This monthâs Genre Grandeur is one I have been anticipating! Thatâs because of the film I selected for the event! Januaryâs theme is âComedies that feature characters who are either Stoners or Drunkâ. After doing some research on the internet, I discovered the 1950 movie, Harvey, would be eligible! Harvey is a film I have been wanting to see for several years. Led by the beloved James âJimmyâ Stewart, so many good things have been said about this film. I was also interested in seeing Harvey because of its release date. Recently, I read an editorial by Jillian Atchley titled âItâs A Wonderful Life, James Stewart, and George Baileyâ. In the article, Jillian explains there are two kinds of James Stewart films; pre-war and post-war. The post-war films, such as Itâs A Wonderful Life, contain depth. Iâd also add the post-war films feature higher stakes. Since Harvey was released four years after Itâs A Wonderful Life, I was curious to see how deep this story would go. I also wanted to see how James would approach a character who is friends with an imaginary rabbit.

Things I liked about the film:
The acting: I have seen some of James Stewartâs movies prior to watching Harvey. What Iâve noticed about his roles in films like The Philadelphia Story, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Itâs A Wonderful Life, and Rear Window is how there is a certain amount of charm included in his characterâs personality. While portraying Elwood P. Dowd, Jamesâ on-screen personality was different from what Iâd seen before. In Harvey, Elwood is more laid-back. He also has a gentler persona, not having a care in the world. But there was one point in the movie where Elwood became somewhat philosophical. When asked by Dr. Lyman Sanderson and Miss Kelly how he first met Harvey, Elwood gives a thorough answer that is thoughtful and reminiscent. His answers to Lymanâs and Kellyâs questions not only captivate them, but the audience as well. This conversation shows there is more to Elwood when you look past the drinking and fascination with Harvey.
There were other performances in Harvey I enjoyed seeing. One of them came from Josephine Hull. Portraying Elwoodâs sister, Veta, Josephineâs performance reminded me, to an extent, of Frances Bavierâs portrayal of Aunt Bee Taylor from The Andy Griffith Show. Let me explain myself; like Aunt Bee, Veta has her concerns and worries. You can hear the tension in her voice and see the fear in her eyes, illustrating how much Veta had on her plate. But, like Aunt Bee, Veta had her heart in the right place. All she wanted was for her brother to be a functioning and contributing member of society. Even if her actions werenât always agreeable, Veta put her brotherâs needs before her own. Because of her performanceâs consistency, Josephine became an actress I looked forward to seeing on screen!
The set design: When I thought of Harvey, impressive set design was not what came to mind. So, when I first saw the set design in this movie, I was pleasantly surprised! A great location is the Dowd family home, which I wish was given more screen-time. While the house boasts a classic Victorian exterior, its interior was shown the most. In the houseâs foyer, the stone staircase immediately caught my eye. Bearing a carved design, this staircase felt like it belonged in a castle! Another part of the home that features carved designs are the door frames. Marble fireplaces and stained-glass windows added exquisite details that highlighted the elegance and charm of the house! Another location I loved was Charlieâs! From some characterâs descriptions, the bar sounded like a cheap or sleazy place. But when its interior was shown, it actually looked kind of cozy! The wood paneled walls were covered in framed photos. As a viewer, this gave me the impression the establishment is proud of their history. The booth Elwood sits at also gives off a cozy feel! The dark wood, tall backed seats surround a smaller, dark wood table. Above this seating arrangement was a small Tiffany style ceiling light.

What I didnât like about the film:
Lack of comedy: According to IMDB, Harvey is partially classified as a comedy. As Iâve said before, comedy is a subjective genre. But personally, I didnât find this movie very funny. In fact, I only chuckled once during this hour and forty-four-minute film. I could see the jokes the screenwriters were trying to deliver. Unfortunately, none of these jokes stuck the landing. On IMDB, Harvey is also partially classified as a drama. While watching this movie, it felt like the creative team involved leaned too much into the drama genre. Thereâs typically nothing wrong with having comedic and dramatic elements in a singular story. In the case of Harvey, the balance between these two elements was not there.
Medical negligence: In real life or fiction, members of the medical profession are human. They are not only capable of helping others, but also capable of making mistakes. However, there is a very fine line between making mistakes and committing medical negligence. In an effort to help Elwood, Veta takes him to a mental hospital called Chumleyâs Rest. But due to a registration mix-up, Veta gets admitted into the hospital instead. The idea of mistaken identity and being forced to do something against your will sounds terrifying. Paired with the fact this situation is supposed to be played for laughs makes it worse. Because of this and because of how avoidable the situation was, it didnât sit well with me.
