Since I had a fun-filled, activity packed holiday weekend, I only got to watch one film. I know, I must be slipping. It was Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, part of TCM's weekend-long war-movie-palooza. Spencer Tracy is okay, not one of my favorites, just a guy. I liked his performance as Doolittle. Van Johnson was also good. I enjoyed watching this one, but I'm not sure I'd go back and rent it to see it again. For war movies, my two favorites are Destination Tokyo and Objective, Burma! (Movies with exclamation points in the title are usually good! Or terribly bad!)
On a completely different topic, have you ever noticed how people are listed on IMDB with a url like this: http://imdb.com/name/nm0000075/? I always wondered who was number 0000001. I found out by accident the other day: Fred Astaire. Now I wonder which movie title would have a URL ending in 0000001? Anyone?
Monday, May 30, 2005
Sunday, May 22, 2005
50's Musicals and Queens of England
In that order. It was a triple feature this weekend...first up was The Band Wagon, something I bumped to the top of my Netflix queue when I got a hankering for some Fred Astaire, after watching Gene Kelly: Anatomy of a Dancer. I know, go figure. I also bumped Singin' in the Rain to the top, so that was my Saturday double feature, a pair of 50's musicals.
I like musicals, as a general rule, although I'm not really one of those people who's nuts about them. I'll pick a good weepy 30's drama first. And I prefer my classics in black and white; once the studios went Technicolor, boy, did they go color. Hot pink and neon green and electric blue and that day-glo yellow "Casino number" set from Rain...pass me the sunglasses. Some of the color combos on the costumes, too...no sane human wears those combinations. I prefer a nice, silvery-toned black and white film, thanks. Plus, the dancing they do in some of these musicals is too avant grade for my taste. Give me Astaire and Powell doing a tap to "Begin the Beguine" rather than Gene Kelly slinging Cyd Charisse around while the brass blares. Not that there's anything wrong with that kind of movie, it's just not my first choice.
So, with that in mind, I sat down to watch The Band Wagon and, finally, Singin' in the Rain, one of those movies people always talk about: "You haven't seen it? Ever? What is wrong with you?" I very much enjoyed the premise of Rain, with the story being about the transition from silent movies to sound (although that did make the Casino number seem even more out of place). Fred's starting to look a little creased around the edges in Wagon, but he still can dance, and how. Gene's character of Don Lockwood reminded me of Harry Palmer from For Me and My Gal, one of my all-time favorite movies, ever. And, of course, Gene is extremely easy on the eyes. Especially mine. ;)
Today it was one of the movies from the Errol Flynn box set, The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex. I've been especially looking forward to this one because I have a great interest in Tudor history, I have a whole shelf of books in my library on the subject. I was impressed by how Bette Davis looked, and also her acting, although I thought there was a bit too much begging for a queen in the scene where she sees Essex for the last time before his execution. Errol Flynn, always good in tights, and an all-around wonderful job as Earl of Essex. I can already tell this is one I'll be watching over again quite often. As in Warner's release of The Adventures of Robin Hood, they put together on the DVD a "Warner night at the movies," with a cartoon, newsreel, preview (of Dark Victory), and a short subject. It really sets the atmosphere of going to the movies, and having it be a whole event, which to me is a part of what watching classic movies is all about.
I like musicals, as a general rule, although I'm not really one of those people who's nuts about them. I'll pick a good weepy 30's drama first. And I prefer my classics in black and white; once the studios went Technicolor, boy, did they go color. Hot pink and neon green and electric blue and that day-glo yellow "Casino number" set from Rain...pass me the sunglasses. Some of the color combos on the costumes, too...no sane human wears those combinations. I prefer a nice, silvery-toned black and white film, thanks. Plus, the dancing they do in some of these musicals is too avant grade for my taste. Give me Astaire and Powell doing a tap to "Begin the Beguine" rather than Gene Kelly slinging Cyd Charisse around while the brass blares. Not that there's anything wrong with that kind of movie, it's just not my first choice.
So, with that in mind, I sat down to watch The Band Wagon and, finally, Singin' in the Rain, one of those movies people always talk about: "You haven't seen it? Ever? What is wrong with you?" I very much enjoyed the premise of Rain, with the story being about the transition from silent movies to sound (although that did make the Casino number seem even more out of place). Fred's starting to look a little creased around the edges in Wagon, but he still can dance, and how. Gene's character of Don Lockwood reminded me of Harry Palmer from For Me and My Gal, one of my all-time favorite movies, ever. And, of course, Gene is extremely easy on the eyes. Especially mine. ;)
Today it was one of the movies from the Errol Flynn box set, The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex. I've been especially looking forward to this one because I have a great interest in Tudor history, I have a whole shelf of books in my library on the subject. I was impressed by how Bette Davis looked, and also her acting, although I thought there was a bit too much begging for a queen in the scene where she sees Essex for the last time before his execution. Errol Flynn, always good in tights, and an all-around wonderful job as Earl of Essex. I can already tell this is one I'll be watching over again quite often. As in Warner's release of The Adventures of Robin Hood, they put together on the DVD a "Warner night at the movies," with a cartoon, newsreel, preview (of Dark Victory), and a short subject. It really sets the atmosphere of going to the movies, and having it be a whole event, which to me is a part of what watching classic movies is all about.
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Playing catch-up
So much for my resolve to update this blog every day, or at least several times a week. I’ve watched a boatload of movies since I last wrote, but I’ve been too lazy to sit down and actually write about them, preferring instead to continue stuffing my gaping maw with popcorn. Well, I have a list, so here goes.
Queen Christina -- Greta, for the love of little apples, stop mumbling. I had the volume on my TV turned way up, and still spent most of the movie thinking, "huh?" A good performance, though, and I liked the story so much I went out and bought a biography of Queen Christina, which is on top of my huge "books to read" pile. (I buy way faster than I could possibly read.) I had never seen John Gilbert in a movie before, and after awhile I could understand why he didn’t make it in talkies; his voice is just a little too high and nasal to be pleasing. All that heavy "Spanish" makeup didn’t help, either. Whether Louis B. Mayer purposely tinkered with the treble on the sound board to purposely ruin Gilbert’s career is a debate for another day.
