Harold and Lillian: A Hollywood Love Story – Exclusive Interview with Director Daniel Raim

Posted on March 21, 2018 by minooallen

Harold and Lillian: A Hollywood Love Story
Interview with Director Daniel Raim

Harold and Lillian A Hollywood Love Story coverHarold and Lillian: A Hollywood Love Story

What comes to mind when you think of the word Hollywood? Glamour? Yup. Scandal? Sure. Stardom? Of course. But film maker Daniel Raim wants to show you a different side of Hollywood – a more human side. The side that’s occupied by the mere mortals who never appear on the screen but work above and beyond, behind the scenes.

Last week I had the pleasure of speaking with Daniel about his latest documentary – Harold and Lillian: A Hollywood Love Story.  The film not only chronicles the beautiful romance between two of Hollywood’s unsung heroes: Harold and Lillian Michelson but also sheds light on the their prolific contributions to the American film industry.

Harold and Lillian youngHarold and Lillian

1) I’ll just start with an obvious question: what is the origin of this project? Why did you decide to tell these stories – one about the Hollywood behind-the-scenes workers, and the other a love story between Harold and Lillian?

The genesis of the film began in 2013 while exploring the contributions of Harold and Lillian to the American film industry. At the time, I didn’t know what it would turn into. I met Harold in 1998 as a film student at the American Film Institute, when Harold was invited by my professor Robert Boyle (Hitchcock’s Production Designer) to speak about storyboarding. I was appreciative of their work and deeply curious to understand more.

I was able get to know Harold while working on my first documentary, The Man on Lincoln’s Nose, a film about the production design of Hitchcock films. I traveled with Harold and Boyle to Bodega Bay, the location of The Birds, and I had the privilege to do two career-spanning interviews with Harold. From there Harold and I became friends and by extension I became friends with Lillian.

They were so warm, inviting and nurturing towards me as a young person in the industry, and I know other people shared similar experiences with them as they were coming up in the industry. And it was through knowing them, having fabulous lunches and spending hours with them that left me inspired and energized, that I knew I wanted to make a film about them.

2) Lillian spent her career behind the scenes as a researcher. How did she feel about being front and center as the subject matter of the film, rather than being behind the scenes?

Lillian originally didn’t want to open up and was actually very camera shy. At first, she had absolutely no interest in talking about anything that had to do with her personal life. So, I soon realized I had to change my approach. I started doing it in very traditional way. You know, coming in with a film crew, lights and asking investigative questions. I soon abandoned that and showed up with just me and a camera, and basically started having conversations with Lillian. She had a lot of life lessons to offer. As the doc shows, she had a tough life and has a lot of wisdom to share. After a while, it very much became an intimate journey. It took two years to get to that point but it was very well worth it.

What I hope came across in the film is how she was able to make a life and a career despite the hardships in her life – having a difficult childhood, accepting Harold’s love, and raising an autistic son.

3) Danny DeVito worked as the Executive Producer on this film and as one your interview subjects. Considering his own directing experience, did he offer any creative suggestions during the filmmaking process or did he take a more hands-off approach?

Danny DeVito had originally agreed to be interviewed for the film. He then agreed as a friend of the family to watch a rough cut and liked it enough to call in his friend/editor, editor Lynzee Klingman, to tell her about it. He invited Lynzee and me to come over to his house and go over the film beat by beat. It was like a master class in filmmaking, working with the two of them. They really helped pull the film together.

Once the film was in shape, I submitted it to the Cannes Film Festival and it was accepted! After that, Danny offered his name as Executive Producer to help give the film more exposure. He’s such a great guy. He does a lot to help people making their way in the business.

4) I quite enjoyed the unromantic origins of this love story – with Lillian acting as somewhat of a social climber. Their romance seemed non-traditional in many ways, but I also got the sense that they were very much in love. What was your approach to crafting their romance on screen?

A lot of post work and working with the animator and illustrator, Patrick Mate, who was responsible for the storyboard illustrations of Harold and Lillian. He was really able to bring them to life. Also, getting access to those love letters written by Harold and Lillian were a great addition to the film and helped create a profound intimacy in the film.

And just letting Lillian tell the story in her own voice with her great sense of wit. That’s something she and Harold shared, a great sense of wit. Despite their collective tribulations, such as raising an autistic child in the 1950s, when women were called “refrigerator mothers,” Harold’s WWII experience, and Lillian’s parental abandonment issues, they were able to approach life with such love, tenacity and perseverance.  It’s a beautiful thing to watch.

