d120421
-
Posts
358 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by d120421
-
-
Hi Elinor:
Not meaning any disrespect, but please, if you don't like the film of THE WIZARD OF OZ and you're sick of it, then may I most kindly suggest that you simply ignore the thread on the movie.
I believe you're taking all of these comments much too seriously. Love it or hate it, THE WIZARD OF OZ is a clasic American film, according to some reports, through its' annual screenings on television, etc. it has been seen by more people than any other film in history, that alone would qualify it for the sort of good-natured hypothesizing that has characterized this thread. As I said before, although I don't think OZ is a "perfect" film by any means and has been the subject of serious cinematic analysis on other occasions, these comments are meant to be taken tongue-in-cheek.
Of course, you have every right to read the comments on this thread and to post your own if you wish, but I don't understand why you continue to do so given your pointed dislike for and/or weariness over the film?
I mean, it's not as if you were duped into checking the thread out by a misleading title. The title of the thread is the title of the movie, so, if it upsets you, just ignore it. As I'm sure you're aware, there are dozens of other threads on this forum along (and many other forums devoted to Classic Movies) on which you could participate without going through an emotional meltdown.
-
Hi Lux:
<>
All of this is meant to be "tongue in cheek," (hence my "lol!" notation in my first post on this thread). My apologies if you took it otherwise, but please don't continue to take it so seriously. As you've noted yourself, it's only a movie. Still, it's a clasic movie and one of the enjoyable aspects of discussing a classic can be noting all the inconsistencies/unresolved issues, etc. that the filmmakers apparently never considered important enough to address, or disregarded because it did not fit their concept/vision of the film.
That said (and keeping in mind that this is "tongue in cheek"), as an attorney myself, from all the evidence I can recall in the film, I think your efforts to implicate Miss Gulch as a forgerer of the order which enables her to take Toto is an unsupportable leap of faith.
Had Miss Gulch attempted to do what you've charged her with (forging the sheriff's order to take the dog, etc.) she would leave herself open to a host of very serious charges including, but not necessarily limited to: Forgery (a felony), Obstruction of Justice (another felony), Perjury (another felony for submitting an unauthorized affidavit in support of the Sheriff's order she presents to the Gales) and Petit Larcey (for unlawfully "stealing" the Gale's property, a.k.a. Toto). In fact, it could be "Grand Larceny" should Toto be a valuable (from a monetary standpoint) dog, but as he's owned by the harscrablle Gales, I assume this isn't the case.
Miss Gulch would also potentially incriminate herself through her statements to the Gales concerning the Sheriff's order and her right to take Toto. If you recall, when Aunt Em asks if the Gales could resolve the matter simply by keeping Toto confined ("tied up"), Miss Gulch grudgingly acknowledges, "Well, that's for the Sheriff to decide," therefore, she has stated before three witnesses that she intends to bring the dog to the Sheriff's office. Whatever else one may say "fer er agin'" Miss Gulch, nothing in the movie leads one to believe that she's not doing so when Toto jumps out of the basket and heads for home.
On the "poor doomed dog" issue, my comment referred to the Gales' utter lack of action after Miss Gulch takes Toto. It's true that Miss Gulch has a valid Sheriff's order to take the dog, but there's nothing to prevent the Gales from going to the Sheriff's office themselves to plead Toto's case.
The Gales' inertia means that the only evidence the Sheriff will hear will be from Miss Gulch, who csn hardly be considered an advocate for the dog. Assuming she can prove her case (e.g., that Toto trespassed regularly on her property, chased her cat, ruined her garden, and bit her), it's quite likely that Toto will not be "long for this world," especially as the Sheriff can reasonably conclude that the Gales don't care enough about the dog to stand up for him. As you know, this issue remains unresolved at the film's finale. Perhaps we're lead to believe that Dorothy's Oz dream has given her the wherewithal to challenge Miss Gulch now, but at best she's got an uphill fight on her hands. The movie ended without resolving the issue, which, as I said before, I think is a a valid criticism of the film, but there's no reason to believe that Miss Gulch couldn't come back and take Toto to the Sheriff's office again.
I also think there's a good deal of evidence in the film to indicate that Miss Gulch is telling the truth. First of all, even before Miss Gulch appears, Dorothy acknowledges in her breathless spiel to Aunite Em that Toto chases Miss Gulch's cat and gets into her garden "once or twice a week," (granted Dorothy states that Miss Gulch claims this is a daily occurrence, but Miss Gulch's claim still seems a legitimate one.
Further, at no time after Miss Gulch appears with the Sheriff's order and insists "There are laws protecting folks against dogs that bite," does Dorothy deny that Toto bit her, which logically, even an adolescent child would have the wherewithal to do. All Dorothy does in response is to admit her own culpability ("It's my fault! I let him go in her garden. You can send me to bed without supper?" etc., etc.) but at no time does she say, "She's lying! Toto didn't touch her! She hit him with a rake!, etc., etc.) Miss Gulch would also have to provide evidence of her injury (and as I said before, probably swear out an affidavit under penalty of perjury) to prove her claim, but the fact that she has the Sheriff's order indicates she's at least taken the first proper legal step to have her case heard and adjudicated in her favor.
And why not apply principles of law and rationale to Dorothy's dream? The magical dimensions of Oz aside, the land has many of the same aspects to it that our world does, including a local elected offical (The Mayor of Munchkinland), and government (the Coroner and the town officials who elect Dorothy to the community's Hall of Fame) and local businesses which have, apparently, unionized (the Lullabye League, the Lollipop Guild), so it's not as if Oz is untouched by our "reality."
In fact, the charlatan Wizard makes a clear contemporary American rference to his own status in Oz. When explaining his background to Dorothy and the others he notes that he "is an old Kansas man" himself and was proclaimed "Oz, the First Wizard Deluxe" after his balloon failed to return to its' mooring while he was working for a local carnival. In a pointed reference to the then-current economic Great Depression he also notes: "Times being what they were, I accepted the job!"
At very least (since there's no indication that they were ever stolen) I find it perfectly valid to believe that the ruby slippers belonged to the Witch of the East and should have gone to her sister, the Witch of the West, upon the Witch of the East's demise.
