The Trouble With Angels (1966)

There are many movies that one sees as a youngster or as a teenager that don't hold the same appeal that they once did when we view them as adults. As you get older and wiser, you might go back and watch a movie you haven't seen in years and it just doesn't appeal to you in the same way that it once did. You may not even be able to remember what it was that attracted you to the film in the first place.

There are also those films that you can appreciate even more so as the years pass by. Many of us saw such Disney animated fare as Snow White, Pinocchio, and Bambi as a child and enjoyed them simply because it was as if we were walking into a storybook and experiencing these magical worlds first hand instead of just reading about them or having them read to us. As we grow older, we can still appreciate the films for their outstanding artistry, technical achievements, and for the sheer breath taking beauty that they bring to us on the silver screen not to mention that it's still fun to believe in the fairy tale.

I can remember a few films that I saw as a child or a very young teenager that I had enjoyed for different reasons. But when I view them now I have to wonder what the big deal was. A lot of the horror films I've seen fall into this category. What once scared the crap out of you is now the fodder for lists of worst films of all times. And no, I'm not talking about Plan 9 From Outer Space.

And then there are films like The Trouble With Angels, probably long forgotten about by some who viewed it over forty years ago. It's quite probable that many under the age of forty may not even be aware of its existence unless they bumped into it in one of its occasional showings on Turner Classic Movies. But I certainly remember it, and as the years go by I enjoy watching it as much now as I did back when I first saw it at the Columbia Theater.

Let's be real here. There is no doubt that The Trouble With Angels was probably seen by the producer as a quick way to cash in on the Disney market and family film cash cow by Columbia Studio's big wigs back in 1966. That is a fact that I will not dispute and at first glance I'm sure the film seems to be nothing more than that for some. But for many who had seen it then and for some who watch it now, the film rises way above the level of the churn them out standard film fare of a bygone era and it does so for many reasons that may not be obvious at first glance.

Angels is a film in which the screenplay was written by a woman, based on a novel written by a woman, was directed by a woman, and stars almost entirely a cast of women. Yes, there are three males whom do make an obligatory appearance, but they are here for nothing more than to help the plot turn a few quick corners. And none of the three have what one would consider particularly admirable character traits.

The story on the surface seems rather basic and run of the mill. Two girls are sent away to a private school run by nuns where they proceed to cause havoc and cause headaches for Mother Superior and the rest of the nuns.

But certainly there was something about the film that enticed Ida Lupino to direct her first feature in thirteen years. It would also be the last big screen release that she would direct although she would continue to work from behind the camera on many more television episodes.

In this reworking of the "16 Millimeter episode of her Twilight Zone episode, you tuber aaronjoseph inserts much of Lupino's work as director and actress.

It would seem as if Angels was not exactly the type of film Lupino would even want to bother with. Two of her works as a director dealt with a serial killer in The Hitchhiker and rape in the film Outrage. She is also the only woman to have starred in an episode of The Twilight Zone ( The Sixteen Millimeter Shrine) and to direct one (The Masks) as well.

From Images Journal:

From 1949 through 1953, Ida Lupino directed six movies for The Filmakers, a tough, emotionally powerful group of films that make up for their meager budgets by providing gritty, uncompromising stories and imaginative, occasionally stunning camera work. Comparisons with directors Robert Aldrich and Samuel Fuller are apt, for Lupino's movies are filled with strong pitches of near melodramatic intensity recorded in stark, unflattering terms. Lupino wasn't interested in typical Hollywood glamour, for her characters were common people--salesmen, waitresses, gas station attendants, and fishermen. And her empathy for the characters was revealed in the finely-honed characterizations that made us care about these people that Hollywood would typically ignore.

More clips from The Trouble with Angels and other highlights from Ida Lupino's career as a director and actress.

I emphasized the last sentence because that is what Ida Lupino brings to The Trouble With Angels. She makes us care about characters that otherwise might quickly be forgotten if they were the usual two dimensional cardboard cutouts one would find in a film such as this cranked out endlessly by the Disney studio in the late sixties and through much of the seventies (although this is a Columbia Pictures film). She gives the characters depth. She gives them reasons for being the way they are instead of just having them go through the motions.

Of course it helps when you have a strong script penned by Blanche Hanalis based on the novel by Jane Trahey. Instead of just littering the filmscape with cliches, she uses one incident after another to not only move the story along but to help us understand that there is a reason for these girls to be the way they are and why they become so inseparable.

