Revisiting: Desk Set

In addition to reviewing classic films as I discover them for the first time, happen to catch them again on TCM or am inspired to write about them, I want to attempt to set aside a post a week in which I specifically revisit a favorite classic film that I've watched a million times over so that I can talk about it. By revisit, I mean actually watch it and then create a post as opposed to writing from memory. In some cases, I may not have seen the film in ages and in others, I might have watched it as recently as last month.

I'm going to start this series with Desk Set from 1957 starring Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy. I'm beginning with this movie because one, I hadn't seen it in a good long while and this was a great excuse to watch it again and two, it was a very formative movie from my tween years and pretty much shaped several of my adolescent ideals/fantasies of romance (as did a lot of the classic films that were formative for me during that time period).

Desk Set finds Katharine Hepburn as Bunny Watson, a middle-aged woman working as the head of a reference library in a large broadcasting company in New York City. If you're uncertain what a reference library is, it's basically Wikipedia before the internet. In the film, people call the reference library asking all numbers of questions from the names of Santa's reindeer to specific recall of information from magazine articles. Instead of going to the library to do the research themselves, the people calling rely on the research already done by Bunny and her three female coworkers. Many of the answers they've already memorized and those that they haven't, they have memorized the right reference works to look through. They place the person on hold and go quickly research the information (the library is full of encyclopedias, almanacs, etc.) to give the person an answer. They also call actively research new information such as calling places to confirm facts, obtain facts they don't already have on reference, etc.

However, as if foreshadowing how nowadays the internet and Wikipedia has made a lot of hard copy encyclopedias and reference works a thing of the past, the films drama begins when Richard Sumner, played by Spencer Tracy, comes to set up a reference computer called EMERAC that will be the new source for researching answers to people's questions (people feed in tons of information from reference works and then later type in questions for better accuracy and a quicker response time as people call in). Sumner is told by the boss not to let the girls in reference know what's going on yet because he doesn't want any of the company's notorious grape vine leaking out information that might hinder a merger in progress. Of course, this only makes tensions run high in the reference library as Sumner shadows the women and scopes the layout for his computer causing the women to suspect they are under inspection for possible termination.

But Bunny Watson is clever and she does what she does best. Research. She researches Sumner and puts him on the spot. He confesses that he's looking to place a computer in the reference library, which does little to ease fears of being terminated (a similar machine in payroll led to layoffs). Sumner also gets his first real taste of Bunny's intellect and overall prowess. It's pretty obvious he's smitten with her right away, but for all his brainpower, he's a bit of a bumbling oaf who's more at ease around machines than people. So what ensues is a pretty generic, but still cute and interesting, plot where Watson is torn between her growing interest in Sumner and her boyfriend of 7 years (a higher up in the company) as well as confused as to her fate and her friends' fate in the company in lieu of EMERAC.

This movie might not be the most definitive Hepburn/Tracy pairing or even remembered by many, but the reasons why I love this movie are many. Nostalgia has much to do with it. I fell in love with it in my youth and no amount of critical analysis or age can take that away from me now.

I once bought a silver shirt that I adored because it looked
a lot like Bunny's dress - same material and such.

First of all, I have a penchant for subtle romances just as much as outright ones (sometimes more if the outright ones are obnoxiously done). This can especially be said for me when I was younger. I loved romances that were based on battles of wits, sarcasm mingled with genuine affection, love/hate, will they-won't they, etc. In this film, the romance is placed on a low broil as the two get to know each other, respect each other, fall for each other in a realistic way, especially given their ages in the film. It's all treated in a straightforward manner. Both have their flaws and it's all very much my cup of tea. And both Bunny and Sumner have varying forms of wits about them that adds to the low broil sizzle. Sumner is out of his league with Bunny in many areas and he's efficient in areas that she isn't. This spoke to me as a tween interested in mature/realistic romances and speaks to me even more so now that I can relate to Bunny's worry of being an old maid because there's seemingly no one around who's a good match for her (played well as Katharine was good at picking roles that showed feminism in a realistic manner that didn't diminish the fact that many women, especially of that time period, still wanted marriage or companionship). The idea of that right guy finally coming out of the blue and developing a slow but sweet relationship with him is even more romantic now that I think about my own life as a single lady.

This is EMERAC, Mike Sumner's first love. And a fictional
precursor to computer technology as we know it today.

Another reason why I fell in love with the movie was the time period. I watched it during my 50s stage. Films during this period intrigued me because it was clear, on film, that the world was changing toward modernity and yet there was still the vintage charm that I love. Even in the late 90s, the idea of a reference library or computer the size of a whole wall fascinated me and the film transported me to that era of working women and business men and single adult living and so on. Now that I'm 26 and have lived to see the invention of smart phones and iPads that can do the job of EMERAC and then some on the go, the film feels even more vintage and therefore all the more intriguing for it. To pause and think about how life used to be and to see a film where technological advances are being used as a plot point while still thinking the filmmakers probably didn't even have a clue of what was really to come...well, it just gets to me deep down and settles in my bones in a way that's hard to describe.