No explanations for Harvey: As the title suggests, a portion of this story revolves around Elwoodâs friendship with Harvey, a 6 foot 3 ½ inch, invisible white rabbit. Throughout the movie, I was waiting for an explanation of what Harvey was. I even waited to see if Harvey would show up on screen. Sadly, none of these things happened. Even though suggestions about Harveyâs purpose were given, no definitive answers were presented. Was Harvey truly an imaginary friend? Was he a mythical creature only Elwood could see? Was Harvey used as a tactic by Elwood to test peopleâs trust? As I continue to write this review, I still donât know what Harvey is.
Decisions being flip-flopped: Thereâs nothing wrong with showing a character changing their mind about something. After all, that prevents them from being static. If a character is going to change their mind on something, you need to show the process of that viewpoint being changed. In the case of Harvey, that process was, sometimes, omitted. When visiting the Dowd family home in search of Elwood, Marvin Wilson, an employee from Chumleyâs Rest, takes a romantic fancy to Myrtle Mae, Elwoodâs niece. During Marvinâs visit, Myrtle expresses no interest in his romantic advances. But when they meet up again, later in the film, Myrtle suddenly wants to pursue a relationship with Marvin. Her change of opinion feels abrupt, with no lead-up to that decision. The omission of decision transitions sometimes left me frustrated.

My overall impression:
âWhat is the point of this movieâ? Iâm not asking this to be disrespectful or mean-spirited. Iâm asking this because Iâm genuinely curious to figure out what that point is. Sometimes, a filmâs purpose or intended message is either obvious or easier to figure out. But with Harvey, I donât know what the creative team was trying to say. Was this movie meant to be a cinematic PSA about how those with mental health related issues should be treated with dignity and respect? Is the film supposed to be an exploration of how some adults lose their sense of imagination the older they become? How am I expected to care about the filmmakersâ message when I donât have a clear idea what it is? Besides being confusing, Harvey was, for me, disappointing. Because of James Stewartâs involvement in this project and because of the inclusion of a 6 foot 3 ½ inch, invisible white rabbit, I thought the movie was going to be whimsical and charming, with a sense of âmagical realismâ. Unfortunately, the 1950 film was none of those things. The lack of comedy and medical negligence did not help either. In all my years of watching movies, I never thought Iâd see a James Stewart film I didnât like. But, as of January 23rd, 2022, here I am.
Overall score: 5 out of 10
Have you seen Harvey? Which film from James Stewart’s filmography would you recommend I review next? Let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
If you’re interested in reading Jillian’s editorial, here is the link:
Aaaahhh! đ Thank you so much for the shoutout and the link! â¤
When I discovered Harvey several years ago (in either high school or college), it quickly became one of my favorite movies. But the last time I tried to watch it, I had issues with it, too!
After not having seen it in years, I was so happy when it came my way again some months ago. I remembered the film as whimsical and heartwarming, and I was excited to revisit it. But while I still adored Elwoodâs kind and gentle nature, I had trouble getting into the movieâs overall vibe – and I found the mix-up at the hospital so off-putting that I decided to turn it off and try again later. (I was also multitasking at the time.) But I didnât return to it before it expired, and it hasnât been available to me again since.
Your review inspired me to watch some clips from it – to try and remember what it was that I loved so much about it when I first saw it years ago. And honestly, I found those clips charming. đ Somehow, I mustâve made it through the whole thing once back then and experienced all its charms. And knowing what was coming mustâve helped me get past the hospital and other slow or unpleasant moments.
An important thing to keep in mind with Harvey is that itâs an adaption of a stage play, I wonder if the hospital mix-up in particular was funnier on stage (where everything is played much more broadly and isnât quite so realistic – and terrifying)? Sometimes play adaptions lose something in translation on the big screen. And, as with most theatre, I think the comedy comes from the dialogue and the characters. Itâs more of a subtle chuckler than uproariously (or even visually) funny. (Incidentally, James Stewart was a replacement for the original Elwood on Broadway, but Josephine Hull was the first to play Veta. She also won an Oscar for her performance in the film, too. So youâre not the only one who liked her!)
