"Fountain of Youth" on YouTube!!!
by Glenn Anders » Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:22 am
Now we're cooking, gang.
I find too many wonderful matches to comment on them all, and so, I'll say a word about those referred to me, and maybe one or two from each of you. Otherwise, I'll slip out the side door and let you and others go to it again. There's such a wealth of possibilities!
Yes, Roger, you win the prize. I was thinking of "Director John Sullivan" in Preston Sturges' SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS (1941). You are no doubt correct that Welles would have found difficulty matching Joel McCrae's perfection in the picture. One can't argue against a satirical masterpiece. However, I'm fairly certain Sturges had Welles (and himself) in mind when he created the character, and Welles would repeatedly try over the period to soften his image of "The Great Director" by publicly kidding himself. He did so in his curtain calls, his end notes for Radio programs, his self-deprecation on "The Jack Benny Show," and later, on TV's Lucy Shows. He must have known that a warmer human image (a term not often heard in this context, at the time) would help his career. Welles even went so far, in 1946, as to import Fletcher Markle and an entire Canadian Radio company to present "Life with Adam," Markle's lampoon of him on CBC, for an episode his of his Mercury Theater Summer Series.
And my next candidate, mido505, would have been the Genius Director "Jonathan" that Kirk Douglas played in THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL (1952), produced by . . . right, John Houseman. You might think, too, about a similar film Houseman made years later, when the movie business had changed greatly.
[Midio505, Welles loved The Man Who Came to Dinner, was a close friend of Critic and Radio Personality Alexander Woolcott, and Welles did play the part of Sheridan Whiteside in a Hallmark 1972 TV production. He remarked at the time that he had been offered the role in both the stage and 1942 film versions but had turned it down.]
And you are certainly right, Roger and Harvey, about the likeness with Cregar, especially in the last two films of that brilliant actor's career, THE LODGER (1944) and HANGOVER SQUARE (1945), which you mention.
And mido505, because you bring up Lars Thorvald in Hitchcock's THE REAR WINDOW (1954), we might want to suggest Raymond Burr as a stand-in for Welles before he settled into the terrible comfort of Perry Mason. I'm thinking of his Dist. Atty. R. Frank Marlowe, with canes again, in A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951). Welles would have worked in tandem with old Mercury Player Ted de Corsia, who played Judge R.S. Oldendorff.
[Ironically, they dubbed de Corsia, a Radio "man of a thousand voices." In a switch, de Corsia took on Welles' role of Harry Lime in the 1951 Lux Radio Theater Production of THE THIRD MAN!]
Tony and mido505, Huston and Welles had both dreamed of making MOBY DICK for years. Welles is quoted as saying that he put his hopes aside when he discovered his old friend and colleague had been given the Green Light. But when one thinks of it, the expenses involved for Welles in mounting his own big screen picture, I wonder if his 1955 London stage and TV productions of Moby Dick Rehearsed might not have been, in part, a campaign to land the role of Captain Ahab for himself, once Huston's first choice, his father Walter, had passed on. Warner Brothers, alas, wanted a matinee idol, and by then, Welles (only forty) was no longer considered that.
BTW, mido505, I've probably written here before that if the original Huston/Oswald Morris color process for MOBY DICK (1956) is compared with the conventional prints which went to most theaters later, and was the standard for years, we have two different Gregory Peck Ahabs. Huston and Cinematographer Morris knew that Ahab was a much older man than their star at the time, and that the part was going to be a stretch for Peck. Therefore, they had him cock his head a lot, put him in shifting shadow, showed him in hazy sealight, lit only one side of his face, key lit his eyes, etc. But Warner Brothers, who had insisted on Peck in the first place, did not like their handsome leading man obscured and looking demented, and so the prints for wide distribution were conventional, wiping out the carefully created appearance of dementia and revealing a lot of bizarre, phony looking makeup. Fortunately, the original color process version is now again available.
Finally, Harvey, thank you for pointing out Harlan Ellison's novella based on the life of Veronica Lake. I'll try to find it.