Romance -- second movie on my Garbo hit parade. The video box made much of the fact that this was Gavin Gordon’s first and only film role! Which turned out to be not true; according to the IMDB, he appeared in 70 movies. Maybe that was his only starring role, which I would be more inclined to believe as his other roles include the likes of "Frisbie the Butler" and "Geoffrey Miles, Costume Director." Anyhow, it was a very nice little love story. Garbo is beautiful, of course. Gordon does much bugging of the eyes and flaring of the nostrils as an aspiring minister who can’t quite believe he’s fallen for this scandalous woman. A very sad and touching ending, without being too gooey.
Mata Hari -- last of the Garbos for now, and also good. Some of those outfits, though...skin tight glittery leggings attached to boots, worn under a dress/cape? Okay, I get that Hollywood is trying to glam it up, but come on. The hats were kind of cool, though. I had never seen Ramon Navarro, and I thought he was great. The scene at the end, after he’s been blinded, when they bring him to the prison to say goodbye to her but tell him it’s a hospital? Ah, so sad. And it’s always good to see Lionel Barrymore.
Strike Up the Band -- after all that gloom and failed romance I needed a peppy movie, and you can’t do better than Mickey and Judy. (And by the way, on the subject of Judy, every time I go to IMDB I'm always surprised again to see that she was only in 35 movies. Doesn't it seem like a lot more?) I own Babes in Arms and have wanted to see the sort-of sequel Babes on Broadway, but this was all TLA had, so it had to suffice. Your usual "let’s put on a show, kids!" movie, with the added bonus of June Preisser, cute little blond rival for Mickey’s affections and a nifty acrobat to boot. It’s such a typical Judy & Mickey musical that I can’t think of anything else distinctive to say about it.
The Adventures of Errol Flynn -- a documentary/biography of the man himself, part of the fabulous box set that was released recently. Comments from Flynn’s daughter Deirdre and Olivia de Havilland (who is beautiful as ever) lend it credibility that many print biographies of Flynn have lacked. Voiceover comments from Flynn himself, culled from radio interviews, are another good addition. I thought this was a very well done biography; the ones produced by TCM always are, in my experience.
In Name Only -- Carole Lombard plays not a screwball, but a widowed young mother who falls in love with "in name only" married Cary Grant in this great romance. Lombard and Grant go together quite well, and she more than proves she can handle drama as well as comedy. She has an earnestness about her that is really quite appealing. You’re totally rooting for them to overcome their obstacles, and when Carole cries that she can’t take it anymore, or Grant ties one on and catches pneumonia in the process, it’s what a good weepy story is all about. Charles Coburn as Grant’s father and Peggy Ann Garner (who played "young Jane" in Jane Eyre) as Carole’s daughter are so much "character actor" gravy.
Stella Dallas -- I caught this during TCM’s Mother Day extravaganza (which featured the mother of all mother movies, Mildred Pierce); I usually don’t stay with movies if I’ve missed the opening (I came in about 15 minutes into the movie) but Alan Hale carousing around caught my eye, and I was hooked from there. It was the first time I’d seen Barbara Stanwyck (a lot of firsts in my recent movies) and I thought she was amazing. I rented the movie from Netflix the next week to see the beginning and find out how Stella and Stephen (John Boles) ended up getting married, because I just didn’t get it. I had the feeling the actress playing Helen Morrison looked familiar, and found out during the end credits that I was right -- hi, Mrs. O’Hara! Now there is an underrated beauty, Barbara O’Neil.
There’s No Business Like Show Business -- which has no business being billed as a Marilyn Monroe movie (it’s part of one of her Diamond collections) because she didn’t show up until about an hour into it. Ethel Merman, though...wowza. I watched it with a friend and we ended up talking like her the rest of the day. And singing the song as we marched to the kitchen for more snacks. I love me some vaudeville, so I was happy.
Arsenic and Old Lace -- last week’s "Essential" on TCM; they rerun the Saturday show on Sunday nights at 6:00, so it’s becoming a tradition for my dad and I to watch it over Sunday dinner. I love Cary Grant (just started reading the Marc Eliot biography) and he is HI-larious in this movie. His multiple takes when he finds the first body in the window seat are too funny. Nobody does comedy like him. I was disappointed to read, in the biography, that this was one of Grant's least favorite performances. Jean Adair and Josephine Hull are just darling as the murderous aunts. Too bad they couldn’t actually get Boris Karloff.
Thank Your Lucky Stars -- I bought a used copy of this, never having seen it before, after seeing a clip of Jack Carson and Alan Hale doing a tap dance together. That was good enough for me; musical numbers by Errol Flynn and Bette Davis were also a big incentive. It wasn’t exactly what I expected; I didn’t anticipate so much of a back story involving Dinah Shore, Eddie Cantor (in a double role -- that’s a lot of Eddie) and a couple of unknown hopefuls. I was hoping we’d cut right to the musical numbers. When they finally did arrive, though, they were worth waiting for. Some of it is not so much singing as "talking to music" (Bette Davis; although she was a good sport to let herself get swung around in that dance step), and some numbers showcased previously unexpected talents (Errol Flynn, who can really sing and dance). Then again, some people were misused to the point of being unrecognizable. During one number, I pointed to the gingham-clad, gum-chomping, tap-dancing, curly-haired, scat-singing gal on the left. "Guess who that is," I said to my dad. He had no idea. "Olivia de Havilland," I said. I don’t think he believed me until he put on his glasses and double-checked for himself. Not the best use of Miss de H, but she seemed to be enjoying herself, and after all, it was for the war effort.
The Broadway Melody (1929) -- the first musical to win an Academy Award for Best Picture, I’d seen this before and rented it from Netflix again to see if I liked it enough to buy it, since I saw it at Borders when I bought Broadway Melody of 1940 (Astaire and Powell, that one was a no-brainer). The verdict: eh, I’ll rent it if I ever want to see it again. Bessie Love was cute if a little hyper, everyone else was okay. The dancing numbers were good, typical for the day. It's memorable if for no other reason than that the sisters are named Hank and Queenie.