I also think it's safe to conclude that the Wizard ruled through fear and intimidation. While he may not have been a slave driver, given that he never allowed any residents of Oz to apepar before him (and tried to scare off those who did as Dorothy and her friends discover), he clearly couldn't be bothered with any of his subjects. Moreover, if one believes the Witch of the West is "evil" (as the Wizard apparently does) he eagerly sends Dorothy and her friends off on a "suicide mission" to retrieve her broomstick.
This will undoubtedly solve his "problem" one way or the other (either Dorothy et. al. will kill the Witch, thereby solidifying his power base), or they'll be killed by her, in which case he won't have to bother with them), but what does it say about his alleged compassion and concern for his subjects? Answer: He has none (or very little). Even after the Tinman timidly points out that they'll have to kill the Witch to get her broom, the Wizard's (floating head's) only reponse is to order them out of his chamber.
Yet what is Glinda's response to Dorothy's query about the Wizard ("Is he good or is he wicked?"). She readily replies, "Oh very good, but very mysterious." What's good about a ruler who devotes all his energy to avoiding any contact with his subjects? At very least Glinda should have told Dorothy that she didn't know what the Wizard was like, or that he was an out-and-out fake, but she readily lets Dorothy believe the Wizard is a benevolent and caring ruler, which isn't the case at all. Even the Wizard himself ultimately admits this to Dorothy when she reproaches him for being "A very bad man!" ("Oh no, my dear, I'm a very GOOD man. I'm just a very bad Wizard!")
As for the trees grumbling about having their apples picked, while I might not care about how a tree feels if I was the "Picker," if I was the "Pickee" (i.e. the tree) I think it's quite logical that it could hurt and that I might feel quite differently about the matter. Although Dorothy didn't mean any harm, she did yank off part of the tree's body without even asking him and the tree rightly was upset about it.
On the issue of who considers Oz a "coming of age" story, one notable espousal (among many) of that interpretation is popular culture historian Ethan Mordden, who, in his 1990 article on Judy Garland wrote of OZ: "In the end, 'The Wizard of Oz' is yet another classic American fable about, growing up, about exchanging the child's charmed existence for the responsibilities of the adult." Mordden ruminates on this theme at some legnth in this article, but this excerpt is the gist of his interpretation.
Finally, concerning Judy Garland's passive screen image, at no point did I ever say that her screen characters lacked admirable qualities, but independence and self-suficiency isn't aren't among them. In the vast majority of Garland's MGM vehicles, she NEEDS a Rooney, Kelly or Astaire to both validate her talent and to promote it/find a proper venue to bring it to an appreciative public. Unlike the screen images of more pro-active Garland contemporaries like Deanna Durbin and Doris Day, vestiges and elements of which can be seen in recent films like Sandra Bullock's WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING, Julia Roberts' PRETTY WOMAN and Ricki Lake's MRS. WINTERBORNE, Garland's "wistful wallflower" "reflection of a man" screen image is one which appears to have all but disappeared from contemporary film and popular culture in general.
-
Well said, Stoneyburke666:
And don't forget that not only did Toto/Dorothy trespass on Miss Gulch's property, but Toto also bit Miss Gulch and, as Miss Gulch rightly points out, "there are laws protecting people from dogs that bite."
Also, as chattel , Toto would have no rights under the law, so by simply allowing Miss Gulch to take him without going to the Sheriffl's office to plead his case, Dorothy, Auntie Em and Uncle Henry were, to all intents and purposes, sentencing him to death.
I also think it's interesting that WOZ is considered a great "coming of age" film with the theme of exchanging the child's world of fantasy for adult responsibility/reality, yet Dorothy's "adventure" IS a fantasy. She dreams the whole thing and wakes up without having solved her main problem, i.e., saving her poor doomed dog.
Finally, it's interesting how the "Dorothy Gale" character, like a few of her earlier film roles, sets the tone for Garland's MGM star image. Dorothy is usually cited as one of Judy's most independent and pro-active roles, yet all of Dorothy's independent acts take place in an extended dream sequence.
Although she was one of the most vibrant and energetic of screen presences, blessed with an incredible natural "belt" in a voice of tremendous power, Judy Garland's MGM screen image is perhaps the least independent, most passive and needy of all the great female musical stars in the Golden Age of Hollywood.
With VERY few exceptions (e.g, EVERYBODY SING, PRESENTING LILY MARS, THE HARVEY GIRLS), MGM's Garland almost always needs the guidance and oversight of a more overtly ambitious and imaginative male vis-a-vis to recognize, promote and develop her talent and to make her dreams of showbusiness glory a reality.
While it's doubtful that anyone ever played this image more appealingly/engagingly than Garland did at her best, it's also not surprising that it's an image that seems to have all but disappeared from contemporary film/popular culture.
-
Sorry, I disagree. Glinda proved time and again that she had her own agenda and was "bad to the bone" (or is it "bubble" in this case)?
And while we're on the subject, so was the allegedly "very good but very mysterious" WIZARD OF OZ (about whose "good" qualities Glinda gleefully prevaricated) who ruled his land through fear and intimidation (e.g., that giant floating head and never granting any of his subjects an audience).
On the other hand, the alleged "Wicked" Witch of the West was nothing of the sort. As another poster has corectly pointed out, she was only trying to get back what were rightfully hers (the ruby slippers) and she gave Dorothy several opportunities to give them back voluntarily before deciding she had no recourse but to take them by force.
Since both Glinda and Dorothy are guilty of Grand Larceny (a felony) and Conspiracy to Commit Grand Larceny in swiping the slippers in the first place, the Witch of the West has every right to feel put out by their larcenous attitudes/behavior.
-
Among the actresses, I'd love to see months devoted to Deanna Durbin, Irene Dunne, Margaret Sullavan, and/or Wendy Hiller, but I suspect that TCM doesn't own enough of the film ouvres of any of these talented performers to do so. A real shame. Actually, I suppose they might have a shot with Dunne. Barbara Stanwyck is another favorite, but I believe TCM has saluted her in the past.
Among the actors, William Holden, Walter Huston, Robert Montgomery, Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire, Howard Keel, Bing Crosby and Gordon MacRae come to mind. Would really enjoy seeing some of Crosby's early, seldom-seen Paramount films and shorts.