Storyboard drawing

5) I am curious about your thoughts on the Auteur Theory in regards to filmmaking.  The film puts so much emphasis on how much Harold’s storyboard influenced the framing and camera work of some celebrated directors that, to me, it could act as an argument against it, since Harold’s framing was so important in the story-telling of a plethora of the films he worked on.

Yes, well film is a deeply collaborative effort and Hitchcock, for example, relied on his crew. He really worked with the best screenwriters, productions designers, art directors, cinematographers, storyboard artists, composers – he worked with the best around. They all enriched his films and Hitchcock trusted in them to so do. But it all began with his ideas. You know, there’s the saying Hitchcock directed from a telephone. Well, on the The Birds he directed from the inside of a limousine.

Hitchcock liked Harold’s work enough to bring him along to storyboard on location in Bodega Bay. This wasn’t something that happened that much with storyboard artists. But for Hitch, Harold was his visualizer. Every shot in The Birds was based of Harold’s storyboards, his visual conception of Hitchcock’s vision. For the most part, Harold liked to be behind the scenes and being left alone with his charcoal, ink, and the script so that he could visualize the story.

As for Mike Nichols, he was still a pretty young director when The Graduate came out. So, he was reliant on his cinematographer and Harold’s storyboards to visualize his films since he came from a theater and Broadway background. Harold’s boards were so visually strong that the DP, Robert Surtees, fell in love with them. Harold had this special ability to visualize everything, height of the camera, the tilt and lens. So he created storyboards that show what the camera sees. He knew he had to think like a director.

I truly believe Harold is one of the unsung masters of filmmaking in American Film.

6) One thing that I loved about your film was the tone – it felt warm and inviting, as if I should have been drinking a nice cup of hot cocoa while watching it. Did the romance of Lillian and Harold dictate this tone? Or did you actively steer away from the more cynical and often scandalized tones of many Hollywood-centric documentaries?

They were both so down earth and I wanted to show that – to show all the work that goes into behind the scenes of Hollywood. One thing I hope to do is humanize Hollywood. There’s more than what is on the screen. They are just two of the countless unsung heroes who pour their hearts and souls into their work. And then they go home and live perfectly normal lives. As much as film is a fabrication, there is some truth there. That’s what I want to show.

7) This question veers away from the film a bit but I am curious about your thoughts on comic book and graphic novels as an art form, considering they have the same visual language and story-telling style as storyboards.

I must admit, I’m not the most well-versed or much of an authority on comic books or graphic novels. But I can say this, I think the key difference is their function. Graphic novels are an art form at its end stage and exist for themselves. It’s the final product. Storyboards are the visual screenplay interpreted by the artist and exists to aid in the development of the film. Their function is to set visual ideas in motion.  Being a storyboard artist is about ideas, not style.

8) What was the most difficult part of making this film?

This might sound too broad but the most difficult part was just seeing if we could make this work! Between the behind the scenes story and the love story, there was just so much material to work with.  I mean, how can we create a unified film – you know, make this material come together? How do you whittle down 60 years of two careers and a 60-year marriage into a 94-minute documentary and weave them together into a cohesive whole? It was such a big risk. But, the bigger the risk the bigger reward. And in the end it all came together.

Lillian researching

9) Lillian was such a great storyteller and wonderful character! Was there a story that Lillian told that you liked but couldn’t fit in to the movie? If so, what was it?

To be honest, I didn’t anticipate the impact Lillian would have on the audience. People have such a profound liking for her! At TCM events or any festival events we attended, there would be a line out the door to meet her. It was absolutely incredible.

As for more stories, there is a really great Blu-ray/DVD extra called Lillian’s Life Lessons. So, if you want more Lillian stories, be sure to check out the DVD!

…..

I would like to extend my gratitude to Daniel Raim for taking the time to do this interview with us. You can order a copy of Harold and Lillian: A Hollywood Love Story here on amazon.  

…..