As for the depth that Jimmy Stewart brings to this particular picture, I think itâs found not only in his philosophical moments (like you mentioned), but also in his ambiguity. I think weâre supposed to wonder whatâs up with Elwood – especially the first time we see the film. But even after itâs clear that Elwoodâs harmless and Harvey indeed seems to exist – if I remember correctly, there are just as many unanswered questions about Elwood as there are about Harvey. I donât believe weâre ever given any concrete detail as to how Elwood used to be (when he was âsmartâ rather than âpleasantâ, as he says) or why he chose to change. Not only that, but I detect the slightest touch of sadness or melancholy in him as well. (Why? I have no idea.) Thatâs a lot of ambiguity to play around in, and James Stewart does it beautifully.
And as for the storyâs point, I think itâs about the right to be uniquely yourself and live life on your own terms. Elwood apparently used to be different (I assume more conventional), but made the decision at some point to just be fully himself. And part of being himself is to be open and honest about the fact that heâs friends with a giant rabbit. đ People may see him as crazy, but he is happy with his life – which enables him to spread kindness to others. The injection they were going to give him at the hospital would take Harvey away and turn Elwood into a âperfectly normal human beingâ – but Veta realizes that would also take away whatâs special, and even magical, about him. If he were ânormalâ, he wouldnât be Elwood! đ
Those clips jogged my memory enough to make me want to give the film another chance the next time it comes my way. In the meantime, I discovered a TV movie version of the play from 1972 on YouTube (also starring Jimmy Stewart). Television adaptations are generally more faithful than big screen ones, so Iâm looking forward to watching it and seeing if it plays differently. đ
PS – I must say, you have quite the eye for visual detail! You pointed out things about the set design Iâd never noticed before that will enhance the film the next time I see it. đ
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for reading my review, Jillian! When you share your thoughts on this film, it makes a little more sense. As I reflect on how the movie is about Elwood simply being himself, that overarching message seems so straight-forward and simple. Simple messages in film aren’t a bad thing, I just didn’t catch this one. While I didn’t know ‘Harvey’ was based on a stage play until I watched the movie, I was aware of the made-for-TV film. Therefore, I’m not sure what parts of the 1950 cinematic production are straight from the play’s script or creative liberties for the film. I’ll have to check out the 1972 version. Hopefully I enjoy that one more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Harvey came around on TCM again recently, and I caught it before it expired from Hulu Live – AND I watched the whole thing this time. đ I also took the opportunity to watch the TV movie version of the play I had discovered on YouTube.
After watching them both, I feel the story is more metaphorical than something thatâs supposed to be 100% realistic. Taking it too seriously spoils its magic and its message, which I think is basically that ânormalâ is relative and kindness is whatâs important.
It illustrates that point in rather exaggerated ways, like with the mix-up at the institution that bothered us both. All the ânormalâ characters say and do things that sound crazier than anything Elwood ever said or did, to the extent that Veta seemed like the patient instead of her brother. (And the doctor, and even Nurse Kelly, went by appearances and didnât listen when Elwood kept trying to introduce them to Harvey, while supposedly âcrazyâ Elwood pays much better attention to people.)
If you donât think about the reality of the story too much – how Elwoodâs drinking and aimlessness would be unsustainable and concerning in real life, how terrifying a mix-up at a mental institution would be to live through (not to mention the fact that anyone who claims to see a pookah would actually be crazy) – itâs makes worthwhile points in a whimsical and charming way.
As I suspected, it does play differently as a play. For example, we never SEE the hospital mix-up. Veta just comes home looking disheveled and tells Myrtle Mae and the judge about her ordeal. And the way she describes it IS rather funny. But itâs a whole other thing to see it with your own eyes, and gets worse if you think about how terrifying that experience would be. (I imagine it all plays even better on an actual stage in front of an audience, which would remove the whole scenario from reality even further.)
But the play canât open up the world like the movie can. All the scenes take place in the living room or the mental hospital – no Charlieâs. đŚ One storyline that was removed entirely was the romance between the doctor and Nurse Kelly. đŽ I wonder if this version was abridged (since it was less than 90 minutes) and that element was just cut for time. But since we never see Charlieâs, they canât go dancing, so maybe they really donât have a romance in the original play.
I recommend giving the version on YouTube a try to see if you like it better. Jimmy Stewart plays Elwood again (and, in some ways, is even better than he was in the original film), and I LOVED Helen Hayes as Veta (though I know you like Josephine Hull). If you do try it out, Iâd love to know what you think. đ
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for revisiting my review, Jillian! I honestly wish I had read your thoughts on ‘Harvey’ before I saw the 1950 film. Maybe then I wouldn’t have found it so disappointing. I will check out the TV movie version in the future. This time, though, I’m going to keep your words in mind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: The Top 10 Worst Movies I Saw in 2022 – 18 Cinema Lane