On, "The Jolson Story."

I just watched, The Jolson Story, for the fortieth time and once again, was thoroughly entertained from beginning to end.     The question I have is:   "Is it a good motion picture?"   If so, why?  If not, why not? Sounds like a question on a High School final exam.    That's what it feels like.    It's almost a stupid question. But no, I mean it.  

No one, I mean no one in the history of the Broadway stage had a career like Al Jolson.   This should have been a key point of the film.   It was not.   In fact, there was much about Jolson's stage career that was so crucial to understanding his success and legendary status that was omitted.    Primarily, Jolson was first and foremost perceived to be a comic figure.  Advertisements for his show referred to him as the "Winter Garden Comedian,"  not the singer.  The character he portrayed in so many shows, Gus Jackson, was a type of harlequin, and his charm and attraction lay in his ability to make you laugh.  And it wasn't only Gus Jackson's foibles, it was Jolson coming out of character, having discussions with the audience, making topical jokes, etc, that so beguiled audiences.     One never knew what one was going to get from an evening of Jolson at the Winter Garden.  

Of course, there was his voice, which was said to make the walls vibrate.  An oddly powerful voice, it seems, but nevertheless expressive to the extreme.   Jolson could make you laugh and he could make you cry, and usually did both within a short span of time.   What was it about his voice, his "persona," that made him such a magnetic and electrical stage performer?   Gilbert Seldes called his presence, "demonic."   Did he tap into some unseen force that only a few artist-shaman could tap into?   Judging from the reviews and audience accounts, that's exactly what he did.   His presence was often said to be "magical."  

None of this was made clear in The Jolson Story.   Probably the most important and salient point about Jolson was not addressed.    But then again, how could it?  Could it?  It  would have taken some very good and pointed script writing to make that clear.   But it should have been made clear.   No doubt.

But the film succeeds.   In fact, it succeeds on a grand scale.   Why?

First, there is Jolson himself.   Unlike any other biographical depiction of any star, we hear Jolson himself singing.    We don't have Cohan dancing in Yankee Doodle Dandy, or, Fanny Brice joking around at the New Amsterdam theater in, Funny Girl.   Again, no Cohan in, George M, and no Chauncey Olcott in, My Wild Irish Rose.    Jolson's voice is unique and indefinable in it's beauty and expressiveness.   It is the star of this movie.    But Larry Parks portraying Jolson, I must admit, does an outstanding job of creating a Jolson style of bodily movement that is highly successful on film, and very attractive.   He exudes emotion and a love of entertaining.   No doubt.   As an actor Parks was. . . meh, middle of the road.   But what he did as Jolson deserves great accolades.   It is said he listened and experiment with his motions by standing in front of two huge speakers with Jolson's voice blaring out of them.   He wanted his movements to reflect his inner experience of the songs, and he did so fabulously.  

Secondly, there is a kind of "sweep" to the film.   It begins at the turn of the last century, which is depicted rather well in costume and scenery, then jumps to what could best be described as the "present," (1940's) in style.    One has the feeling that a great deal of time has passed.   This is certainly reflected in the music and in the choices of songs.

Lastly, there is the ending.   A very, very unusual ending for a Hollywood movie.  The boy loses the girl.  One is left with a feeling of. . . not sadness but of poignancy, of the feeling that one has just seen a film that expressed reality and has jarred our expectations.    It is beautifully done, and the perfect  choice.

So successful was the film after its release that a sequel was made, Jolson Sings Again.   It marks the only time in history that a single performer has had two bio-pics made during their life-time.   High praise for the "World's Greatest Entertainer."  

Entertainer.   That is the key word.  

Anyone been entertained much lately?