Mary Clancy (Hayley Mills) is in fact an orphan. Her parents died at some point in her life and she was sent to live with her Uncle George (Kent Smith). He in turn has sent Mary to St. Francis in the hopes that the nuns can keep her out of trouble. The fact that George's own daughter, Marvel-Ann (Barbara Hunter) had long ago been sent to take up residency with the nuns lets us know that when it comes to parenting skills, he might be sadly lacking. It isn't until later in the film that our deepest suspicions regarding Uncle George are borne out.

It is on the train to the school where Mary meets up with Rachel Devery (June Harding). Rachel is being sent to St. Francis by her parents because after having been enrolled in a progressive school, it turns out that her education is sadly lacking. To say that Rachel isn't college material is an understatement but she does excel in silent piano playing. It is also obvious that not being Catholic, Rachel feels like an outsider. We learn this as she awkwardly tries to make the sign of the cross during an evening meal attended by the sisters.

It is no wonder that she finds instant camaraderie with Mary, who may be Catholic but seems to have little regard for St. Francis and even less for Mother Superior (Rosalind Russell):

Rachel: Boy, she's a fink

Mary: President of the Club

Rachael: The way she acted you'd think we were criminals or something.

Mary: The only difference between this place and the girl's reformatory is tuition.

Rachel: And we got enrolled instead of committed.

And that's just the first day of what is to become a three year sentence for the two of them.

Much of the early part of the film does become a continuous battle of wills between the two partners-in-crime and Mother Superior. It seems that Mary has one scathingly brilliant idea after another such as giving fake names when the girls first arrive at the school,

What's a silent piano?

sneaking off to the bathroom for a cigarette, taking the other girls on a tour of the nuns living quarter at the rate of 35 cents per person, skipping swimming lessons, having Rachael write a passionate letter to her former headmaster at New Trends School asking him to free her from the clutches of the Reverend Mother, spiking the sugar bowl with bubble bath, and entrapping Mary's cosin, Marvel-Ann, in a plaster mold.

It is during this time that we also get to know Sister Liguori (Marge Redmond), who runs her math classes as if it were a day at the track.

Rachael: Isn't she too much!

Mary: She should have been a bookie.

Whereas Reverend Mother as the authoritarian figure, Liguori is her exact opposite. She is the one the students can relate to because she is "fun". She is that one single teacher that we wish we could have taught every single class as we made our way through school, and its obvious that Mary and Rachael feel the same way. As it turns out, Sister Liguori is also Reverend Mother's closest friend and advisor.

Early on we had already met Sister Clarissa (Mary Wickes) as the gym teacher, swimming instructor and bus driver. She may seem a little daffy at times, but we know that she loves every aspect of her work. Sister Rose Marie (Dolores Sutton) is the overly shy sister who Mother Superior appoints to head the "Social Action Committee" (Mary: That's for picketing things) for the girls. Hardly the position one would expect someone of such demeanor to be appointed to but I guess there is always a method to the madness of Mother Superior.

Then there is Sister Elizabeth (Portia Nelson) who teaches art. If Sister Liquori is pinpointed as the perfect teacher, Sister Elizabeth is the complete opposite. She is the teacher that none of us could stand because unless you are perfect, you are perfectly useless to her. And for the most part she makes it clear to Rachel that she when it comes to art, she just as well not show up for class.

It's not that she's an important part of the film, but I find it is to the credit of director Lupino and writer Hanalis that they are willing to include the imperfect character in the mix instead of giving in to the temptation to make every nun into some kind of a perfect and idealistic saint. A nice reminder that they are still human and still subject to the same temptations and foibles as the rest of world.

During this first year, in one of the shortest scenes in the film, we are clued in as to what we can expect. From her upstairs window, Mary watches as Reverend Mother strolls through the grounds amidst the falling leaves of autumn. We see in Mary's face and eyes her antagonism toward Mother Superior. There is no mistaking that. But what we also see is that there is more to her resentment than the fact that Reverend Mother is her superior and her boss. Its as if she resents her existence. Does she in fact, remind Mary of her own mother (we are never told how old Mary was when her parents died) or does Mary see some of herself in the Reverend Mother? Or is it a little of both?

The scene is wonderfully staged by Lupino, beautifully photographed by cinematographer Lionel Lindon, and acted extremely well by both Russell and Mills although neither of them speak a single word. Lindon in fact, was a three time Oscar Nominee and won once for Around The World In Eighty Days and does a credible job here especially in the many outdoor sequences on the grounds such as this one.