-
I'll take a shot at the remaining lines too:
We hear he is a "Whiz of a Wiz"
If ever a Wiz there was!
If ever, oh ever a Wiz there was,
The Wizard of Oz is one because,
Because, Because, Because, Because, Becaauussee..
Because of the wonderful things he does!
We're off to see the Wizard,
The Wonderful Wizard of Ozzzzzz!
-
I remember reading the NEW YORK TIMES review by Nugent when the film was first released. While Nugent gave a fine notice to Garland (the line was something like "Judy Garland's Dorothy is a fresh-faced miss with the wonderlit eyes of a believer in fairy tales.") what really caught my attention was the next line in which Nugent opined, "But OZ is at its' best when the Scarecrow, the Tinman and the Cowardly Lion are on the move."
In its' review of OZ, TIME Magazine also felt that OZ's best moments were provided by Lahr, Bolger and Haley and only mentioned that Garland was even in the film in passing.
Of course, Judy was awarded a special Oscar for Best Juvenile Performance of the Year for her performance in OZ, but it makes me wonder how long it took viewers to regard OZ as a Garland showcase/vehicle. It certainly wasn't marketed that way upon its' release, nor does Judy receive special billing in the film's credits (though her name is listed first.)
Actually (and I know this will creep some people out) my favorite character was the allegedly "Wicked" Witch of the West. I thought the stuff she could do (e.g., tossing fireballs at her enemies, skywriting with her broom, animating apple trees and zeroing in on her enemies with her crystal ball, etc.) was so cool and I really didn't find her all that "evil." I mean, she COULD have killed off Dorothy's travelling companions (and possibly Dorothy) much sooner than she ultimately threatened to (just before she's done in with that bucket of water!) but gives them many prior opportunities to give up the ruby slippers voluntarily.
I realize that we're programmed from childhood to think of the Witch of the West as "Evil," but given her superior organizational skills and mastery of ledgerdemain, I think the disshevelled and disorganized political structure of OZ, with its' "Paper mache" Wizard, could really use someone like her in command. With (allegedly) acquired maturity, one can see the campaign against the unjustly persecuted Witch of the West for what it really was: an unjustified prejudicial assault against a forward-thinking, imaginative woman with a great business head and controversial fashion sense by a fearful, outmoded and largely impotent patriarchial society. lol!
In any case, I tend to think of the alleged "Good" Witch of the North, Glinda as the true villainess of the piece. Her offhanded "You don't need to be helped any longer. You've always had the power to go back to Kansas!" at the end of the film always infuriated me and I could never understand why Dorothy and the others didn't beat her to a bloody pulp for waiting so long to tell them this after nearly getting them all killed in the process. Also, once Glinda utters this line, it's as if she can't get rid of Dorothy fast enough. She might as well be saying: "Thanks for killing off all the threats to my power and don't let the tornado hit you on the butt on the way out!"
As for favorite performances, I'd probably agree that Bert Lahr's Cowardly Lion is the most endearing of the cast. He certainly gets the wittiest lines. I always love when he challenges the Tinman with: "How long can you stay fresh in that can?! Huh-huh-huh-huh!" Although Ray Bolger also gave a fine performance as the Scarecrow, I've never really bought that line of Dorothy's that she'd miss his character "the most of all." I agree with Lahr's daughter that the Lion's the one she should miss the most.
As for Judy's performance as Dorothy, while I do think it was wonderful, as a child it always really upset me that Dorothy/Judy wakes up from her OZ dream without ever having solved her main dilemma: how to prevent the all-powerful Miss Gulch from euthanizing Toto. I love dogs and it seems to me that Miss Gulch, in addition to being the wealthiest and most powerful landowner in the area would have an excellent case, since Dorothy was trespassing through Miss Gulch's property and Toto did bite her.
Did anyone else ever notice the film's failure to address this important issue, and did it bother you if you did?
In any case, no wonder I ended up liking Deanna Durbin so much. She was much more of a "take charge" personality than Garland and in 100 MEN AND A GIRL (her classic modern Depression era fairytale) Deanna's "Patsy Cardwell" actually DOES end the Depression for her father and the 99 men of "her" orchestra, while Judy's "Dorothy Gale" just dreams her problems away courtesy of the smack she receives from that flying window pane without resolving them.
Interesting how those two early films reflect the subsequent screen personas of Durbin and Garland, with Durbin's feisty, impulsive and imaginative "Little Miss Fixit" characters being much more independent and pro-active than Garland's "Wistful Wallflower/Reflection of a Man" roles.
-
Actually, from your description, I'd say the film you are looking for is the 1998 television movie, THE STAIRCASE, starring William L. Peterson as the stranger (I think his name is "Joad") who arrives in New Mexico and builds the staircase for the chapel in question.
Barbara Hershey plays the Mother Superior in this film. I believe her character may be fictional, but she gives a marvelous performance nonetheless as does Petersen, who has since gone on to star in the current CSI television series.
While I agree that LILIES OF THE FIELD is a wonderful heartfelt movie, very much in the same mold/genre, the African-American Poitier, who does give a marvelous performance, could not easily be mistaken for a "McQueen/Newman" type, as Petersen can be. Moreover, in LILIES OF THE FIELD, Poitier doesn't build a "staircase" per se, but an entire chapel, while Petersen constructs the staircase for the choir loft of the New Mexico chapel, the rest of which is already built.
I think THE STAIRCASE is (or was) available on VHS and possibly on DVD. It also occasionally shows up on the LIFETIME MOVIE CHANNEL.
Hope this is helpful.
-
Hi Rosinryanz:
Apologies for not answering your post earlier. As I noted at the end of my post to Richardny4me, Deanna's interview with Shipman was for a British magazine called FILMS AND FILMING. As far as I know, it is the only "official" interview she has given since she retired in 1949.
I do have a copy of the article, and would be happy to e-mail a transcription of it to you, if you'd like. Just send me an e-mail with your e-mail address. You can find my e-mail address in my profile for this forum.
-
Hi Richardny4me:
I tend to think that the main problem with Deanna Durbin's career once Joe Pasternak left Universal was not so much his departure as Universal's inability/lack of resources to properly exploit Deanna's abilities and appeal once she had made the transition to adult/romantic roles.
