PDA

View Full Version : THE DISCREET CHARM OF GEORGE CUKOR (Film Society of Lincoln Center Dec. '13-Jan. '14)



Chris Knipp
01-10-2014, 10:11 PM
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/829/7u8n.jpg

The Discreet Charm of George Cukor
Film Society of Lincoln Center

The Film Society of Lincoln Center celebrated the end of 2013 with the holiday glitter of an impressive, 26-day, 50-film retrospective of "The Discreet Charm of George Cukor" running from December 13 through January 7, and with a handsome little brochure. Cukor, a New Yorker born of Hungarian Jews who began as a Broadway director then moved to Hollywood, is noted for his taste and elegance, his fine work with actresses, ability to find good scripts and focus on comedies and literary adaptations. The question that emerges is: what really was Cukor's most characteristic work? There may be no obvious answer. See the NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/movies/the-discreet-charm-of-george-cukor-at-lincoln-center.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=nytimesarts) on this survey by Stephen Farber.

Simply as a figure of Hollywood society the pretty obviously yet discreetly gay Cukor was of immense importance. His stylish house and garden were the headquarters for glittering social gatherings where prominent members of the gay subculture partied with their latest boyfriends. But there gathered also plenty of (mainly) straight Hollywood aristocracy including the likes of Hepburn, Tracy, Bogard, Bacall, Fairbanks, Crawford, Dietrich, Olivier, Leigh, Judy Garland, Noel Coward, Cole Porter -- American movie society of the classic era just doesn't get any more glamorous and smart. And there were famous writers, Maugham, Dreiser, Huxley -- see the excellent, well-written Wikipedia biography of the filmmaker here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cukor#Personal_life)

The films commented on below chosen randomly and according to taste from the Lincoln Center series provide a a survey of Cukor and his significance, but remember that his oeuvre spans half a century and many genres. Notables give their Cukor faves on the series' FSLC website (http://www.filmlinc.com/daily/entry/george-cukor-films-favorites-film-society-2013) and you'll see they strike no common chord either. Yet reviewing Cukor's career one feels he truly spans and reflects Hollywood in its great days when it was the nation's and the world's dream factory. I discuss my viewings below in the order in which I saw them.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/21/fj6q.png

Rich and Famous, USA, 1981. in Technicolor. It iis basically a soap opera about two female Smith college students (Jacqueline Bisset and Candice Bergen), whose lives we follow from 1959 until 1981. Both have success writing fiction, but their private lives are a disaster, except for their friendship. There are some very daring scenes between Bisset and a couple of her lovers, young dark lean sexy guys (one of whom, a street hustler picked up by Bisset's character, strips on camera), that almost certainly reflect indirectly the director's gay fantasies. It was Cukor's last film, so Bisset and Bergen were his latest, last "girls." This must have been hard to find a print of, since the one that had to be shown was one with French subtitles. Bisset and Bergen are both glossy, luscious babes in this film, Bisset's character distinctly more boldly conceived (independent, sexually experimental) and interesting. Meg Ryan debuts as Bergen's daughter, but it's an unimportant role. There was controversy over Pauline Kael's attacking this film as reflecting a "gay sensibility" and a closeted one, which caused gay readers to reject Kael; but the street hustler sequence does seem very gay, and so does the treatment of Bisset's relationship with the much younger Rolling Stone writer. Cukor has moved into the world of glossy magazines and though this may not seem quite an Eighties film, there are four-letter words never used in his work of earlier decades.

The Marrying Kind, USA, 1952, is a tale of the trials and tribulations of a working class marriage. Judy Holliday and Aldo Ray are the young couple, who relate their problems to a sympathetic divorce judge in flashbacks. The judge obviously aims to talk them out of splitting when they've seen how much of life they've shared by now. It is always a pleasure to watch Holliday on screen, but the story itself has many unbelievable moments and she is given perhaps more shouting than acting to do. This was Aldo Ray's film debut, and his macho physicality and distinctive rough voice are put to good use. A very disturbing tragedy is passed over too quickly, and there is a notable condescension toward these people in the writing of Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon, though it also anticipates the sympathetic TV-derived working class realism of Paddy Chayefsky and Marty. The Marrying Kind is an odd but interesting period piece, transitional in nature.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/801/pstl.jpg

Edward, My Son, UK, 1949, stars Spencer Tracey as a Canadian transplanted early to England who becomes rich and titled while committing arson and causing two suicides. He will do anything to get and stay rich and to insure the comfort of his badly spoiled and wayward son Edward (never seen on screen), even buy his stodgy, snobbish school and threaten to dismiss the headmaster if he doesn't tow the line. His wife (Deborah Kerr) can't divorce him so she becomes an alcoholic and grows rapidly old and dies. Perhaps ironic that Tracy is not the drinker in this. The actor is a little too likable to make this evil man convincing or give him real edge. This is written like a conventional play of the period, literate, well paced, and a succession of good, big scenes, each divided by periods of years covering a 23-year span in all, and is taken from a drama by Robert Morley and Noel Langley. Handsome black and white photography by Freddie Young (who shot Lawrence of Arabia and Docoter Zhivago for David Lean and was to shoot Cukior's Bhowani Junction) and shown in this series in an immaculate black and white print.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/208/ti6t.jpg

Dinner at Eight, USA, 1933. Cukor was recruited by Hollywood because he had become a successful Broadway director and it was known he knew how to handle people talking. Some of the truly cinematic elements (as seen in Eisenstein, German expressionism), as seen here,l took second place for a while. The big artificially constructed, roofless interiors look very much like those used in silent films, and this came in only the fourth year of sound movies. This is a conventional stage play by George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber that has been elaborated considerably in the screen version, with little scenes to further develop individual characters, all of whom are invited to or giving a fancy dinner party that evening. The expansion causes the piece to feel like it's pulled in too many directions. But the glittering, talented all star cast compensates. There are great turns by Wallace Beery, Lionel and John Barrymore, Marie Dressler, and a pungent Jean Harlow, wallowing in tons of white fur even in bed. John Barrymore has a pathetic "downfall" scene as an aging actor, and Lionel is sad too as shipping line owner whose company is failing (a depression era element). Jean Harlow is the defiantly lowbrow wife of a nouveau riche boor. The hostelss (Billie Burke) is a satire on American snobbism: the sole purpose of her party evaporates when a pair of titled British aristocrats cancel and go to Florida. (Cukor's Anglophilia and old Hollywood's involve a love-hate relationship.) This print was old unrestored film footage and one or two of the reels were in shaky condition.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/59/ri21.jpg