Funny Girl -- I include this on the list not because I consider it a classic movie (my definition of "classic movie" stops around 1960 or so -- I’m referring to an era rather than a film’s endurance or popularity), but because it’s about someone I would consider a classic performer, Fanny Brice. Actually, it’s supposed to be about Fanny, but it’s really yet another movie that proves Barbara Streisand loves no one so much as herself. Not for one second did I get any feeling that I was seeing Fanny Brice up on the screen -- it was always Fanny heavily diluted by Barbara. And I’m not a big Babs fan in the first place, so you know I was watching the DVD player count down the minutes until the movie was over. I’ll be skipping the sequel, Funny Lady, thanks very much.
Queen Christina -- Greta, for the love of little apples, stop mumbling. I had the volume on my TV turned way up, and still spent most of the movie thinking, "huh?" A good performance, though, and I liked the story so much I went out and bought a biography of Queen Christina, which is on top of my huge "books to read" pile. (I buy way faster than I could possibly read.) I had never seen John Gilbert in a movie before, and after awhile I could understand why he didn’t make it in talkies; his voice is just a little too high and nasal to be pleasing. All that heavy "Spanish" makeup didn’t help, either. Whether Louis B. Mayer purposely tinkered with the treble on the sound board to purposely ruin Gilbert’s career is a debate for another day.
Romance -- second movie on my Garbo hit parade. The video box made much of the fact that this was Gavin Gordon’s first and only film role! Which turned out to be not true; according to the IMDB, he appeared in 70 movies. Maybe that was his only starring role, which I would be more inclined to believe as his other roles include the likes of "Frisbie the Butler" and "Geoffrey Miles, Costume Director." Anyhow, it was a very nice little love story. Garbo is beautiful, of course. Gordon does much bugging of the eyes and flaring of the nostrils as an aspiring minister who can’t quite believe he’s fallen for this scandalous woman. A very sad and touching ending, without being too gooey.
Mata Hari -- last of the Garbos for now, and also good. Some of those outfits, though...skin tight glittery leggings attached to boots, worn under a dress/cape? Okay, I get that Hollywood is trying to glam it up, but come on. The hats were kind of cool, though. I had never seen Ramon Navarro, and I thought he was great. The scene at the end, after he’s been blinded, when they bring him to the prison to say goodbye to her but tell him it’s a hospital? Ah, so sad. And it’s always good to see Lionel Barrymore.
Strike Up the Band -- after all that gloom and failed romance I needed a peppy movie, and you can’t do better than Mickey and Judy. (And by the way, on the subject of Judy, every time I go to IMDB I'm always surprised again to see that she was only in 35 movies. Doesn't it seem like a lot more?) I own Babes in Arms and have wanted to see the sort-of sequel Babes on Broadway, but this was all TLA had, so it had to suffice. Your usual "let’s put on a show, kids!" movie, with the added bonus of June Preisser, cute little blond rival for Mickey’s affections and a nifty acrobat to boot. It’s such a typical Judy & Mickey musical that I can’t think of anything else distinctive to say about it.
The Adventures of Errol Flynn -- a documentary/biography of the man himself, part of the fabulous box set that was released recently. Comments from Flynn’s daughter Deirdre and Olivia de Havilland (who is beautiful as ever) lend it credibility that many print biographies of Flynn have lacked. Voiceover comments from Flynn himself, culled from radio interviews, are another good addition. I thought this was a very well done biography; the ones produced by TCM always are, in my experience.
In Name Only -- Carole Lombard plays not a screwball, but a widowed young mother who falls in love with "in name only" married Cary Grant in this great romance. Lombard and Grant go together quite well, and she more than proves she can handle drama as well as comedy. She has an earnestness about her that is really quite appealing. You’re totally rooting for them to overcome their obstacles, and when Carole cries that she can’t take it anymore, or Grant ties one on and catches pneumonia in the process, it’s what a good weepy story is all about. Charles Coburn as Grant’s father and Peggy Ann Garner (who played "young Jane" in Jane Eyre) as Carole’s daughter are so much "character actor" gravy.
Stella Dallas -- I caught this during TCM’s Mother Day extravaganza (which featured the mother of all mother movies, Mildred Pierce); I usually don’t stay with movies if I’ve missed the opening (I came in about 15 minutes into the movie) but Alan Hale carousing around caught my eye, and I was hooked from there. It was the first time I’d seen Barbara Stanwyck (a lot of firsts in my recent movies) and I thought she was amazing. I rented the movie from Netflix the next week to see the beginning and find out how Stella and Stephen (John Boles) ended up getting married, because I just didn’t get it. I had the feeling the actress playing Helen Morrison looked familiar, and found out during the end credits that I was right -- hi, Mrs. O’Hara! Now there is an underrated beauty, Barbara O’Neil.
There’s No Business Like Show Business -- which has no business being billed as a Marilyn Monroe movie (it’s part of one of her Diamond collections) because she didn’t show up until about an hour into it. Ethel Merman, though...wowza. I watched it with a friend and we ended up talking like her the rest of the day. And singing the song as we marched to the kitchen for more snacks. I love me some vaudeville, so I was happy.
Arsenic and Old Lace -- last week’s "Essential" on TCM; they rerun the Saturday show on Sunday nights at 6:00, so it’s becoming a tradition for my dad and I to watch it over Sunday dinner. I love Cary Grant (just started reading the Marc Eliot biography) and he is HI-larious in this movie. His multiple takes when he finds the first body in the window seat are too funny. Nobody does comedy like him. I was disappointed to read, in the biography, that this was one of Grant's least favorite performances. Jean Adair and Josephine Hull are just darling as the murderous aunts. Too bad they couldn’t actually get Boris Karloff.
Thank Your Lucky Stars -- I bought a used copy of this, never having seen it before, after seeing a clip of Jack Carson and Alan Hale doing a tap dance together. That was good enough for me; musical numbers by Errol Flynn and Bette Davis were also a big incentive. It wasn’t exactly what I expected; I didn’t anticipate so much of a back story involving Dinah Shore, Eddie Cantor (in a double role -- that’s a lot of Eddie) and a couple of unknown hopefuls. I was hoping we’d cut right to the musical numbers. When they finally did arrive, though, they were worth waiting for. Some of it is not so much singing as "talking to music" (Bette Davis; although she was a good sport to let herself get swung around in that dance step), and some numbers showcased previously unexpected talents (Errol Flynn, who can really sing and dance). Then again, some people were misused to the point of being unrecognizable. During one number, I pointed to the gingham-clad, gum-chomping, tap-dancing, curly-haired, scat-singing gal on the left. "Guess who that is," I said to my dad. He had no idea. "Olivia de Havilland," I said. I don’t think he believed me until he put on his glasses and double-checked for himself. Not the best use of Miss de H, but she seemed to be enjoying herself, and after all, it was for the war effort.