Unfortunately, unlike Judy Garland and other ingenue actresses at MGM, Universal didn't have a stable of male actors (musical and non-musical) under contract who could compliment and/or match Durbin's talents and uniquely appealing onscreen presence. For instance, while Garland had Rooney, Kelly and Astaire, Durbin was often saddled with the bland likes of Edmund O'Brien (a fine character actor but not really a leading man), John Dall and Don Taylor.
Also, although the ideas for several of Deanna's adult vehicles such as HERS TO HOLD, BECAUSE OFHIM, and I'LL BE YOURS were sound (in the latter, for instance, Deanna is a perfectly valid and delightful substitute for Margaret Sullavan in this remake of Sullavan's THE GOOD FAIRY), the execution/scripts of these films were often pedestrian and uninsipired.
Still, aside from the omnipresent "MGM gloss" of Technicolor, costuming, etc. I don't consider most of Durbin's later films to be any worse than the Pasternak films at MGM during the same period, including Garland's IN THE GOOD OLD SUMMERTIME and SUMMER STOCK.
Pasternak may have been of real value in this regard, since he seemed to have an undeniable knack for choosing the right scripts for the adolescent/maturing Durbin, but I think it's also worth pointing out that, while his stable of MGM stars, including sopranos Grayson, Powell and Blyth and the non-operatic June Allyson certainly had successful careers, none of them, even at the height of their appeal, approximated the tremendous affection Durbin inspired in the public at large, nor are their films, despite the fact that they had all the power of MGM's movie-making machine behind them, as well-regarded today by cineastes and film scholars as Durbin's best vehicles.
For example, it's interesting to compare Pasternak's development of Jane Powell's career at MGM with his development of Durbin's at Universal. While Pasternak (no doubt inspired by the tremendous public interest in her) took great care in developing Durbin's onscreen image, enabling her to mature gradually and gracefully onscreen from child to ingenue to adult actress, his handling of Powell's career is much more haphazard and lackadaisical.
Powell's first two films following her signing at MGM in 1943 (SONG OF THE OPEN ROAD and DELIGHTFULLY DANGEROUS) were minor efforts made on loan-outs to another studio (United Artists). After preparing a lavish Technicolored starring debut for the by now seventeen year-old Jane in 1946's HOLIDAY IN MEXICO, Pasternak/MGM kept her off the screen for over a year, crowding three Powell films into release in 1948 (THREE DARING DAUGHTERS, LUXURY LINER and A DATE WITH JUDY).
Powell's onscreen maturation in these films is also haphazard. For example, in HOLIDAY IN MEXICO, Powell's character is fifteen. In her next film, 1948's THREE DARING DAUGHTERS, Powell's character is eighteen (she graduates fro high school in the film). Then, in LUXURY LINER and A DATE WITH JUDY, she's sixteen(?) again, but in NANCY GOES TO RIO, she's eighteen/nineteen. Yet in her next film TWO WEEKS WITH LOVE, she's sixteen going on seventeen. Small wonder then, if audiences became somewhat confused by and/or lost interest in, Powell's onscreen development.
In tracking Powell's slightly out of whack onscreen maturation under Pasternak, one is reminded of Judy Garland's similarly disparate cinematic vehicles for Arthur Freed almost a decade earlier. For example, Garland goes from playing 12 year-old Dorothy Gale in 1939's THE WIZARD OF OZ to playing a young mother who dies in childbirth in 1940's LITTLE NELLIE KELLY, then back to playing sweet sixteen year-old Betsy Booth in her last ANDY HARDY film and from there to playing a young woman in FOR ME AND MY GAL back to playing a teen in GIRL CRAZY and MEET ME IN ST LOUIS. I get the impression that, given the tremendous public interest in tracking Durbin's onscreen development that Universal could not have gotten away with a similarly lackadaisical, "catch-as-catch-can" approach to her career.
Your comment about the disparate stagings of "Musetta's Waltz" in IT'S A DATE and NANCY GOES TO RIO provide a perfect illustration of this point. As you're probably aware, the aria is performed by the coquettish Musetta in Puccini's LA BOHEME as a means of re-capturing the affections of her former flame Marcello, as Musetta pointedly sings of her considerable physical and emotional charms and the blatant "romantic" effect they have on every man she meets while flirting with the male customers of the Momus cafe for Marcello's "benefit."
While Universal's "staging" of Durbin's rendition is indifferent (Deanna pretty much just stands there and sings, though, talented actress that she is, through subtle movements of her eyes and head she makes it clear that she's singing to Walter Pidgeon), Deanna Durbin "everyone's favrorite Kid Sister" as THE NEW YORK TIMES christened her, certainly couldn't flirt OPENLY with Pidgeon or anyone else without bringing the wrath of the world down upon Universal's head.
Jane Powell's rendition in NANCY GOES TO RIO is also delightful, and, thanks to MGM's superior behind-the-scenes talents (e.g., Stanely Donen, Nick Castle) and her own prior dance training, Jane is given a bit more to do with her arms and makes a charming curtsey at the conclusion of the aria.
Nevertheless, as delightful, talented and attractive a performer as Jane was, I find her presentation, both singing and acting, to be just slightly arch, in a manner that Durbin's naturally candid and emotionally direct singing style never was. From her vibrato-laden soprano to her slightly forced smile, Jane simply doesn't, at this point in her career, radiate the singular natural confidence and emotional directness that made Deanna Durbin such a uniquely compelling performer/personality.
Of course, like all fine performers, Jane would eventually shed these early affectations, but in my opinion, she hasn't quite made the transition yet in her performance of "Musetta's Waltz." For a better illustration of Jane's budding mature musico-dramatic talents I would choose her lovely and understated rendition of "Magic Is The Moonlight" from the same film. Coincidentally, it is Jane's performance of this song which convinces the producer's of Sothern's play that Jane is capable of stepping into her mother's role and in this case, I think it does work. In fairness to Jane,
I think I should add that, other than Judy Garland and possibly Alice Faye and Betty Garrett, I don't think any musical actress of that era could approximate Durbin's singularly spectacular combination of artless ease, candor and self-confidence as a singing actress. She really was pretty much in a class by herself, at least in my opinion.