A Double Life, USA, 1947 is a star vehicle for British-born Ronald Colman about a well-known New York actor who goes off the deep end when he plays dark roles too long, and a three-year run as Othello leads him into madness, murder, and suicide. Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon's first collaboration with Cukor as writers, and for his multi-faceted performance, debonair, tormented, and Shakespearean, Colman got his only Best Actor Oscar. Edmond O'Brien and Signe Hasso have key supporting roles and Shelley Winters is seen in her first screen role as a feisty, risk-taking waitress. Betsy Blair gets a walk-on. Luminous cinematography by Milton Krasner. A Double Life reflects the period's obsession with Freudian psychology and surrealism, but Kanin and Gordon seem most in their element in scenes of newsmen and cops who talk in tough-guy B-picture lingo, as does Shelley Winter's waitress ("How's the chicken cacciatore?" -- "It's your stomach.")

Gaslight, UK, 1944, with its opening train scene, foggy London, and search for a homicidal crook, is material Hitchcock dealt with in his silent period (and this again shows Cukor's Anglophile side). But this has Charles Boyer as a creepy, unctuous, sadistic pianist who marries Ingrid Bergman's young unmotivated opera singer and takes her from Italy to live in the London town house she inherited when her aunt was murdered there a decade earlier. This, like A Double Life, is a Forties psychological thriller, because Boyer tries to drive Bergman mad or think she's mad. Joseph Cotton, only slightly improbably (he never lacks confidence), is a Scotland Yard inspector who's suspicious. Dame May Whitty is a charmingly nosy neighbor, and 18-year-old Angela Lansbury is excellent as a flirtatious young maidservant. There is much that is unbelievable here, but Cukor gets great performances out of the cast. Boyer may rarely have been so creepy or Bergman so hysterical, but it's all so elegantly staged it avoids lurid melodrama. You can see the finale coming from miles off, but still there is suspense. Wonder what Hitch could have done with it.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/690/wn8q.jpg

Let's Make Love, USA, 1960 is a musical comedy in which billionaire Yves Montand falls in love with song-and-dance girl Marilyn Monroe after seeing her do a spirited rendition of Cole Porter's "My Heart Belongs to Daddy." Coming to shut down the show because it makes fun of him, Montand winds up hiring Bing Crosby, Milton Berle, and Gene Kelly to up his skill level so he can be in the show and get close to Marilyn. Popular British song and dance man Frankie Vaughan plays the show's male lead. Montand and Monroe have good chemistry, which their resulting off screen affair bears out. The show numbers sparkle, the small combo music adding a jazz feel, but the movie was a flop. It was originally conceived differently, with Cyd Charisse and a non-singer such as Cary Grant or Gregory Peck. It may fail because it's neither fully rom-com or nor musical. Arthur Miller, then Marilyn's husband, did some rewriting to make her role more prominent, which may help explain why the film feels a tad long. This seems the kind of thing Cukor was meant to do, and shows his light touch. But this time, as could happen in the workaholic push of endless studio work, he delivered polish but fell short of the brilliance of his best work. It seems a pity it was Marilyn's last musical performance; but she was to be in only two more films before her premature demise in 1962.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/41/dzct.jpg

A Star Is Born, USA, 1954, is a musical melodrama and a process story, of the overlapping rise and fall of two stars, Norman Main (James Mason), the alcoholic British actor who discovers Vicki Lester (Judy Garland), a talented little singer/dancer/comedienne with a minor band. This classic is the ultimate version of a story first done by Cukor in 1932 as What Price Hollywood? (Mary Evans, Max Carey), then redone by William A. Wellman in 1937 with Janet Gaynor and Fredric March. Moss hart wrote the later screenplay, with new songs by Harold Arlen and Ira Gershwin. Garland got a Best Actress nomination. It's a big comeback for the difficult star, who hadn't been in a movie in four years. This is a depiction of the merciless Hollywood studio system, which melded actors, especially female, to its will, and chewed them up and spit them out at its will. There seems little understanding of alcoholism or addiction and its treatment; the disease is seen by some characters, especially the brutal studio publicity man Matt Libby (Jack Carson), simply as a despicable character flaw. Vicki is Norman's clueless enabler, whose sentimental devotion doesn't help him. His demise occurs glamorously at sea outside the couple's modern Malibu mansion. Nearly 3 hours and one intermission, with parts early on where the visuals are missing. Shown in original 35mm print form.

Les Girls, UK, 1957, FSLC blurb: "Hailed by Andrew Sarris as a musical Rashomon, Cukor’s glorious CinemaScope bauble stars Gene Kelly as a dance troupe impresario who gives one of three differing accounts when one of his dancers accuses another of libeling her in a tell-all memoir" (series blurb) -- told from the viewpoints of three characters, Kelly's and that of Mitzi Gaynor, Kay Kendall, and Taina Elg, his three main dancing girls. But this musical with a courtroom drama narrative link gets to be a bore, the Rashomon comparison really pushing it, even though the performers are talented. It's too elaborate and pointless. It feels like when Cukor switched to color, his work deteriorated.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/6/yx1d.jpg

Born Yesterday, USA, 1950, with Broderick Crawford and William Holden, is the quinessential Judy Holiday vehicle, in which her timing and movements are riveting and perfect as a naive uneducated chorus girl living with a crooked gangsterish rich man (Crawford), who hires a suave journalist (Holden) to "educate" her. She becomes smart and independent. It's a perfect role for Holiday, who was super-smart in real life, but played the roles of dumb blondes. And she got the Oscar for it. This is as good as Cukor gets and was the highlight of my selections.