The Broadway Melody (1929) -- the first musical to win an Academy Award for Best Picture, I’d seen this before and rented it from Netflix again to see if I liked it enough to buy it, since I saw it at Borders when I bought Broadway Melody of 1940 (Astaire and Powell, that one was a no-brainer). The verdict: eh, I’ll rent it if I ever want to see it again. Bessie Love was cute if a little hyper, everyone else was okay. The dancing numbers were good, typical for the day. It's memorable if for no other reason than that the sisters are named Hank and Queenie.
Funny Girl -- I include this on the list not because I consider it a classic movie (my definition of "classic movie" stops around 1960 or so -- I’m referring to an era rather than a film’s endurance or popularity), but because it’s about someone I would consider a classic performer, Fanny Brice. Actually, it’s supposed to be about Fanny, but it’s really yet another movie that proves Barbara Streisand loves no one so much as herself. Not for one second did I get any feeling that I was seeing Fanny Brice up on the screen -- it was always Fanny heavily diluted by Barbara. And I’m not a big Babs fan in the first place, so you know I was watching the DVD player count down the minutes until the movie was over. I’ll be skipping the sequel, Funny Lady, thanks very much.
Monday, April 25, 2005
Character Actors I Love: Ted Healy
If I had to sum up Ted Healy in one sentence, it would be "more than just a Stooge." I don’t care for the Three Stooges at all (don’t email me), but I enjoy the work of their "founding father," Ted Healy. I’ve seen him in 3 movies: Reckless, Dancing Lady, and Bombshell.
Ted was born in Houston in 1896. His real name is a matter of dispute; various sources state it as Ernest Lee Nash, Charles Lee Nash, or Clarence Lee Nash. He gave up the life of a salesman in 1919 and went to work on vaudeville, changing his name to Ted Healy. He and his wife Betty (both his wives were named Betty, so I’m not sure which one it was) had an act called "Ted & Betty Healy: The Flapper and The Philosopher." That must have been interesting, to say the least. In 1923 he founded a stage act with two childhood friends, Moe and Shemp Howard (later joined by Larry Fine) and called it "Ted Healy and His Stooges." Thus a legend was born. Shemp left the act and was replaced by Moe’s brother Jerome, who shaved his head and was known as Curly. The Stooges parted ways with Ted in 1934 when they were offered a contract with Columbia Studios.
Ted and The Stooges were still an act, however, when I first saw him, in Dancing Lady. Ted plays Steve, the assistant to Patch Gallagher (Clark Gable), a Broadway producer. (The Stooges are stagehands who make minor appearances, mainly to tease Joan Crawford.) Steve is not just comic relief but a fairly well-rounded character, somewhat inept on his own but loyal to his boss. In Bombshell, he plays Jean Harlow’s drunken lout of a brother, but doesn’t show up until the second half of the film, just in time to stomp all over her plans to adopt a baby with his bad behavior. In Reckless he’s rather endearing as one of William Powell’s sidekicks, Smiley, another not-too-bright-but-loyal-pal-of-the-leading-man. At the racetrack with a stiff and proper English lady, he’s boorish but funny. I don’t think Ted ever could have been a leading man, but he’s still fun to watch, and gives a good performance. Ted also wrote five films: Nertsery Rhymes, Beer and Pretzels, Hello Pop!, Plane Nuts, and The Big Idea.
Sadly, Ted had a problem with alcohol, which was one of the factors in his split from the Stooges. His only child, John Jacob Nash, was born December 17, 1937, and Ted went out drinking that night to celebrate. He ended up in a bar fight, was found unconscious on the sidewalk, and died on December 21 from his injuries and kidney failure brought on by years of alcoholism. He’s buried in Calvary Cemetery in Los Angeles.
I picked Ted as a CAIL mainly because of his performance in Dancing Lady, which is one of my all time favorite classic movies, ever. I can’t really explain why. It’s not a great epic like Gone With the Wind, or even a popular classic like The Women, two of my other favorites. Dancing Lady is the movie equivalent of comfort food to me; I’ll pop it in even when I’m not planning to sit down and watch it all the way through. It serves as background noise while I’m doing chores or cooking, something I can watch in bits and pieces just to unwind, or I’ll actually sit down for another complete viewing of an old favorite. It has quite a cast: Joan Crawford, Clark Gable, Franchot Tone, Winnie Lightner, Robert Benchley, Ted & The Stooges, May Robson, Nelson Eddy, Sterling Holloway (voice of Winnie the Pooh) and Fred Astaire, playing himself in his first movie role. It’s a musical, a backstage story, a comedy, a love story, a drama. The songs are hokey (example: "Let’s Go Bavarian," about the joys of German beer), and not ones anyone remembers fondly today, but I’ll catch myself humming them under my breath. I’ll stop here because I could (and plan to) do a whole separate entry about this movie, and I didn’t mean to get so far off the original topic. (It was Ted Healy, remember?)
Ted was born in Houston in 1896. His real name is a matter of dispute; various sources state it as Ernest Lee Nash, Charles Lee Nash, or Clarence Lee Nash. He gave up the life of a salesman in 1919 and went to work on vaudeville, changing his name to Ted Healy. He and his wife Betty (both his wives were named Betty, so I’m not sure which one it was) had an act called "Ted & Betty Healy: The Flapper and The Philosopher." That must have been interesting, to say the least. In 1923 he founded a stage act with two childhood friends, Moe and Shemp Howard (later joined by Larry Fine) and called it "Ted Healy and His Stooges." Thus a legend was born. Shemp left the act and was replaced by Moe’s brother Jerome, who shaved his head and was known as Curly. The Stooges parted ways with Ted in 1934 when they were offered a contract with Columbia Studios.