Deanna's interview with David Shipman was in a Briths magazine called FILMS AND FILMING. I don't own a scanner, but I think I have a transcription of it which (assuming I do) I'll be happy to e-mail to you if you'd like. Just send me an e-mail with your address. You can get my e-mail address from my profile.
-
Hi Richardardny4me:
Was the videotape you have the MGM/UA version? I assume it was since this was the only commercial release of the film, as far as I know.
I don't recall my copy as being that bad, though it's been some time since I watched it so I may have forgotten a few glitches. The TCM print seemed fine to me. I was moving around during parts of it, so I may have missed one or two moments when a "bad splice" occurred, but I didn't notice any.
I thought Deanna gave a very good performance in IT'S A DATE, as usual. When I was first asking my parents about her after seeing the "Every Sunday" clip in THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT! my mother mentioned that she "grew up very very gracefully and naturally onscreen," and I think IT'S A DATE demonstrated her ability to make the transition from child to adult star quite easily.
Although I find William Seiter's direction more deliberate and less effervescent than the films she made with Henry Koster and some of her other films, and the film itself may be a little overlong, I also like IT'S A DATE as a film. I admire the way that Pasternak eased Deanna into adult roles in films like this by having her character(s) take on more "adult" romantic situaltions such as, in this case, developing a romantic crush on older man Walter Pidgeon. Unlike her adolescent crush on Melvyn Douglas in 1938's THAT CERTAIN AGE, in this film the "hook" is that the other characters could readily believe that she might be a suitable romnatic partner for Pidgeon, and, as I said, she handled the acting assignment beautifully.
I'm also always a little surprised, given their generally "wholesome" presentation, at how sophisticated the Durbin films can be. In the case of IT'S A DATE, one particularly recalls the funny scene in which Lewis Howard "auditions" for the part of a "Dope fiend" (not realizing the part is actually that of a DAUPHIN) with nervous ticks,sniffs, and disheveled appearance to demonstrate his "addiction."
As is the case with Judy Garland and other musical greats, Durbin's song spots are always special. As Osborne said in his comnents on the film, "Deanna projected a screen presence unlike anyone else, ever."
She also photographed beautifully,and her subtle understated acting, for which she often isn't given due credit (at least in my opinion), usually made up for the fact that Universal often didn't stage her numbers with the imagination that MGM deployed in their musicals. If there was ever a performer whose style was suited for the "in your face" style of musical number, Durbin was it, as her musical performances in this film amply demonstrate.
As for NANCY GOES TO RIO, I also like that film though I prefer IT'S A DATE to the remake. I don't think the subplot of NANCY, which has the characters mistakenly believing that Jane Powell's "Nancy Barklay" is pregnant was necessary, though I suspect it was added in order to give more screen time to the top-billed Ann Sothern.
Still, the film does contain one of my favorite Jane Powell numbers, "Magic Is the Moonlight," and, although I think her performance of "Musetta's Waltz" is more arch and a little less self-confident than Deanna's, it's still a charming performance from a talented and underrated performer. Actually, I don't think many performers projected the naturalness and self-confidence Durbin did onscreen. She was pretty much in a class by herself in that regard.
-
Very worth seeing, Moviejoe!
Did anyone else happen to catch this broadcast last night?
I thought Robert Osborne's introductory and closing comments were interesting. In the opening, he stated that IT'S A DATE "was made when Deanna was the most popular young actress in Hollywood, even more popular, by several degrees, than Judy Garland, who was only six months younger." From what I know, Osborne's comments here were accurate.
In his closing comments, however, as an indication of how completely Deanna had retired from her Hollywood celebrity lifestyle, Osborne stated that Deanna "has not been interviewed since 1949," which is inaccurate. She gave an interview to the late David Shipman in the early 1980s.
At any rate, Osborne must like this film and Deanna very much as he has made it one of his "personal picks" at least twice before. He's also introduced it in the same manner before: "IT'S A DATE and it's a HONEY!"
Does anyone have an opinion on IT'S A DATE?
PS Just after finishing FIRST LOVE and prior to beginning IT'S A DATE, Deanna was supposed to take a "European vacation" which was to include a Command Performance for the Royal Family, but it was cancelled due to the increasingly dangerous world situation with the outbreak of the European Conflict/World War II.
-
There isn't a version of LITTLE WOMEN with Judy Garland, but producer Joe Pasternak reportedly wanted to do a musical version of LITTLE WOMEN at MGM with Judy and Deanna Durbin, but Universal wouldn't loan Deanna, so that was the end of that.
-
Dear Paty:
Delighted to hear you received a response from Deanna. I know what a huge fan of hers you are. I have a Group on Deanna and two of the members have indicaated that they also received responses to recent letters they had sent her.
However, one of these members had written Deanna a few months earlier and was disappointed not to receive a reply. The success of the other (newer) member encouraged her to try again, and she was thrilled to receive a reply this time.
I imagine that, due to the continuous overflow of mail she continues to receive from fans, Deanna could not continue to maintain her decision to "re-retire" following her husband's passing. A very gracious lady, considering she answers all the mail herself and has been retired for over half a century.
A few weeks ago, I sent Deanna some materials I thought she might enjoy looking over (though not with a request for a resposne/reply). From what I've read, she seems to be quite "up" on the material written about her since she retired, so I suspect that she may have seen/heard this material before, but, if so, perhaps she'll enjoy checking it out again.
-
Hi Path:
I've read that about Greer Garson, too. I believe MGM bought the rights to INTERRUPTED MELODY as a potential vehicle for Garson, who was very interested in playing the role and began preparing for it, but left the studio before the film went into production, so the lead was given to Eleanor Parker.
It's certainly a part that would seem to suit Garson and I imagine she could have done a good job with it. The only real potential problem being that she might have been a little too old (late 40s) by the time the film was produced.
Incidentally, just so we don't completely forget Marni Nixon, I've read that in addition to THE SECRET GARDEN, she also dubbed Margaret O'Brien's vocals for BIG CITY (1947).