It Should Happen to You, USA, 1954, again a Judy Holiday masterpiece, just one step down from Born Yesterday, and the debut of Jack Lemmon, who plays a struggling documentary filmmaker who falls for the small town girl in New York, Gladys Glover, who takes her earnings of $1,000 and spends it hiring a billboard just with her name on it to make herself famous. Peter Lawford plays his ideal role, an elegant bounder, who wants the Columbus Circle billboard for one of his companies and so arranges for Gladys to get more billboards and become truly famous. A prescient vision of branding and product placement and Warhol's 15 minutes of fame idea.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/36/ug3n.jpg

Heller in Pink Tights, USA, 1960. This movie about a theater troupe in the Wild West who get mixed up with a crooked town and a desperado, with Anthony Quinn in charge of the company and Sofia Loren the star, is a mixture that doesn't work. The Western elements never get going and the theater troupe story is artificial. Quinn is in good form, and Cukor got Loren to lose so much weight that in a tight bodice her waist narrows to a pinpoint. She looks fabulous, and Quinn oozes charisma as a thin echo of his role in Fellini's La Strada six years earlier. Maybe Jim Jarmusch could have done something with this, slow it all down, in the vein of Dead Man; or a German director? Again Cukor is trying outside his usual limits a bit and there is quality in the production, but it's a disappointment after so many good films from this director.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/14/uwt1.jpg

The Actress, USA, 1953,"is a charming tale of a young girl, wanting to leave her small town to become an actress on stage in New York at the turn of the twentieth century. It stars an adorable Jean Simmons, with Spencer Tracy and Teresa Wright as her working class parents. The acting is superb."--Aubrey Reuben in "On the Town with Aubrey Reuben." The screenplay is by Ruth Gordon and describes her own early life as a girl in Massachusetts dying to go to Boston to become an actress. Her former seaman father (Tracy) opposes it but relents and even gives her his most prized possession to finance her start. There is more focus on the father than on the autobiographical element, for some reason. Anthony Perkins has a minor role as Ruth's suitor who is a Harvard student and owns a steam car, but gets passed up for the acting career: this was Perkinn's screen debut and he charms, if only briefly. The film belongs to the gruff Tracy and to a lesser extent to Simmons, who is sweet and winning.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/14/tz4b.png

Bhowani Junction, USA, 1956. John Masters' novel about racial identity in India centers on an Anglo-Indian woman played by Ava Gardner torn between three men, one Indian, one like her, and a haughty Brit played by costar Steward Granger, at the transition time just before petition and the end of the Raj. In Technicolor and Cinemascope this is again shot by master dp Freddie Young and was shot on location in Pakistan and is full of color, though some main roles are played by Englishman in blackface. “It was a different kind of experience for me,” Cukor said of the film; "It excited me—and then we had a bad preview." So the film was brutally cut to tone down Ava Gardner's role and the political content. But this still has elements that will remind contemporary viewers of Masterpiece Theater miniseries like "The Jewel in the Crown," with more intense personalities and more star power. Was the fact that Granger was gay an element in his casting by the gay cukor? Ultimately quite a conventional film but a visually handsome and lively one. Ava Gardner was a diva, and Steward Granger was a glamorous male lead with a British gloss.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/850/ts7d.jpg

Holiday, USA, 1938. This sparkling drama about the enterprising 30-year-old Johnnie Case (Cary Grant) who finds himself betrothed to a very rich girl (Doris Nolan) but is drawn to her eccentric sister Linda (Katherine Hepburn), the latter showing off what Melissa Anderson in her recent piece for the Voice (http://www.villagevoice.com/2013-12-11/film/george-cukor-film-society-of-lincoln-center/), "The Star Maker, 50 Years of George Cukor, calls Hepburn's "command of fierce fragility" in her fourth role for Cukor (of nine) and second with Cary Grant. The theme is the very American conflict of the pursuit of money versus living and being oneself, and the film uses typical Thirties movie themes of snobbism, glitz, party-giving and an ocean voyage in a fresh, thought-provoking way that makes this one of the director's best early works. With Edward Everett Horton and Jean Dixon as Professor and Mrs. Potter, the sympathetic friends who help Johnnie and Linda decide what to do, and Lew Ayres as the sister's equally sympathetic alcoholic brother, Ned.

Adam's Rib, USA, 1949. One of Cukor's several collaborations with the husband and wife writing team of Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon, this dramatizes the battle of the sexes through the courtroom trial of a woman accused of attempting to murder her adulterous husband and transcends its subject and time through the exceptional performances of real-life couple Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy as the opposing lawyers, he for the husband, she for the wife. The way Tracy and Hepburn, perhaps the most famous acting couple in Hollywood history, play off each other, goes far beyond mere "chemistry," they make the feel of what it is to be a loving couple so palpable. One would be happy just watching them squabble and chat. Add that the accused wife is Judy Holiday and the husband is Tom Ewell and you have a classic in which George Cukor had only to keep the pace going and stay out of the way. Some think this the best Tracy-Hepburn screen duet: but there were so many! David Wayne shines a bit awkwardly as the professional song-and-dance man neighbor Kip Lurie who composes a song, "Farewell, Amanda" in Hepburn's honor, actually written by Cole Porter. Kip flirts continually with Amanda, yet he has a moment that distinctly hints the character is gay.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/534/7p3x.jpg