Later, under different circumstances, the scene is repeated during the dead of winter and the difference is that we can begin to see that the resentment harbored by Mary is slowly beginning to fall by the wayside.

When Reverend Mother returns the gaze, it is as if she is seeing the same thing we are and is not sure how to deal with someone like Mary. But late in the film, we discover that perhaps our suspicions regarding Mary and Reverend Mother as more alike than either one of them is willing to admit to. During a conversation with Sister Liguori Reverend Mother tells her:

"Mary has a will of iron. To bend but not to break. To yield but to not capitulate. To have pride, but also humility. This has always been my struggle sister. Can I be less tolerant of Mary than the Church has been of me?"

So it is no coincidence that as the girls enter their second year and begin to mature that the pranks enter less and

Reverend Mother explains her decision not to expel the girls to Sister Liguori.

less into the plot. In fact, whereas most of the things they did during their first year were done simply to antagonize the Reverend Mother, what happens in the second and third years of enrollment are actually no worse than the things any one of us might have done at any given time during our teen years. It's just that when we did them the results weren't so disastrous, we didn't get caught, and we possibly hadn't already built up a long resume of crimes beforehand. Well, you might have but I didn't.

Eventually Rachel grows tired of always being the odd girl out while Mary becomes more aware of certain events pertaining to the sisters themselves, to the point where antagonism begins to turn almost begrudgingly into respect and then admiration. Though it is left unsaid, there is no doubt that there has always been something missing from Mary's life. We see it on many occasions and as her rebellion slowly subsides, it is replaced by what is an obvious desire to find something more meaningful.

One day when Mary and Rachel are out on the grounds, Mary mocks Sister Ursula (Marjorie Eaton) by imitating her German accent within earshot of Reverend Mother. Reverend Mother tells Mary that since she finds Sister Ursula's accent so funny, then perhaps Mary would also find it amusing that the Sister had hidden Jewish orphans for two years during the war, was later captured and suffered many indignities. After Mary and Rachael leave, Mary stops to reflect with Rachel asking her what is wrong.

Mary: I hate her! (Reverend Mother)

Rachel: So, what else is new

In fact, we know right away that Mary is more ashamed of her own shallow behavior toward Sister Ursula, someone who has done nothing but treat her and the other girls with kindness.

But that is one tiny incident of many that we witness. Some, taken by themselves may not seem like much. Other events make an indelible impact on Mary and it does not behoove me to give you a complete rundown which would take away too much of what this film has to offer. But what all of these small episodes do is help the film reach a satisfying conclusion that not only makes sense, but is in the end satisfyingly inevitable.

If the ending had just been dropped in as it were with nothing to lead us to it, then we would have felt cheated. It's a credit to Lupino, Mills, and Lindon that we are able to see things as Mary sees them, not as distant observers as one of the other girls might. Often, without saying a word, Mills manages to convey to us what she is going through, and it takes a remarkable actress to be able to pull it off. But she is not beyond letting us know what is exactly on her mind at times.

"I hope I die young, and very wealthy."

In one of the films more remarkable scenes, during a Christmas visit by the students to a home for the elderly to entertain them, Mary is taken aback by not only what she hears but what she sees as well. As she walks around the room the conversations fade in and out much in the same way as if one were tuning an old radio from one station to the next. An old lady near senility sees a toy bird as a real one, another one complains about the home taking all of her social security. Still another cries while being comforted by Reverend Mother because her children won't be coming to get her as they promised they would. It is the first time that Mary is confronted by the plight of those less fortunate than her and she does not know how to handle it.

"I hope I die young, and very wealthy!," she tells Reverend Mother angrily.

When The Trouble With Angels was filmed, Mills was trying to distance herself from the Disney type films she had left behind so it is fitting that she chose a film where in fact she could play a teenager who over the span of three years not only matures as an adult, but cuts many of the ties that bound her to her childhood. It is no fault of Mills that many critics refused to get past the juvenile high jinks in the early part of the film and could see it as nothing more than much of the same old same old, even when those things heavily promoted in the films theatrical posters pretty much dissipate over the final two thirds of the running time.

If you go to this particular web page dedicated to The Trouble With Angels (and I highly recommend that you do)and see how the film was promoted, its no wonder that some (but not all critics. There are many who see it as I do.) still fail to see the "big picture" placed on the canvas by Lupino.