I did not mean to imply that Welles and Lake would have been happy, simply that his relationship with this other sex goddess of the period would have seen a reversal of roles. Rita Hayworth, despite her show biz family and other troubles, managed to come to maturity a shy but fairly stable individual. Veronica Lake was the daughter of a wandering sailor, grew up in a broken home, and was diagnosed, early on, as suffering from borderline schizophrenia. That was why colleagues and friends could be charmed by her vivacity, intelligence and charm, one day, and be rebuffed the next day by what Eddie Bracken, often a co-star, called "The Bitch."
The missing piece of this blonde puzzle came to me when Andre De Toth was honored at the San Francisco Film Festival, in 1997. A big-looking one-eyed man, he often was sitting in a wheelchair roundabout the refreshment area of the Kabuki Theater, signing autographs on two memoirs he had recently completed. The day of his formal public appearance, he hoistd himself up, and with the help of a cane, lurched down to a seat in the front of the theater.
De Toth spoke generously of all he had seen in his life. Son of a Hungarian Cavalry officer, a documentary photographer for the Wehrmacht during the 1939 Invasion of Poland, a cameraman for Alexander Korda after he fled to England, then Hollywood.
He spoke of marrying Veronica Lake when he was 29, making pictures for her, how bright and beautiful she was, how they worked out their problems, and then his voice turned bitter. He said she took her roles too seriously, and "got in with the wrong crowd." Though I could find no reference to the subject in his written memoirs later, he added one word: "Heroin."
If you examine the "serious" films she played in during her later career, including the final one, FOOTSTEPS IN THE SNOW, you notice how many references there are to narcotics. If you've known heroin addicts, put that together with those bad teeth you mention, and you may have completed the puzzle.
To end on a brighter bit, I came across this factoid:
Jessica Rabbit, the 'toon bombshell in WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT (perhaps a reference to Agatha Christie's "Who Murdered Roger Ackroyd," a Herman J. Mankiewicz Mercury Theater on the Air Adaptation), is said to be a combination of Rita Hayworth and Veronica Lake. The red hair and bodacious figure of Rita, and at least, the peekaboo hair style of the tiny Veronica.
Perhaps they are both with Welles in Toonland.
Glenn
I find too many wonderful matches to comment on them all, and so, I'll say a word about those referred to me, and maybe one or two from each of you. Otherwise, I'll slip out the side door and let you and others go to it again. There's such a wealth of possibilities!
Yes, Roger, you win the prize. I was thinking of "Director John Sullivan" in Preston Sturges' SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS (1941). You are no doubt correct that Welles would have found difficulty matching Joel McCrae's perfection in the picture. One can't argue against a satirical masterpiece. However, I'm fairly certain Sturges had Welles (and himself) in mind when he created the character, and Welles would repeatedly try over the period to soften his image of "The Great Director" by publicly kidding himself. He did so in his curtain calls, his end notes for Radio programs, his self-deprecation on "The Jack Benny Show," and later, on TV's Lucy Shows. He must have known that a warmer human image (a term not often heard in this context, at the time) would help his career. Welles even went so far, in 1946, as to import Fletcher Markle and an entire Canadian Radio company to present "Life with Adam," Markle's lampoon of him on CBC, for an episode his of his Mercury Theater Summer Series.
And my next candidate, mido505, would have been the Genius Director "Jonathan" that Kirk Douglas played in THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL (1952), produced by . . . right, John Houseman. You might think, too, about a similar film Houseman made years later, when the movie business had changed greatly.
[Midio505, Welles loved The Man Who Came to Dinner, was a close friend of Critic and Radio Personality Alexander Woolcott, and Welles did play the part of Sheridan Whiteside in a Hallmark 1972 TV production. He remarked at the time that he had been offered the role in both the stage and 1942 film versions but had turned it down.]
And you are certainly right, Roger and Harvey, about the likeness with Cregar, especially in the last two films of that brilliant actor's career, THE LODGER (1944) and HANGOVER SQUARE (1945), which you mention.
And mido505, because you bring up Lars Thorvald in Hitchcock's THE REAR WINDOW (1954), we might want to suggest Raymond Burr as a stand-in for Welles before he settled into the terrible comfort of Perry Mason. I'm thinking of his Dist. Atty. R. Frank Marlowe, with canes again, in A PLACE IN THE SUN (1951). Welles would have worked in tandem with old Mercury Player Ted de Corsia, who played Judge R.S. Oldendorff.