–Minoo Allen for Classic Movie Hub

 

Posted in Interviews, Posts by Minoo Allen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Noir Nook: The Luck of the Irish (and not so Irish)

Posted on March 16, 2018 by Karen Burroughs Hannsberry

 

The Luck of the Irish (and not so Irish)

The month of March is known for many things – the beginning of spring, the start of Daylight Savings Time…and St. Patrick’s Day! Where I’m from, in Chicago, we dye the local river green to acknowledge this foremost patron saint of Ireland – and with this same spirit of commemoration, this month’s Noir Nook is taking a look at 10 ladies of noir whose ente in show business was nothing but sheer luck! Read on…

Cathy O'Donnell and Farley Granger in They Live by NightCathy O’Donnell and Farley Granger in They Live by Night

Cathy O’Donnell (not Lana Turner, as legend has it) was sitting at the counter of Schwab’s Drug Store in Hollywood when she was discovered by agent Ben Medford. Medford took O’Donnell to see producer Sam Goldwyn, who offered her a contract without even viewing the screen test he gave her.

While a student at Southern Methodist University, Dorothy Malone was starring in a school play, Starbound, portraying a silver screen hopeful who was waiting for her big break. During the run of the play, Malone’s performance was seen by RKO talent scout Edward Rubin, who gave her a screen test in her mother’s living room, which led to her contract with the studio.

When Jan Sterling was 17, her mother enrolled her in an exclusive finishing school in Connecticut, but Sterling convinced her mom to let her go to New York, agreeing that she’d go to the finishing school if she wasn’t able to land an acting job within a month. Sterling wasn’t having much success when one day, while waiting for a friend outside the offices of the famed Schubert brothers, she ducked inside a producer’s reception room to get out of the rain. The producer emerged from his office, took one look at Sterling, and gave her a part in her first play.

Ann Blyth and Joan Crawford in Mildred PierceAnn Blyth and Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce

While Ann Blyth was eating lunch at the Professional Children’s School, she was spotted by Broadway director Herman Shumlin and playwright Lillian Hellman. They asked her to read for a part in their new production and she was cast as Paul Lukas’s daughter in Hellman’s Pulitzer Prize-winning play, Watch on the Rhine. She was 13 years old.

As a drama and art student at UCLA, Jeanne Crain interviewed for a part in Max Reinhardt’s stage production of The Song of Bernadette and was glimpsed by Reinhardt’s wife, who gave her tickets to see another play, Two on an Island. When Crain attended that play, she caught the eye of three separate talent scouts, including Ivan Kahn of 20th Century Fox, who arranged for a screen test. A short time later, she signed a contract with the studio.

Not long after Rosemary DeCamp played on radio’s The Career of Alice Blair, the show’s star, Martha Scott left the airwaves for the starring role in Cheers for Miss Bishop (1941). Scott recommended her old pal DeCamp for a role in the film playing a Danish woman – DeCamp later said Scott “fought with the producer, director and everyone to give me the part.” Whatever Scott said obviously worked – DeCamp got the role.

Yvonne DeCarlo and Dan Duryea in Criss CrossYvonne DeCarlo and Dan Duryea in Criss Cross

Yvonne DeCarlo was working as a dancer at the Florentine Gardens in Hollywood, where her exotic good looks caught the attention of numerous celebrities, including Orson Welles, Franchot Tone, and bandleader Artie Shaw, who encouraged her to quit her job and seek a career in the movies. She followed his advice, signed on with an agent, and a short time later appeared in her first film, Harvard, Here I Come (1942). (It wasn’t exactly Shakespeare, but a break’s a break!)

After graduating from Northwestern University in 1945, Jean Hagen headed for New York, working on radio series and supplementing her income by ushering at the Booth Theatre. One night, she encountered playwright Ben Hecht, whose play, Swan Song, was playing at the Booth. Hecht asked Hagen what she thought of the production, and she frankly responded, “It stinks.” After briefly arguing the point, Hecht offered Hagen a part in the play!

Evelyn Keyes was living in the Hollywood Studio Club in L.A., unsuccessfully making the rounds at the local movie studios, when she met Jeanie MacPherson, a one-time silent film actress and screenwriter for director Cecil B. DeMille. MacPherson introduced Keyes to DeMille, who – after ordering Keyes to shed her southern accent – signed her to a seven-year contract.

Loretta Young in The AccusedLoretta Young in The Accused

Loretta Young and her older sister, Polly Ann, were both budding actresses, when Mervyn LeRoy, then-assistant director for First National Pictures, called their home to see if Polly Ann was available for a part in a Colleen Moore movie. Loretta answered the phone, told LeRoy that Polly Ann wasn’t available, but SHE was, and was promptly hired for the role.