In the wrong hands, the role of Mother Superior could have become nothing more than a stern taskmaster, placed in the film solely for the purpose of being the target of Mary and Rachael's antics. But Rosalind Russell brings more to the role than that. We at no time have any doubt that beyond being a nun, she loves St. Francis even with it's crappy boiler. More importantly, she loves each and every girl who is entrusted into her care and sees it as her duty not to convert them to some kind of religious fanaticism in the hopes that they will join the sisterhood, but to prepare them to be able to make their way in the real world. The fact that she is still able to convey this beneath what is supposed to be a rough experience can tell you how under appreciated Russell's performance was in this film.

Because she cares about the future of these girls, it explains why she is so dismayed when confronted with Rachel's lack of scholastic achievement after transferring over from New Trends. She views Rachel as being totally unprepared for the world that confronts her, and understands why Rachel has chosen to follow Mary down what may be a destructive path from which there may be no turning back. And there is no disguising Reverend Mother's total disdain for Mary's Uncle George and his "secretaries".

In one comical moment, when Rachel is writing her letter to Mr. Petry so that she can be "sprung", she writes that Mother Superior said she was the devil's agent.

"She meant you were my stooge," Mary informs her.

Rachel changes throughout the film just as Mary does although not to the same degree. When there is a sewing contest, she stays up all night trying to finish a cocktail dress so that she won't be the only student without an entry. She no longer cares to be the odd girl out.

June Harding, in her first big screen role, acquits herself well as Rachel especially considering that she was the new kid on the block amongst a bevy of old pros. Since the character of Rachel does have a problem with her lack of basic education, another actress may have been tempted to play Rachel as a clueless dolt. But she is far from being that. She may be physically uncoordinated and at times in her life unmotivated scholastically, but she is far from being a dunce. And though Mary may be the leader and Rachel the follower, there can be no doubt at all that their friendship is one that will last well beyond their years at St. Francis.

There is a story floating about that Russell said she and Mills did not get along on the set. Although this is posted in several places, one can only take it with a grain of salt since the story is never sourced.  Without Russell around to to give creedence to it and Mills not having confirmed it, it remains just what it is. But even if it were true, it did nothing to affect the work of the actresses and obviously had no affect on the body of work as a whole.

I hate to think what some producer or director in today's society would have done with this material if the film were being made today. I'm sure they would once again dumb it down thinking it might play well to teenage girls if they did. They would probably pit Mary and Rachael against another group of girls at the school while Mother Superior becomes the distant observer.

Looking at the box office grosses of some of these dumbed down hopeless and hapless teen and tweener girl films, it's obvious that some producers and directors are as clueless as Mr. Petry from New Trends is.

In The Trouble With Angels, the producers obviously got what they wanted. They were pleased enough with the results that they commissioned a sequel called Where Angels Go, Trouble Follows which I will write about at a later date.

It is also obvious that given the confines of the story, Lupino managed to get much of what she wanted out of the project as well. Frankly, as much of a pioneer as she was for women in film and televison, one would think that even posthumously she should get an honorary Oscar for those reasons alone. She would certainly deserve it.

The troubling thing is, given todays climate and how difficult it is for women to still break into the directors chair, she would still be facing many of the same obstacles. Yes, there have been successful woman directors, most notably Penny Marshall, Nora Eprhron & Martha Coolidge, but they are certainly the exception and not the rule. Have you heard that Helen Hunt has directed aq new movie? I didn't think so.

William Donati, author of Ida Lupino - A Biography which is a highly appreciative account of her life, has written:

"Great directors make great films, and good directors make good films. Those whose work transcends time and changing values earn undying recognition. Within the locus of low-budget, modest films, Lupino features were commendable for the period but fall short of being great films."

That assessment needs to be augmented by the recognition that Ida Lupino broke through various glass ceilings for women as directors and producers. In that process she enriched the sensibility and subject matter available in all feature films. That she was able to do so with a slender body of directed films, and without being or claiming to be an awesome genius, ought to be encouraging to all filmmakers confronting new thematic and employment barriers.

Couldn't have said it better myself and really, how could I not have any choice but to give The Trouble With Angels a Solid A.

There are several ways you can see this film. It plays occasionally in wide screen format on Turner Classic Movies. It is also available to rent from Netflix or to own for about ten bucks. The DVD is shamefully barebones and worst of all is panned and scanned full frame in order to fit someone's idea of what a movie on TV should look like. I won't even go into the fact that nothing shown on the cover of the DVD actually happens in the movie. Shame on you Sony.

And I do want to acknowledge Jerry Goldsmith's perfect score. When I say perfect scores I mean a musical rift that plays throughout the film and can be changed according to the mood of what is happening on the screen. And from the opening titles to the end credits, Goldsmith hits all of the right notes.