SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Matthew Kresal It can be surprising sometimes how films can be overlooked and forgotten about. Keeper Of The Flame from 1942 is a prime example of that as it has faded into obscurity despite featuring one of Classic Hollywood's best known couples in the form of Spencer Tracey and Katherine Hepburn. It was only when clips of the film were featured in an episode of Oliver Stone's The Untold History Of The United States that I even heard of the film for the first time. One can only hope that its featuring in Stone's series might go some way to bring the film back into the light as it deserves far more than the obscurity than it seems to have languished in.For one thing, it's quite an intelligent thriller. Tracey plays a journalist freshly returned from the war in Europe who decides to write a biography of the recently deceased and immensely popular former soldier Robert Forrest. Meeting Forrest's widow (Hepburn) and those immediately around him at his massive country home. For much of its length, Keeper Of The Flame is a cross between a Gothic tale and a mystery novel with a large, imposing house, Forrest's secretive associates, and secrets apparently buried as the ghost of Forrest's life hangs over the house. There is a strong sense of foreboding throughout which serves the film well.Which leads to the ending where the film shifts gears. There are hints of the truth laid throughout the film about Forrest's activities and the kind of literal hero worship he inspired in people (such as young Jeb) and it's in the final minutes that it's revealed. It's something that makes the film standout from many films of its time and perhaps even since as the film touches upon the little talked about encroachment of fascist leanings during the years leading up to World War II. Indeed, one might be forgiven of thinking about the little known Business Plot from the mid-1930s. All of this makes Keeper Of The Flame an early political thriller and a finely made one at that.Coming out of the Hollywood Golden Age, it's a prime example of what studio film-making could produce. The performances across the board are solid from Tracey and Hepburn on down. Despite the famous love affair between the two, the film wisely doesn't play it up though there is no denying the chemistry between them that is funneled into quite an interesting little relationship here leading to a powerful final scene with Hepburn delivering a lengthy monologue. The supporting cast is strong as well ranging from Richard Whorf as Forrest's aide, Howard Da Silva as the groundskeeper, Margaret Wycherly as Forrest's mother, and Frank Craven as a somewhat cynical local doctor. The production values are solid as well including some moody cinematography William H. Daniels which highlights some of the more Gothic elements of the film and some good special effects work for the era.Which isn't to say that the film is perfect. As much as I praise the plot and the writing above, the writing is also part of the film's few issues. Not so much in the plot but in the dialogue. Made early on during America's involvement in World War II, there is a certain preachy quality to some of the film's moments, especially when it comes to the scenes that Tracey's character shares with Darryl Hickman's Jeb. Perhaps it's just old fashioned patriotism showing through, a product of a "simpler time" but given what the film's ending suggests about such attitudes, it's something that stands out like a sore thumb at times. It's a flaw though most certainly not a fatal one.Keeper Of The Flame is a film that has languished in obscurity undeservedly. It's a fine mix of the Gothic with the political thriller genre, the latter of which it is perhaps an early example of. It is also a fine product of Hollywood's Golden Age which despite some of the flaws that it has in terms of its writing don't serve to seriously diminish what is otherwise a fine piece of work. Perhaps, with the film's ultimate message, it's time for it to be rediscovered by a new generation.

DKosty123 My first viewing of this movie got kind of strange. It starts with the death of Richard Forrest. We never meet him, because he is already dead, but the whole film revolves around the people he knew.His widow, Kathryn, is a woman who hides so much knowledge, and keeps everyone in the dark the entire film. Spencer Tracy meets her after Richard's death and his job is to investigate what happened to Richard and why. It is one of Tracy's few roles in a film noir type of setting.George Cukor directs this and throughout there is a lot of mystery and suspense. The music is much like many noir films in that it ramps up whenever something strange happens. Some of the actors in this cast would go on to many other things. Percy Kilbride would go on to be Pa Kettle, but in this film is a cab driver giving passenger Tracy knowledge to chew on about the people he is investigating. Richard Whorf would go on to be a television director doing a lot of Paul Hennings classic sitcoms of the 1960's. Darryl Hickman, Dwayne Hickman's older brother and the more serious actor of the two is one on those conspiring to keep Tracy in the dark. The most haunting thing about this is a sequence later in the film. Tracy catches up with Hepburn trying to destroy the evidence he is not supposed to see.It seems Richard Forrest, the dead hero, had gone from super patriot to evil sympathizer when he died. He has stashed money, papers and plans to pit groups against each other and use each groups hate to divide and conquer them. While this film is referring to Facists and Nazis, the themes and the group that the plans were designed for using each groups hate to isolate and conquer it sounds just like politics today. As Hepburn tells all to Tracy, it sounds too spooky to believe how much Nazi plans are still being used worldwide. Hepburn's (Mrs. Forrest) speech about all the evil being planned to Tracy is an amazing testament to the ways some things do not change, even after those Nazis are gone.

Peter Heyrman "Keeper of the Flame" is the most fascinating, and least appreciated of the Hepburn-Tracy pairings. To fully understand it, a viewer must look at when it was made. Though not a war movie, it's one of Hollywood's earliest World War II propaganda films, portraying American attitudes just before Pearl Harbor. It begins with businessman-statesman-hero, Robert Forrest, dying in a suspicious car crash in September, 1941. Forrest's heroics came in World War I. His unit saw heavy action in the Argonne, and Forrest saved many lives, including that of his commanding officer. We aren't told what he did after the war, but from the comments about him we can assume that his good deeds continued. He founded a nationwide club dedicated to patriotism. His followers idolize him. Tracy plays a reporter just returned from Germany, to an America still fighting internal battles between isolationists and interventionists. O'Malley is an interventionist and loyal Forrest follower. Forrest's story is ending in 1941, but the movie was made the following year, a watershed. The isolationist-interventionist battles raged right up to the morning of Pearl Harbor. FDR-led interventionists fought the heroic Charles Lindbergh and the isolationists. Was Lindbergh Forrest's model? If so, he was no more than a point of departure. Forrest heroics came in battle, not in the sky. This son of servants went on to make a huge fortune and employ a full staff of servants on his vast estate. Unlike Forrest, Lindbergh was born into the upper middle class. His congressman-father wasn't rich, but the family had servants, and Lindbergh did a short stint in college. Too young for World War I, his only politics were aviation until the worldwide drift toward war in the late '30s. He married a woman about his own age, and began a family. He didn't like fame, and was suspicious of reporters. During the media blitz following his son's kidnapping his suspicions evolved into outright hostility. Nothing we know of Forrest corresponds with any of this. Lindbergh looks to be a model in only two general ways: isolationism and past heroics. The 1942 watershed affected all American heroes. Nations always love their heroes, but in the years between the wars, America practiced hero-worship almost as a national pastime. This era of gangsters and corruption also had Sergeant York, Babe Ruth, Elliott Ness and J. Edgar Hoover. Women idolized Amelia Earhart and Eleanor Roosevelt. Even our presidents had to be heroes. Hoover was elected because he'd fed millions of starving children in World War I. When the Depression tarnished him, Americans looked to FDR who'd heroically fought polio.This was the world Robert Forrest occupied. It was about to change. World War II altered our ideas about heroes. We built a working man's army filled with depression-bred young people who hated the idea of battle, but were happy to have jobs. On land and sea they did what they must, taking each island and milepost as chores that had to be done. Men fought, killed, and died, the milepost was reached, the island fell, and it was on the next chore. Our heroes became dirty men who were likely to get dirtier. Their rules were made to bend a little. As our GIs altered our notion of "hero," our support for them never wavered. Now any hero who looked too good drew suspicion. We gained more respect for dirty hands, and less for smooth, clean faces. As we questioned the world, we also traded myth for reality. The real life isolationist movement had a huge influence on American thinking right up to December 7, 1941. Up until that morning Charles Lindbergh opposed entering the war with everything he had. After Pearl Harbor isolationism fell into sudden, and nearly total disrepute, taking its hero with it. When Lindbergh tried to volunteer for war service, Roosevelt froze him out. By the time the war ended, many had lost track of "Lucky Lindy." Heroism had morphed into something that was fleeting, unless accompanied by a leavening of sin. We gravitated to anti-heroes,trading Errol Flynn for Humphrey Bogart at the box office. Even FDR was gone, replaced by the far grittier Truman. The beginning of this shift is what "Keeper of the Flame" is all about. Even in death Robert Forrest is at war with himself. It's the age-old conflict of myth-versus-reality. This plays out in the arc of Hepburn's performance, while Tracy prods her, and himself, toward an elusive truth. Perhaps the best thing abut this movie is something its original audiences couldn't see: it looks back at an America that might have gone either way, but it also has a fascinating vision of what was to come. It spoke to a new notion of individualism, one that doesn't rely on heroism or wealth. It celebrated people who think for themselves, and look at their leaders critically. Now we can watch it, and make up our own minds about whether that vision was prescient, wildly off-base, or somewhere in between. I recommend it to anyone who likes a good mystery, but also to all viewers who have an interest in American history.

richard-1787 This film bears no resemblance to the other Spencer Tracy - Katherine Hepburn films. It is a very serious drama, with no hint of comedy.And, while it sometimes veers into melodrama, it is a very important film that needs to be seen. It deals with the dangers of third columnists, those who, impatient with democracy, would bring fascism to this country. Meet John Doe hints at this as well, but not as powerfully as this movie.Yes, it's melodramatic at times. But it tells, very well, a very important tale, one that we dare never forget.Watch this movie, if you get a chance. And remember its message, which, alas, is for all times. Those with power, especially those who have acquired power through wealth, sometimes lose patience with democracy and want to by-pass it to get what they want. It is the function of a free press to expose them, and to save us from them.