And how’s YOUR luck this month???

– Karen Burroughs Hannsberry for Classic Movie Hub

You can read all of Karen’s Noir Nook articles here.

Karen Burroughs Hannsberry is the author of the Shadows and Satin blog, which focuses on movies and performers from the film noir and pre-Code eras, and the editor-in-chief of The Dark Pages, a bimonthly newsletter devoted to all things film noir. Karen is also the author of two books on film noir – Femme Noir: The Bad Girls of Film and Bad Boys: The Actors of Film Noir. You can follow Karen on Twitter at @TheDarkPages.
If you’re interested in learning more about Karen’s books, you can read more about them on amazon here:

 

Posted in Noir Nook, Posts by Karen Burroughs Hannsberry | Tagged , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Silents Are Golden: The Thoroughly Lost Art of the Title Card

Posted on March 14, 2018 by Lea Stans

The Thoroughly Lost Art of the Title Card

A few months ago I wrote a brief overview on silent films title cards, covering both their practical use and their artistic side. Now I’m going to delve a little deeper into that artistic side, giving a peek into the trends that popped up throughout that creative era.

When you think of jobs that have gone the way of the dodo, certain ones spring to mind right away. Chimney sweeps. Switchboard operators. Bowling alley pinsetters. Organ grinders’ monkeys. Almost every flea circus ringmaster. Well, just imagine what it was like to have a career as a title card artist or title card writer in the late 1920s when talkies were starting to take off. Either way, it must’ve been intense.

It must’ve been a little sad, too. For even though titles (or “captions,” or “subtitles,” or “leaders,” as they were variously called) were sometimes considered a tad intrusive even back then, they did evolve into their own skilled art form.

Cecil B DeMille Forbidden Fruit 1921 title cardForbidden Fruit (1921)

It’s tough to track the early stages of that evolution since many of the oldest silents are missing their titles–the main titles, at any rate. Usually, this is because they were damaged by being threaded onto projectors countless times, or because they were printed on cheaper film stock that didn’t hold up over time. And foreign theaters often swapped English titles for ones in their own language.

So from what we can tell, 1900s and early 1910s films seemed to mainly use plain black backgrounds with white lettering. This was the standard since they didn’t strain the eyes the way white backgrounds did. Since piracy became an issue almost the second Louis Le Prince and Thomas Edison got twinkles in their eyes, studios soon began adding their logos to the titles.

The Teddy Bears 1907 title cardThe “Teddy” Bears (1907)

Notice the plain, sans-serif font. As studios began churning out alarming amounts of one-reel and split-reel films, they found one of the quickest ways to make titles was by arranging simple white metal or cardboard letters on a black velvet background. There were also special printing machines available just for creating title cards, helping to further streamline the process.

At times, early titles could be a bit experimental. In this still from Alice in Wonderland (1903), the title is overlaid over a live action shot of Alice:

Alice in Wonderland 1903 title cardAlice in Wonderland (1903)

And in the famous The Great Train Robbery (1903), we see what are either hand-drawn or perhaps artfully arranged letters complete with flourishes:

the great train robery 1903 title cardThe Great Train Robbery (1903)

In time, studios starting adopting a specific template for their titles, putting the words inside an artistic frame. Each studio had their own style, whether it was the same frame for every film (like Keystone) or several frames with similar motifs (like the work of Segundo de Chomón):

the magic roses 1906 title cardThe Magic Roses (1906)

Mabel's Wilful Way 1915 title cardMabel’s Wilful Way (1915)

a trip to the moon 1902 title cardA Trip to the Moon (1902)

By the 1910s, film was rapidly growing more sophisticated, and so were title cards. While typed letters were still used, hand-drawn lettering was very common since filmmakers felt it had more character. Stencils with openings for rows of words ensured everything was properly spaced and centered. Designers began utilizing more of the empty spaces, adding painterly backgrounds or “pictorial embellishments” and trying different fonts, as in this example for From the Manger to the Cross (1912):

From the Manger to the Cross (1912) title cardFrom the Manger to the Cross (1912)

In time, someone (wish I knew who) came up with one of the most popular trends of the silent era — adding little cartoons or paintings that served as humorous illustrations or visual commentary. Slapstick comedy and light comedies especially tended to gravitate toward these charming touches:

Number, Please? (1920) title cardNumber, Please? (1920)

The Return of Draw Egan (1916) title cardThe Return of Draw Egan (1916)

The Flapper (1920) title cardThe Flapper (1920)

These kinds of “art titles” became so common that directors of “serious” dramas would sometimes deliberately opt for titles with plain backgrounds–a 1922 book called Photoplay Writing explained: “There is a mighty good theory on the part of some producers that the plainly lettered title devoid of ‘art’ or the trick photography is better calculated to carry along the story, for, after all, the play is the thing!” Well, that was an opinion, anyways.