She and Deborah Kerr became quite friendly duirng the filming of THE KING AND I, and Kerr was reportedly quite upset that the studio refused to credit Nixon for her contribution to the film on the film's soundtrack recording, but, however it happened, I guess it became general knowledge that Nixon had done the vocals in any case.
-
Hi brackenhe:
Agreed. It would be a very dull world indeed if we all liked the same things. I much prefer discussing our different opinions, preferences, etc. (so long as it's done considerately, of course). Makes life much more interesting.
Actually, the performance in INTERRUPTED MELODY I had a problem with was Roger Moore's. It was probably more due to his character than his performance, but I agree with Eleanor Parker that "her success" went to his head. Also, I always wonder how Moore's character, Cecil Lawrence, made a living after Marjorie contracted polio and couldn't work for so long. I assume he managed other performers, but the movie didn't touch on this, nor do I recall Lawrence's memoir doing so.
Another intersting sidenote to INTERRUPTED MELODY: MGM soprano Kathryn Grayson has reportedly stated that Marjorie Lawrence vetoed Grayson as a candidate to play her onscreen because Grayson was "too pretty." While Grayson was an attractive and talented vocalist, I can't imagine her light, bright florid coloratura being an appropriate vocal match for Lawrence's enormous dramatic soprano, nor, given audiences' familiarity with Grayson as a singer, can I imagine her being dubbed for the movie by Eileen Farrell or anyone else. I would think audiences would expect to hear Kathryn Grayson.
On an unrelated note, while I agree with twtpark that Eileen Wilson was a very talented vocalist, I don't think she dubbed Mary Astor's vocals in MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS. The singer listed on my soundtrack CD of the film dubbing Astor's portion of "You and I" is Denny Markas. Incidentally, the "singer" who dubbed Leon Ames's vocals in the song was MGM producer Arthur Freed.
-
I thought Glenn Ford did very well in INTERRUPTED MELODY. Since I've read how temperamental he could be behind-the-scenes, I'm surprised that he took the role,which was clearly secondary to Parker's despite his top-billing.
Eleanor Parker also gave a fine performance, though I thought she was a little too "grand" in a couple of scenes. Eileen Farrell did a marvelous job singing those songs though.
Incidentally, in addition to Roger Moore, Stuart Whitman is one of the men who hits on Parker when she's lying on the beach in Mexico. (They subsequently notice her wheelchair and beg off.)
-
I think MGM dubbed Ava Gardner's vocals with Annette Warren's voice. However, MGM allowed Gardner's recordings were used on the soundtrack of SHOW BOAT, so she continued to collect royalties from sales of the soundtrack until the day she died.
Gardner's voice probably sounded more natural, if less polished, than Warren's, but MGM ruined that version of SHOW BOAT In so many ways, including the staging of Gardner's numbers, that it really wasn't a big deal to me that they dubbed Gardner.
A textbook example of MGM's "style over substance" approach and disregard for the special qualities of a groundbreaking musical theater classic.
-
Hi brackenhe:
I agree about Dennis Morgan being a very talented singer with a good voice. I'm not sure why MGM chose to dub his voice with Allan Jones's but one reason given was that it was THE big number in a spectacular production that was costing the studio a fortune and they didn't want to have an "unknown" sing it.
Of course, the fly in THAT ointment is that they didn't advertise that it was Jones doing the singing, so I'm not sure what the advantage was in having him do the honors anyway. Maybe MGM just got a sense of satisfaction knowing that one of their stars was doing the honors.
And I agree 100% that Eleanor Parker's lip synching to Eileen Farrell's vocals in INTERRUPTED MELODY was superlative: possibly the best lip synching job I've ever seen by a non-singer. And the musical program was certainly a daunting one, taking in everything from opera to folk songs to "pop" ("Over The Rainbow", "Don't Sit Under The Apple Tree", etc.) Somehow I doubt whether Marjorie Lawrence ever sang all these songs, but Farrell made them all sound like it was a piece of cake for her. Perhaps the most impressive (and varied) vocals of any "ghost singer."
Farrell later recalled that Eleanor Parker would show up for the rehearsals and recording sessions whenever she could to study Farrell's breathing, etc. when she sang, so that she could mimic them realistically onscreen. As Parker was then in the process of shooting the Western MANY RIVERS TO CROSS, she would often show up at the recording sessions in the buckskin costume she wore for the film. Farrell also recalled that Parker studied her so carefully and intently that, after the filming for INTERRUPTED MELODY was completed, Parker suffered a mild nervous breakdown and needed to take a few weeks' rest.
Apparently, the only one who was not pleased with Farrell's participation in the project was Marjorie Lawrence herself. MGM initially hoped to have Lawrence record the soundtrack to INTERRUPTED MELODY, but, for whatever reason, found the test recordings Lawrence made unacceptable and hired Farrell to do the honors. Farrell enjoyed the project, and, although already a very popular radio vocalist/concert artist in her own right, the best-selling status achieved by the film's soundtrack album was a major boost to her career.
Farrell did recall running into Lawrence inadvertently as they were exiting a concert and thinking to herself: as she saw Lawrence's wheelchair approaching, "Betcha that's Marjorie Lawrence...Wonder if she's got a gun?" but recalled that Lawrence swept past her without uttering a word.
-
Nixon's certainly a very talented singer and has proven her talent as a vocal double for some of the biggest musical films of the 1950s and 1960s.
Still, her very bright, "pingy" monochromatic soprano isn't my favorite type of voice. While I thought Nixon made a good try at dubbing for Audrey Hepburn in MY FAIR LADY, and did well enough in the "lady" songs, in my opinion the weakest part of "Hepburn's" performance as the flower girl Eliza is Nixon's too refined, sedate and "pretty" soprano vocalizing. I think it takes a lot of the "earthy" personality abd spontaneity out of these narvelous songs.
In my opinion, Nixon's best job of "ghost singing" was for Deborah Kerr in THE KING AND I. Kerr reportedly did some of her own singing on the soundtrack including all of "I Whistle a Happy Tune", and introductory portions of "Getting To Know You" and "Shall We Dance?", and her vocals were melded with Nixon's so that Nixon's singing covered the higher notes and more sustained passages. For example, Nixon reportedly sang all of "Hello Young Lovers" because the vocal line for this song is so sustained.
As for other "unsung" vocal doubles. Here are a few more:
It was Betty Wand who dubbed Rita Moreno's vocals in WEST SIDE STORY, and, from what I've read, she dubbed all of Moreno's singing in the film, not just "A Boy Like That." Wand also dubbed Leslie Caron's vocals in GIGI. I think it was Jimmy Bryant who dubbed Richard Beymer's vocals in WSS.
Although Juanita Hall had originated the role of "Bloody Mary" in the Broadway version of SOUTH PACIFIC, when she appeared in the film version, her vocals were dubbed by Muriel Smith who had played the role in London and whose voice Rodgers and Hammerstein reportedly preferred in the part to Hall's. Rosanno Brazzi's vocals in the same film were dubbed by Metropolitan Opera basso Giorgio Tozzi, while John Kerr's were dubbed by Bill Lee.
Lee also did the vocalizing for Matt Mattox ("Lonesome Polecat", etc.) and some of the other "brothers" in SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS, as well as dubbing Christopher Plummer's vocals in THE SOUND OF MUSIC. You can catch a glimpse of Bill Lee in the 1965(?) television version of R & H's CINDERELLA (the one with Lesley Anne Warren). In the "The Prince is Giving a Ball" number, Lee is the "father" who recites the line: "Our daughter's looking dreamy-eyed.
Among other "ghost vocalists", singer Carole Richards dubbed the vocals for Vera-Ellen in the film version of CALL ME MADAM and for Cyd Charisse in the film versions of both BRIGADOON and SILK STOCKINGS. Louanne Hogan performed similar duties for Jeanne Crain, dubbing Crain's songs in both STATE FAIR and CENTENNIAL SUMMER.
For his rendition of "A Pretty Girl is Like a Melody" in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD (1936), tenor Dennis Morgan (then billed as Stanley Mormer) was dubbed by MGM star tenor Allan Jones. Singer Tony Martin's vocals as the radio singer of "When I'm With You" for the Shirley Temple film, POOR LITTLE RICH GIRL (1936) were dubbed by popular band vocalist Dick Wood, while Jack Haley's vocals as the popular radio crooner who suffers from "mike fright" in the Alice Faye vehicle, WAKE UP AND LIVE (1937) were dubbed by popular singer Buddy Clark. Clark also dubbed the vocals for actor Mark Stevens in I WONDER WHO'S KISSING HER NOW?
Nan Wynn dubbed Rita Hayworth's vocals for both of her musicals with Fred Astaire YOU'LL NEVER GET RICH and YOU WERE NEVER LOVELIER (I think she may also have dubbed Hayworth in MY GAL SAL), while Martha Mears did the honors for Hayworth in COVER GIRL and Anita Ellis dubbed her in GILDA. Ellis also dubbed Vera-Ellen's vocals in THREE LITTLE WORDS.
Dramatic soprano Eileen Farrell dubbed Eleanor Parker's vocals for the film biogpraphy of Australian dramatic soprano, INTERRUPTED MELODY. Popular singer Jane Froman dubbed Susan Hayward's vocals for the filmization of Froman's life story, WITH A SONG IN MY HEART.
A pre-Broadway bound Mary Martin dubbed Margaret Sullavan's vocals ("Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit Bag") in THE SHOPWORN ANGEL, while a pre-Met Opera Marilyn Horne dubbed the vocals for Dorohty Dandridge in CARMEN JONES.
Perhaps the most unusual case of "ghost vocals" were those used for Debbie Reynolds in SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. Although the film's plot has Reynolds' unknown extra "Kathy Selden" allegedly dubbing both the singing and the speaking voice for Jean Hagen's adenoidal movie diva "Lina Lamont", in reality, when the time came to dub "Lina's" speaking voice (e.g., "Nothing will keep us apart. Our love will last till the stars turn cold."), it was Hagen, using her own naturally cultured and refined speaking voice who actually spoke the lines for Reynolds, whose voice at that time was considered too "Texas accented" to speak the lines convincingly. Thus, Hagen ended up dubbing Reynolds dubbing Hagen.
Only in Hollywood!
-
Me too. PYGMALION's the best. Wendy Hiller is the best Eliza I've ever seen,and Leslie Howard is a marvelous Higgins. The only potential drawback being that its' crisp pacing emphasizes how ponderous the too careful pacing of MY FAIR LADY is by comparison.
MAJ0R BARBARA is also marvelous. Shaw approved of Hiller for both films, which made her very reluctant to accept further film projects. I think it also marked the film debut of Deborah Kerr.
Fortunately, when Hiller did decide to step before the movie cameras again, she made an excellent choice: the enchanting Powell/Pressburger wartime romantic fantasy, I KNOW WHERE I'M GOING (1945).
> I agree with Path "Pygmalion" is one of the best
> movies and one the best adaptation of any of Shaw's
> work ever. Try "Major Barbara" (1940) with Rex
> Harrison and Wendy Hiller too.
-
> "THE AMAZING MRS. HOLLIDAY (an attempt at a "European
> art house" style film, the majority of which was
> directed by Jean Renoir)"
>
> Well that made me take the film of off my shelf and
> watch it Sunday night. It was a very good film, and I
> can see the "foreign" influence, for example in one
> scene where she sings a lullaby to the orphans in
> their bedroom, she actually sings accapella without
> any orchestral background - very unusual for films at
> that time. And her close-ups wow, she was beautiful.
Hi Richard:
Deanna claims that Renoir directed 3/4ths of THE AMAZING MRS. HOLLIDAY as released. I think another example of Renoir's influence is the fact that the Japanese are simiply referred to as "the invaders" rather than, as was the case with most Hollywood films of the period, describing them as "evil", "cruel", etc., etc. or having one actor (e.g., Richard Loo) serve as the embodiment of the Japanese race at its' most brutish.
I actually need to look at the film again myself. MRS. HOLLIDAY was criticized at the time of its' release for its' superficial treatment of the very serious theme of the tragic plight of war refugee children, and my recollection of the film is that the children did come off as something of a handy plot device, appearing and disappering quickly from some scenes just for the sake of dramatic "effect", without going into their plight in great detail.
