Random Harvest

I have watched this movie before and I have the Amazon ebook. Recently re-read the book again, skipping some of the details to focus on the nitty-gritty. The two formats present a somewhat different way of looking at the same story. I was looking for the differences and found that the conversation of our Charles Rainier with the tobacconist was stream-lined a little - nothing wrong with that; and the conversations at the house in Stourton about Charles reappearing and the will his father left were also edited down. The directors had to save some time somewhere, I know but the viewer lost out on some of the humourous posturing of Rainier's silly, selfish siblings - as they insisted they must include him in the inheritence but then were so disappointed when he finally caved in and accepted - though we know he truly did not care about the money. And the shortened scene at the tobacconist shop took out Charles' stammering and facial contortions as he tried to speak. Little things but they made the discerning reader more appreciative of the great comeback that Rainier really made - and would not have made without Paula's unconditional love.As I watched the movie I was mentally filling in some of these missing data and it did nothing but add to the appreciation of the movie for me.Greer Garson was beautiful and completely charming to me. I could believe that in the movie and the book it was she who made Rainier - got him onto his feet, with patience and encouragement and faith in him, until he was able to make it on his own and then continued to guide his career.Rainier was "blown up" in the war in 1917, losing much of his mental abilities including his memory.Colman was injured in combat in that war and he played his part well. Initially a shell-shocked veteran and ultimately a successful businessman and politician. And the difference between him and so many other victims of the victorious war against the evil Hun was the girl: Paula Ridgeway=Greer Garson.I was in Viet Nam in 1969-70 and got a purple heart, thanks to a random piece of shrapnel that stuck in my face above my lip during a fire-fight. I have P.T.S.D. and I certainly relate to what Rainier=Colman went through and . I have memory loss - though not as dramatic as Rainier's, but possibly worse in that I forget the simple, immediate things every day and it ruins many of my days. ANd I fall into stammering and stuttering when confronted with a confusing situation and I often still feel like I am back in the war like Rainier did when things get crazy around me and I don't have the confidence to believe I can handle things.Difference between me and Rainier was: the adorable Paula and her enduring love.Other reviewers have emphasized that the time element was very different between the book and the movie, i.e. the movie stays chronological and the book jumps from one period of time to another though both have flashbacks.In the film, Rainer first gains back his abilities to speak properly and then his present-memory and finally his memory of the lost years with Paula.Reviewers have stated that the viewing audience would not relate to the mental effort of following the plot jumping from one time period to another, remembering what Rainier's state of mind at each part.The audience needed to be told clearly what was happening.Garson's acting was superb. From the vivacious, loveable, talented gushing, happy young singer-dancer-actress in the beginning to the dutiful, competent, devoted secretary, always loving her man. I was uplifted by her optimism and her joy in shell-shocked Rainier's little achievements in getting it together. And I marvelled at her poise and her complete focus on Rainier the business tycoon as she fed him little bits of info about the past and watched breathless to see if more of his memory came back... and I appreciated her composure as she walked with dignity from him into her own room - to fall to pieces in private because her love was not recognized by him. My heart ached.Colman gives us the typical educated upper-class Britisher - dignified, confident, poised. But he is also sincere and - in his own way - caring for the thousands of families that are making it because his factories provide decent jobs and - presumably - decent wages. The man has integrity and lacks snobbishness. ANd he has Paula.We also get to see the every-day decent, hard-working British commoners who had the resilience to make it through the coming blitz, the ever day hell of screaming death from the skies.And then the end: I had to watch it slowly over again - and read it over again - though I knew all the words by heart - as Rainier puts the last of the pieces of his mind together and realizes that everything he has been searching for is there in front of him. He has Paula.I have my disability allowance and my chromebook to watch Amazon movies on.Maybe in the end it is true that all we really have is love - or - for some of us - all we really needed was love.The time-frame for the story was 1918 to 1939 and the movie was made in 1942.For younger people. born after the 1960's, I know the movie is just an old black-and-white film. You will not relate to the thrill it was to see Greer Garson's legs as she danced in an early scene, though the extras, watching her being filmed got all excited and rushed onto the stage.And many of you cannot relate to being so spaced out, as Rainier was at times, like when Kitty asked him if he liked the music she had chosen for their proposed wedding - and he did not know her for a moment because he was lost in space. I have been there.So? It is not for everyone. But for me, this it beings tears to my eyes.

Well-acted. Great romantic story. A bit of a tear jerker.

Two magnificent actors in a magnificent story.