Ted and The Stooges were still an act, however, when I first saw him, in Dancing Lady. Ted plays Steve, the assistant to Patch Gallagher (Clark Gable), a Broadway producer. (The Stooges are stagehands who make minor appearances, mainly to tease Joan Crawford.) Steve is not just comic relief but a fairly well-rounded character, somewhat inept on his own but loyal to his boss. In Bombshell, he plays Jean Harlow’s drunken lout of a brother, but doesn’t show up until the second half of the film, just in time to stomp all over her plans to adopt a baby with his bad behavior. In Reckless he’s rather endearing as one of William Powell’s sidekicks, Smiley, another not-too-bright-but-loyal-pal-of-the-leading-man. At the racetrack with a stiff and proper English lady, he’s boorish but funny. I don’t think Ted ever could have been a leading man, but he’s still fun to watch, and gives a good performance. Ted also wrote five films: Nertsery Rhymes, Beer and Pretzels, Hello Pop!, Plane Nuts, and The Big Idea.
Sadly, Ted had a problem with alcohol, which was one of the factors in his split from the Stooges. His only child, John Jacob Nash, was born December 17, 1937, and Ted went out drinking that night to celebrate. He ended up in a bar fight, was found unconscious on the sidewalk, and died on December 21 from his injuries and kidney failure brought on by years of alcoholism. He’s buried in Calvary Cemetery in Los Angeles.
I picked Ted as a CAIL mainly because of his performance in Dancing Lady, which is one of my all time favorite classic movies, ever. I can’t really explain why. It’s not a great epic like Gone With the Wind, or even a popular classic like The Women, two of my other favorites. Dancing Lady is the movie equivalent of comfort food to me; I’ll pop it in even when I’m not planning to sit down and watch it all the way through. It serves as background noise while I’m doing chores or cooking, something I can watch in bits and pieces just to unwind, or I’ll actually sit down for another complete viewing of an old favorite. It has quite a cast: Joan Crawford, Clark Gable, Franchot Tone, Winnie Lightner, Robert Benchley, Ted & The Stooges, May Robson, Nelson Eddy, Sterling Holloway (voice of Winnie the Pooh) and Fred Astaire, playing himself in his first movie role. It’s a musical, a backstage story, a comedy, a love story, a drama. The songs are hokey (example: "Let’s Go Bavarian," about the joys of German beer), and not ones anyone remembers fondly today, but I’ll catch myself humming them under my breath. I’ll stop here because I could (and plan to) do a whole separate entry about this movie, and I didn’t mean to get so far off the original topic. (It was Ted Healy, remember?)
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Simpler times
Myrna Loy, in her autobiography Being and Becoming, wondered about the modern nostalgia for the war years, as evidenced in both movies, and things people had said to her over the years. Why would people look back fondly on such a time, she wondered, which was full of terrible fears and tragedies. I see her point; I suppose people who look back are seeing those years through rose colored glasses, thinking about (or imagining, if they weren’t there) the good things, and not the bad. Another thing that lends itself to happier memories is the fact that we know now how it turned out -- a happy ending. I love big band music, including WWII songs (and also movies), and one theme that I can see the appeal of is the unity; there were clear cut good guys and bad guys, and from what I can tell, not many people questioned that, especially after Pearl Harbor. Not that people shouldn’t question, but compare our country’s attitude towards that war with, say, Vietnam, or the current war in Iraq. I can’t imagine our country, or at least a good majority of it, throwing itself behind a war like they did in WWII ever again. I’m not sure if that’s good or bad.
My own nostalgia goes back a decade farther, so the 1930s, when most of my favorite movies were made. I won’t list them all here, because the list is too long, and if I haven’t talked about them already, I soon will. The atmosphere of those movies, besides being so beautiful and glamorous, is one of an age that was sometimes rich and easy, sometimes poor and difficult (but of course not too difficult), but always…simpler. At least that’s how it seems to me. And yes, of course I know that this is Hollywood, and everything is covered with a patina of happiness, whether it’s a slapstick comedy, or a tearjerker that doesn’t seem bright until the end. I do know that life is never so simple as a movie. Yet the innocence that the studios put into their movies must have existed to some extent out in the world, I choose to believe. After all, this was the era when no one locked their doors, or so my grandfather told me.
An example of that very thing is the beginning of the 1933 movie Hold Your Man, which I’ve talked about before. Ruby is in the bath when Eddie bursts into her apartment, on the run from the police (he is a penny ante con man, no one dangerous). Ruby shrieks when Eddie runs into the bathroom, and he immediately goes back out. She comes out in her (ostrich feather trimmed) robe and demands to know what’s going on. Eddie coaxes Ruby to help him, and he hides in her tub (under a layer of suds) eluding the police with her help. Flirtatious banter ensues, Ruby dries his pants in her oven (ha), and Eddie takes off when Ruby’s neighbor comes to call (for a cup of bathtub gin). After realizing he’s sneaked out the bathroom window, Ruby runs to her dresser and shakes her piggy bank, whistling in relief when she finds that Eddie didn’t steal the money.
Now imagine that scene today. Granted, we still have the "encounter a stranger who changes your life for the better" premise in movies, but more it’s more likely that Eddie would be some psycho featured on America’s Most Wanted, and Ruby would be a crack dealing hooker, or worse (rather than just the "good time gal" she is in the movie). Either Eddie would attack her and she’d end up as this week’s victim on Law & Order SVU, or she’d have a gun and blow the intruder’s brains out. Never in a million years would they fall for each other and get married for the sake of their baby and for love, which is how Ruby "holds her man." No, today she’d have to go on Maury to prove paternity, if she ever got the kid back from foster care, since he was born while she was in prison.
See what I mean about simpler times?
Let’s take another example: Mary Haines from The Women. Mary finds out her husband Stephen is having an affair (sex is somewhat implied but never addressed directly) with a girl at the perfume counter of a department store, Crystal. They have it out in the fitting room of a boutique after a fashion show. Mary’s pride is hurt, and she goes to Reno and divorces him, making some lovely new girlfriends in the process. Mary suffers no other hardships, presumably living quite well on her alimony. Two years pass, Mary find out her ex is unhappy in his new marriage and that Crystal has a new paramour. She exposes Crystal (with the help of her pals and the friendly neighborhood gossip columnist, played by Hedda Hopper), and ends the movie by rushing back into her husband’s arms. "Pride! That’s something a woman in love can’t afford," she says happily.