[Ironically, they dubbed de Corsia, a Radio "man of a thousand voices." In a switch, de Corsia took on Welles' role of Harry Lime in the 1951 Lux Radio Theater Production of THE THIRD MAN!]
Tony and mido505, Huston and Welles had both dreamed of making MOBY DICK for years. Welles is quoted as saying that he put his hopes aside when he discovered his old friend and colleague had been given the Green Light. But when one thinks of it, the expenses involved for Welles in mounting his own big screen picture, I wonder if his 1955 London stage and TV productions of Moby Dick Rehearsed might not have been, in part, a campaign to land the role of Captain Ahab for himself, once Huston's first choice, his father Walter, had passed on. Warner Brothers, alas, wanted a matinee idol, and by then, Welles (only forty) was no longer considered that.
BTW, mido505, I've probably written here before that if the original Huston/Oswald Morris color process for MOBY DICK (1956) is compared with the conventional prints which went to most theaters later, and was the standard for years, we have two different Gregory Peck Ahabs. Huston and Cinematographer Morris knew that Ahab was a much older man than their star at the time, and that the part was going to be a stretch for Peck. Therefore, they had him cock his head a lot, put him in shifting shadow, showed him in hazy sealight, lit only one side of his face, key lit his eyes, etc. But Warner Brothers, who had insisted on Peck in the first place, did not like their handsome leading man obscured and looking demented, and so the prints for wide distribution were conventional, wiping out the carefully created appearance of dementia and revealing a lot of bizarre, phony looking makeup. Fortunately, the original color process version is now again available.
Finally, Harvey, thank you for pointing out Harlan Ellison's novella based on the life of Veronica Lake. I'll try to find it.
I did not mean to imply that Welles and Lake would have been happy, simply that his relationship with this other sex goddess of the period would have seen a reversal of roles. Rita Hayworth, despite her show biz family and other troubles, managed to come to maturity a shy but fairly stable individual. Veronica Lake was the daughter of a wandering sailor, grew up in a broken home, and was diagnosed, early on, as suffering from borderline schizophrenia. That was why colleagues and friends could be charmed by her vivacity, intelligence and charm, one day, and be rebuffed the next day by what Eddie Bracken, often a co-star, called "The Bitch."
The missing piece of this blonde puzzle came to me when Andre De Toth was honored at the San Francisco Film Festival, in 1997. A big-looking one-eyed man, he often was sitting in a wheelchair roundabout the refreshment area of the Kabuki Theater, signing autographs on two memoirs he had recently completed. The day of his formal public appearance, he hoistd himself up, and with the help of a cane, lurched down to a seat in the front of the theater.
De Toth spoke generously of all he had seen in his life. Son of a Hungarian Cavalry officer, a documentary photographer for the Wehrmacht during the 1939 Invasion of Poland, a cameraman for Alexander Korda after he fled to England, then Hollywood.
He spoke of marrying Veronica Lake when he was 29, making pictures for her, how bright and beautiful she was, how they worked out their problems, and then his voice turned bitter. He said she took her roles too seriously, and "got in with the wrong crowd." Though I could find no reference to the subject in his written memoirs later, he added one word: "Heroin."
If you examine the "serious" films she played in during her later career, including the final one, FOOTSTEPS IN THE SNOW, you notice how many references there are to narcotics. If you've known heroin addicts, put that together with those bad teeth you mention, and you may have completed the puzzle.
To end on a brighter bit, I came across this factoid:
Jessica Rabbit, the 'toon bombshell in WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT (perhaps a reference to Agatha Christie's "Who Murdered Roger Ackroyd," a Herman J. Mankiewicz Mercury Theater on the Air Adaptation), is said to be a combination of Rita Hayworth and Veronica Lake. The red hair and bodacious figure of Rita, and at least, the peekaboo hair style of the tiny Veronica.
Perhaps they are both with Welles in Toonland.
Glenn
-
Glenn Anders - Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2003 12:50 pm
- Location: San Francisco
by Tony » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:06 am
Mido: I've always lked Greg Peck and thought he was underrated as an actor because of his lack of aggression; he's miscast as Ahab, but I like the chances he takes in the role; Welles had the raw power, the gravitas, for that role. They shouldn't have had him play Mapple, because nothing in the picture rises to that power again.
- Tony
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:44 pm
by Alan Brody » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:48 am
James Stewart was miscast in Rope. Could Welles have pulled off the part of Rupert Cadell?