My Fair Lady, USA, UK, 1964. Cukor's version of the classic Lerner and Loewe musical based on Shaw's Pygmalion is one of his most popular films and an Oscar winner yet not really one of his best. Pauline Kael's criticisms in 5001 NIghts at the Movies are true. The overlong film (170 minutes) "staggers along" and "seems to go on for about 45 minutes after the story is finished." Rex Harrison's performance as Henry Higgins is a bit wan from playing the role on stage over 1,000 times. Marni Nixon's dubbing of Audrey Hepburn's singing is a "dreadfully impersonal" voice and Hepburn is "affecting" as Eliza Doolittle, but still "totally unconvincing as a guttersnipe." Further as others have pointed out Hepburn doesn't properly capture either Eliza's original Cockney accent or the proper British accent she is supposed to learn, as Julie Andrews did much better on stage in the original musical and Wendy Hiller did still better in the 1938 Anthony Asquith movie of the play. Nenetheless we can be grateful to have this grand record of the musical. Cecil Beaton's designs of the crowd set pieces are surpassingly elegant and handsome even if they add to the lumbering formality of the film because they seem like tableaux. Stanley Holloway as Eliza's dad is as sprightly as he ever was and the well-born and Eton-educated Jeremy Brett is charming and romantic as Freddie, the young aristo who falls in love with Eliza. And for a change, Brett is one who has a good singing voice.

cinemabon
01-11-2014, 04:22 AM
I enjoyed your retrospective on Cukor. I can think of a dozen films by Cukor including "The Women," "The Philadelphia Story," "Adam's Rib," and "My Fair Lady" (Katherine Hepburn being in two of them) that I've thoroughly enjoyed as well. The script to "Born Yesterday" is one of the best comedies Judy Holliday ever made. She was a close friend of Garson Kanin. He wrote the script with her in mind. The scene with her doing the cards and the tea and her little nervous bits that drove Broderick Crawford mad was all Judy. Cukor only had to sit back and let her run with it. As to your claim that Stewart Granger was gay I found astounding. He had an intense marriage to Jean Simmons that started as a torrid love affair and produced one of his four children. He may have been bi-sexual (although I never heard that either) but he had numerous affairs with his leading actresses, including a famous one with Ava Gardner. If Granger was gay, being straight was the greatest acting role of his life.

Chris Knipp
01-11-2014, 01:41 PM
Cukor is fun, isn't he? Such a survey of Holllywood history lies there.

Those Cukor movies you mention are great ones and would have to be in a true survey. I like them, especially THE PHILADELPHIA STORY, except I've never seen MY FAIR LADY, which I should, though Pauline Kael knocked it. I saw the PYGMALION film of 1938, which may be more admired.

As for Stewart Granger's gayness, bisexual might be a better word. That's somewhat a coverrup term though, less used in our more out of the closet times. But I was kind of confusing Stewart with Farley, of STRANGERS ON A TRAIN and ROPE. Farley was the one time lover of Lowell Nesbitt, the most famous artist to come out of my alma mater, Towson High, whose most famous grad now is the Olympian great Michael Phelps. Who, I'm guessing, is totally straight.

Chris Knipp
01-11-2014, 02:03 PM
Garson Kanin may have originally conceived BORN YESTERDAY not as a vehicle for Judy HOliday but to expose corruption in Washington, the theme of the play apart from its rom-com element. The film of the play may well have been tweaked in the making to suit Judy, who dominates it so beautifully, but originally the play starred Jean Arthur, and Holiday was called in to replace her on Broadway at the last minute. So clearly Kanin did not create it for Holiday. See here (http://www.shawfest.com/assets/guides/Shaw_Festival_Study_Guide_Born_Yesterday.pdf) for a stage history that gives these details.

Chris Knipp
01-11-2014, 02:09 PM
When Michael Wilding dragged his feet about becoming her second husband, Elizabeth grew impatient and began dating Tab Hunter. But soon Hunter dumped the gorgeous actress in favor of Tony Perkins. Wilding and Taylor tied the knot and had two sons. But Wilding continued an affair with bisexual actor Stewart Granger. As her marriage to Wilding fell apart, Liz found consolation in the arms of yet another homo- sexual, according to the bio. Elizabeth and Rock Hudson became intimate. . .

--gossipy website 9Types (http://www.9types.com/movieboard/messages/4361.html)discussing an unnamed biography of Liz Taylor. (I do not vouch for any of this, but Hunter's and Wilding's and Perkins' "bixexuality" is well established, and it shows rumors of Stewart Granger's not bein straight exist.)

cinemabon
01-12-2014, 11:36 PM
I have to concede that people I thought were totally straight turned out to be anything but and even the so-called straightest actors had dalliances on the side. I discovered that for myself when I lived in Hollywood during the 1970's. Shocked would be the least of my reactions when I found so many macho guys hanging out in gay bars in disguise. What was I doing there? What was anyone doing at Studio One in the 1970's. It was the place to go, if you could get in - straight, gay or bi. When Rick managed to slip me past the door, I discovered a world inside that - even though it was public - was the unspoken world of actor's private lives. No one thought of "blowing" someone's cover. So it was understood you didn't discuss things outside the studio. That cult has not disappeared and this cult of secrecy still protects many stars and others in the film business from being outed. What a shame that we believe we've got past prejudice when in reality it's as secretive as ever. What I know about where and whom I too keep quiet about, and have never spoken of those I saw. I've never even mentioned it to my friends, for I fear the repercussions too much. I'm certain that is considered good taste by some. Living a life in fear is not one I relish.

Chris Knipp
01-13-2014, 10:41 AM
Well, there you are. The Seventies were a time of experimentation. And not just wider ties and lapels. "Ain't nobody straight, man" -- Joe D'Allesandro (in Bike Boy?).

Johann
01-13-2014, 03:41 PM
I know an older lady in her late sixties who had the most massive crush on Anthony Perkins for years and years.
When she found out he swung for the other team she was devastated.
What she saw in Tony Perkins is beyond me. I asked her why not Brando or Clark Gable and she scoffed that they were Louts. :)

Chris Knipp
01-13-2014, 04:14 PM
We have our types, but you would not know. Tony Perkin's gayness was not known to me at all till late in his life when he was intervieweed in Interview and when he had AIDS. He had kept his illness secret till shortly before his death.

oscar jubis
01-13-2014, 06:21 PM
My favorite Cukor films are four starring Katherine Hepburn:
HOLIDAY (1938)
SYLVIA SCARLETT (1935)
THE PHILADELPHIA STORY (1940)
ADAM’S RIB (1949)

Cukor also directed some scenes from two films I love:
ONE HOUR WITH YOU (1932), credited to Lubitsch and LUST FOR LIFE (1956) credited to Minnelli

Other Cukor films I like a lot (ranked according to memories of viewings long ago):
MY FAIR LADY (1964)
A STAR IS BORN (1956)
GASLIGHT (1944)
BHOWANI JUNCTION (1956)
BORN YESTERDAY (1950)
LET’S MAKE LOVE (1960)

Cukor's strangest film: A WOMAN’S FACE

Thanks for the thread CK.

Chris Knipp
01-13-2014, 08:03 PM
I would agree (with individual reservations, but these seem among his notable ones, except I have not seen as I said MY FAIR LADY and I have not seen SILVIA SCARLETT or the film you call his strangest). Those you mention were all in the series.

Thanks to Aubrey Reuben of On the Town with Aubrey Reuben (http://blacktiemagazine.com/New_York_Society/Aubrey_Reuben_January4_2014.htm), Lincoln Center screenings pal for years now, for tipping me off to this series and watching and discussing the films with me..

The FSLC blurb (http://www.filmlinc.com/press/entry/fslc-presents-the-discreet-charm-of-george-cukor-26-day-retrospective-of-ho) for A WOMAN'S FACE made it sound interesting but that was too late for me to go.
A WOMAN’S FACE (1941) 106 min, 16mm
When Cukor made A WOMAN’S FACE—a dreamlike, psychologically acute noir about a disfigured woman stuck in a life of crime, adapted from a Swedish Ingrid Bergman vehicle—his star Joan Crawford was on shaky career ground. It was a risk for her to appear onscreen half-caked in grisly makeup, but the gamble paid off: her performance here is one of her finest, a sensitive portrait of a woman consumed by shame, resentment, and fear. (Special notice goes to her extended, burnt-out confessional speech mid-film.) It’s a beautifully shot and often highly stylized movie—which, somehow, makes it no less effective at probing the relationship between physical and moral ugliness.
Sunday, January 5 at 1:30PM & 8:10PM

cinemabon
01-14-2014, 09:02 AM
Cukor also directed scenes for directors who were having problems and did so as a friend. On more than one occasion he helped on the set of movies where the main director needed help - "Gone with the Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz" were two projects where he assisted without credit. There were others, too.

I could make a list of film actors that would astound some (not Chris, of course) and it came as quite a surprise to me when I went to parties in Hollywood (Silver Lake, Los Feliz, and other areas adjacent to Hollywood) and saw actors - really macho actors who were in cowboy movies, or war movies, and found they were so gay. The list of leading men is well known inside the community and remains a closely guarded secret. Anthony Perkins was one I knew about in the early 1970's before the AIDS crisis. As I said earlier, I've decided to remain moot. I felt privileged to be invited into people's homes. Far be it from me to expose secrets they wanted kept that way - some for their "legacy" and some for their family's "face."

George Cukor and Vincent Minnelli are two of the most well known gay directors. There are others less well known.

I can just see him now on the set of "The Women" and having to deal with the cattiness going on with so many MGM prima donnas. No one but Cukor could have dealt with that bunch or have brought out the kinds of performances needed to sell an "all female" picture in the 1930's and make it so successful. I'm certain Mayer and other studio bosses looked the other way to Cukor's off screen antics as he consistently delivered a quality product.

Chris Knipp
01-14-2014, 11:15 AM
I would agree, cinemabon, it's better not to be gossip or tell tales about Hollywood secrets. We're here to discuss the art of the motion picture. Some of what you mention above is in an excellent George Cukor Wikipedia biography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Cukor) I cited at the outset of this thread. According to it he was originally the director of GONE WITH THE WIND, and was not just helping out, but there were differences with Selznick over the script and general quality of the work, which Cukor wanted to be better.
Cukor was hired to direct Gone with the Wind by Selznick in 1936, even before the book was published.[17] He spent the next two years involved with pre-production duties. . .From a private letter from journalist Susan Myrick to Margaret Mitchell in February 1939: "George [Cukor] finally told me all about it. He hated [leaving the production] very much he said but he could not do otherwise. In effect he said he is an honest craftsman and he cannot do a job unless he knows it is a good job and he feels the present job is not right. For days, he told me he has looked at the rushes and felt he was failing... the things did not click as it should. Gradually he became convinced that the script was the trouble... So George just told David he would not work any longer if the script was not better and he wanted the [Sidney] Howard script back... he would not let his name go out over a lousy picture... And bull-headed David said 'OK get out!' -- George Cukor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

oscar jubis
01-17-2014, 12:42 AM
I'm glad to notice all the love for Holiday by commentators in the Lincoln Center website . Holiday was overshadowed since its release by the Oscar-winning The Philadelphia Story which shares the same crew (including screenwriter) and the same principal cast.

My favorite Cukor pictures are black and white, academy ratio, but I think he used the 'Scope format as well and used color as creatively as Nicholas Ray.

Chris Knipp
01-17-2014, 09:12 AM
Will watch Holiday shortly. His Cinemascope and color pictures are nice looking, it's true.

cinemabon
01-17-2014, 12:27 PM
Cukor, like so many directors in the 1950's, hated Cinemascope. Part of the reason had to do with the Bausch and Lomb lens created to make the anamorphic image. They had a limited depth of field, which meant directors were forced in most instances to lock down the camera and shoot scenes within the confines of the frame. Cukor said he went "nuts" with the "Man who got away" sequence because Garland kept moving in and out of focus. They had to choreograph the scene with the focus puller. You can see that in one part of the final cut shot, she goes out of focus for a second. While perfect for scenery, Cinemascope was lousy for close ups and POV conversation. For composition, you ended up with two thirds of the frame full of wasted space that had to be filled. Cameramen were always throwing colored gels on backgrounds to make them interesting because only the foreground - focused on the actor - would be in focus.

I shot an entire film with a 20th Century Fox B&L Cinemascope Lens adapted to an Angenieux lens in the 1970's. It was a nightmare. Every scene had to be choreographed because the viewing angle was so wide, we could pick up background movement in what was normally off frame. Shooting outside was next to impossible. I had to block traffic and block sidewalks because any movement on the periphery of the shot was distracting. The editor and I had to throw out several shots because extras who thought they were off camera dropped out of character and made stupid gestures that ruined the shot. I'd never use one again and Panavision eliminated that by setting the standard widescreen at 2.28 to 1; although Superpanavision 70 was a close approximation to Cinemascope. I feel sorry for any director who has to shoot with a 2.66 to 1 aspect ratio.

Chris Knipp
01-17-2014, 06:01 PM
That's interesting. However Cukor did shoot some films in Cinemascope and they look great, A STAR IS BORN, LES GIRLS, and BHOWANI JUNCTION. Perhaps others, but I don't know what they are.

In this connection I find that Peter Bogdonovitch's signature Indiewire blog has a George Cukor file (http://blogs.indiewire.com/peterbogdanovich/the-george-cukor-file-part-1) that was written recently.

In ever richer detail about widescreen and CinemaScope and the restrictions it imposed I find that Sam Roggen on the website LOLA has posted an article (http://www.lolajournal.com/4/cinemascope.html), "]You See It Or You Don’t: CinemaScope, Panoramic Perception and the Cinephiliac Moment," which goes into the same issues you mention in more detail, including some interesting stuff about how the Cahiers du Cinéma writers especially André Bazin reacted favorably to these limitations.


Not only did CinemaScope have a short life; many distinguished filmmakers also infamously rejected the anamorphic widescreen system with its impressive aspect ratio of 2.35:1. Despite the sophisticated staging strategies that some of them developed in Scope, the format is at least equally known for the technical restrictions it implied, and, above all, the aesthetic possibilities these restrictions eliminated.
--Sam Roggen.


In the 1963 Jean-Luc Godard film Contempt (Le Mepris), filmmaker Fritz Lang makes a disparaging comment about CinemaScope: "Oh, it wasn't meant for human beings. Just for snakes – and funerals." Ironically, Contempt was shot in CinemaScope.
--Wikipedia article, "CinemasScope, Technical Difficulties" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinemaScope#Technical_difficulties).

Wikipedia lists (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Films_shot_in_CinemaScope&pagefrom=North+To+Alaska%0ANorth+to+Alaska#mw-pages)335 films shot in CinemaScope.

Chris Knipp
01-17-2014, 06:32 PM
Here is part of Sam Roggen's discussion of CinemaScope framing and composition.


In response to these technical constraints, filmmakers created a wide range of methods to guide the attention of the audience through the broad frame, and emphasise essential parts of the composition. Bordwell has pointed out that early solutions to the problem often looked uninspired: ‘The most defensive reaction was to deemphasise the empty stretches of the frame. Filmmakers filled the holes with props or flanking figures, and blocked off chunks altogether’. (4)
--Sam Roggen, LOLA

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/42/2oo0.jpg


http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/607/gdl8.jpg

While early Scope films often display enforced applications of the frame-within-the-frame, directors like George Cukor, Vincente Minnelli or Elia Kazan would later figure out virtuoso staging patterns in order to highlight parts of the large field.
--Sam Roggen.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/320x240q90/30/y5y4.jpg
ELIA KAZAN (The stooped, central figure in red stands out in the row)

See Roggen's discussion of planometric composition or clothesline staging by Nicolas Ray in BIGGER THAN LIFE. The forgotten pill bottle on the right is a key element that the viewer spots, while the characters momentarily forget it.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640x480q90/560/q8ig.jpg

cinemabon
01-17-2014, 11:50 PM
You could achieve an image up to 2.66 to 1 (which it says on the B&L lens).

Great links, Chris.

First on Peter Bogdanovich blog about Cukor - never speak ill of a fellow director and heaps the praise on like brown gravy, a little too thick. I would not call, "A Star is Born" as his greatest achievement. Nor would I characterize his use of Cinemascope as brilliant. As you stated, there were hundreds of "scope" films and other directors made better use of the letterbox frame. I would even argue that Henry Koster's "The Robe" made better use of the wide frame than Cukor did. However, it is not my intention to diminish Cukor's career. On the contrary, I admire him a great deal. It's just that there's praise and then there's constructive analysis.

As to shooting in Cinemascope, I would emphasize that given the right venue, widescreen films not only have their place in modern cinema, but can be more expressive than films that do not have scope-like aspect ratios. Wyler shot "Ben Hur" with a super-scope lens and did a brilliant job. Kubrick shot "2001" with a super-wide process and delivered the greatest space film of all time. Cinemascope had its limitations, but the widescreen process found a place in current cinema because of technicians who came along and perfected the process and made the cameras more versatile and allowed directors greater latitude in making their ideas large impressive ones.

Chris Knipp
01-18-2014, 01:39 AM
I agree Bogdonovich lays on the praise a little bit too thick at times. However I found nothing wrong with Cukor's use of Scope. It seems Ray's in BIGGER THAN LIFE however may have been more interesting, Ray arguably a more distinctive artist than Cukor. I remember that film as being extremely "trippy." That may owe something to the distortion of the lens. Maybe Ray makes good use of it to dramatize James Mason's character's twisted perceptions due to the drug he is taking. What do you think?

cinemabon
01-18-2014, 12:42 PM
Nicholas Ray is one of those rare exceptional talents that sort of got the raw end of the stick (if you'll excuse an old Midwestern expression). He made some outstanding widescreen films after he more or less made an incredible impression on the Film Noir movement (shot in Academy ratio). Many believe his two "ultra-wide screen" films - "King of Kings" and "55 Days in Peking" are two of the most artistic statements available in the form. While that is arguable, you can certainly see in his first Cinemascope project that Ray took great pains to carefully make his groupings fill the wide rectangular screen ("Rebel Without a Cause"). After reading about his life (the behind the scenes stuff on "Rebel" was incredibly steamy - Ray had affairs with Sal Mineo AND Natalie Wood even as she was seeing Dennis Hopper!), I can see how Ray took to the new medium with more acceptance than someone like Cukor may have as Cukor had two difficulties to handle - he had never directed a film in Cinemascope and he had never directed a musical. I would say he managed to come through with an incredible achievement at the other end of that process considering the obstacles he faced (such as Garland not showing up for her scenes that put the production behind schedule).

I had no idea Ray was bisexual or that he led such a secretive life until his death in 1979. Oh, the things we learn online...

Chris Knipp
01-18-2014, 01:16 PM
Why do you say Ray "got the raw end of the stick"?

The gossip never ceases, especially on the Internet. But at some point it becomes a distraction I want to avoid. I don't want to be admiring a painting by Caravaggio and have somebody come up and say, "And he was bisexual, y'know!" But of course the "steamy set" is a thing people just can't help being curious about.

Chris Knipp
01-19-2014, 10:58 PM
I'll be adding some more thumbnail reviews of other Cukor films included in the series and I just wrote one of HOLIDAY (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?3667-THE-DISCREET-CHARM-OF-GEORGE-CUKOR-%28Film-Society-of-Lincoln-Center-Dec-13-Jan-14%29&p=31607#post31607) (1938).

cinemabon
01-20-2014, 01:13 AM
Loved Lew Ayres in "All Quiet on the Western Front;" hated him in "Holiday." Over the top.

I would say sexuality plays an incredible role in how artists view the world and has a great bearing on their work, especially if the director is influencing the performance (as they do anyway but in some instances that performance changes in perception when certain facts become relevant).

Chris Knipp
01-20-2014, 01:57 AM
A mysterious post.

I quite like Lew Ayres in HOLIDAY. He is an alcoholic, and to be an alcoholic may seem to you "over the top," but that's what it is to be alcoholic. He is made appealing and rather sweet, though he is trapped in their father's world, and can't go off on the boat trip when Linda proposes that he join her and Johnnie. He is nice, though. Why you make these statements about an artist and sexuality at this point eludes me, and it's a bit hard to prove in any case, don't you think? What are you referring to? Why now?

You still didn't answer my question, why did you say Nick Ray "got the raw end of the stick"? Maybe he got what he deserved. He seems to have been a fuckup, though a gifted director, no doubt.

cinemabon
01-20-2014, 09:55 PM
I grew up in a bar. I know how alcoholics behave. I also started out as an actor at age two, when I did my first play and was in a play every year for the next thirty-eight years of my life. I know acting as well. I never went to an audition in my life where the director wasn't instantly captivated by me and wanted me to appear in his production in some capacity. I love directors. I love actors. I love the theater. I love cinema. Lew Ayers is a very likable person. If you want realism and alcoholism from that era, try Ray Milland.

Nicholas Ray did not deserve what he got, whatever that may be; i.e., the short end of the stick.We were avoiding specifics. Remember? Ray was a gifted, talented man who was misunderstood

Chris Knipp
01-21-2014, 12:28 AM
I don't quite see what your acting background has to do with it, or your growing up in a bar. YOu don't have to tell your life story every time you want to make a point. Ned may be poetic license; he may be a different kind of alcoholic, not the kind who grew up in a bar, or wound up like Ray Milland's character in THE LOST WEEKEND. I don't think that's such a great movie, either. And HOLIDAY, though little known, is a fine film. Here is a blog essay by someone who adores Lew Ayres as Ned in HOLIDAY.

http://cinema-fanatic.com/2012/09/23/what-a-character-lew-ayres-as-ned-seton-in-holiday/

He is, in fact, a very endearing figure, touching, kind, polite, but sad. "Poor lamb," Linda says. He's a Scott Fitzgerald figure.

There is absolutely no reason to call Ayres' performance "over the top." It's beautifully understated.

Johann
01-21-2014, 08:08 AM
I would say sexuality plays an incredible role in how artists view the world and has a great bearing on their work

That is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read here.

Chris Knipp
01-21-2014, 11:14 AM
I don't know about ignorant; I'd hold back on that, but it just seems to me a non sequitur as a generalization at that point.

I've added a thumbnail review of the excellent ADAM'S RIB, and I'm currently watching the movie version of MY FAIR LADY. It's pretty long to watch at home at one go. Since the Lincoln Center series included all Cukor's films and there remain some of the most famous ones and ones recommended by Oscar that I haven't seen, I'm filling in some gaps. Besides there's no film series to watch or a lot of good new movies right now.

cinemabon
01-21-2014, 12:42 PM
I respectfully disagree with you, Chris, on "Holiday." And as for Johann. That was uncalled for and reveals more about your character than it reflects on mine.

Chris Knipp
01-21-2014, 02:02 PM
I like the "respectfully" part, which is getting back on a better track. Our disagreement is noted, and we can pass on. But it was not a good idea to comment on the "character" of Johann. Johann is a member in good standing. We know he is plainspoken. Agreed, that was out of line to call your statement ignorant, perhaps, but I found it without context and inexplicable as given. Let's not bother about what anybody's remark "reflects on". We're not trying to build up our personal reputations here. We've been discussing and debating movies for years. We have nothint to prove.

Johann
01-21-2014, 02:14 PM
What does it say about my character?
I'd like a straight answer please.

Johann
01-21-2014, 02:19 PM
I'm not here to argue- I just want a straight "respectful" answer.
I am definitely plainspoken.
Grab a helmet cinemabon. When you give us strange bon mots, don't be surprised when we ask for clarification.
No character assassination here.
We are not about that.

cinemabon
01-21-2014, 02:28 PM
Oh, I think your message is quite plain. And so are your attacks.

Johann
01-21-2014, 02:32 PM
I love you too. *BIG HUGS*

cinemabon
01-21-2014, 02:49 PM
I like you. I respect you. I still want to go to Toronto, even though you're living on Krypton now.

Johann
01-21-2014, 02:51 PM
I've always lived on Krypton. :)

My respect for you is huge. We've all been here for over a decade. How can I not respect you?

Chris Knipp
01-21-2014, 09:36 PM
Thanks, boys, for making up.

I've seen Cukor's MY FAIR LADY and so added a thumbnail review of that to my artificially extended record of the Lincoln Center Cukor festival. Needless to say it would have been better to see it on the big screen at the Walter Reade Theater, but I got the idea. I had never seen this and needed to. The songs are marvellous, of course, but Cukor gets no credit for than.

cinemabon
01-21-2014, 10:30 PM
I saw "My Fair Lady" in 1964 during its 70mm roadshow run. We had reserved seats. That print is lost, gone and forgotten by most. I can tell you that in the restored version, the opening is not as effective as the original opening. Cukor had close up shots of flowers that were not static. I found it almost puzzling at first until I realized that he wanted to put Eliza in the middle of the flower market. I found the film stunning and Rex Harrison is every bit as good as he was on Broadway (or damn near it). The one thing that puzzled me to this day was Jack Warner's disdain for Julie Andrews. He didn't cast her in "My Fair Lady" (despite her Tony nominations, Theater World win, and reputation) and he didn't cast her in "Camelot." This "snub" so infuriated the acting community that they overwhelmingly voted for her Best Actress award in "Mary Poppins" and prevented "Lady" from sweeping the Oscars that year. Andrews fumed about it for years. Eventually, she and Audrey Hepburn reconciled. However, I don't believe Andrews ever spoke to Jack Warner or ever made a movie for Warner Brothers. Hepburn was dubbed by Marnie Nixon who dubbed so many actresses including Debra Kerr in "The King and I" and Natalie Wood in "West Side Story" among many others. The Julie Andrews Broadway soundtrack was one of the greatest selling Broadway soundtracks of all time while the film hardly sold any discs at all in comparison. Andrews did four big musicals in the 1960's and one big flop - Star! (Mary Poppins, The Sound of Music, Thoroughly Modern Millie, and Darling Lili. Ironically, like Audrey Hepburn, Andrews won her first and only Oscar for her debut film.

"My Fair Lady" is largely a filmed version of the stage play with 100% shot on sound stages set up like theater sets. The Lerner and Lowe score is bright, snappy, and fun. The acting is superb. In addition to Harrison, Stanley Holloway reprised his famous Broadway rendition of Alfred P. Doolittle and his number that brought down the house - Get me to the church on time. Cukor's famous battle with designer Cecil Beaton erupted when Beaton tried to throw his considerable weight around and Cukor wouldn't stand for it. While Beaton's designs are prominently filmed in the opening, the two men loathed each other and avoided one another during the shoot. They both won Oscars that year.

As a twelve year old, I was far more enamored with "Mary Poppins" (also nominated for Best Picture) and would have preferred that over "My Fair Lady." Although in retrospect, I can see how many people felt and still do that both "Zorba" and "Dr. Strangelove" are better films. Quinn's performance in "Zorba" is certainly one of the most memorable screen appearances of any actor on film. It is one of those choice roles that come along once in a generation. "Dr. Strangelove" is one of the strangest and yet most profound films of that year and affected everyone who saw it, including myself (I had to sneak into the theater in the nearby town because in my hometown it was labeled, "For adults only.") I believe Kubrick's movie had an influence on the entire cold war (along with the film "Fail Safe") as all of those who saw it began to realize the futility of nuclear war as not just absurd but as something that must be avoided at all cost. The lasting image of Slim Pickens final ride was so powerful that it is constantly shown in clips that include the greatest cinema of all time. Unfortunately, Kubrick had given up on Hollywood and America and moved to England. Jack Warner put his political machine in motion and his movie not only swept the awards, but Warner won his long coveted Oscar prize - the only one he would ever receive.

Chris Knipp
01-22-2014, 12:32 AM
Another page from your memoirs.

The musical also closely follows the Anthony Asquith film, in some details I expect more than the original play. It's interesting to compare the two films. Cukor's version adds more stuff. The big padding is the Ascot race sequence, where Eliza's comical conversation is inserted instead of during the visit to Higgins' mother's. The Asquith film's tea at the mother's with Eliza's outrageous tale of "them as did her in in" and "gin was mother's milk to her" is more focused and funnier and Freddy's delighted reaction is more comical; Wendy Hiller is better at delivering dialogue and a warmer screen presence than the fragile, porcelain Audrey Hepburn, who probably was not as good as Julie Andrews but looks great and arouses our pity and sympathy well. I wonder if the Ascot races sequence was Cecil Beaton's doing, since it is the big opportunity to display his vision of stylized grey, black and white elegance, as also are the extended tableaux of the ball.

In the musical paradoxically (since you'd think a musical would be sweet; but that sure has changed) Higgins seems more cruel. In the film, Eliza is brilliant at learning with a fabulous ear as Higgins and Pickering immediately note and exclaim, and she catches on right away when introduced to "the rain in Spain falls mainly in the plain" and she nails the H's at once in "Hereford and Hampshire, hurricanes hardly ever happen" except for adding a H at the start of "ever" whereas in the musical/Cukor version, over and over Eliza gets it wrong. It all goes quickly in the more economical and fast-moving 1938 film. But much in the musical is copied from that film, such as the look of the insufferable Hungarian "best pupil," though Asquith's is more colorful. The fact that Eliza's perfect pitch and brilliant learning ability are left out and downplayed in the musical eliminates a central motive. They work with her because she's a perfect subject.