Again, set the movie today (and I’ve heard that Hollywood is remaking The Women, which is an appalling idea). Mary, Crystal and Stephen would all end up on Jerry Springer, taking off their clothes and throwing chairs at each other. Mary would be lucky to get child support from Stephen, would have to go back to work, and most likely suffer financial hardships. Or if they were celebrities, their divorce documents would be on The Smoking Gun and tabloid photographers would follow them everywhere. There would be an ugly custody battle, Mary’s friends would talk to the tabloids, and Little Mary would need years of therapy to recover.
I’m sure terrible and painful things like this did happen to people back then, but I don’t imagine them to be as bad as things can get today. Maybe that’s naïve of me, and maybe I am buying too much into the MGM version of the world at that time. Yet I hear stories about my grandparents and great-grandparents, and I think…no, it’s not entirely false. Things were not always hearts and flowers, but they also weren’t as ugly as some things get today, either.
This is not to say that I wish we could, or think we should, go back to those times. As the saying goes, it’s a nice place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there. If I had kidney failure like Jean Harlow did, I would want to live in a world where there are transplants and dialysis, not 1937 when my only option would be a slow, painful death. And I may love vintage phones, but I love the Internet more. Still, when the world around me becomes too ugly or scary or annoying to deal with, it’s lovely to know that I can put in a movie and go back to simpler times.
See how I wrapped up the essay with the title? Clever, eh? ;)
My own nostalgia goes back a decade farther, so the 1930s, when most of my favorite movies were made. I won’t list them all here, because the list is too long, and if I haven’t talked about them already, I soon will. The atmosphere of those movies, besides being so beautiful and glamorous, is one of an age that was sometimes rich and easy, sometimes poor and difficult (but of course not too difficult), but always…simpler. At least that’s how it seems to me. And yes, of course I know that this is Hollywood, and everything is covered with a patina of happiness, whether it’s a slapstick comedy, or a tearjerker that doesn’t seem bright until the end. I do know that life is never so simple as a movie. Yet the innocence that the studios put into their movies must have existed to some extent out in the world, I choose to believe. After all, this was the era when no one locked their doors, or so my grandfather told me.
An example of that very thing is the beginning of the 1933 movie Hold Your Man, which I’ve talked about before. Ruby is in the bath when Eddie bursts into her apartment, on the run from the police (he is a penny ante con man, no one dangerous). Ruby shrieks when Eddie runs into the bathroom, and he immediately goes back out. She comes out in her (ostrich feather trimmed) robe and demands to know what’s going on. Eddie coaxes Ruby to help him, and he hides in her tub (under a layer of suds) eluding the police with her help. Flirtatious banter ensues, Ruby dries his pants in her oven (ha), and Eddie takes off when Ruby’s neighbor comes to call (for a cup of bathtub gin). After realizing he’s sneaked out the bathroom window, Ruby runs to her dresser and shakes her piggy bank, whistling in relief when she finds that Eddie didn’t steal the money.
Now imagine that scene today. Granted, we still have the "encounter a stranger who changes your life for the better" premise in movies, but more it’s more likely that Eddie would be some psycho featured on America’s Most Wanted, and Ruby would be a crack dealing hooker, or worse (rather than just the "good time gal" she is in the movie). Either Eddie would attack her and she’d end up as this week’s victim on Law & Order SVU, or she’d have a gun and blow the intruder’s brains out. Never in a million years would they fall for each other and get married for the sake of their baby and for love, which is how Ruby "holds her man." No, today she’d have to go on Maury to prove paternity, if she ever got the kid back from foster care, since he was born while she was in prison.
See what I mean about simpler times?
Let’s take another example: Mary Haines from The Women. Mary finds out her husband Stephen is having an affair (sex is somewhat implied but never addressed directly) with a girl at the perfume counter of a department store, Crystal. They have it out in the fitting room of a boutique after a fashion show. Mary’s pride is hurt, and she goes to Reno and divorces him, making some lovely new girlfriends in the process. Mary suffers no other hardships, presumably living quite well on her alimony. Two years pass, Mary find out her ex is unhappy in his new marriage and that Crystal has a new paramour. She exposes Crystal (with the help of her pals and the friendly neighborhood gossip columnist, played by Hedda Hopper), and ends the movie by rushing back into her husband’s arms. "Pride! That’s something a woman in love can’t afford," she says happily.
Again, set the movie today (and I’ve heard that Hollywood is remaking The Women, which is an appalling idea). Mary, Crystal and Stephen would all end up on Jerry Springer, taking off their clothes and throwing chairs at each other. Mary would be lucky to get child support from Stephen, would have to go back to work, and most likely suffer financial hardships. Or if they were celebrities, their divorce documents would be on The Smoking Gun and tabloid photographers would follow them everywhere. There would be an ugly custody battle, Mary’s friends would talk to the tabloids, and Little Mary would need years of therapy to recover.
I’m sure terrible and painful things like this did happen to people back then, but I don’t imagine them to be as bad as things can get today. Maybe that’s naïve of me, and maybe I am buying too much into the MGM version of the world at that time. Yet I hear stories about my grandparents and great-grandparents, and I think…no, it’s not entirely false. Things were not always hearts and flowers, but they also weren’t as ugly as some things get today, either.
This is not to say that I wish we could, or think we should, go back to those times. As the saying goes, it’s a nice place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there. If I had kidney failure like Jean Harlow did, I would want to live in a world where there are transplants and dialysis, not 1937 when my only option would be a slow, painful death. And I may love vintage phones, but I love the Internet more. Still, when the world around me becomes too ugly or scary or annoying to deal with, it’s lovely to know that I can put in a movie and go back to simpler times.
See how I wrapped up the essay with the title? Clever, eh? ;)
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Essential? Hardly!
Joan Crawford: The Essential Biography by William Schoell and Lawrence Quirk
Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
The main problem with this book can be summed up by quoting its own dust jacket: "Schoell and Quirk [the authors] move beyond the myths and misconceptions about Crawford by looking extensively at her film work, which in many respects -- as Crawford herself admitted -- was her life."