I disagree that Stewart was miscast as Rupert, and I can't imagine Welles being more effective in the role. Of course Welles did play the lawyer of the two murderers in Compulsion, a similar but lesser film then Rope. One of Welles's better acting roles, tough.
In case this hasn't been mentioned yet, Welles was offered the lead role in The Uninvited, playing a murderous radio star. The part, in fact, was written for him. Claude Rains eventually played the role in the 1948 film, strangely right around the time of the Black Dahlia murder.
Wasn't Welles also offered the lead in John Ford's The Last Hurrah? Why he turned that down is hard to imagine.
- Alan Brody
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:14 am
by mido505 » Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:06 pm
Alan:
According to Welles, he would have worked for Ford for nothing, but his agent asked for too high a fee and Ford, rather than countering, never said another word and offered the part to Spencer Tracy.
Tony:
Yeah, sometimes a miscast actor can really work because of the choices he makes attempting to overcome the miscasting. Peck delivers some of those speeches beautifully, and his furious "from hell's heart I stab at thee, for hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee, thou damned whale" always sends chills down my spine. Welles was so nervous before shooting the Father Mapple sermon that he downed a bottle of brandy, and then did the speech in one take! I wonder if watching Orson do that scene gave Peck ideas on how to approach Ahab?
According to Welles, he would have worked for Ford for nothing, but his agent asked for too high a fee and Ford, rather than countering, never said another word and offered the part to Spencer Tracy.
Tony:
Yeah, sometimes a miscast actor can really work because of the choices he makes attempting to overcome the miscasting. Peck delivers some of those speeches beautifully, and his furious "from hell's heart I stab at thee, for hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee, thou damned whale" always sends chills down my spine. Welles was so nervous before shooting the Father Mapple sermon that he downed a bottle of brandy, and then did the speech in one take! I wonder if watching Orson do that scene gave Peck ideas on how to approach Ahab?
- mido505
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:24 pm
by Tony » Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:13 am
Alan:
I've always felt he perfect actor for the role of the irresponsible/naiive professor in Rope would be James Mason, and recently Farley Granger said the same thing in an interview, so I must be right!! Poor Rope: that terribly unwieldy camera concept and Stewart terrribly miscast: it could have been another Hitchcock masterpiece. I still like it, though, for the fine performances of Granger and Dall, both of whom happen/happened to be gay, as were Leopold and Loeb, the characters they were 'playing', (not that that's important, of course, unless you're a method actor). Perhaps the character of the professor was supposed to be gay as well; Mason could easily have implied that: Stewart never could have. I feel reverberations of Rope in Big Brass Ring as well as The Other Side of the Wind: I guess it's the gay/svengali aspect. In 48 I believe Welles would also have been a very good professor, but perhaps not as fine as Mason.
I've always felt he perfect actor for the role of the irresponsible/naiive professor in Rope would be James Mason, and recently Farley Granger said the same thing in an interview, so I must be right!! Poor Rope: that terribly unwieldy camera concept and Stewart terrribly miscast: it could have been another Hitchcock masterpiece. I still like it, though, for the fine performances of Granger and Dall, both of whom happen/happened to be gay, as were Leopold and Loeb, the characters they were 'playing', (not that that's important, of course, unless you're a method actor). Perhaps the character of the professor was supposed to be gay as well; Mason could easily have implied that: Stewart never could have. I feel reverberations of Rope in Big Brass Ring as well as The Other Side of the Wind: I guess it's the gay/svengali aspect. In 48 I believe Welles would also have been a very good professor, but perhaps not as fine as Mason.
- Tony
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:44 pm
by mido505 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:43 pm
My understanding is that the character of the professor in Rope, Rupert, was to have been coded gay. Cary Grant was Hitchcock's first choice for the part, which, given the rumors that have always swirled around Grant, would have been interesting casting. Gay actor Montgomery Clift was Hitch's first choice for Brandon, but he turned down the role due to its homosexual content. There is a dream cast for you - Cary Grant, Montgomery Clift, and Farley Granger, three of the handsomest men in the movies at the time, and all slightly resembling one another. Clift also turned down the part that ultimately went to William Holden in Sunset Boulevard, and he was Elizabeth Taylor's first choice to play the repressed homosexual Major Weldon Penderton in Huston's Reflections in a Golden Eye, but died before shooting commenced.