"Random Harvest" is a superb film in many ways. Let's just focus on the acting -- Ronald Colman and Greer Garson have matchless screen chemistry. They are entirely believable in a story that certainly has some very tricky plot elements. These main characters are called upon to convey the widest possible range of human emotions and they do so in a thoroughly engaging way. We sympathize with them, we laugh with them, we cry with them, and we wish above all for them to overcome impossible obstacles as they find love, lose one another, and then (hopefully) find one another and rekindle their love again. Greer Garson is a dream as Paula -- beautiful and full of caring and compassion. What a wonderful actress! No surprise that she is superb here and could easily have won a Best Actress Oscar for this role as she shortly did for her classic performance as "Mrs. Miniver". Ronald Colman is also remarkable in his role as "Smithy". Many have found fault with Mr. Colman 's age -- yes, he is older than the character in Hilton's novel. But I feel that he works just fine here -- he plays an army officer (a major) in the film, and he is entirely believable, at least in my opinion, since officers in that war tended to be older men. Also that horrible war aged men dramatically. My own grandfather (I'm in my 70s) was badly wounded at Verdun, and my mother said that his hair turned white and he was shockingly aged by his experience. Ronald Colman was a veteran of that war as well. He was severely wounded, and just as significantly, was witness to the full range of horrors that that conflict inflected upon its combatants. So, when we see Mr. Colman early on in the film, as a character experiencing shell shock and longterm PTSD, he knows from his own experiences just how damaging that conflict was to mind and body. Mr. Colman's long and distinguished film career (he was to win Best Actor Oscar himself for "A Double Life") began in silent films. This early acting work in the silents tends to be glanced over in many discussions of his career. Much more focus is placed upon his later work, which enabled him to use his remarkable speaking voice. I'm not the first to point out that Mr. Colman developed, in these silent films, the ability to use subtle facial expressions, as well as hand gestures, to convey a complex range of emotions, all without the use of spoken words (see his outstanding work with Lillian Gish in the silent classic "The White Sister"). He used the lessons learned as an actor in these early silents throughout his later films. Here in "Random Harvest", please note how masterfully he conveys the desolation caused by his character's PTSD with hardly a spoken word. For the first part of the film, he scarcely speaks at all -- a true legacy of his training in the silents. There is some seriously fine acting in the very early scenes of Smithy as a traumatized and fearful amnesiac. Only an actor as great as Ronald Colman could have pulled off that performance. And then to be partnered with Greer Garson -- pure movie-making heaven. This is a film to be savored and enjoyed again and again.

Wonderful movie. Sound and picture quality are excellent. A keeper! Greer Garson did it again! Glad I finally purchased it.

Excellent

Dieser Film schildert einen kleinen Punkt, einen aus unzähliger Nanopixel, die das Bild humanitären Horrors historisch sich immerwiederholender geplanter kapitalistischer Kriege zur weiteren Bereicherung der Reichen darstellen, diesmal halt nach dem 1.Weltkrieg, wie üblich, einem Familienstreit verwandter elitärer Opponenten, und, wie immer auch, ausgeführt durch willig-bereite, verdummte Bevölkerungen, die ob ihres vom System her bedingten Alltagselends sich an ihren vorgetauschten "Gegnern" rächen wollen, anstatt ihre "Obrigkeiten" aus ihren Amtshäusern an ihren gepflegten Haaren herusschleppen und aufhängen ... wie gesagt, ein einziger Punkt in einem grossen Bild, aber immerhin ein Punkt, wunderbar dargestellt, - George

I like the occasional love story and this is one of the better ones. Ronald Coleman is excellent as the man who has lost his memory because of the horrors of war. The scene early on in the film where a man and wife looking for their son is brought in to meet him to see if he is theirs is heartrending. The look of disapointment and quiet acceptance that he does not BELONG to anyone is so loaded with pathos that it is hard to hold back a tear. His demeanour of confusion and helplessness makes you want to reach out to him and we are thankful when Greer Garson does.She meets him in a tobacconist's shop where he is about to be reported for escaping from the nearby asylum and takes him away. She looks after him tenderly and lovingly and he recovers from the speech problem he has but not his memory loss.There is a dignity about this film, first at the start when Smithy struggles with his plight and later when Paula uses restraint in not telling him who she is that is reminiscent of the stiff upper lip days. The movie is all the more refreshing because of it. We were a different breed of people in those days. This may have been able to happen in 1918 but it is highly unlikely that events would unfold in this way in today's society.This is a highly enjoyable movie. Incidently, it's the only one where Greer garson shows her legs - and what nice legs they are! The print is superb, you'd think it was filmed yesterday. Nice contrast and sharp picture. I'm referring to the American region one version when I say that there are some curious extras in the form of two shorts of the time. One is, "Don't Talk," about the dangers of careless talk during wartime and, "Marines in the Making," showing the training of American marines. There is also an audio only Lux Radio Theatre adaption starring Ronald Coleman and Greer Garson and a Garson trailer gallery.I recommend this DVD, it's a good buy. Enjoy the movie, I cheered at the end - my wife thinks I'm nuts.

Beautiful story that keeps you involved right to the end. The actors were well chosen for the parts. Black and white only adds to the quality of the film and the times.