Other trends were temporary. Starting in 1912, many of the major studios would add a film’s name to the top of all its title cards. This was mainly done for people who would stroll into the theaters in the middle of the movie (a common occurrence when films were replayed all day). It also helped solve the problem of wear and tear eventually wrecking the main titles.

Fatty and Mabel Adrift (1916) title cardFatty and Mabel Adrift (1916)

 Other things like textured backgrounds became very common, a nice break from the usual black velvet. Wallpaper, watercolor paintings, wood panels, burlap, carpeting, and different types of cloth could all be used, with the actual titles superimposed using double exposures.

The Nervous Wreck (1926) title cardThe Nervous Wreck (1926)

And as the plain backgrounds became more decorative, the plainer fonts of the 1900s gradually gave way to the quainter letters that we tend to associate with silent films today. These often included modest flourishes:

Lady Windermere’s Fan (1916) title cardLady Windermere’s Fan (1916)

Probably the most widely-used type of lettering was what I’ve dubbed the “lazy ‘E’ font,” neat and rounded with a slightly tilted “E”. Note the extra tall “illuminated capital” in the example below, also a very common embellishment:

The Nervous Wreck (1926) title card 2The Nervous Wreck (1926)

There were animated titles too, such as this famous “watery” example from Sunrise (1927):

Sunrise (1927) title cardSunrise (1927)

And of course, in the meantime the avant-garde world tended to do precisely what it wanted to:

Balllet Mecanique (1924) title cardBalllet Mecanique (1924)

L’Inhumaine (1924) title cardL’Inhumaine (1924)

Towards the end of the silent era, titles grew more slick–along with the rest of the film industry. Main titles started condensing as much information as possible, including the names of producers and directors with the main stars featured in bold lettering:

It (1927) title cardIt (1927)

Should Married Men Go Home? (1928) title cardShould Married Men Go Home? (1928)

Title cards did linger into the talkie era a little bit, popping up sparingly in comedy shorts and dramas, and of course main titles were essential. But the heyday of printed captions was over, and the artists and writers behind them (hopefully) transitioned into set design and screenplay writing.

And that takes us to Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times (1936), sometimes considered the very last silent film. And if we consider it the last silent film, then perhaps this is the very last official title card–a plucky message of hope as the Tramp and his love walk off hand-in-hand, and, for me, a tinge of nostalgia for the title card itself:

harlie Chaplin’s Modern Times (1936) title cardModern Times (1936) 

…..

Note: A “thank you” to historian Paul Gierucki for assisting me with some of the information on Keystone title cards!

–Lea Stans for Classic Movie Hub

You can read all of Lea’s Silents are Golden articles here.

Lea Stans is a born-and-raised Minnesotan with a degree in English and an obsessive interest in the silent film era (which she largely blames on Buster Keaton). In addition to blogging about her passion at her site Silent-ology, she is a columnist for the Silent Film Quarterly and has also written for The Keaton Chronicle.

Posted in Posts by Lea Stans, Silents are Golden | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

The Outer Limits Season One (1963-64) DVD/Blu-Ray Giveaway (now thru April 7)

Posted on March 12, 2018 by Annmarie Gatti

The Outer Limits Season One (1963-64) DVD/Blu-Ray Giveaway
Contains the Entire First Season, 32 Episodes in All!

“Do Not Attempt To Adjust The Picture…”

Yay! The contest is over and the winners are Tim and Steve W. Congratulations!

Now for a very special giveaway… To celebrate the release of The Outer Limits Season One, on March 27th, we’ll be giving away TWO copies of the title this month, courtesy of our friends at Kino Lorber. This 7-disc set contains all 32 episodes from the first season plus audio commentaries and a 40-page essay booklet. And, if you can’t wait to win a copy, you can purchase the Blu-Ray and/or DVD on amazon here.