Tony, I never thought of James Mason as Rupert, but it is perfect casting. Mason would have got that silky, sexually ambiguous perversity down pat. Interestingly, I've always thought that Mason's character in North by Northwest, Phillip Vandamm, was coded gay, with Martin Landau's Leonard as his minion.
Tony, I never thought of James Mason as Rupert, but it is perfect casting. Mason would have got that silky, sexually ambiguous perversity down pat. Interestingly, I've always thought that Mason's character in North by Northwest, Phillip Vandamm, was coded gay, with Martin Landau's Leonard as his minion.
- mido505
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:24 pm
by tonyw » Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:17 pm
Mason's character is definitely bi-sexual and recognizes Leonard's sexual jealousy of Eve which he describes as "feminine intuition." In a more liberal climate Mason could have appeared in more challenging roles than most of his Hollywood career allowed him to.
- tonyw
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:33 pm
by Alan Brody » Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:36 am
I think Rope is one of Hitchcock's masterpieces, despite it's occasionally clunky attempt to create the illusion of being all in one shot. For my money, the sheer audacity of the attempt far overrides the minor flaws in the execution, which I think is otherwise brilliant for the most part.
Also, the fact that Jimmy Stewart doesn't 'read gay' doesn't necessarily mean that he's miscast. Even if it had not been downplayed by Hitchcock, the homosexual subtext would still be secondary to the central theme that these extreme Darwinists feel they are entitled to kill mainly because of their intellectual superiority. This psychotically sophomoric notion is one that Stewart actually fits quite well into because of the conflict at the time between Stewart's naive, boyish pre-war film persona and his post-war persona which had begun to aquire a darker, more cynical edge, which you can see in It's A Wonderful Life as well as Rope, and which would be well-used in the Anthony Mann westerns.
I think Stewart does a good job of conveying the idea that Rupert is slightly sophomoric himself, and therefore potentially sympathetic to the philosophical idea behind the murder. In fact, he seems to be playing a sadistic game throughout most of the film, an intellectual chess game with the two killers that he starts up immediately, or gets drawn into, because his instinct tells him right off the bat that something is wrong with this party. Although he doesn't know what, he is obsessed with finding out, just as Brandon has invited him to the party in the first place because he is obsessed with beating Rupert at this game, and receiving the massive adrenalin rush that comes from 'getting away with it' under the most daring circumstances.
Of course, when this game is lost he goes to Plan B, which entails persuading Rupert to play on his side of the board. I think it's more fascinating to watch someone of a well-established moral rightousness like Jimmy Stewart get tempted by evil, then it would be to watch actors like James Mason or Welles get tempted, since those actors already had somewhat dark and tragic personas to begin with. I'm sure each would have been good Ruperts, although I think Joseph Cotton probably would have been a more likely choice then Welles, especially since he had already worked with Hitchcock. Nevetheless, I thoroughly enjoy Jimmy Stewart in the role every time I watch the film, which is one of my favorites.
Also, the fact that Jimmy Stewart doesn't 'read gay' doesn't necessarily mean that he's miscast. Even if it had not been downplayed by Hitchcock, the homosexual subtext would still be secondary to the central theme that these extreme Darwinists feel they are entitled to kill mainly because of their intellectual superiority. This psychotically sophomoric notion is one that Stewart actually fits quite well into because of the conflict at the time between Stewart's naive, boyish pre-war film persona and his post-war persona which had begun to aquire a darker, more cynical edge, which you can see in It's A Wonderful Life as well as Rope, and which would be well-used in the Anthony Mann westerns.
I think Stewart does a good job of conveying the idea that Rupert is slightly sophomoric himself, and therefore potentially sympathetic to the philosophical idea behind the murder. In fact, he seems to be playing a sadistic game throughout most of the film, an intellectual chess game with the two killers that he starts up immediately, or gets drawn into, because his instinct tells him right off the bat that something is wrong with this party. Although he doesn't know what, he is obsessed with finding out, just as Brandon has invited him to the party in the first place because he is obsessed with beating Rupert at this game, and receiving the massive adrenalin rush that comes from 'getting away with it' under the most daring circumstances.