Now that I'm an adult, I've recognized even more reasons to love this film than when I was a kid - mainly to do with the role of women in the film and the subversion of tropes that have come to exist. As a kid, I loved the movie because I loved Katharine Hepburn. I did recognize her as a talented and powerful woman whom I looked up to and wished to be like (simultaneously with Doris Day). I just naturally saw her and her characters as the "strong female" that current media tries hard to latch onto. But when I was 12 it was a role model thing while everything else was me sighing over her romantic plots. Looking back at the film, I see how progressive (at least for those who are convinced that there were no "strong females" in classic film) it was in its portrayal of women. Actually, I'd maybe not say it was progressive so much as it makes many of today's films look regressive, at the very least in terms of quantity.

The film centers on one main female character, yes. But Bunny Watson is surrounded by three strong supportive female characters. In fact, there are a total of 4 women with substantial roles, a 5th borderline substantial role toward the end, a 6th woman with a handful of speaking parts and a 7th who is a regular presence if not for speaking or anything beyond laughs. This compared to only 3 men with substantial roles, a 4th borderline substantial role who has quite a few lines when he does speak, but who isn't in the film for more than 6-8 minutes altogether, and a young errand boy with some lines. You'd be stretching to count the nameless suits who I believe might get a few disgruntled statements or a guy whom the 6th woman as listed above is kissing who makes a very quick statement about them getting back to kissing or something like that (he's that forgettable). The point is, it's pretty balanced with men and women, but it's very obvious that the women are the forefront of the film. It's all about the women in the reference library and their everyday job and the fate of their jobs.

Four beautiful and bright women of varying ages and sizes.
The only thing missing is color diversity, unfortunately.

To say the women of this film pass the Bechdel test with flying colors is an understatement. They interact with each other about everything. Work, love, shopping, money, research, their lives, random people, etc. They also have a penchant for looking out for one another. They offer advice and support to one another, Bunny training a newcomer for example. There's even a secretary in a higher up position who immediately contacts her fellow women to give them a heads' up on things or what have you when it pertains to them. There's only one woman whom they treat harshly because of a big misunderstanding and it's painted in a way that it's clear that none of them are behaving in a way that they should be, at least that's what I take from it, and they do a good job of making you feel sorry for this outsider while also sympathizing with why the other women feel threatened by her to the point of cattiness. Furthermore, none of these women are shown to be incompetent or lesser than the men who get to do the actual running of the company. In fact, Sumner calls the group of women in the reference library "the big leagues" and it's repeatedly pointed out that they are extremely competent, intelligent, etc. Bunny herself, being the brightest because she's the star, is so intelligent that she has a flash memory and is good enough at reports that her boyfriend actually depends on her to look over his stuff which aids in his eventual promotion.

On the other hand, the men have a much more passive role. Bunny's long time boyfriend, Mike Cutler, is depicted as non-committal, dependent on her, somewhat archaic and wrong for having ingrained misogynistic beliefs and so on. He seems to have some feelings for Bunny, he is jealous of Sumner after all, but it's obvious he doesn't love her enough for a romantic relationship to ultimately work and it's obvious in Bunny's body language that she's more in a relationship with him because there's really nobody else and not because she's in love with him. But at the end of the day, Cutler also concedes to the fact that Bunny has chosen Sumner over himself and even leaves them roses he had bought for Bunny himself. Again, there's a lot of charming complexity to the various roles and it plays well, in my opinion.

Along the lines of male vs. female in the film, I also like pointing out that the major trope of gossipy women is really subverted in the film. While the women do spread the word of things or chit-chat or worry, it's implied that it's the entire building regardless of gender and more because of it being a natural progression of things in a big business (water cooler mentality). Additionally, there is one notorious gossip spreader, eavesdropper, etc. in particular with a substantial enough role who is...male. He's so bad that he takes all the gossip home to his wife and mother (or mother-in-law, can't recall).

Overall, I just really enjoy this film. It's not as high on my list of favorites as it was when I was much younger,
but I'll always revisit it with joy and count it as a formative film of my youth as well as just a hidden gem that more people should view. It might not be riveting, Oscar-worthy material, but it's charming and fun. If for no other reason, an older, but still vibrant and gorgeous Joan Blondell is a great reason to watch it. When I was younger I loved her character, Peg, but didn't know it was Joan (whom I love). I'll admit it wasn't until very recently that I made the connection and kicked myself for several days thereafter.