, in a manner of dealing with tragedy in art or music or in film, it makes for a certain auditory and visual means of wrapping our minds and our emotions around the tragedy of the insatiable need for humans to kill one another in the name of honor.
In the early years of the academy awards, several films dealt with the subject and walked away with the top prize. First was Wings, a largely pro-war epic that tried to help us understand the war in the air. Two years later came the devastation of Lewis Milestone's adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front, a fearless anti-war epic about the men in the trenches displayed in bloody and unflinching detail. Those films dealt with the war from battlefield. Two years later came Cavalcade, a portrait of war and family on the home front.
Of course, with Cavalcade, The First World War only makes up part of the story, but the impact is there. Based on a 1931 play by Noël Coward and directed by Frank Lloyd (who would go on to direct another Best Picture winner Mutiny on the Bounty before the decade was out), Cavalcade follows thirty years in the rise and fall of a wealthy British family from New Year's Eve of 1899 to New Year's Day of 1932. We see them through The Second Boar War, the death of Queen Victoria, the sinking of The Titanic and finally The First World War. Like Cimarron, a western that won the Oscar for Best Picture two years earlier, Cavalcade deals with the progression of world affairs as seen through the eyes of a family over several decades. The difference is that this film deals with specific red-letter moments whereas the other film simply dealt with personal issues seen through the passage of time.
The focus of Cavalcade is on two families, one rich, the other employed as their servants. The wealthy are the Marryots, headed by Sir Robert and wife Lady Jane (Clive Brook and Diana Wynyard. They have two sons, Edward (John Warburton and younger brother Joe (Frank Lawton). The Bridges are headed by Alfred (Herbert Mundin) and wife Ellen (the invaluable Una O'Connor). They have a daughter Fanny (Ursula Jeans).
The film opens with Robert going off to fight the Boar War and ends with son Edward coming back from The Great War. That leaves the focus of the film mostly on the women, specifically on Lady Jane who stays home and fears that her husband and then son won't come back. It is a decent performance but not great. The film is very talky and most of that talk is very flat and stiff. Cavalcade leaves you feeling as if you're watching a stage play – which is the last thing you want from a feature film.
Diana Wynyard, a darling of the British stage made only a few stopovers in film throughout her long career (this was her second film) but mostly spent her life in the theater. She gives a decent performance here as Lady Jane but it is clear that the theater is still in her blood. She's was not a natural film actor and it is evident in her performance. She got her only Oscar nomination here but lost to Katherine Hepburn, came back to film occasionally but stayed on the stage until her death in 1965.
Her legacy would outlive this movie. It is an interesting curio in that it shows us the lives and attitudes of people just a generation into the 20th century, but there's not real tension here. The movie is dusty and flat. There's no passion, no energy. Everyone looks as if they are reading cue-cards. For that reason, Cavalcade is all but forgotten today, a curiosity but not a necessity. Of all the Best Picture winners is has more or less passed out of common knowledge. That's as it should be because, as well intentioned as it is in dealing with war, it is not worth remembering.
In the early years of the academy awards, several films dealt with the subject and walked away with the top prize. First was Wings, a largely pro-war epic that tried to help us understand the war in the air. Two years later came the devastation of Lewis Milestone's adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front, a fearless anti-war epic about the men in the trenches displayed in bloody and unflinching detail. Those films dealt with the war from battlefield. Two years later came Cavalcade, a portrait of war and family on the home front.
Of course, with Cavalcade, The First World War only makes up part of the story, but the impact is there. Based on a 1931 play by Noël Coward and directed by Frank Lloyd (who would go on to direct another Best Picture winner Mutiny on the Bounty before the decade was out), Cavalcade follows thirty years in the rise and fall of a wealthy British family from New Year's Eve of 1899 to New Year's Day of 1932. We see them through The Second Boar War, the death of Queen Victoria, the sinking of The Titanic and finally The First World War. Like Cimarron, a western that won the Oscar for Best Picture two years earlier, Cavalcade deals with the progression of world affairs as seen through the eyes of a family over several decades. The difference is that this film deals with specific red-letter moments whereas the other film simply dealt with personal issues seen through the passage of time.
The focus of Cavalcade is on two families, one rich, the other employed as their servants. The wealthy are the Marryots, headed by Sir Robert and wife Lady Jane (Clive Brook and Diana Wynyard. They have two sons, Edward (John Warburton and younger brother Joe (Frank Lawton). The Bridges are headed by Alfred (Herbert Mundin) and wife Ellen (the invaluable Una O'Connor). They have a daughter Fanny (Ursula Jeans).
The film opens with Robert going off to fight the Boar War and ends with son Edward coming back from The Great War. That leaves the focus of the film mostly on the women, specifically on Lady Jane who stays home and fears that her husband and then son won't come back. It is a decent performance but not great. The film is very talky and most of that talk is very flat and stiff. Cavalcade leaves you feeling as if you're watching a stage play – which is the last thing you want from a feature film.
Diana Wynyard, a darling of the British stage made only a few stopovers in film throughout her long career (this was her second film) but mostly spent her life in the theater. She gives a decent performance here as Lady Jane but it is clear that the theater is still in her blood. She's was not a natural film actor and it is evident in her performance. She got her only Oscar nomination here but lost to Katherine Hepburn, came back to film occasionally but stayed on the stage until her death in 1965.
Her legacy would outlive this movie. It is an interesting curio in that it shows us the lives and attitudes of people just a generation into the 20th century, but there's not real tension here. The movie is dusty and flat. There's no passion, no energy. Everyone looks as if they are reading cue-cards. For that reason, Cavalcade is all but forgotten today, a curiosity but not a necessity. Of all the Best Picture winners is has more or less passed out of common knowledge. That's as it should be because, as well intentioned as it is in dealing with war, it is not worth remembering.