SHINING VICTORY

US, 1941, 80 minutes, Black and white.
James Stephenson, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Donald Crisp, Barbara O’ Neil, Sig Ruman.
Directed by Irving Rapper.

Shining Victory is a Scottish medical story – from a play by A.J. Cronin, the author of the very popular Doctor Finlay’s Casebook.

The film was directed by Irving Rapper, whose first film as director this was after working as an assistant. He was to make a number of films over the next twenty years including a number with Bette Davis including The Corn is Green. He also directed Rhapsody in Blue and The Glass Menagerie. The film is a star vehicle for James Stephenson, a British theatre actor who had come to Hollywood in 1937 but who died of a heart attack in 1941. However, he appeared in thirty-nine films during this period including The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex and won an Oscar nomination as best supporting actor for The Letter. He is well matched by Geraldine Fitzgerald as his assistant, with Barbara O’ Neil as the cold secretary and Donald Crisp as a fellow doctor – and Crisp was to receive an Oscar for his role in How Green Was My Valley in this same year.

A small and modest B-film from Warner Bros during this period but of interest because of the association with A.J. Cronin and the medical story.

1. Was this an entertaining film? How uplifting was it and meant to be? The significance of the title for Paul Venner? For Mary Murray? The ending with Paul looking into the sunset? The sketch that Mary had made of Victory?

2. How typical a film of the Hollywood forties was this? In its themes and noble attitude? In its styles of filming, studios, emotional encounters? The need to edify? What needs in the forties' audiences was this film satisfying? Successfully?

3. How strong was the medical interest and the background? The interest in psychology and the treatment of mental illness and nerve illnesses? How well does the medical background stand up now?

4. What emotional response was asked by the Hungarian sequences? The strong sense of injustice towards Paul? Was the drama credible? Why? Did this shape our view of Paul for the rest of the film?

5. How much sympathy did you have for Paul Venner when he went to England? Why? Did he deserve it? Were you happy at his gaining the research job in Scotland? His behaviour in that job, attitude towards patients, attitude towards the staff, towards his work? How did he begin to lose sympathy? How well did the film communicate this in the dialogue?

6. What judgement did the film make on his unemotional approach to science? Completely humanistic? So cold? So experimental?

7. What did the minor actors contribute to the film? Dr Dm**tt? His friendship with Venner, his game of patience his succeeding with the game? Dr Blake and his management of the institute? His needs for practical support from rich patients, for reputation? Dr Fulton and his ridicule? Was he a stock character?

8. How attractive a heroine was Mary Murray? Her nobility, a doctor, a missionary? How conventional was her behaviour and dialogue? How did the character come through despite this? Loyalty and support, emotion and love?

9. How did Paul and Mary change during their work together? Why? Why was Paul so rude to her? Their work with Foster? Mary's success because of her humane approach? Venner's harshness waiting for him to die?

10. How satisfying was the preparation for change and the change in them both? Did this look too good to be true? Why?

11. How well-written was the character of Miss Leeming? A strong spinster? Her inquiries of Venner? Her love for him and her attacks on Mary? Was the melodramatic behaviour at the end credible? Why?

12. The impact of Mary's death? Expected? Emotional response? Her nobility in helping Paul? The result of this on his success? His coming to his senses? credible?

13. Impressions of his going to China? Why was he going? Would he be a success? Was this a shining victory for him? Doing Mary's work?

14. How true was this of people's behaviour in the thirties? What effect would such a message film have on the audiences of the time? Impressions now?