In order to qualify to win one of these DVD or Blu-Ray Sets (winner’s choice of format) via this contest giveaway, you must complete the below entry task by Saturday, April 7 at 10PM EST. However, the sooner you enter, the better chance you have of winning, because we will pick a winner on two different days within the contest period, via random drawings, as listed below… So if you don’t win during the first drawing, you will still be eligible to win during the second drawing.

  • Mar 24: One Winner
  • Apr 7: One Winner

We will announce each winner on Twitter @ClassicMovieHub (or this blog, depending how you entered), the day after each winner is picked at 10PM EST — for example, we will announce our first winner on Sunday March 25 at 10PM EST.

the outer limits

…..

ENTRY TASK (2-parts) to be completed by Saturday, April 7 at 10PM EST— BUT remember, if you enter early, you’ll be eligible to win for the second drawing (if you didn’t win during the first drawing)…

1) Answer the below question via the comment section at the bottom of this blog post

2) Then TWEET (not DM) the following message:
Just entered to win “The Outer Limits Season One” DVD/Blu-Ray #Giveaway courtesy of @KinoLorber and @ClassicMovieHub contest link: http://ow.ly/CRAq30iVR5m

THE QUESTION:
Why do you want to win this DVD/Blu-ray Set? 

*If you do not have a Twitter account, you can still enter the contest by simply answering the above question via the comment section at the bottom of this blog — BUT PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU ADD THIS VERBIAGE TO YOUR ANSWER: I do not have a Twitter account, so I am posting here to enter but cannot tweet the message.

ALSO: Please allow us 48 hours to approve your comments. Sorry about that, but we are being overwhelmed with spam, and must sort through 100s of comments…

About The Set: Newly Re-Mastered in HD! There Is Nothing Wrong With Your Television Set… Do Not Attempt To Adjust The Picture… We Are Controlling Transmission… The entire first season – 32 Episodes – You hold in your hands an artifact from a time now vanished forever; a compendium of portals into worlds unknown. A seven-disc set that controls over 27 hours of transmission from the 1963-1964 series, this vessel has sought you out for one specific purpose: to expand your mind to The Outer Limits! Guest stars include Ed Asner, Macdonald Carey, Dabney Coleman, Robert Culp, Bruce Dern, Robert Duvall, Mimsy Farmer, Don Gordon, Harry Guardino, Gloria Grahame, Signe Hasso, Miriam Hopkins, Richard Jaeckel, Sally Kellerman, Shirley Knight, Martin Landau, George Macready, John Marley, David McCallum, Ralph Meeker, Gary Merrill, Vera Miles, Leonard Nimoy, Simon Oakland, Warren Oates, Carroll O’Connor, Donald Pleasence, Cliff Robertson, Ruth Roman, Barbara Rush, Martin Sheen, Henry Silva and many more. “The best program of its type ever to run on network TV!” – Stephen King.

DVD Extras Include:

  • Audio commentaries by David J. Schow (author of The Outer Limits Companion) and film historians Tim Lucas, Reba Wissner, Craig Beam, Gary Gerani, Michael Hyatt and Steve Mitchell
  • THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH YOUR TELEVISION SET – 40 Page Booklet Essay by David J. Schow

You can visit Kino Lorber on their website, on Twitter at @KinoLorber or on Facebook.

Please note that only residents of the Continental United States (excluding Alaska, Hawaii, and the territory of Puerto Rico) entrants are eligible to win.

For complete rules, click here.

And if you can’t wait to win, you can click on the image below to purchase it on amazon 

…..

Good Luck!

–Annmarie Gatti for Classic Movie Hub

Posted in Contests & Giveaways | Tagged , , | 139 Comments

Vitaphone View: The Coming of Talkies – The Theatre’s Angle, Part 2

Posted on March 10, 2018 by Hutchinson, Founder of The Vitaphone Project

 

Vitaphone View: The Coming of Talkies
The Theatre’s Angle, Part 1

This is the second part of my two-part blog series on the effect of the coming of sound to exhibitors in the late 1920’s……..

Fountain Square theater marquee see talkie movietone the air circus

…..

A New Deal on Ticket Sales

The huge success of The Jazz Singer (WB, 1927) triggered a restructuring of the studio/exhibitor relationship. Prior  to that film, except for blockbusters, theatre owners paid a flat rental fee to studios to exhibit films. Typical costs in the twenties would be $2 – $3/day per short and an average of $25/day for the average feature. Enterprising theatre owners could improve their profits by running creative publicity campaigns, contests, or  presenting outstanding prologues with local talent to pack in audiences. With the advent of talkies, studios required both a flat fee and a percentage of the gate at every show. This practice enriched the studios, while driving exhibitors to cut costs by eliminating expensive live stage acts.

pipe organ theater advertisement

…..