Assuming this is a valid criticism, it was undoubtedly due in large part to the fact that the film was begun without a script, with Renoir stating that they could make the film in the "French style" and more or less, create as they went along with new ideas to inspire them as the filming progressed and the plot took shape.
Unfortunately this did not happen. Renoir ultimately left the film citing the flare-up of an old war wound as his reason for doing so, and first-time (and, as it turned out, only time) producer Bruce Manning was left to assemble Renoir's footage into a cohesive whole as best he could. Considering what he apprently had to work with, I do think Manning did an admirable job.
One more comment on MRS. HOLLIDAY: Although several fleeting references to Durbin (e.g., David Thomson's BIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY OF FILM sketch on Deanna) and the film indicate that Renoir abandoned MRS. HOLLIDAY due to Durbin's alleged lack of acting ability/talent and/or temperamental behavior, Alhtough I don't claim that my review of Renoir's correspondence is definitive, from what I have seen of it, I can find no evidence that this was the case. In fact, the reverse appears to be true.
In his personal correspondence of the period in which he expressed his growing concerns about the troubled production history of the film with family and friends, Renoir rails against the Hollywood/Universal studio system (which he terms "in the hands of the adjutants"), the "invincible laziness" of Bruce Manning (an accusation which Deanna has denied), the unruly behavior of the child actors in the film ("they have no respect for my person") and his own increasing ill health, he speaks of Durbin, both personally and professionally, in nothing but the most glowing and superlative terms calling her "a remarkable actress" and "a wonderful comrade."
By the way, Renoir would agree (as would I) with your appraisal of Durbin's beauty in the film. Much later he recalled of his meeting with Deanna: "I met Deanna Durbin and liked her very much. She is a charming girl and was then between the stage of girlhood and womanhood, newly married and particularly ravishing."
-
GIGI should seem very similar to MY FAIR LADY, since it was crafted by Lerner and Lowe, who wrote the score for MY FAIR LADY and were hired by MGM to craft a similar film musical following MY FAIR LADY's smashing Broadway success.
Hepburn DID play GIGI on Broadway, but it was in a non-musical version, not the Lerner/Lowe musical written for MGM and starring Caron. Reportedly Hepburn was approached about playing the part in the musical, but turned it down on the grounds that she was both too tall and, by that time, too old to successfully portray the adolescent Gigi on film.
Andrews did create the role of "Eliza Doolittle"in the original Broadway version of MY FAIR LADY (she was hired after Deanna Durbin, Dolores Gray and Mary Martin reportedly all turned it down, Martin because she didn't care for the score), which was the longest-running Broadway musical hit up to that time. Jack Warner, however, who paid $5,000,000 dollars for the film rights, refused, despite great public interest, to gamble on Andrews's untested screen potential and hired Hepburn to play "Eliza", with Marni Nixon dubbing her vocals.
This outraged a huge section of both the public and the critical intelligentsia, all of whom felt (unjustly) that Hepburn had "stolen" Andrews's "part." Columnist Hedda Hopper, for example, snidely commented: "With Marni Nixon doing the singing, Audrey Hepburn will give only half a performance."
This pro-Andrews/anti-Hepburn sentiment, probably accounts for Hepburn failing to receive an Oscar nomination for her work as "Eliza" in the film (despite the generally fine reviews she received), although the film itself and co-star Rex Harrison did both receive Oscar nods.
As for choosing which one is better or a favorite, although GIGI has a fine score, MY FAIR LADY unquestionably has a better one, as well as the better source material (Shaw's PYGMALION). On the other hand, by the time MY FAIR LADY reached the screen, it had attained such an iconic status that I think much of the spontaneity was drained out of the film version due to the too-careful and measured approach taken by George Cukor and the other makers of the film.
Andre Previn, who handled the musical direction/scoring, said of the finished film, "I don't think it's so wonderful, I think it's endless. People became too obsessed over the details of the film, such as whether a rest should be a quarter or a half rest. It's a MUSICAL for heaven's sake, not Wagner's RING CYCLE!"
Actually, I do think that much of the film version of MY FAIR LADY is enjoyable, in large part because Harrison and Hepburn are, even though Hepburn, especially with that too-refined, monochromatic, and bright Marni Nixon soprano, never convinces as the "flower girl" Eliza. Despite this handicap, Hepburn is still an affecting Eliza following her transformation into the "Lady", but I definitely think the film could have been livelier and better overall had its' makers not looked upon it as a "once in a lifetime" event.
Therefore, although neither one is my favorite, as a film, I'd probably prefer GIGI. Although it's also burdened by the heavier tone that generally impacted fifties musicals, it suffers from this defect much less so than MY FAIR LADY, in my opinion.
-
Very sad. I'd heard that she'd been ill for a while. Hopefully she had a peaceful passing. I recall seeing her on a talk show several years ago updating people on her life. It's a shame she had such a hard one. She seemed to be a genuinely nice lady.
I didn't think Dee was an especially talented actress, but she was pretty and likeable in several films, including the ones she made with Bobby Darin. My sisters used to watch the GIDGET and TAMMY films whenever they were on when I was growing up. It's probably not much of a compliment to an actress, but Dee was definitely the best "Gidget" of the movies I saw.
The Essentials
in General Discussions
Posted
I really haven't had the chance to see much of Bogdanovich's commentary on THE ESSENTIALS, though I can understand why his very dry commentary would irritate some listeners.
Personally, I'm glad that he picked a film like IT SHOULD HAPPEN TO YOU over BORN YESTERDAY to salute Judy Holliday and Lubitsch's THE MERRY WIDOW for a classic musical over the omnipresent SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. Given other commentary I've read on Bogdanovich's musical tastes, I suspect he may cite THE MERRY WIDOW as the best musical film ever made.
That said, I do wish that, whoever the host/hostess of this continuing TCM feature may be, they'd have a greater variety of films to select and choose from. I'm not knocking the ones that have been shown. Most, if not all, are undeniable film classics, but many have been shown ad nauseum in other contexts on TCM (e.g., "Star of the Month," "Birthday Salute," "Movie Themes," etc., etc.) and I'd like to see some other films (and studios besides MGM and Warners) get what I consider some much overdue recognition on this series.