Of course, when this game is lost he goes to Plan B, which entails persuading Rupert to play on his side of the board. I think it's more fascinating to watch someone of a well-established moral rightousness like Jimmy Stewart get tempted by evil, then it would be to watch actors like James Mason or Welles get tempted, since those actors already had somewhat dark and tragic personas to begin with. I'm sure each would have been good Ruperts, although I think Joseph Cotton probably would have been a more likely choice then Welles, especially since he had already worked with Hitchcock. Nevetheless, I thoroughly enjoy Jimmy Stewart in the role every time I watch the film, which is one of my favorites.
- Alan Brody
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:14 am
by Tony » Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:30 am
Welll Allan, you've eloquently expressed your opinion, but personally I just can't see Stewart as an intellectual professor, as his entire career was based , in a way, on a kind of anti-intellectualism which I personally find very appealing, but wrong for the Rupert character. Mason (and many other actors) could easily project an amoral relativism, but Jimmy Stewart? I think not: this was an actor wo screamed moral self-righteousness (in the best sense) in every role he ever played, except perhaps The Flight of the Pheonix, which most people didn't like him in. Rupert has a 'sophistication' which is dangerous in its amorality, in its "uberman" notions, and Stewart's entire career was based on the opposite principles.
However, I think you've given Rope the best defense it has ever had, and I, like you, always enjoy it, even with what I perceive are it's serious defects.
However, I think you've given Rope the best defense it has ever had, and I, like you, always enjoy it, even with what I perceive are it's serious defects.
- Tony
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:44 pm
by mido505 » Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:52 am
Alan:
I am with you that Rope is one of Hitchcock's masterpieces; I am a big fan, and find it far superior to Vertigo, a great idea for a film that is, for me, ruined by its casting. But I have always found Stewart problematic as Rupert, not because he fails to convey the gay subtext, but because he fails to convey the intellectual and seductively evil one. I like his playfulness, and your observation that he is "psychotically sophomoric" is apt. I like the attempt, and there is a lot to enjoy in Stewarts take on the role, but there is just too much plain-spoken all-American Midwestern horse sense in Stewart's persona for me to get past. My understanding is that Rupert's entire volte-face at the climax of Rope was rewritten to better accomodate the familiar Stewart image.
I've not seen the Stewart/Mann collaborations although, coincidentally, inspired by this thread and my recent viewings of El Cid and Fall of the Roman Empire, I put them all in my Netflix queu a couple of days ago. However, I suspect that the deepening and darkening of Stewart's persona in those films is a variation on an existing theme, not a total transformation. I look forward to finding out.
Perhaps it was the times. In 1948, you didn't tinker too much with a star's public image. Ironically, Hitch led the charge a decade later with Psycho, turning boy-next-door Anthony Perkins into a psychotic momma's boy and murdering sweetheart Janet Leigh on screen. Another decade hence, Henry Fonda and Sergio Leone would together create one of the great monsters of cinema - the cold, blue-eyed child killer Frank in Once Upon a Time in the West.
I am with you that Rope is one of Hitchcock's masterpieces; I am a big fan, and find it far superior to Vertigo, a great idea for a film that is, for me, ruined by its casting. But I have always found Stewart problematic as Rupert, not because he fails to convey the gay subtext, but because he fails to convey the intellectual and seductively evil one. I like his playfulness, and your observation that he is "psychotically sophomoric" is apt. I like the attempt, and there is a lot to enjoy in Stewarts take on the role, but there is just too much plain-spoken all-American Midwestern horse sense in Stewart's persona for me to get past. My understanding is that Rupert's entire volte-face at the climax of Rope was rewritten to better accomodate the familiar Stewart image.
I've not seen the Stewart/Mann collaborations although, coincidentally, inspired by this thread and my recent viewings of El Cid and Fall of the Roman Empire, I put them all in my Netflix queu a couple of days ago. However, I suspect that the deepening and darkening of Stewart's persona in those films is a variation on an existing theme, not a total transformation. I look forward to finding out.
Perhaps it was the times. In 1948, you didn't tinker too much with a star's public image. Ironically, Hitch led the charge a decade later with Psycho, turning boy-next-door Anthony Perkins into a psychotic momma's boy and murdering sweetheart Janet Leigh on screen. Another decade hence, Henry Fonda and Sergio Leone would together create one of the great monsters of cinema - the cold, blue-eyed child killer Frank in Once Upon a Time in the West.