And that's it right there: as admirable an actress as Crawford may have been (and I am a huge fan of many her performances), her roles in films cannot provide much of a basis for a biography about her actual life. The line between fantasy and reality is, in this case, not only blurred, but erased almost completely.
I understand that Quirk was a fan and professed confidant of Crawford's (that fact is hard to miss, it's mentioned so many times) and his intentions seem to be to try his best to defend her honor and reveal his version of the truth about her. In doing so, however, Quirk makes several missteps, the most notable among them being his complete and utter of savaging of Christina Crawford because of her allegations of abuse against her mother. He says terrible things; for example, he expresses his opinion that Christina's near fatal stroke in 1981 was "Joan getting revenge beyond the grave." For someone who thinks Christina was wrong to say bad things about her mother, Quirk in turn says even worse things about Christina. In trying to dispute the charges she made in "Mommie Dearest," he protests way, way too much, and stoops even lower than the level he accuses her of sinking to.
Even other friends of Crawford's are criticized for not living up to his exacting standards. For example, in 1984 about 125 friends and family of Crawford took out a tribute ad in the "Daily Variety" to show their support in the wake of the Mommie book and movie. I thought it was a nice gesture, myself, but Quirk says that it was "put together for the wrong reasons by the wrong people." What really seems to be wrong is the fact that he wasn't included, and now he's pouting.
When I got to the "Notes" section at the end of the book, I thought, "okay, now we'll see where he got all this information." I was disappointed to discover that the majority of his sources are "Joan Crawford to Lawrence Quirk." Interviewing the subject of a biography is of course helpful when it's possible to do, but any writer worth his salt knows that it can't be your only, or even your primary, source. People have an impression of themselves they want to perpetuate; this needs to be balanced by opinions and information from others as well. In that regard, this book falls far short.
Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
The main problem with this book can be summed up by quoting its own dust jacket: "Schoell and Quirk [the authors] move beyond the myths and misconceptions about Crawford by looking extensively at her film work, which in many respects -- as Crawford herself admitted -- was her life."
And that's it right there: as admirable an actress as Crawford may have been (and I am a huge fan of many her performances), her roles in films cannot provide much of a basis for a biography about her actual life. The line between fantasy and reality is, in this case, not only blurred, but erased almost completely.
I understand that Quirk was a fan and professed confidant of Crawford's (that fact is hard to miss, it's mentioned so many times) and his intentions seem to be to try his best to defend her honor and reveal his version of the truth about her. In doing so, however, Quirk makes several missteps, the most notable among them being his complete and utter of savaging of Christina Crawford because of her allegations of abuse against her mother. He says terrible things; for example, he expresses his opinion that Christina's near fatal stroke in 1981 was "Joan getting revenge beyond the grave." For someone who thinks Christina was wrong to say bad things about her mother, Quirk in turn says even worse things about Christina. In trying to dispute the charges she made in "Mommie Dearest," he protests way, way too much, and stoops even lower than the level he accuses her of sinking to.
Even other friends of Crawford's are criticized for not living up to his exacting standards. For example, in 1984 about 125 friends and family of Crawford took out a tribute ad in the "Daily Variety" to show their support in the wake of the Mommie book and movie. I thought it was a nice gesture, myself, but Quirk says that it was "put together for the wrong reasons by the wrong people." What really seems to be wrong is the fact that he wasn't included, and now he's pouting.
When I got to the "Notes" section at the end of the book, I thought, "okay, now we'll see where he got all this information." I was disappointed to discover that the majority of his sources are "Joan Crawford to Lawrence Quirk." Interviewing the subject of a biography is of course helpful when it's possible to do, but any writer worth his salt knows that it can't be your only, or even your primary, source. People have an impression of themselves they want to perpetuate; this needs to be balanced by opinions and information from others as well. In that regard, this book falls far short.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Captain Blood, redux?
The Master of Ballantrae
starring Errol Flynn, Roger Livesey, Beatrice Campbell, Anthony Steel
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Flynn tries to recapture his Captain Blood days, and does a so-so job. The plot of Master of Ballantrae is somewhat similar to Captain Blood (our hero gets on the wrong side of a tyrant, escapes danger to live the life of a pirate, and returns home and/or to his one true love) but in comparing the two Ballantrae comes off the worse; Flynn looks his age and then some (although he still looks fabulous in tights, even if they are plaid), and his lady love (Beatrice Campbell) is certainly no Olivia de Havilland. On the plus side, Roger Livesey, as Col. Francis Burke, is a suitably entertaining sidekick. I couldn't get into the other characters enough to care what happened to them (the parts of the storyline without Flynn are only average at best), but it's always fun to watch Errol swashbuckling away.
P.S. The Errol Flynn Signature Collection is being released on April 19. Yay!
starring Errol Flynn, Roger Livesey, Beatrice Campbell, Anthony Steel
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Flynn tries to recapture his Captain Blood days, and does a so-so job. The plot of Master of Ballantrae is somewhat similar to Captain Blood (our hero gets on the wrong side of a tyrant, escapes danger to live the life of a pirate, and returns home and/or to his one true love) but in comparing the two Ballantrae comes off the worse; Flynn looks his age and then some (although he still looks fabulous in tights, even if they are plaid), and his lady love (Beatrice Campbell) is certainly no Olivia de Havilland. On the plus side, Roger Livesey, as Col. Francis Burke, is a suitably entertaining sidekick. I couldn't get into the other characters enough to care what happened to them (the parts of the storyline without Flynn are only average at best), but it's always fun to watch Errol swashbuckling away.
P.S. The Errol Flynn Signature Collection is being released on April 19. Yay!
Monday, April 11, 2005
Character Actors I Love: Charles Butterworth
Before my recent viewing of Love Me Tonight, I had only seen Charles Butterworth in one other movie: Forsaking All Others, in which he’s hilarious. The whole film (starring Joan Crawford, Clark Gable, Robert Montgomery, Billie Burke and Rosalind Russell) is so, so funny, and Butterworth as "Shep" (The IMDB has "Shemp" but trust me, they're wrong) has some of the best lines of all.
Eleanor: [commenting on bachelor parties] I wish I were a man.
Shep: Were, or had?
Sometimes it’s the way he says the lines, rather than the dialogue itself.
Shep: Look, a cow!
Jeff: Yes, Sheppy, a great big moo cow.
He’s so good at playing silly and witty at the same time. Shep’s not dumb, exactly, but definitely rather spacey. Everyone in this film is funny, but because of Butterworth’s delivery and demeanor, the character of Shep makes me laugh the most.
Forsaking All Others is filled with witty banter and amusing one-liners. I've seen the movie dozens of times, and it still makes me laugh every time.
Dill: I don’t need matches, I can start a fire by rubbing two Boy Scouts together!
(I don’t think you could get away with that today.)
Also, watching Eleanor and Shep "tango" is too cute. Butterworth often played the leading man’s daffy sidekick, in fact so well that script writers starting leaving blank chunks in the screenplays, so Butterworth would improvise and fill in with his own well-appreciated wit.
Butterworth graduated from Notre Dame with a degree in law, and also tried his hand at journalism before drifting into acting. He was best friends with Robert Benchley, and I have heard that Butterworth’s death in a car crash wasn’t an accident, but rather a suicide; he was despondent over Benchley’s death seven months before. Butterworth is buried in St. Joseph Valley Cemetery in his hometown of South Bend, Indiana.
Eleanor: [commenting on bachelor parties] I wish I were a man.
Shep: Were, or had?
Sometimes it’s the way he says the lines, rather than the dialogue itself.
Shep: Look, a cow!
Jeff: Yes, Sheppy, a great big moo cow.
He’s so good at playing silly and witty at the same time. Shep’s not dumb, exactly, but definitely rather spacey. Everyone in this film is funny, but because of Butterworth’s delivery and demeanor, the character of Shep makes me laugh the most.
Forsaking All Others is filled with witty banter and amusing one-liners. I've seen the movie dozens of times, and it still makes me laugh every time.
Dill: I don’t need matches, I can start a fire by rubbing two Boy Scouts together!
(I don’t think you could get away with that today.)
Also, watching Eleanor and Shep "tango" is too cute. Butterworth often played the leading man’s daffy sidekick, in fact so well that script writers starting leaving blank chunks in the screenplays, so Butterworth would improvise and fill in with his own well-appreciated wit.
Butterworth graduated from Notre Dame with a degree in law, and also tried his hand at journalism before drifting into acting. He was best friends with Robert Benchley, and I have heard that Butterworth’s death in a car crash wasn’t an accident, but rather a suicide; he was despondent over Benchley’s death seven months before. Butterworth is buried in St. Joseph Valley Cemetery in his hometown of South Bend, Indiana.
Sunday, April 10, 2005
Misleading, but still worthwhile
The Lost Films of Laurel & Hardy Volume 3
starring Oliver Hardy, Stan Laurel, Jimmy Finlayson, Mae Busch, Charley Chase,
Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
I think calling this DVD "Lost Films of Laurel & Hardy" is somewhat misleading, because only 3 out of the 6 shorts feature the boys as the pair that most fans are familiar with.
Love 'Em And Weep, for example, has Oliver Hardy, buried under a thick mustache, in a small role as a dinner guest of Jimmy Finlayson, and Stan Laurel as one of Jimmy's employees; the two never meet in the film. In another short, Bromo and Juliet, Hardy shows up for a few minutes as a taxi driver.
In addition, the picture quality is not always good, but that's to be expected in films so old. Also, the same soundtrack is used over and over, which can get a little monotonous after awhile.
Depsite the fact that this DVD wasn't exactly what I expected, however, I still enjoyed it. It was interesting to see Laurel & Hardy in roles other than "the boys" and the rest of the casts (Charley Chase, Mae Busch, Vivian Oakland, to name a few) gave hilarious performances. I recommend it to fans of Laurel & Hardy (and other silent stars as well), but be aware that not all the films may be what you might have expected.
starring Oliver Hardy, Stan Laurel, Jimmy Finlayson, Mae Busch, Charley Chase,
Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
I think calling this DVD "Lost Films of Laurel & Hardy" is somewhat misleading, because only 3 out of the 6 shorts feature the boys as the pair that most fans are familiar with.
Love 'Em And Weep, for example, has Oliver Hardy, buried under a thick mustache, in a small role as a dinner guest of Jimmy Finlayson, and Stan Laurel as one of Jimmy's employees; the two never meet in the film. In another short, Bromo and Juliet, Hardy shows up for a few minutes as a taxi driver.
In addition, the picture quality is not always good, but that's to be expected in films so old. Also, the same soundtrack is used over and over, which can get a little monotonous after awhile.
Depsite the fact that this DVD wasn't exactly what I expected, however, I still enjoyed it. It was interesting to see Laurel & Hardy in roles other than "the boys" and the rest of the casts (Charley Chase, Mae Busch, Vivian Oakland, to name a few) gave hilarious performances. I recommend it to fans of Laurel & Hardy (and other silent stars as well), but be aware that not all the films may be what you might have expected.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Character Actors I Love: (Sir) C. Aubrey Smith
Three words: tall, craggy, and English. That would be Sir C. Aubrey Smith, character actor I love (and also an excellent cricket player). I first saw Sir Aubrey as Colonel MacFay in Another Thin Man, where his character is vaguely English, rather excitable, somewhat paranoid, and ends up murdered. Not his most distinguished role. Luckily, I’ve also seen him in Little Women (perfectly cast as James Laurence), Rebecca, China Seas, Bombshell, and most recently, Love Me Tonight. He sings a little in LMT, and has a lovely deep singing voice. Take a look at his picture and you’ll probably recognize him immediately, what with the bushy eyebrows and giant mustache and all. He almost always played military officers or English gentlemen, being very suitable for either type of role.
Biographical information is somewhat scarce; he was a champion cricket player, captian of the Hollywood Cricket Club, and was knighted in 1944. He died in 1949 and is buried in St. Lawrence Churchyard in England.
Biographical information is somewhat scarce; he was a champion cricket player, captian of the Hollywood Cricket Club, and was knighted in 1944. He died in 1949 and is buried in St. Lawrence Churchyard in England.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)