Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Midnight Margaritas
Courtesy of Practical Magic (1998)
Fab-u-lous Stockard Channing and Dianne Wiest, as well as Sandy and Nicole.
Fab-u-lous Stockard Channing and Dianne Wiest, as well as Sandy and Nicole.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Humphrey Bogart
Bogart's career, like Davis, Colbert, and Grant, began in the 1930s with early talkies. Unfortunately, it ended in the late 50s due to his relatively early death from cancer; if he had lived, he would undoubtedly have continued making films, like his colleagues. Maybe we would have seen Bogart on 60s game shows and sit-coms: imagine.
![]()
Bogart's status as a star usually rests on his work in The Petrified Forest (1936), when he was still playing criminals and cons, and closes with The Caine Mutiny and Sabrina, both in 1954, as his last "big" pictures. These three give a clue to Bogart's usually ignored range as an actor: comedy, drama, suspense.
Type-cast early as a crazy guy with a gun in B-movies, he was able to transcend such successful but limiting casting and move into what we now think of as his regular gig: romantic leading man in major pictures. Unlike Grant, Bogart was completely contemporary -- no period pieces for him. Like Colbert, he started in plays, but turned to films in the late 20s, breaking into regular work in the 1930s. In 1934 he was cast in the play of Petrified Forest, which was a huge success on Broadway; Leslie Howard bought the film rights, and both he and Bette Davis were cast. Howard insisted Bogart reprise his B'way role, and Bogart's film career took off.
![]()
Like all three of the other actors in this group, there are a few well-known Bogart films, but lots of great unknowns, which are worth renting or watching on Netflix. Again, a great way to spend your holiday weekend, checking them out from the library or local rental place, or looking online for free streaming versions.
My recommendations of famous Bogart films include:
The Petrified Forest (1936) -- bonus, you get Davis and Howard, too. This is Bogart's signature "tough guy" role, the killer without remorse but still complex.
The Roaring Twenties (1939), with James Cagney, where Bogart is a bootlegger. Again, b-movie bad guy with style.
The Maltese Falcon (1941). Brilliant Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, Sidney Greenstreet and Elisha Cook Jr. as supporting cast. Read the Hammett novel after, but watch this for the fun of the John Huston screenplay/directing. Huston and Bogart were life-long friends--you can see why!
![]()
Casablanca (1942), this time with the fantastic Howard Koch screenplay. The role cemented Bogart's status as a star, and he never had to do a B-picture or struggle for casting again. Bergman and Henried are fantastic, but don't miss Greenstreet, Conrad Veidt, and Lorre, as well as the bar staff. Best moment: "La Marseillaise."
To Have and Have Not (1944), the film where Bogart met Bacall. Based on a Hemingway story, this is one sext action picture. Bacall was 19 and Bogart was 45: that didn't seem to be a problem. You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? And the music of Hogey Carmichael.
The Big Sleep (1946), Bogart's first Chandler picture, playing Phillip Marlowe--again, with Bacall. Read the book after (it's better!) but see the picture.
The Treasure of Sierra Madre (1948), another John Huston picture, and one of my favorite Bogart films. he's not a good guy, here. The brilliant Walter Huston, John's dad, co-stars. Both Hustons won Oscars: acting and directing/writing. Bogart? Bupkis.
Key Largo (1948), again Bacall and the return to the complex loner hero. Claire Trevor deservedly won an Oscar for Supporting Actress (she's really, really good!) and Edward G. Robinson is just fun.
The African Queen (1951) with Kate Hepburn. Fun and funny to watch.
The Caine Mutiny (1954), where he plays the nutty Commander Queeg. Again, worth watching for the raft of great performances, anchored by Bogart's complex character.
Sabrina (1954), the original, with Audrey Hepburn and William Holden. Ooh la la! Ok, it is Hepburn's transformation from awkward teen to stylin' Paris girl that I love, but Bogart and Holden are a great pair of suitors. And Bogart, despite being, yes 55, to Hepburn's 25, is still sexy. I prefer this to the later version with Harrison Ford because it is simply funnier, wittier, and better done all 'round.
But rent these, too:
Dead End (1937), based on the stage play. Fantastic Bogey as escaped criminal come back to old neighborhood. Depression-era grittiness.
Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), with Cagney and Pat O'Brien. Bogart is third-billed behind these two but gives a solid performance in this story of a thug trying to corrupt a gang of local kids, while their tough priest tries to save them. Surprisingly good script.
The Oklahoma Kid (1939) a Western (yes!) with Bogart and Cagney playing basically ganster versions of battling cowboys in the old West. You know you want to see it.
The Two Mrs. Carrols (1947), with Barbara Stanwyck. Meller-dramma with Bogart as insane, wife-killing artist.
We're No Angels (1955), another odd Christmas film with Bogart, Peter Ustinov, and Aldo Rey as criminals escaped from the notorious Devil's Island who save an impoverished family. Witty, funny, and bright. It almost seems a parody of Bogart's bad guy role... delightfully.
These are the best, but there are obviously more. I love that Bogart wasn't the typical gorgeous actor, but in either bad guy roles or romantic hero roles always added some twist.
Bogart's status as a star usually rests on his work in The Petrified Forest (1936), when he was still playing criminals and cons, and closes with The Caine Mutiny and Sabrina, both in 1954, as his last "big" pictures. These three give a clue to Bogart's usually ignored range as an actor: comedy, drama, suspense.
Type-cast early as a crazy guy with a gun in B-movies, he was able to transcend such successful but limiting casting and move into what we now think of as his regular gig: romantic leading man in major pictures. Unlike Grant, Bogart was completely contemporary -- no period pieces for him. Like Colbert, he started in plays, but turned to films in the late 20s, breaking into regular work in the 1930s. In 1934 he was cast in the play of Petrified Forest, which was a huge success on Broadway; Leslie Howard bought the film rights, and both he and Bette Davis were cast. Howard insisted Bogart reprise his B'way role, and Bogart's film career took off.
Like all three of the other actors in this group, there are a few well-known Bogart films, but lots of great unknowns, which are worth renting or watching on Netflix. Again, a great way to spend your holiday weekend, checking them out from the library or local rental place, or looking online for free streaming versions.
My recommendations of famous Bogart films include:
The Petrified Forest (1936) -- bonus, you get Davis and Howard, too. This is Bogart's signature "tough guy" role, the killer without remorse but still complex.
The Roaring Twenties (1939), with James Cagney, where Bogart is a bootlegger. Again, b-movie bad guy with style.
The Maltese Falcon (1941). Brilliant Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, Sidney Greenstreet and Elisha Cook Jr. as supporting cast. Read the Hammett novel after, but watch this for the fun of the John Huston screenplay/directing. Huston and Bogart were life-long friends--you can see why!
Casablanca (1942), this time with the fantastic Howard Koch screenplay. The role cemented Bogart's status as a star, and he never had to do a B-picture or struggle for casting again. Bergman and Henried are fantastic, but don't miss Greenstreet, Conrad Veidt, and Lorre, as well as the bar staff. Best moment: "La Marseillaise."
To Have and Have Not (1944), the film where Bogart met Bacall. Based on a Hemingway story, this is one sext action picture. Bacall was 19 and Bogart was 45: that didn't seem to be a problem. You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? And the music of Hogey Carmichael.
The Big Sleep (1946), Bogart's first Chandler picture, playing Phillip Marlowe--again, with Bacall. Read the book after (it's better!) but see the picture.
The Treasure of Sierra Madre (1948), another John Huston picture, and one of my favorite Bogart films. he's not a good guy, here. The brilliant Walter Huston, John's dad, co-stars. Both Hustons won Oscars: acting and directing/writing. Bogart? Bupkis.
Key Largo (1948), again Bacall and the return to the complex loner hero. Claire Trevor deservedly won an Oscar for Supporting Actress (she's really, really good!) and Edward G. Robinson is just fun.
The African Queen (1951) with Kate Hepburn. Fun and funny to watch.
The Caine Mutiny (1954), where he plays the nutty Commander Queeg. Again, worth watching for the raft of great performances, anchored by Bogart's complex character.
Sabrina (1954), the original, with Audrey Hepburn and William Holden. Ooh la la! Ok, it is Hepburn's transformation from awkward teen to stylin' Paris girl that I love, but Bogart and Holden are a great pair of suitors. And Bogart, despite being, yes 55, to Hepburn's 25, is still sexy. I prefer this to the later version with Harrison Ford because it is simply funnier, wittier, and better done all 'round.
But rent these, too:
Dead End (1937), based on the stage play. Fantastic Bogey as escaped criminal come back to old neighborhood. Depression-era grittiness.
Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), with Cagney and Pat O'Brien. Bogart is third-billed behind these two but gives a solid performance in this story of a thug trying to corrupt a gang of local kids, while their tough priest tries to save them. Surprisingly good script.
The Oklahoma Kid (1939) a Western (yes!) with Bogart and Cagney playing basically ganster versions of battling cowboys in the old West. You know you want to see it.
The Two Mrs. Carrols (1947), with Barbara Stanwyck. Meller-dramma with Bogart as insane, wife-killing artist.
We're No Angels (1955), another odd Christmas film with Bogart, Peter Ustinov, and Aldo Rey as criminals escaped from the notorious Devil's Island who save an impoverished family. Witty, funny, and bright. It almost seems a parody of Bogart's bad guy role... delightfully.
 |
| Comic publicity shot |
 |
| Don't they look happy? |
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Cary Grant
Like Davis and Colbert, Grant had a flourishing career beginning in the early 1930s, and, like Davis, his career in film lasted into the 1970s. Amazing.
![]()
Once asked about his life, Grant responded, "My formula for living is quite simple. I get up in the morning and I go to bed at night. In between, I occupy myself as best I can."
When I lived in NYC (in a former life) The Regency Theatre on the West Side had a summer film festival with all Grant's pictures--it was a month-long festival and they showed every picture only twice. I saw a lot of pictures I'd never heard of, as well as the familiar ones. Believe me, seeing the less familiar ones is as big a treat as the famous ones you already know.
Grant could do comedy or drama. He was hilarious in, for example, His Girl Friday, The Awful Truth, The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer, and even in Charade, which is after all a mystery with violence. But he was also spectacular in such serious films as Notorious, North by Northwest, An Affair to Remember, and Suspicion. No one seemed to think he was acting much, just being himself, a ridiculously suave and charming man. I suspect there was a lot of acting going on, but he made it all seem simple.
In her famous book The Dress Doctor, Edith Head talked about how great Grant was to work with, and how smart he was about style, fashion, costuming, and the camera. He always worked to make his co-stars look as good as himself, and was extremely aware of the nuances of screen costumes.
A list of Grant films would take you through the month I mentioned above, so I've got two categories:
My favorite famous Cary Grant films (a must-see collection):
She Done Him Wrong (1933), the early vehicle with Mae West that might be considered Grant's first break-through; he plays a temperance guy who tries to reform West, while being tempted by her. Oh, yes.
I'm No Angel (1933), again Grant and West, this time as a lion-tamer. Her earthiness and his class are an... interesting combination. And her costumes!
![]()
His Girl Friday (1940) with Rosalind Russell. Fast-talking version of B'way hit originally starring two male leads, Grant and Russell plays a soon-to-be-divorced newspaper couple caught in the story of the century! Quick, witty dialogue, with the delectable Ralph Bellamy as the fiance and a mob of great character actors.
The Philadelphia Story (1940) with Katharine Hepburn and Jimmy Stewart and, again, a fantastic supporting cast. Grant is a huge star by now, and in this, the third of the Grant-Hepburn match-ups, they are at their best. Again, great style, witty dialogue, and fantastic characters. Super date movie, as well. The scene with Stewart, drunk, and Grant, sober, is priceless--better than anything else in the film, except maybe the song "Lydia."
Notorious (1946), Grant's second Hitchcock work, is my favorite romantic film of all time. He and Bergman were lightning in a bottle, in my opinion. But, hey, look for yourself.
To Catch a Thief (1955), third Hitchcock outing, with Grace Kelly... the film where she met Prince Rainier, as it was shot in Monte Carlo. The scenery is gorgeous, as are Grant and Kelly.
An Affair To Remember (1957), with Deborah Kerr. This is actually not one of my favorites; I think the tearjerking melodrama is over the top, but the style is fantastic. And it is considered an iconic "romantic" film, and the basis for Sleepless in Seattle's romantic use of the Empire State Building. I think the script is weak, but Grant and Kerr are both master actors and their scenes are often wittier and more complex than the thin script suggests.
North by Northwest (1959), fourth and final Hitchcock match-up. This one with the beautiful and talented Eva Saint Marie. The iconic race against the crop-duster.
My favorite unknown Cary Grant films (the follow-up, just for your own pleasure!)
Blonde Venus (1932), a very early film that pairs Grant with Dietrich. He's "the other man" and kind of a bad guy.
Madame Butterfly (1932), as, yes, Pinkerton. This is the original stage version (pre-opera!), and Grant plays the careless American sailor who seduced and "marries" the Japanese geisha, then deserts her, only to return and claim their child. In 1932, Sylvia Sidney, who played Cho Cho San, was much more famous than Grant; she is not Asian, he is a total cad, but oh, boy, worth every minute of the drah-ma.
Alice in Wonderland (1933) -- Forget Tim Burton and Johnny Depp (ok, well, for a minute) and get this live-action version of Alice starring major actors and character actors in Carroll's story. Oh, early Hollywood! Grant plays the Mock Turtle, Gary Cooper is the White Knight, Edward Evertt Horton is the Mad Hatter, and W.C. Fields is Humpty-Dumpty. Just get it!
Topper (1937) with Constance Bennet and Billie Burke. Grant and Bennet are a young couple killed in a car wreck who come back to haunt their stuffy banker. Light comedy with, again, great style.
The Awful Truth (1937) the first film with Irene Dunne--one of my personal favorites because of the great chemistry between Dunne and Grant, the witty script, and the supprting cast which again includes Bellamy and the ever-great Cecil Cunningham.
![]()
Only Angels Have Wings (1939) with Jean Arthur and the deightful young Rita Hayworth.
My Favorite Wife (1940), the second Grant-Dunne pairing, this time with Randolph Scott as the handsome man with whom Dunne, married to Grant, was stranded on an island for 7 years... oh, yes, hilarity ensues.
Penny Serenade (1941), the third Dunne-Grant film, this time a serious film about a couple trying to have a child. Charming.
Mr. Lucky (1943), with Laraine Day. Here, Grant plays a gambler trying to romance a society dame (Day) while cheating her charity out of lots of cash. This is his cad-turned-honest guy character, and again, well done.
Arsenic and Old Lace (1944). The stage play turned film -- RUN, do not walk, to get this fabulous comedy. Peter Lorre is priceless as Dr. Einstein, Raymond Massey terrifying and hilarious as evil brother Jonathan, and the supporting cast simply brilliant. The timing, the dialogue, the physical stuff--perfect.
None But the Lonely Heart (1944) with the great Ethel Barrymore are his mom. Tear-jerker extraordinaire.
The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer (1947), one of his best comedies with the luscious Myrna Loy, Shirley Temple, and Rudy Vallee. Temple gets a crush on Grant, and her sister, the judge (Loy), mandates dating to cure Little Sister of her crush... hijinx ensue when Big Sister too get a crush (who wouldn't?). Best scene: the nightclub (below)... or maybe the Fourth of July picnic? Mellow greetings, yukey dukey!
![]()
The Bishop's Wife (1947) in which Grant (an angel) competes for Loretta Young's attention with her husband, David Niven (the bishop). A lovely Christmas film you should see all year.
Crisis (1950), in which Grant, a brain surgeon, has to save the life of a South American dictator. I know! Just see it, for the fun of Grant operating.
Houseboat (1958) with Sophia Loren as the "housekeeper" Grant takes on to care for his three kids after their mom dies. Loren is on the run from her constricted life as a socialite (natch!), and hilarity and romance ensue. Loren is young and earthy, a great match for Grant's maturing glamour.
That Touch Of Mink (1962), Grant's only match-up with Doris Day is witty, again, as he pursues her. He wants an affair, she wants marriage... guess what?
Charade (1963), another personal favorite, that matches Grant with Hepburn--Audrey this time--in Paris. How could it go wrong? Clever, charming, and funny. The drip-dry suit: I love that Grant could laugh at himself so effortlessly. And I think I stayed in that hotel... but in the 1990s. Imagine!
What a list!
A mix of any or all would be an excellent use of your weekend.
One last image:
![]()
Once asked about his life, Grant responded, "My formula for living is quite simple. I get up in the morning and I go to bed at night. In between, I occupy myself as best I can."
When I lived in NYC (in a former life) The Regency Theatre on the West Side had a summer film festival with all Grant's pictures--it was a month-long festival and they showed every picture only twice. I saw a lot of pictures I'd never heard of, as well as the familiar ones. Believe me, seeing the less familiar ones is as big a treat as the famous ones you already know.
Grant could do comedy or drama. He was hilarious in, for example, His Girl Friday, The Awful Truth, The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer, and even in Charade, which is after all a mystery with violence. But he was also spectacular in such serious films as Notorious, North by Northwest, An Affair to Remember, and Suspicion. No one seemed to think he was acting much, just being himself, a ridiculously suave and charming man. I suspect there was a lot of acting going on, but he made it all seem simple.
In her famous book The Dress Doctor, Edith Head talked about how great Grant was to work with, and how smart he was about style, fashion, costuming, and the camera. He always worked to make his co-stars look as good as himself, and was extremely aware of the nuances of screen costumes.
A list of Grant films would take you through the month I mentioned above, so I've got two categories:
My favorite famous Cary Grant films (a must-see collection):
She Done Him Wrong (1933), the early vehicle with Mae West that might be considered Grant's first break-through; he plays a temperance guy who tries to reform West, while being tempted by her. Oh, yes.
I'm No Angel (1933), again Grant and West, this time as a lion-tamer. Her earthiness and his class are an... interesting combination. And her costumes!
The Philadelphia Story (1940) with Katharine Hepburn and Jimmy Stewart and, again, a fantastic supporting cast. Grant is a huge star by now, and in this, the third of the Grant-Hepburn match-ups, they are at their best. Again, great style, witty dialogue, and fantastic characters. Super date movie, as well. The scene with Stewart, drunk, and Grant, sober, is priceless--better than anything else in the film, except maybe the song "Lydia."
Notorious (1946), Grant's second Hitchcock work, is my favorite romantic film of all time. He and Bergman were lightning in a bottle, in my opinion. But, hey, look for yourself.
To Catch a Thief (1955), third Hitchcock outing, with Grace Kelly... the film where she met Prince Rainier, as it was shot in Monte Carlo. The scenery is gorgeous, as are Grant and Kelly.
An Affair To Remember (1957), with Deborah Kerr. This is actually not one of my favorites; I think the tearjerking melodrama is over the top, but the style is fantastic. And it is considered an iconic "romantic" film, and the basis for Sleepless in Seattle's romantic use of the Empire State Building. I think the script is weak, but Grant and Kerr are both master actors and their scenes are often wittier and more complex than the thin script suggests.
North by Northwest (1959), fourth and final Hitchcock match-up. This one with the beautiful and talented Eva Saint Marie. The iconic race against the crop-duster.
My favorite unknown Cary Grant films (the follow-up, just for your own pleasure!)
Blonde Venus (1932), a very early film that pairs Grant with Dietrich. He's "the other man" and kind of a bad guy.
Madame Butterfly (1932), as, yes, Pinkerton. This is the original stage version (pre-opera!), and Grant plays the careless American sailor who seduced and "marries" the Japanese geisha, then deserts her, only to return and claim their child. In 1932, Sylvia Sidney, who played Cho Cho San, was much more famous than Grant; she is not Asian, he is a total cad, but oh, boy, worth every minute of the drah-ma.
Alice in Wonderland (1933) -- Forget Tim Burton and Johnny Depp (ok, well, for a minute) and get this live-action version of Alice starring major actors and character actors in Carroll's story. Oh, early Hollywood! Grant plays the Mock Turtle, Gary Cooper is the White Knight, Edward Evertt Horton is the Mad Hatter, and W.C. Fields is Humpty-Dumpty. Just get it!
Topper (1937) with Constance Bennet and Billie Burke. Grant and Bennet are a young couple killed in a car wreck who come back to haunt their stuffy banker. Light comedy with, again, great style.
The Awful Truth (1937) the first film with Irene Dunne--one of my personal favorites because of the great chemistry between Dunne and Grant, the witty script, and the supprting cast which again includes Bellamy and the ever-great Cecil Cunningham.
Only Angels Have Wings (1939) with Jean Arthur and the deightful young Rita Hayworth.
My Favorite Wife (1940), the second Grant-Dunne pairing, this time with Randolph Scott as the handsome man with whom Dunne, married to Grant, was stranded on an island for 7 years... oh, yes, hilarity ensues.
Penny Serenade (1941), the third Dunne-Grant film, this time a serious film about a couple trying to have a child. Charming.
Mr. Lucky (1943), with Laraine Day. Here, Grant plays a gambler trying to romance a society dame (Day) while cheating her charity out of lots of cash. This is his cad-turned-honest guy character, and again, well done.
Arsenic and Old Lace (1944). The stage play turned film -- RUN, do not walk, to get this fabulous comedy. Peter Lorre is priceless as Dr. Einstein, Raymond Massey terrifying and hilarious as evil brother Jonathan, and the supporting cast simply brilliant. The timing, the dialogue, the physical stuff--perfect.
None But the Lonely Heart (1944) with the great Ethel Barrymore are his mom. Tear-jerker extraordinaire.
The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer (1947), one of his best comedies with the luscious Myrna Loy, Shirley Temple, and Rudy Vallee. Temple gets a crush on Grant, and her sister, the judge (Loy), mandates dating to cure Little Sister of her crush... hijinx ensue when Big Sister too get a crush (who wouldn't?). Best scene: the nightclub (below)... or maybe the Fourth of July picnic? Mellow greetings, yukey dukey!
The Bishop's Wife (1947) in which Grant (an angel) competes for Loretta Young's attention with her husband, David Niven (the bishop). A lovely Christmas film you should see all year.
Crisis (1950), in which Grant, a brain surgeon, has to save the life of a South American dictator. I know! Just see it, for the fun of Grant operating.
Houseboat (1958) with Sophia Loren as the "housekeeper" Grant takes on to care for his three kids after their mom dies. Loren is on the run from her constricted life as a socialite (natch!), and hilarity and romance ensue. Loren is young and earthy, a great match for Grant's maturing glamour.
That Touch Of Mink (1962), Grant's only match-up with Doris Day is witty, again, as he pursues her. He wants an affair, she wants marriage... guess what?
Charade (1963), another personal favorite, that matches Grant with Hepburn--Audrey this time--in Paris. How could it go wrong? Clever, charming, and funny. The drip-dry suit: I love that Grant could laugh at himself so effortlessly. And I think I stayed in that hotel... but in the 1990s. Imagine!
What a list!
A mix of any or all would be an excellent use of your weekend.
One last image:
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Claudette Colbert
Colbert is one of the best comediennes of her era (the 1930s and 40s) as well as one of the most stylish stars of the movies.
![]()
Her career started in the 1920s, when she was just a girl. She was born in France--actually, in the eastern Parisian suburb I lived in on sabbatical--in 1908, so her first movies, made in 1927, were when she was just 19.
Like Davis, she made a bunch of minor melodramas initially, really breaking out in 1934 with It Happened One Night, with her co-star Clark Gable. For both of them, it was a break-out picture, but before she made this, she made 26 films between 1927 and 1934. Any of those are fun, but it was her appearance as the Empress Poppaea with her bath of asses' milk that made early censorship happen. Forget Janet Jackson--this is the original peek-a-boo, and Colbert is great, just acting while naked. But don't ignore the "slavegirls'" BDSM chains and peek-a-boo dresses, either.
![]()
Her final, great film might be The Egg and I (1947) with Fred MacMurray (of future My Three Sons' fame). Like Davis, in the 1950s her career turned to TV, but by 1961 she was done, retired from the spotlight, until her final appearance in 1987. Unlike most actresses, she had only two marriages, one short when young, and one long marriage to a surgeon who died in 1968.
My favorite Colbert films include:
The Wiser Sex (1932) with Melvyn Douglas and Franchot Tone, two very classy actors no one knows anymore.
I Cover the Waterfront (1933)
It Happened One Night (1934), the great classic comedy
![]()
Cleopatra (1934) -- watch this, then the Liz-and-Dick one. Laugh!
Imitation of Life (1934) which also stars the great Hattie McDaniel; later this was a Lana Turner tear-jerker of the 1950s, of the same title, with the great Juanita Moore. I prefer the Colbert version, perhaps because it is more honest about the issues of "passing" and race that are central to this piece.
The Gilded Lily (1935) with Fred MacMurray and Ray Milland.
I Met Him in Paris (1937) with Melvyn Douglas and Robert Young, later of Father Knows Best on TV.
Bluebeard's Eighth Wife (1938) -- a pretty great comedy with Gary Cooper.
My personal favorite of all is The Palm Beach Story (1942), with Joel McCrae, Rudy Vallee, and Mary Astor. Simply brillant! Here's the trailer, with French subtitles.
Since You Went Away (1944) is one the host of "at home" picture studios made during WWII about life without husbands and fathers. It also stars the beautiful Jennifer Jones and Joseph Cotton, who were a great movie couple as well.
The Egg and I (1947) is charming and surprisingly holds up well. It includes Ma and Pa Kettle, too, so if you've never seen Marjorie Main in this role, definitely find it!
Colbert's films are definitely a record of the star system (she refused to be filmed from the left, for instance, after learning about film lighting) and the studio/contract era of Golden Hollywood. Unlike davis she was never considered a "great" actress, but watching her films you see that she had strong comic timing, the ability to handle complex language (whether comedy or drama) as well as weaker dialogue (and make it look good), and that she was a professional. She, too, made the transition from ingenue to "mature" roles gracefully.
![]()
Her career started in the 1920s, when she was just a girl. She was born in France--actually, in the eastern Parisian suburb I lived in on sabbatical--in 1908, so her first movies, made in 1927, were when she was just 19.
Like Davis, she made a bunch of minor melodramas initially, really breaking out in 1934 with It Happened One Night, with her co-star Clark Gable. For both of them, it was a break-out picture, but before she made this, she made 26 films between 1927 and 1934. Any of those are fun, but it was her appearance as the Empress Poppaea with her bath of asses' milk that made early censorship happen. Forget Janet Jackson--this is the original peek-a-boo, and Colbert is great, just acting while naked. But don't ignore the "slavegirls'" BDSM chains and peek-a-boo dresses, either.
Her final, great film might be The Egg and I (1947) with Fred MacMurray (of future My Three Sons' fame). Like Davis, in the 1950s her career turned to TV, but by 1961 she was done, retired from the spotlight, until her final appearance in 1987. Unlike most actresses, she had only two marriages, one short when young, and one long marriage to a surgeon who died in 1968.
My favorite Colbert films include:
The Wiser Sex (1932) with Melvyn Douglas and Franchot Tone, two very classy actors no one knows anymore.
I Cover the Waterfront (1933)
It Happened One Night (1934), the great classic comedy
Cleopatra (1934) -- watch this, then the Liz-and-Dick one. Laugh!
Imitation of Life (1934) which also stars the great Hattie McDaniel; later this was a Lana Turner tear-jerker of the 1950s, of the same title, with the great Juanita Moore. I prefer the Colbert version, perhaps because it is more honest about the issues of "passing" and race that are central to this piece.
The Gilded Lily (1935) with Fred MacMurray and Ray Milland.
I Met Him in Paris (1937) with Melvyn Douglas and Robert Young, later of Father Knows Best on TV.
Bluebeard's Eighth Wife (1938) -- a pretty great comedy with Gary Cooper.
My personal favorite of all is The Palm Beach Story (1942), with Joel McCrae, Rudy Vallee, and Mary Astor. Simply brillant! Here's the trailer, with French subtitles.
Since You Went Away (1944) is one the host of "at home" picture studios made during WWII about life without husbands and fathers. It also stars the beautiful Jennifer Jones and Joseph Cotton, who were a great movie couple as well.
The Egg and I (1947) is charming and surprisingly holds up well. It includes Ma and Pa Kettle, too, so if you've never seen Marjorie Main in this role, definitely find it!
Colbert's films are definitely a record of the star system (she refused to be filmed from the left, for instance, after learning about film lighting) and the studio/contract era of Golden Hollywood. Unlike davis she was never considered a "great" actress, but watching her films you see that she had strong comic timing, the ability to handle complex language (whether comedy or drama) as well as weaker dialogue (and make it look good), and that she was a professional. She, too, made the transition from ingenue to "mature" roles gracefully.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Bette Davis
From the time I was 7 or 8 until I started college, one of my greatest pleasures was watching what are now called "classic" movies on TV. Where I grew up there were two channels devoted to them, one that showed movies everyday between 430 and 6, and on weekends, when not covering sports, other channels also ran old movies. Why not? They were cheap and no one had heard of reality TV, cable channels, 24-hour news, QVC, or the Food Network.
I watched everything possible, especially films made from the advent of talkies to about 1965. I had to be a lot older to appreciate the nuances of the gritty movies made after that.
Other than that, I wasn't very discriminating about my viewing: musical, comedy, drama, costume drama, great literature, b-movie, film noir, etc. No one was showing foreign classics, few showed silents, so it was 99.5% American studio industry films.
My suggestion for summer savings? Get these "old" movies from your library, Netflix, wherever, and enjoy.
Bette Davis.
![]()
A career that spanned the early 30s to the late 80s (Wow!), Davis played everything from comedy to drama to costume pieces. Probably she is best known for the endless series of melodramas she appeared in during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, bounded by Jezebel (1937), her first Oscar win that went a long way to legitimize her and separate her from the herd of young, blonde actresses of the period, to All About Eve (1950), her amazing turn as an aging actress shadowed by a young wannabe. Of course, after that came The Virgin Queen, and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, as well as a string of TV appearances (Bette Davis in Perry Mason and Alfred Hitchcock Presents and Wagon Train and Gunsmoke!) and TV movies.
My personal picks from among her films:
Of Human Bondage (1934): in this filming of Maugham's novel, she plays a cheap tramp wiithout a heart of gold who tortures Leslie Howard (later Ashley Wilkes), who plays a sensitive med student/doctor infatuated with the girl. Davis is fabulous stealing this scene from Howard. Yes, over the top, but that is part of Bette's charm.
Petrified Forest (1936), again with Howard and also with Humphrey Bogart, pre-Casablanca.
Kid Galahad (1937) with Bogart and Edward G. Robinson.
Jezebel (1937) with Henry Fonda--Davis as the "headstrong Southern belle" who dares to wear red to the Cotillion! Great film, with Davis at her young peak.
![]()
Dark Victory (1939) Of course! Davis as the dying headstrong heiress, with Bogart and George Brent as the man she loves.
The Little Foxes (1941), based on Hellman's play. Fabulous! Especially, the scene on the stairs.
The Man who Came to Dinner (1942), one of her few comedies, but she is brilliant in the film version of the Kaufman-Hart stage play. Hilarious!
Now, Voyager (1942)--admittedly, one of my very favorites because despite being a melodrama, it is actually not over the top and Davis gives a controlled and layered performance as a spinster who falls for a married man, played by the ever-sexy Paul Henried. And yes, the clothes, hats, sets are all fantastic.
A Stolen Life (1946), in which she plays twins, one of whom dies in a tragic boating accident....
All About Eve (1950), which is the pinnacle of her career, in my opinion,because she never appears in a script as smart, funny, and perfect for her as this again.
The Star (1952), perhaps a little autobiographical.
Pocketful of Miracles (1961), the remake of a Damon Runyon-based story, with Glenn Ford and Hope Lange.
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), brilliant, brilliant over-the-top film with Davis and Crawford trying to outact each other. A horror film, a mystery, a fantastic scary thing... with Davis doing her parody of Mary Pickford (ouch! Take that, Mary!).
![]()
My sister and I re-enact this scene. We worry which of us might end in the wheelchair: take note!
Davis was an incredible, enduring actress who adapted to new forms and genres, as well as "grew up" on screen, refusing to get stuck playing the ingenue (although she was a pretty one!).
![]()
We all know it is more fun to play the experienced, sophisticated grown-up girl.
Love this ad! Smoking, Jim Beam, that laser-sharp gaze, that amused smile.
![]()
Tomorrow, Claudette Colbert.
I watched everything possible, especially films made from the advent of talkies to about 1965. I had to be a lot older to appreciate the nuances of the gritty movies made after that.
Other than that, I wasn't very discriminating about my viewing: musical, comedy, drama, costume drama, great literature, b-movie, film noir, etc. No one was showing foreign classics, few showed silents, so it was 99.5% American studio industry films.
My suggestion for summer savings? Get these "old" movies from your library, Netflix, wherever, and enjoy.
Bette Davis.
A career that spanned the early 30s to the late 80s (Wow!), Davis played everything from comedy to drama to costume pieces. Probably she is best known for the endless series of melodramas she appeared in during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, bounded by Jezebel (1937), her first Oscar win that went a long way to legitimize her and separate her from the herd of young, blonde actresses of the period, to All About Eve (1950), her amazing turn as an aging actress shadowed by a young wannabe. Of course, after that came The Virgin Queen, and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, as well as a string of TV appearances (Bette Davis in Perry Mason and Alfred Hitchcock Presents and Wagon Train and Gunsmoke!) and TV movies.
My personal picks from among her films:
Of Human Bondage (1934): in this filming of Maugham's novel, she plays a cheap tramp wiithout a heart of gold who tortures Leslie Howard (later Ashley Wilkes), who plays a sensitive med student/doctor infatuated with the girl. Davis is fabulous stealing this scene from Howard. Yes, over the top, but that is part of Bette's charm.
Petrified Forest (1936), again with Howard and also with Humphrey Bogart, pre-Casablanca.
Kid Galahad (1937) with Bogart and Edward G. Robinson.
Jezebel (1937) with Henry Fonda--Davis as the "headstrong Southern belle" who dares to wear red to the Cotillion! Great film, with Davis at her young peak.
The Little Foxes (1941), based on Hellman's play. Fabulous! Especially, the scene on the stairs.
The Man who Came to Dinner (1942), one of her few comedies, but she is brilliant in the film version of the Kaufman-Hart stage play. Hilarious!
Now, Voyager (1942)--admittedly, one of my very favorites because despite being a melodrama, it is actually not over the top and Davis gives a controlled and layered performance as a spinster who falls for a married man, played by the ever-sexy Paul Henried. And yes, the clothes, hats, sets are all fantastic.
A Stolen Life (1946), in which she plays twins, one of whom dies in a tragic boating accident....
All About Eve (1950), which is the pinnacle of her career, in my opinion,because she never appears in a script as smart, funny, and perfect for her as this again.
The Star (1952), perhaps a little autobiographical.
Pocketful of Miracles (1961), the remake of a Damon Runyon-based story, with Glenn Ford and Hope Lange.
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), brilliant, brilliant over-the-top film with Davis and Crawford trying to outact each other. A horror film, a mystery, a fantastic scary thing... with Davis doing her parody of Mary Pickford (ouch! Take that, Mary!).
My sister and I re-enact this scene. We worry which of us might end in the wheelchair: take note!
Davis was an incredible, enduring actress who adapted to new forms and genres, as well as "grew up" on screen, refusing to get stuck playing the ingenue (although she was a pretty one!).
We all know it is more fun to play the experienced, sophisticated grown-up girl.
Love this ad! Smoking, Jim Beam, that laser-sharp gaze, that amused smile.
Tomorrow, Claudette Colbert.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
JANE EYRE: The New One
Since Jane Eyre was one of those seminal books for me as a young girl (2.11.10), of course I went to see the newest version, starring MiaWasikowska as Jane and Michael Fassbinder as Mr. Rochester, directed by Cary Fukunaga.
General overall comment: go see it if you are a fan of the book or the story.
Caveat: the screenplay by Moira Buffini moves like a house a-fire and has a more Gothic feeling than I think the novel embraces. Buffini includes sizable segments from the three parts of the book: Jane's life prior to coming to Thornfield Hall, her life at Thornfield/with Mr. Rochester, and her time with St. John Rivers (played by Jamie Bell), who actually gets a lot more time than his character warrants.
But everyone is here: Mrs. Reed and her nasty children, Mr. Brocklehurst and Helen Burns, and the crew at Thornfield. In fact, the most famous actor in the piece is Dame Judi Dench, who plays Mrs. Fairfax; Dench is of course spectacular as a working actress in her prime and graciously plays this small secondary role, mostly in scenes with the young Wasikowska.
My major arguments against this new version are personal. One, the screenplay, besides rocketing along so quickly there are none of Bronte's subtleties, also starts in an unlikely and ultimately flawed place: with Jane's rescue on the moor by St. John Rivers. Thus, while she "recovers" and starts to embrace her new life with the Rivers family, she flashes back to her childhood and time with Mr. Rochester, memories triggered by what feel like very cliched comments from the Rivers brother and sisters.
And the book is very clear: St. John Rivers is a more typical "hero" than Rochester -- better looking, more selfless, more in keeping with a mainstream religious and political audience. he is the obvious choice, if you will, and the reader is meant to be surprised and affected by Jane's refusal to choose him rather than the problematic Rochester. Jamie Bell is unfortunately hampered by some mutton-chop whiskers that simply became more fascinating than his acting (yes, it's true) and kept him from in any way appearing heroic. No way was Jane even tempted -- which is all too clear.
Second objection: Fassbinder was handsome in a brooding sort of way, but did not have the humor or intelligence Rochester amply demonstrates in the novel. Jane doesn't fall for her employer's looks (that is made clear) but for the fact that his spirit, his character, his self is as stubborn, intelligent, quirky, and free-willed as her own. Fassbinder's Rochester is a weeper (oy, the sensitive Gothic hero!) and doesn't have nearly the right amount of self-aware arrogance the novel demonstrates. The Rochester here is more Harlequin Romance than Bronte, sadly. he's not bad, but in my opinion the best Rochester was Toby Stephens (2006 BBC-TV version).
Third objection: there is absolutely no time to breathe, to appreciate, the enjoy the story. It's a roller coaster ride. Which disappointed me, because the end result was more Danielle Steele than Charlotte Bronte: a romance where there is no need for pausing because the whole thing is so shallow that it is like eating whipped cream. No need to chew. Whereas, as I see it, Jane Eyre is actually more like a savory beef pot pie, thick with gravy and veg. Not solely romantic, but delightfully seasoned, filling, and, on a cold winter's night on the moors, something you're glad to linger over.
And Bronte's novel is, in fact, not solely a romance but a social critique, an indictment of class inequity, and a compelling portrait of an intelligent young woman who knows that because of her lack of fortune and pretty face, she has limited opportunities and yet she is a fierce, free, intelligent, compassionate being. It is about atonement and forgiveness, it is about paying for the mistakes of our youth, it is about love (and not merely romantic love, but filial love and deep friendship). it is about judging people by their appearance, and (in a very early form) an indictment of the social text that some people, because they are rich or beautiful, are superior to or more entitled than the poor, the ugly, the crippled in body or mind.
Jane sees the world very clearly, and while she understands that her perceptions are colored by her love, her envy, her fear, or her anger, she records for us her perceptions and her prejudices without being preachy or priggish.
The movie eliminates that in favor of Jane as romantic, helpless heroine, the little girl enamoured of and healing the damaged hero... except (spoiler alert!) he is never damaged as the novel requires in its hard justice. And the film ignores Bronte's sense of justice, which is hard and perhaps thus not comfortable to our pink-clouded romantic eyes.
This is the same kind of Hollywood mishandling that damaged the Pride and Prejudice of a few years ago: way too Gothic, was too emo to be true to Austen's sense of justice and independence... as well as the author's clear-eyed and harder sense of reality.
General overall comment: go see it if you are a fan of the book or the story.
Caveat: the screenplay by Moira Buffini moves like a house a-fire and has a more Gothic feeling than I think the novel embraces. Buffini includes sizable segments from the three parts of the book: Jane's life prior to coming to Thornfield Hall, her life at Thornfield/with Mr. Rochester, and her time with St. John Rivers (played by Jamie Bell), who actually gets a lot more time than his character warrants.
But everyone is here: Mrs. Reed and her nasty children, Mr. Brocklehurst and Helen Burns, and the crew at Thornfield. In fact, the most famous actor in the piece is Dame Judi Dench, who plays Mrs. Fairfax; Dench is of course spectacular as a working actress in her prime and graciously plays this small secondary role, mostly in scenes with the young Wasikowska.
My major arguments against this new version are personal. One, the screenplay, besides rocketing along so quickly there are none of Bronte's subtleties, also starts in an unlikely and ultimately flawed place: with Jane's rescue on the moor by St. John Rivers. Thus, while she "recovers" and starts to embrace her new life with the Rivers family, she flashes back to her childhood and time with Mr. Rochester, memories triggered by what feel like very cliched comments from the Rivers brother and sisters.
 |
| Jane is ogling the mutton-chops! |
 |
| Gothic Hero |
Third objection: there is absolutely no time to breathe, to appreciate, the enjoy the story. It's a roller coaster ride. Which disappointed me, because the end result was more Danielle Steele than Charlotte Bronte: a romance where there is no need for pausing because the whole thing is so shallow that it is like eating whipped cream. No need to chew. Whereas, as I see it, Jane Eyre is actually more like a savory beef pot pie, thick with gravy and veg. Not solely romantic, but delightfully seasoned, filling, and, on a cold winter's night on the moors, something you're glad to linger over.
And Bronte's novel is, in fact, not solely a romance but a social critique, an indictment of class inequity, and a compelling portrait of an intelligent young woman who knows that because of her lack of fortune and pretty face, she has limited opportunities and yet she is a fierce, free, intelligent, compassionate being. It is about atonement and forgiveness, it is about paying for the mistakes of our youth, it is about love (and not merely romantic love, but filial love and deep friendship). it is about judging people by their appearance, and (in a very early form) an indictment of the social text that some people, because they are rich or beautiful, are superior to or more entitled than the poor, the ugly, the crippled in body or mind.
Jane sees the world very clearly, and while she understands that her perceptions are colored by her love, her envy, her fear, or her anger, she records for us her perceptions and her prejudices without being preachy or priggish.
The movie eliminates that in favor of Jane as romantic, helpless heroine, the little girl enamoured of and healing the damaged hero... except (spoiler alert!) he is never damaged as the novel requires in its hard justice. And the film ignores Bronte's sense of justice, which is hard and perhaps thus not comfortable to our pink-clouded romantic eyes.
This is the same kind of Hollywood mishandling that damaged the Pride and Prejudice of a few years ago: way too Gothic, was too emo to be true to Austen's sense of justice and independence... as well as the author's clear-eyed and harder sense of reality.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Oscars!
Dresses first, winners after.
Best overall look: Sandra Bullock, Jennifer Lawrence, Hailey Steinfeld, and Reese Witherspoon. Dress, jewelry, makeup, hair, accessories: Brava!
I loved Bullock's total look, which was so much better than her Golden Globes mess. Like Bullock, Reese Witherspoon went for simple elegance: a killer dress and gorgeous accessories. Witherspoon's black-and-white was so simple it made the perfect foil for those emerald earrings (I want!). The color isn't as brilliant here, but the style is visible, as is her pefect hair and makeup.
I loved that Hailey Steinfeld was so very age-appropriate, but in the prettiest possible way. And Jennifer Lawrence (my favorite actress of 2010) really wore that Calvin Klein sheath dress perfectly: only for a younger woman with excellent posture. The color and the style were perfect for her age, as well.
Great dresses with a ouch! factor: Gwyneth Paltrow (hair and handlers), Annette Benning (hair), Amy Archer (neckline and cap sleeves), Halle Berry (tulle froth), Jennifer Hudson (breast explosion)
What bothered me about Paltrow was that this dress on her was absolutely perfect: who can wear a silver sheath with that neckline? Prettier, I think, than the fabled pink Lauren gown (which was poorly fitted). But her hair! First off, color great, but her handlers and she kept fussing all night to make it lie perfectly flat. Visible fussing is like visible panty lines: disruptive.
That was also one of my problems with Hudson and Hathaway's dresses, see above. Initially nice to look at, but if you require 1-2 handlers to pooch or park the dress... uh-uh. Unless you want your grumpy minions in the pictures fussing and holding up your dress (like Hudson). The illusion is all, and seeing the stagehands ruins the illusion.
Hudson looks great and really found a color and a style that showcase her weight loss. The problem for me was that the inner curve of her breasts constantly stole the show from her total look. Their blatant featuring was completely distracting and in bad taste, in my opinion. Not saying you shouldn't rock a great figure and play up your best features, but the "here they are!" signal is tacky. Her eyebrows also looked overplucked... or something. Again, a small thing, but distracting to me.
Seen in the long version onstage, Adams' dress was gorgeous. The color--not balck or navy but a vibrant deep blue--was great on her skin tone. But I don't like the cap sleeves or neckline, and given the stunning diamond and emerald necklace, felt that the glittery gown was a distraction from a sincerely amazing piece of jewelery chosen to stun us. A matte fabric or a deeper neckline would have been better. Loved the back and the leg slit: ladylike but glamorous.
Halle Berry: someone finally wore the pale off-white/cream color perfectly. Finally! Gown is perfectly fitted, gorgeous fabric... and erupts into a flurry of tulle. Ugh. The tulle seemed an afterthought that, again, distracted from a nearly perfect dress and thus overall design. Like Bullock, she was soooooo much better than her Golden Globes disaster (OMG!). But not dead-on.
Shoulda stayed home: Melissa Leo (oh, dear!), Cate Blanchet (some green growth is eating my very square shoulders and giving me unibreast, Cap'n Kirk!), Anne Hathaway (too much going on behind), Nicole Kidman (what a very fancy apron, or shouldn't your wrap be around your shoulders?).
Melissa Leo was just not right. Too many things: lace, gold metallic, slit, shoulders, whoa! The hair was too casual for this very fussy dress. I suspect that as a working actress rather than a celebrity, she didn't have the stylist or the experience to solve the total conundrum that is working the red carpet. It's not a sideline: it is an event in itself with its own culture.
Anne Hathaway: why have a big, loose bag on your butt? And... visible handlers. Ugh.
Cate Blanchett: ??? I know people will disagree with me because there is a Cate-cult out there, but this was a huge misstep. The shoudlers, the frothy stuff, the color, the portrait breasts... everything. her hair and makeup: dead on. The skirt of the dress: great. The bodice: sooo many things gone wrong.
Nicole Kidman: again, someone who can wear white without washing out, but... ???? I don't get the notion of this dress with its big wraparound satin thing. Un-clear. Cuts her in two, bulky, architecturally useless, and awkward. And red shoes? Not with white satin embroidered in gunmetal. What happened to the woman who rocked puce as a color?
I also want to speak up for Helena Bonham Carter, partly because I am envious of her gorgeous porcelain skin. Ok, she's a kook blah blah blah... who cares? She and Colleen Atwood designed her gown and it was unique and who cares? Shut up already about her personal style: we all get it. Kelly Osborn judging HBC on style? Please.
She's a character. A unique woman who plays the fashion game in her own way. Get on her train or get off, but don't condescend or treat her like everyone else: you only make yourself look jerky.
As far as the awards: Annette Benning and Jennifer Lawrence were robbed for Best Actress (I am also officially over pregnant = "awwww!" = my business = award-worthy). Completely surprised THE SOCIAL NETWORK didn't win everything, not that I liked it or saw it, but everyone was so ga-ga over it at the Golden Globes. Glad for THE KING'S SPEECH, an old-fashioned kind of picture with old-fashioned kind of acting (the good kind!). Ridiculous Amy Adams didn't win Bes t Supporting Actress because she was sincerely brilliant in THE FIGHTER in the kind of specific, non-showy part that makes the picture and the other actors look good, while Leo was simply not.
My two cents.
 |
| Bullock: perfect |
 |
| Witherspoon: Brava! Berry: Tulle much? |
 |
| Steinfeld: Age appropriate and excellent! |
I loved that Hailey Steinfeld was so very age-appropriate, but in the prettiest possible way. And Jennifer Lawrence (my favorite actress of 2010) really wore that Calvin Klein sheath dress perfectly: only for a younger woman with excellent posture. The color and the style were perfect for her age, as well.
Great dresses with a ouch! factor: Gwyneth Paltrow (hair and handlers), Annette Benning (hair), Amy Archer (neckline and cap sleeves), Halle Berry (tulle froth), Jennifer Hudson (breast explosion)
 |
| Adams: Just the sleeves and neckline, ouch! |
 |
| Lawrence, Hudson, Hathaway |
That was also one of my problems with Hudson and Hathaway's dresses, see above. Initially nice to look at, but if you require 1-2 handlers to pooch or park the dress... uh-uh. Unless you want your grumpy minions in the pictures fussing and holding up your dress (like Hudson). The illusion is all, and seeing the stagehands ruins the illusion.
Hudson looks great and really found a color and a style that showcase her weight loss. The problem for me was that the inner curve of her breasts constantly stole the show from her total look. Their blatant featuring was completely distracting and in bad taste, in my opinion. Not saying you shouldn't rock a great figure and play up your best features, but the "here they are!" signal is tacky. Her eyebrows also looked overplucked... or something. Again, a small thing, but distracting to me.
Seen in the long version onstage, Adams' dress was gorgeous. The color--not balck or navy but a vibrant deep blue--was great on her skin tone. But I don't like the cap sleeves or neckline, and given the stunning diamond and emerald necklace, felt that the glittery gown was a distraction from a sincerely amazing piece of jewelery chosen to stun us. A matte fabric or a deeper neckline would have been better. Loved the back and the leg slit: ladylike but glamorous.
Halle Berry: someone finally wore the pale off-white/cream color perfectly. Finally! Gown is perfectly fitted, gorgeous fabric... and erupts into a flurry of tulle. Ugh. The tulle seemed an afterthought that, again, distracted from a nearly perfect dress and thus overall design. Like Bullock, she was soooooo much better than her Golden Globes disaster (OMG!). But not dead-on.
Shoulda stayed home: Melissa Leo (oh, dear!), Cate Blanchet (some green growth is eating my very square shoulders and giving me unibreast, Cap'n Kirk!), Anne Hathaway (too much going on behind), Nicole Kidman (what a very fancy apron, or shouldn't your wrap be around your shoulders?).
 |
| Oh, no |
 |
| Huh? |
Melissa Leo was just not right. Too many things: lace, gold metallic, slit, shoulders, whoa! The hair was too casual for this very fussy dress. I suspect that as a working actress rather than a celebrity, she didn't have the stylist or the experience to solve the total conundrum that is working the red carpet. It's not a sideline: it is an event in itself with its own culture.
Anne Hathaway: why have a big, loose bag on your butt? And... visible handlers. Ugh.
Cate Blanchett: ??? I know people will disagree with me because there is a Cate-cult out there, but this was a huge misstep. The shoudlers, the frothy stuff, the color, the portrait breasts... everything. her hair and makeup: dead on. The skirt of the dress: great. The bodice: sooo many things gone wrong.
Nicole Kidman: again, someone who can wear white without washing out, but... ???? I don't get the notion of this dress with its big wraparound satin thing. Un-clear. Cuts her in two, bulky, architecturally useless, and awkward. And red shoes? Not with white satin embroidered in gunmetal. What happened to the woman who rocked puce as a color?
I also want to speak up for Helena Bonham Carter, partly because I am envious of her gorgeous porcelain skin. Ok, she's a kook blah blah blah... who cares? She and Colleen Atwood designed her gown and it was unique and who cares? Shut up already about her personal style: we all get it. Kelly Osborn judging HBC on style? Please.
 |
| I heart HBC |
As far as the awards: Annette Benning and Jennifer Lawrence were robbed for Best Actress (I am also officially over pregnant = "awwww!" = my business = award-worthy). Completely surprised THE SOCIAL NETWORK didn't win everything, not that I liked it or saw it, but everyone was so ga-ga over it at the Golden Globes. Glad for THE KING'S SPEECH, an old-fashioned kind of picture with old-fashioned kind of acting (the good kind!). Ridiculous Amy Adams didn't win Bes t Supporting Actress because she was sincerely brilliant in THE FIGHTER in the kind of specific, non-showy part that makes the picture and the other actors look good, while Leo was simply not.
My two cents.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Review: RED
This might seem like the Helen Mirren pages, or the Helen Mirren love blog... not so. I just... admire her heartily.
RED = Retired Extremely Dangerous.
Damn, I want my file to have that phrase stamped across it (in red ink) when I... can I retire? Ever? Oh, well.
Wow, did I think this movie was worth seeing. A friend and I went to a Saturday matinee, and all people "of our experience" were there--meaning no one under 30. She and I laughed out loud throughout the movie, from the first shoot 'em up attack to the final coup de grace. (I will admit, we were the only people laughing out loud, so loud... ???)
RED is what a comic book movie should be: witty, fast-paced, full of explosions and gunfire that are totally and completely fake (and therefore satisfying!), with well-directed action sequences and stand-up characters full of piss and vinegar. ($58M gross... and $15M must have been spent on bullets! Oh, you'll see!)
Bruce Willis's character is both wry and lethal, as a man retired from active duty as one of the world's deadliest men. O-kay. How do you retire from that job? Apparently, to Cleveland, in a two-story frame house, in a PTA neighborhood. And they still find you! His romance with Mary Louise Parker is intelligent, funny, and sweet. Willis has always been a better actor than credited, especially throughout the 80s and 90s string of weak/strong comedies (including Moonlighting); I first remember him as a wife-beating drug dealer in Miami Vice... and he was terrifying and powerful. Now that his "youth" is over he has settled into a more nuanced, more complex, and more human set of characters... in action films. Yes, in action films. But he looks good.
Parker is delightful as the civil servant gone radical girlfriend; she is one of the best actors we have and gets too little credit. I hope she made a pile of money in Weeds and can now choose her projects with absolute care. (Side note: she does need to eat a few baked potatoes and fudge sundaes, just to cushion her bones in the action sequences. Ouch!)
In turn, they add in John Malkovich (who should earn an Oscar for this role), Morgan Freeman, Richard Dreyfus (so tan his veneers glow!), Brian Fox (Russian KGB, chewing the scenery as ever), and Dame Helen, who is an ex-wet works specialist now running a lovely B&B in the Virginia countryside.
Of course.
Karl Urban plays the young G-man sent to kill Willis. Boy, is he (Urban) in for a surprise!
The plot could be twistier. We figure out early that someone wants these geezers (!) killed and then, still quickly, who it is and why... and then there's one one twist left twisted to the end. The point, of course, is to see the ensemble in action as actors and colleagues. Willis, Parker, and Malkovich are the best, with the richest parts and the best byplay; Willis plays the anchor and Malkovich is the paranoid nutball who's tried to kill him more than once. See it only for the pig--I won't explain, just go and wait for it. Mirren and Fox have an old romance that lights up... but apparently Mirren's assassin was the love object of many men's long ago fantasies...
Of course.
The dialogue is funny, smart, and well-paced. Freeman and Rebecca Pidgeon are the least skillful with it (I see in her bio that husband David Mamet wrote the part in Oleanna for her. Ew). The interactions between Willis and Parker, or Willis and Malkovich are fine. The fight scene between Willis and Urban in Urban's office--hilarious and on target. The secondary love story betwen Mirren and Fox needed more attention (both in the writing and in the direction), but there are lovely moments--you are able to see two wonderful actors working less-than-great dialogue and cliched situations into something much, much better.
RED is the perfect distraction, and the catharsis of things blowing up will make you feel better. No 20-somethings, no perfect bodies, no ridiculous texting.
For Willis, this is what movies like Hudson Hawk or The Whole Nine Yards should have been: showcases for an actor who is more than a smart-ass wisecracker from Jersey. A film with class. The actor's confidence and ability are strong here, and he has surrounded himself with top-notch, grade-A talent, within which he can be the anchor and the straight man. I assume he had some creative control (who are we kidding? All of the creatve control.). RED is an adult action film, made by adults for adults... not 16-year-old boys. It is even smarter and funnier than Ocean's Eleven, which was pretty smart. And funny.
RED = Retired Extremely Dangerous.
Damn, I want my file to have that phrase stamped across it (in red ink) when I... can I retire? Ever? Oh, well.
Wow, did I think this movie was worth seeing. A friend and I went to a Saturday matinee, and all people "of our experience" were there--meaning no one under 30. She and I laughed out loud throughout the movie, from the first shoot 'em up attack to the final coup de grace. (I will admit, we were the only people laughing out loud, so loud... ???)
RED is what a comic book movie should be: witty, fast-paced, full of explosions and gunfire that are totally and completely fake (and therefore satisfying!), with well-directed action sequences and stand-up characters full of piss and vinegar. ($58M gross... and $15M must have been spent on bullets! Oh, you'll see!)
Bruce Willis's character is both wry and lethal, as a man retired from active duty as one of the world's deadliest men. O-kay. How do you retire from that job? Apparently, to Cleveland, in a two-story frame house, in a PTA neighborhood. And they still find you! His romance with Mary Louise Parker is intelligent, funny, and sweet. Willis has always been a better actor than credited, especially throughout the 80s and 90s string of weak/strong comedies (including Moonlighting); I first remember him as a wife-beating drug dealer in Miami Vice... and he was terrifying and powerful. Now that his "youth" is over he has settled into a more nuanced, more complex, and more human set of characters... in action films. Yes, in action films. But he looks good.
Parker is delightful as the civil servant gone radical girlfriend; she is one of the best actors we have and gets too little credit. I hope she made a pile of money in Weeds and can now choose her projects with absolute care. (Side note: she does need to eat a few baked potatoes and fudge sundaes, just to cushion her bones in the action sequences. Ouch!)
In turn, they add in John Malkovich (who should earn an Oscar for this role), Morgan Freeman, Richard Dreyfus (so tan his veneers glow!), Brian Fox (Russian KGB, chewing the scenery as ever), and Dame Helen, who is an ex-wet works specialist now running a lovely B&B in the Virginia countryside.
Of course.
Karl Urban plays the young G-man sent to kill Willis. Boy, is he (Urban) in for a surprise!
The plot could be twistier. We figure out early that someone wants these geezers (!) killed and then, still quickly, who it is and why... and then there's one one twist left twisted to the end. The point, of course, is to see the ensemble in action as actors and colleagues. Willis, Parker, and Malkovich are the best, with the richest parts and the best byplay; Willis plays the anchor and Malkovich is the paranoid nutball who's tried to kill him more than once. See it only for the pig--I won't explain, just go and wait for it. Mirren and Fox have an old romance that lights up... but apparently Mirren's assassin was the love object of many men's long ago fantasies...
Of course.
The dialogue is funny, smart, and well-paced. Freeman and Rebecca Pidgeon are the least skillful with it (I see in her bio that husband David Mamet wrote the part in Oleanna for her. Ew). The interactions between Willis and Parker, or Willis and Malkovich are fine. The fight scene between Willis and Urban in Urban's office--hilarious and on target. The secondary love story betwen Mirren and Fox needed more attention (both in the writing and in the direction), but there are lovely moments--you are able to see two wonderful actors working less-than-great dialogue and cliched situations into something much, much better.
RED is the perfect distraction, and the catharsis of things blowing up will make you feel better. No 20-somethings, no perfect bodies, no ridiculous texting.
For Willis, this is what movies like Hudson Hawk or The Whole Nine Yards should have been: showcases for an actor who is more than a smart-ass wisecracker from Jersey. A film with class. The actor's confidence and ability are strong here, and he has surrounded himself with top-notch, grade-A talent, within which he can be the anchor and the straight man. I assume he had some creative control (who are we kidding? All of the creatve control.). RED is an adult action film, made by adults for adults... not 16-year-old boys. It is even smarter and funnier than Ocean's Eleven, which was pretty smart. And funny.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
November's books
#4, The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck (1939)
I spent the summer when I was 14 reading Steinbeck. Until I got near the end and couldn't read any more. I still have never read Travels with Charley.
But this book, of all of them, was the best. Left me simply flat out limp with the size and scope, the humanity and compassion of Steinbeck's vision and skill. It seemed to me just as accurate a view of the Depression and the way it revealed America to itself as To Kill A Mockingbird, while looking at other problems, other areas of the country, other realities. For someone whose parents lived through the Depression and who herself has only experienced it in books, plays, and film, this is a great doorway into the non-academic reality of those times and those people. I wish we had a writer with this vision about our times, about the failures, the losses, the foreclosures, the banks, the rich vs. poor cruelty, the government, and the anger, hope, and perseverance of people now.
I spent the summer when I was 14 reading Steinbeck. Until I got near the end and couldn't read any more. I still have never read Travels with Charley.
But this book, of all of them, was the best. Left me simply flat out limp with the size and scope, the humanity and compassion of Steinbeck's vision and skill. It seemed to me just as accurate a view of the Depression and the way it revealed America to itself as To Kill A Mockingbird, while looking at other problems, other areas of the country, other realities. For someone whose parents lived through the Depression and who herself has only experienced it in books, plays, and film, this is a great doorway into the non-academic reality of those times and those people. I wish we had a writer with this vision about our times, about the failures, the losses, the foreclosures, the banks, the rich vs. poor cruelty, the government, and the anger, hope, and perseverance of people now.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
November's books
#3, Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad (1899)
This novel literally did change my way of thinking about time, space, the narrative, the possibilities of how a story could be told--not so much about the content (but yes, there too) but about the way in which a storyteller unwinds her tale for an audience... which I will be doing today, by the way, so I hope the Ghost of Joseph Conrad is with me as I manifest my tale to the ears of my audience...
Literally, a story within a story within a story... a Chinese puzzle box, a magic trick, a dream narrative, a myth, a very modern telling of a man's relationship with another man... and the unknowable gap that lies between us, making it possible to know and impossible to understand another human being completely... and maybe even ourselves.
I read this novel for a course in the Modern Novel that I took as a sophomore and that I ahd no business being in. Grad students and seniors were with me, and I was in over my head... except for the teacher who made literature--including Conrad, Woolf, Hemingway, Forster, and others--both beautiful and comprehensible. Delightful, magical, and what all good literature should be, a gateway to something beyond us that is still knowable. What a lovely memory!
This novel literally did change my way of thinking about time, space, the narrative, the possibilities of how a story could be told--not so much about the content (but yes, there too) but about the way in which a storyteller unwinds her tale for an audience... which I will be doing today, by the way, so I hope the Ghost of Joseph Conrad is with me as I manifest my tale to the ears of my audience...
Literally, a story within a story within a story... a Chinese puzzle box, a magic trick, a dream narrative, a myth, a very modern telling of a man's relationship with another man... and the unknowable gap that lies between us, making it possible to know and impossible to understand another human being completely... and maybe even ourselves.
I read this novel for a course in the Modern Novel that I took as a sophomore and that I ahd no business being in. Grad students and seniors were with me, and I was in over my head... except for the teacher who made literature--including Conrad, Woolf, Hemingway, Forster, and others--both beautiful and comprehensible. Delightful, magical, and what all good literature should be, a gateway to something beyond us that is still knowable. What a lovely memory!
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
November's books
#2, Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte (1847)
Again, another novel with movie versions I love (and those I hate). I read this (with these sad engravings! I own it now) when I was also about 12, and ignored the boring parts about her childhood and her escape to St. John and her return to her aunt's deathbed... in favor of the love story with Mr. Rochester.
Of course, when I was 12 I didn't realize that context was everything and that those boring parts of the story were actually great contrasts to her life at Thornfield, and it was actually impossible to understand the love story without understanding the stifling conditions faced by a young woman without financial prospects, with a plain face, a sharp intelligence, and a quick wit during the Victorian period. By relatives who were selfish and stupid, by an education system more interested in specious morality than educating, by the gender politics of a patriarchal and classist system, and by poverty. In fact, it was amazing that she found anyone who didn't stifle her, but encouraged her native strengths to grow and thrive. I am certain Bronte knew exactly what she wrote (dramed) about...
And yes, Mrs. Rochester had it bad, too (read WIDE SARGASSO SEA).
Again, another novel with movie versions I love (and those I hate). I read this (with these sad engravings! I own it now) when I was also about 12, and ignored the boring parts about her childhood and her escape to St. John and her return to her aunt's deathbed... in favor of the love story with Mr. Rochester.
Of course, when I was 12 I didn't realize that context was everything and that those boring parts of the story were actually great contrasts to her life at Thornfield, and it was actually impossible to understand the love story without understanding the stifling conditions faced by a young woman without financial prospects, with a plain face, a sharp intelligence, and a quick wit during the Victorian period. By relatives who were selfish and stupid, by an education system more interested in specious morality than educating, by the gender politics of a patriarchal and classist system, and by poverty. In fact, it was amazing that she found anyone who didn't stifle her, but encouraged her native strengths to grow and thrive. I am certain Bronte knew exactly what she wrote (dramed) about...
And yes, Mrs. Rochester had it bad, too (read WIDE SARGASSO SEA).
Monday, November 1, 2010
November's books
In keeping with the spirit of my music videos series, in November I am going with books. Again, the choices will me all about me (who else?), quirky or sensible, but books that are, were, and have been important to me.
#1, Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird (1960)
I first read this when I was 12, and again every year until I was, maybe, 30. Since then, not as often, but one of my favorite teaching moments was showing my playwriting students the film version. We were going to have a Q&A with Horton Foote, the great playwright who also wrote the screenplay for this film. Watching my students discover the film--and thus the book--and remembering myself how great both version are was beyond exciting. Some years earlier Gregory Peck had come to My U for a lecture, and kindly done a A&Q with the arts students. He told the story of being on the set the very first day--when Harper Lee was there--and filming the scene where Jem and Scout meet Atticus coming home from work. After, Lee was crying, and Peck rushed to find out what was wrong. His lines? His acting choices? "My daddy had a little pot belly just like yours!" Lee confided. Apparently, Peck's "pot belly" triggered some happy memories!
I think this has one of the best closing scenes in a book ever.
Happy 50th, Harper Lee and To Kill a Mockingbird!
I first read this when I was 12, and again every year until I was, maybe, 30. Since then, not as often, but one of my favorite teaching moments was showing my playwriting students the film version. We were going to have a Q&A with Horton Foote, the great playwright who also wrote the screenplay for this film. Watching my students discover the film--and thus the book--and remembering myself how great both version are was beyond exciting. Some years earlier Gregory Peck had come to My U for a lecture, and kindly done a A&Q with the arts students. He told the story of being on the set the very first day--when Harper Lee was there--and filming the scene where Jem and Scout meet Atticus coming home from work. After, Lee was crying, and Peck rushed to find out what was wrong. His lines? His acting choices? "My daddy had a little pot belly just like yours!" Lee confided. Apparently, Peck's "pot belly" triggered some happy memories!
I think this has one of the best closing scenes in a book ever.
Happy 50th, Harper Lee and To Kill a Mockingbird!
Saturday, June 27, 2009
The Proposal
Wow, it feels like FOREVER since I reviewed a play or movie (see, I get my drah-ma in other places...).
But this afternoon I made a point of going to see The Proposal once my laundry was done (no, I did not do it until this morning). I had dinner with two friends last night (that I did check off my to-do list, of course), and she recommended it--HIGHLY.
So despite the fact that Sandra Bullock has been batting .333 in romantic comedy since Practical Magic (I.M.H.O.) I went.
Well. I enjoyed it--a lot. I'll give the cons right up front: I am really tired of senior citizens gettin' jiggy with sextalk and especially with Betty White doing so. I do not find it funny any more than I find babies saying "poop" and "shit" and "penis." Ugh. Also, Sandra Bullock's indictment of the Modern Working Woman's inability to do anything without her Louboutins is a tad embarrassing and stereotypically two-dimensional.
I worked in publishing for years and I will say this: without family money (New or Old) and/or marriage to a Park Avenue plastic surgeon NO WOMAN IN PUBLISHING, be she Editor-in-Chief or not, can afford to accessorize herself with the large-size Kelly Bag and multiple pairs of Louboutins and Louis Vuitton luggage sets, unless they were gifts from adoring fans.
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
OK, on to pros, which are substantial. First, I LIKE the chemistry between Ryan Reynolds and Sandra Bullock -- finally, a co-star who isn't just a male stereotype. In fact, far from it: Reynolds' character is more honest than Bullock's, and the actor really shows his chops in terms of comic timing, physical humor, line delivery, and character development. Both Bullock and Reynolds are better than the script, which has its moments of intelligent humor (like the scenes where Bullock arrivs at work and everyone in the office reacts to her with fear, awe, and fear) but also pulls out some sorry moments that miss (like the only "exotic" dancer in Sitka, Alaska--it would have been better contextualized somehow, rather than allowing us to think, hey, maybe the writer is serious and this is the pinnacle of culture in that little town). Mary Steenburgen is under-used but wonderful as always; instead of bonding with Gammi Betty White, I'd like to have seen Reynolds' mother Steenburgen getting to know her new daughter-in-law-to-be Bullock: would have given more depth and nuance to the characters in total.
But... seriously, see it for Reynolds (who has already impressed me this summer in Wolverine--okay, mostly for his abs, but still....--and in Adventureland) and Bullock. They also handle the older woman/younger man thing with adroitness (finally!) and make it work. Yahoo! There's a reason older Bullock has a realtionship with younger Reynolds: he is her assistant. AND he is neither wimpy or too testosterone-laden to be believed. The writers and directors and characters are not embarassed nor apologetic for the age difference: they use it beautifully. See, it can be done. And for character performances by the editor-to-be-fired (and Bullock's lambasting of him), the INS man, and the super cute puppy.
I have to give praise to Bullock, who has refused to give up on romantic comedy at the same time she has refused to pretend to be an ingenue. Refreshing. This is not exactly His Girl Friday or The Lady Eve, but closer than Bullock has ever gotten to the witty, intelligent, physical comedy she would actually sparkle in. In fact, I would recommend Bullock look at Stanwyck's Ball of Fire and consider some kind of remake.
Go see The Proposal.
Pearl
P.S.: I worked for this woman when I was in publishing. I once overheard her tell the in-house head of advertising, regarding an ad that had run in the NYTimes Book Review with wrong information, that she planned to blame the advertising agency for the mistakes, because she didn't want anyone thinking she would employ someone in-house who was that stupid. And this was with her door open and the Voice that carried all the way down the hall to my little corner office... She could have taught Torquemada a few new tricks.
But this afternoon I made a point of going to see The Proposal once my laundry was done (no, I did not do it until this morning). I had dinner with two friends last night (that I did check off my to-do list, of course), and she recommended it--HIGHLY.
So despite the fact that Sandra Bullock has been batting .333 in romantic comedy since Practical Magic (I.M.H.O.) I went.
Well. I enjoyed it--a lot. I'll give the cons right up front: I am really tired of senior citizens gettin' jiggy with sextalk and especially with Betty White doing so. I do not find it funny any more than I find babies saying "poop" and "shit" and "penis." Ugh. Also, Sandra Bullock's indictment of the Modern Working Woman's inability to do anything without her Louboutins is a tad embarrassing and stereotypically two-dimensional.
I worked in publishing for years and I will say this: without family money (New or Old) and/or marriage to a Park Avenue plastic surgeon NO WOMAN IN PUBLISHING, be she Editor-in-Chief or not, can afford to accessorize herself with the large-size Kelly Bag and multiple pairs of Louboutins and Louis Vuitton luggage sets, unless they were gifts from adoring fans.
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE.
OK, on to pros, which are substantial. First, I LIKE the chemistry between Ryan Reynolds and Sandra Bullock -- finally, a co-star who isn't just a male stereotype. In fact, far from it: Reynolds' character is more honest than Bullock's, and the actor really shows his chops in terms of comic timing, physical humor, line delivery, and character development. Both Bullock and Reynolds are better than the script, which has its moments of intelligent humor (like the scenes where Bullock arrivs at work and everyone in the office reacts to her with fear, awe, and fear) but also pulls out some sorry moments that miss (like the only "exotic" dancer in Sitka, Alaska--it would have been better contextualized somehow, rather than allowing us to think, hey, maybe the writer is serious and this is the pinnacle of culture in that little town). Mary Steenburgen is under-used but wonderful as always; instead of bonding with Gammi Betty White, I'd like to have seen Reynolds' mother Steenburgen getting to know her new daughter-in-law-to-be Bullock: would have given more depth and nuance to the characters in total.
But... seriously, see it for Reynolds (who has already impressed me this summer in Wolverine--okay, mostly for his abs, but still....--and in Adventureland) and Bullock. They also handle the older woman/younger man thing with adroitness (finally!) and make it work. Yahoo! There's a reason older Bullock has a realtionship with younger Reynolds: he is her assistant. AND he is neither wimpy or too testosterone-laden to be believed. The writers and directors and characters are not embarassed nor apologetic for the age difference: they use it beautifully. See, it can be done. And for character performances by the editor-to-be-fired (and Bullock's lambasting of him), the INS man, and the super cute puppy.
I have to give praise to Bullock, who has refused to give up on romantic comedy at the same time she has refused to pretend to be an ingenue. Refreshing. This is not exactly His Girl Friday or The Lady Eve, but closer than Bullock has ever gotten to the witty, intelligent, physical comedy she would actually sparkle in. In fact, I would recommend Bullock look at Stanwyck's Ball of Fire and consider some kind of remake.
Go see The Proposal.
Pearl
P.S.: I worked for this woman when I was in publishing. I once overheard her tell the in-house head of advertising, regarding an ad that had run in the NYTimes Book Review with wrong information, that she planned to blame the advertising agency for the mistakes, because she didn't want anyone thinking she would employ someone in-house who was that stupid. And this was with her door open and the Voice that carried all the way down the hall to my little corner office... She could have taught Torquemada a few new tricks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