- mido505
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:24 pm
by Tony » Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:41 pm
Now hold on Mido: Rope is a masterpiece far superior to Vertigo, Hitch's universally acknowledged masterpiece and the picture hottest on the tail of Kane in the Sights and Sounds poll? 
Well I'm sure it's never been called that before.. Rope has always been problematic, and has been usually critically lambasted on many counts. I don't even think Hitch was happy with it: certainly none of the actors were. This is like saying Arkadin is a better picture than Kane (or the Rake's Progress is a better opera than the Marriage of Figaro ). I mean you can say it but...
And just what do you find wrong with the casting of Vertigo? I hope you're not going to say that the originally cast but dreary and sexless Vera Miles would have been better than the superlative Kim Novak!
Well I'm sure it's never been called that before.. Rope has always been problematic, and has been usually critically lambasted on many counts. I don't even think Hitch was happy with it: certainly none of the actors were. This is like saying Arkadin is a better picture than Kane (or the Rake's Progress is a better opera than the Marriage of Figaro ). I mean you can say it but...
And just what do you find wrong with the casting of Vertigo? I hope you're not going to say that the originally cast but dreary and sexless Vera Miles would have been better than the superlative Kim Novak!
- Tony
- Wellesnet Legend
- Posts: 1014
- Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:44 pm
by mido505 » Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:04 pm
Now Tony, don't get your dander up. 
I am fully aware that Vertigo is now generally acknowledged to be Hitchcock's masterpiece, but that is a revisionist opinion that I do not share.
Like I wrote, I think Vertigo is a great idea for a picture that fails in execution because of casting issues. I simply cannot stand Kim Novak in the movie; I think she gives a bad, amateurish performance; is completely unmagnetic; and spends most of the narrative looking like she has a wad of gum in her mouth. In a movie about a man's obsession with a woman, I would say that a star completely lacking in charisma is a problem. Had Grace Kelly been the star of Vertigo, it would have gone into the stratosphere.
If you really want to know how I feel, I think Tippi Hedren would have done a better job than Novak.
Jimmy Stewart gives a good performance, but I can think of better choices, for example Montgomery Clift. Or imagine Henry Fonda in Vertigo, with Stewart taking over The Wrong Man, and you have two movies that would have been immeasurably better, in my humble opinion.
Vertigo was a critical and popular flop upon release, so I think at least a few people may agree with my take on it. Hitchcock himself hated Novak - when asked how he liked working with her he said "well, at least I got to throw her in the water!" Hitch also blamed Stewart's age, of all things, for Vertigo's failure to connect with audiences; this led to Hitchcock giving the role of Roger Thornhill in North by Northwest to Cary Grant, despite Stewart practically begging for it.
I'm an odd guy, Tony, what can I say?
I am fully aware that Vertigo is now generally acknowledged to be Hitchcock's masterpiece, but that is a revisionist opinion that I do not share.
Like I wrote, I think Vertigo is a great idea for a picture that fails in execution because of casting issues. I simply cannot stand Kim Novak in the movie; I think she gives a bad, amateurish performance; is completely unmagnetic; and spends most of the narrative looking like she has a wad of gum in her mouth. In a movie about a man's obsession with a woman, I would say that a star completely lacking in charisma is a problem. Had Grace Kelly been the star of Vertigo, it would have gone into the stratosphere.
If you really want to know how I feel, I think Tippi Hedren would have done a better job than Novak.
Jimmy Stewart gives a good performance, but I can think of better choices, for example Montgomery Clift. Or imagine Henry Fonda in Vertigo, with Stewart taking over The Wrong Man, and you have two movies that would have been immeasurably better, in my humble opinion.
Vertigo was a critical and popular flop upon release, so I think at least a few people may agree with my take on it. Hitchcock himself hated Novak - when asked how he liked working with her he said "well, at least I got to throw her in the water!" Hitch also blamed Stewart's age, of all things, for Vertigo's failure to connect with audiences; this led to Hitchcock giving the role of Roger Thornhill in North by Northwest to Cary Grant, despite Stewart practically begging for it.
I'm an odd guy, Tony, what can I say?
Last edited by mido505 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- mido505
- Wellesnet Veteran
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:24 pm
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest