dirac

One of the great what-ifs of movie history is the Laurence Olivier-Vivien Leigh Macbeth that never happened. They played it onstage to some of the best reviews they ever received, jointly or separately (although as always with Leigh in Shakespeare there were those with reservations about her). Alexander Korda was going to produce, but he died, and Olivier was unable to put together alternative financial backing. A heartbreaker. I like the Roman Polanski Macbeth with Jon Finch and Francesca Annis. Regarding the Shearer-Howard Romeo and Juliet: a choice bit of info I forgot to mention earlier. There is a story that the producer of the picture, Irving Thalberg, who was married to Shearer, offered the part of Romeo to.......Clark Gable, MGM’s biggest male star. He turned it down on the grounds that he was totally unsuited to Shakespeare, and remarked tactfully that Thalberg must be nuts to think of him, and that Mrs. Thalberg would be, um, equally unsuited to Juliet. Relations between the two men were never the same.

The subject of Johnson’s unhappy tenure as Vice President and his fraught relationship with the Kennedy brothers, particularly Robert, is also discussed in many other sources, such as the numerous books on the Kennedy administration. I would also add that Dallek wouldn’t necessarily be more “objective” than Caro. He would have a different approach and a different view.

Thank you for those eloquent posts, Paul, and for sticking up for Leslie and Norma. An aging Bernhardt played Joan of Arc and had the audience eating out of her hand, but that was on stage. Age does matter in front of the camera. I wouldn’t be without the film of Ulanova’s Juliet – it gives you an idea of the stage performance, even if it’s only a shadow of what it must have been – but making a record of a legendary dance performance is another thing from casting Juliet in a straight version of Shakespeare. You couldn’t get away with a thirty five year old in the role today, and overall I think that’s a good thing. If it's the production I'm thinking of, I think her Macbeth was Maurice Evans.

I have not read Dallek, either, although I understand his book was written in part as a corrective to Caro. Caro excels at following the money and explaining complex political and financial transactions, but Caro and LBJ are not as good a fit of writer with subject as Caro and Robert Moses were. He lacks humor and a good feel for the flavor of the political culture from which Johnson sprang. There is a penchant for melodramatic contrasts (Johnson has a Good Side and a Dark Side – it’s just like Star Wars) and he’s good at telling a story – perhaps a little too good. He loves stand alone sentences like, "And he did." This does little or no damage to the first volume of his biography, the best in my opinion and the one that contains the eloquent passages about the difficulty of life in the Hill Country Helene mentions, but it mars the second and third. (The second volume, on the Senate race, is the weakest; as noted by Helene, Caro makes claims for Johnson’s rival Coke Stevenson that don’t hold up, and you’d think LBJ was the first politician in Texas to steal votes; Caro goes on and on and on about how Johnson stretched the rules till they broke, but you feel he’s trying too hard.) Caro’s claims about Johnson’s role in the passing of civil rights legislation are not inflated, although some of his rhetoric is. Why Lady Bird never hit him on the head with one of the frying pans she had to cart back and forth from one house to another is something I'll never understand, though. Good luck, and happy reading!

Thank you, beck_hen, for exhuming this thread and for posting Kirkland's illuminating comments. (And yours too, papeetepatrick.)

You can’t do better than Miner, Garcia, and Maffre. Too bad you’re seeing them in Morris instead of Ashton.

Good points, bart. canbelto writes: Many of Shakespeare’s heroes aren’t worthy of his heroines. I think especially of the intrepid Helena in “All’s Well That Ends Well,” stuck with Bertram for the rest of her life. (And Imogen and Posthumus!) papeetepatrick writes: That is not true of Antony and Cleopatra, as he could have only come to hate her had they lived, after her ghastly and quite unaristocratic betrayal of him at sea which is chronicled better by Plutarch than Shakespeare (who was strongly and often influenced by Plutarch). Oh, I think he would have forgiven her, had things gone better. Those two knew each other's weaknesses very well. And Antony’s own nose was hardly clean in the betrayal department.

What interesting comments! Thanks to everyone who’s contributed so far. This really isn't a movie that can be characterized as any kind of art, however. TDWP is an improvement on its source IMO, although it lacks many of the insider details that were the sole interest of the book for this reader, and it’s superior to many recent comedies, admittedly not a large statement. The director, David Frankel, wrote and directed a movie some years ago called “Miami Rhapsody.” It was slavishly imitative of Woody Allen, but within that context was brightly written and acted, showed some directorial adroitness, and I looked forward to seeing what he would do next -- television, as it turned out, which I thought was too bad. Glad to see him back plying his trade on the big screen. The acting was mostly wonderful. Stanley Tucci was a lot of fun – an updated Franklin Pangborn with abs – and in common with Streep and Emily Blunt he makes his comic points but also shows you an actual person. (Nigel is a functionary, not his own man, and by the end of the movie we’ve seen him realize that he will never be anything more. I really felt for him.) I thought Streep deserved all the raves she’s receiving. She creates a rounded character with no help from the book and some from the script and I assume from Frankel as well. Anne Hathaway, alas, was about as plausible as Kate Hudson was in “How to Lose a Guy” etc., when Kate, whose character was similarly situated, expressed the desire to write on foreign policy. I think both of them would be better off sticking to moisturizer. Patricia Field does a splendid job with the clothes in the movie but they’re not necessarily what you would see in the magazine. And what's with that leopardskin thingy?? It's so Bob Mackie. David Denby could use a little febrility; I find him painfully earnest, not a bad quality, but it makes him a sucker for things like “Mystic River" et al. True, he did start out as a Paulette, but then Kael advised him, sagely, to stop writing on movies. (Denby wrote all this up a few years ago in another New Yorker article, “Pauline Told Me to Quit Writing Film Criticism and Look, Now I Have Her Job.” That’s how I remember the gist, anyway.) Denby is correct in drawing the parallel to “Wall Street” – Streep is Michael Douglas, only better – although it is interesting to note that where women are concerned, the stakes are much smaller and so are the moral betrayals, such as they are. Charlie Sheen connives at putting his dad and thousands of others out of work; we know Anne Hathaway is on the fast track to becoming a Heartless Career Woman when she misses her boyfriend’s birthday party and accepts a plum assignment originally intended for a senior employee who has never granted her a friendly word. Gee, the ruthlessness. Opinion tends to be divided on whether Streep is a soulless technician or a total goddess. I fall into the latter camp, but I can understand why the former sometimes feel that way. She tends to make you aware of her technique in a way that can keep her at a distance. (You find yourself thinking, That’s a nice bit of business.) papeetepatrick writes: I just don't think Ms. Streep does anything but don masks superbly. You can see what she's like without make-up in 'The River Wild.' She's not a personality star, and although she has charm she can’t fall back on a winning manner to bull her way through action picture silliness. (Hey, she’s not Harrison Ford.) Her natural speaking voice is not especially distinctive, and it has sometimes sounded richer and more varied with an accent (although I noticed in TDWP that she’s really gotten better in this respect with the years, and can knock you sideways with the slightest inflection; it’s worth the price of admission to hear her say, “I just don’t understand.”). richard53dog writes: She's the only reason to see a movie like "She-Devil" or "Death Becomes Her," but I don't mind telling you that I can watch her in those over and over. I remember what a surprise those performances were to me when those pictures were first released. They are not very good, but she is really funny. (And Sydney Pollack has a great bit in “Death Becomes Her,” too. Remember when he's checking Streep's vital signs?) .

Yes, indeed, bart -- beautifully said. Although aren't Romeo and Juliet and Antony and Cleopatra functioning in a very different context? Yes, their passion is their downfall -- but isn't that the point?

Thank you for posting, richard53dog. Very sad news, indeed.

Rowena Jackson and Philip Chatfield, a married pair formerly of the Royal Ballet.

Trevor Nunn turns “Porgy and Bess” into a musical. Although I’m sure Gershwin would be grateful to have his work shoehorned into a genre he was trying to move beyond, and relieved that “key melodic content” (e.g., the big tunes) would be retained, and granted that “Porgy” isn’t in all respects a fully realized opera, I still think this is a venture that, while not a desecration, is more than a little presumptuous. I assume Gershwin knew that opera appeals to a smaller audience than musical theatre and he was presumably unfazed by that. Oh dear, I must be a “carping purist.” http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/30/theater/...r=1&oref=slogin

In defense of the good old USA, I mention that, while our society has a way to go in some areas, I’ve noted in this thread that it’s being compared unfavorably to countries that have plenty of such cultural issues of their own that are in some respects much worse than anything going on here. I’m not suggesting that we can’t make criticisms – we can and we should – just pointing this out for the record.

He's a taste well worth acquiring. Be brave - open 'em up and give 'em a try. If they don't work for you, put them in storage for ten years and then try again. I've never seen that one, Paul -- thanks for the tip.

Calla Urbanski and Rocky Marval. Nice kids.

I have seen Late Spring, Early Spring, and Tokyo Story, all pictures made in his mature (postwar) style. If anyone out there has seen some of the earlier ones, I'd be interested to hear about them. You could begin with any one of those. Kurosawa is the master of action, Ozu of non-action, so to speak. Ozu takes some getting used to, because he ignores a number of conventions (the kind you don’t realize they’re conventions, until they’re gone). Often you see the actors head on, almost at floor level –“tatami shots,” they’re called. There is very little action in his movies and not much story and you may complain at first that they are slow and static, until you understand what he’s doing and appreciate the care and detail of his work. I first saw Tokyo Story in college and it went right by me at the time; I had to return to it when I was older and wiser. Well, older, anyway. I really don’t want to tell you too much, because it would be interesting to see what you think coming to one of his movies cold turkey. Hiroshi Inagaki's Chushingura is one of my favorite pictures. There is also Teinosuke Kinugasa’s Gate of Hell.

Alexandra, I believe that was true once, but it’s changed. In the last couple of decades or so, Mel Gibson, Don Johnson, Dennis Quaid, and Michael Douglas, to name only three publicly straight actors, have all at one time or another bared their tushes proudfully for the delectation of moviegoers, sometimes more than once, not that I’ve been monitoring the buns situation, you understand. These are all performers who appeal to men as well as women, and if the display bothered their male fans it wouldn’t happen. DefJef, I agree with you about the tights thing, but I also think that there is a certain wariness about dancing in general among many straight men; ballet is not the only form of dancing associated with women. Edited to add that I should have said four, not three, actors. My math was off because I never think of Don as an actor.

Thank you for posting this, papeetepatrick. A very good article worth reading in full. (It's happening in Van Cliburn's neck of the woods, and he's speaking out about it.) It used to be that public radio picked up the slack, but NPR has gone over almost completely to talk. I live in the Bay Area and can get only one classical station, and every year it gets harder and harder to find the Saturday Met broadcasts on the dial. The rule in today’s radio and elsewhere seems to be that if everybody doesn’t want it, nobody gets it, especially as ‘everybody’ gets older. (It’s not limited to classical music, although that's where the problem is most acute. Today's 'classic rock' stations -- they used to be called oldies stations, but baby boomers are too phobic for the term -- don't go back further than the Sixties. You hear little or no Fifties rock and roll, and the Sixties playlist is notably limited.)

omshanti writes: I just did not think having good technique equals virtuoso. papeetepatrick writes: Very well put.

In yesterday's WSJ, Robert Greskovic wrote on American Ballet Theatre in "Manon." He's kinder than some of the other reviewers have been ("MacMillan's uneven but not unsuccesful staging") and also observes:

This explains certain things that puzzled me when I looked through the book. And I will read The Black Dahlia before I see the movie. It was pretty clear even from mere browsing that Ellroy was an obsessive of some kind. There’s a very good documentary circulating on cable – I’m afraid the title escapes me, it’s “James Ellroy’s Feast of Death,” or something like that, which was instructive. What spectacular miscasting. Very difficult to imagine that powerhouse Zeta-Jones as a vulnerable aging star in masochistic sexual thrall to Keanu, as opposed to enjoying him as a tasty in between meal snack. Ashley Judd could handle it – she has that pillowy look of the young Lana, it’s very easy to envision Judd opposite Garfield in The Postman Always Rings Twice. Oh Lana Turner we love you get up

Thanks for the heads up, bart. Joel Lobenthal reviewed the show in today's NY Sun, although because of the subscription barrier you can only read the first paragraph or two: http://www.nysun.com/article/34696

Thank you for posting this, drb. I was also struck by this quote.

I haven't read much of James Ellroy. I saw 'L.A. Confidential' and was impressed enough to head for the library, and I didn't like what I read there as much as I expected to. I found the prose to be crude, and let's say I found Ellroy's sensibility uncongenial. I bought a book of his novellas, made it through the first one, 'Blood on the Moon,' and that was the best I could do. Maybe I should try again. I should also admit that he once made some peevish remarks about Chandler that annoyed me. I understand what you mean about the film version leaving so much out, but I thought they did what they had to do short of making a miniseries, and I don't mind having Ellroy cleaned up a bit, frankly. And the actors were wonderful, just wonderful. I forgot to thank bart for joining the discussion. Also, folks, I find it hard to believe that nobody else out there has read The Last Tycoon, The Loved One, or some of these other titles. Speak up, please.

papeete patrick writes: In West’s defense, I’d suggest that the L.A. of that era must have appeared especially unimpressive in comparison with New York. Most Hollywood novels were/are written by former or current screenwriters, and for a variety of reasons writers have always been low men on the totem pole in Hollywood, leading to a certain jaundiced view. (If I recall correctly, West wrote mostly B pictures, and the ambiance of your average B picture writers’ unit would certainly have been depressing.) “Inside Daisy Clover,” the book, is well worth your time. If you’ve seen the picture you know the general outline, although you should try to erase the memory of Natalie Wood. The movie is odd, and if I didn’t know better I’d never have guessed that Lambert did the adaptation himself. He also wrote another Hollywood novel, “The Goodbye People,” which I have not read. (In the nonfiction area, his books on Wood, Lindsay Anderson, and Norma Shearer are all interesting, too.)