Putting on the Show 

In presenting a Vitaphone disc-synchronized program, the projectionist was expected to prepare and rehearse the program in advance. In addition to providing training, Western Electric issued a 60-page instruction book titled “Operating Instructions for Synchronous Reproducing Equipment – Western Electric Sound Projector System For Theatres.”  Besides giving the nuts-and-bolts instructions on operating and maintaining equipment, the guide includes a dozen pages  dedicated to rehearsing and troubleshooting the show. If a projectionist was running a sound-on-film Movietone show, a film break could be  quickly fixed, and the program resumed. Not so with the Vitaphone disc process.

Operating Instructions for Synchronous Reproducing Equipment – Western Electric Sound Projector System For Theatres

Western Electric told projectionists that if the film broke on a short subject, to simply abandon it and switch to the next title on the other projector. Keep in mind that if the film broke, the sound disc continued playing and there was no practical way for the projectionist to fix the film and resume it in precisely the same spot and in synchronism with the disc.

A feature, however, could not just be written off. Western Electric suggested that the film be re-threaded and warned “synchronism is usually lost under these conditions, but this can be tolerated in an emergency unless there is a direct cue in the record, such as a knock, voice or cheers. In such a case,”  WE directed the projectionist to turn the sound down to zero.

Vitaphone Projection Room

In running a Vitaphone program, discs were set up on the turntable connected  to each projector. While new theatres got the entire projector/turntable assembly installed, existing theatres could have the turntable/reproducer mechanism added to the Simplex, Motiograph or other projectors already in the booth.

Soundtrack discs were two-sided and pressed such that the first would contain reels 1 and 3, the next one 2 and 4, and so on. This allowed the first projector to be cued for playing back reel 1, while the second projector had reel 2. Once reel 1 film and sound had played, the projectionist would switch over to the second projector playing reel 2. He would then flip the reel 1 disc over to play reel 3 and thread up the film for that reel, awaiting the changeover. This process continued through each program.

Paramount Talkie disc Needles

Each 16-inch soundtrack disc was initially pressed in heavy shellac, with the starting point for the placement of the reproducer needle clearly marked  with an arrow just outside of the label. Each disc played from the inside out and at 33 1/3 rpm. This foreshadowed the speed later used for LP’s in the late 1940s. Playing at this speed enabled one full reel (about 10 minutes) of sound to be reproduced.

Major studios often provided theatres with a disc containing specially recorded audience entrance, or overture, music. These were often non-vocal medleys of tunes from musical films, and readily addressed the reality that most theatres had dismissed their entire pit orchestra. The practice of producing audience entrance/exit non-synchronous music on discs continued well into the 1930s. Paramount Publix, Warner Brothers (which bought Brunswick Records in 1930) and later the American Record Corporation (ARC) all made such  recordings available. Often, one lone Vitaphone turntable was left in the projection booth after the others had been scrapped, solely to play the audience music.

laurel and hardy theater marquee

Each Vitaphone disc was shipped, in duplicate, to the theatre with the film. Normally heavy wooden or steel boxes were used by the local exchange to ship the discs. Each disc was in its own padded sleeve, and marked on the label with the film title and reel number. In rare instances, the studios might change the film’s title before release. Several surviving discs show in the space surrounding the label the crossed-out original title with the new one inscribed next to it in the wax. Such was the case with Fifty Million Frenchmen (WB, 1931)  which was originally to be called Nancy From Naples.  And Laurel and Hardy’s first feature comedy, Pardon Us (MGM, 1931) went through many title changes, with one — The Rap — present on some existing discs.

Contrary to the  impression created in  Singin’ in the Rain (MGM, 1952), the miscues and loss of synchronization of Vitaphone discs was not rampant. Nevertheless, the earliest known on-screen kidding of errant synchronization appears in The Talk of Hollywood (SonoArt, 1929), helmed by later Astaire/Rogers director Mark Sandrich, As in the MGM musical,  Talk has the wrong voices coming from the mouths  the screen actors, to great comedy effect. Notably, this film was produced  in the RCA Photophone sound-on-film process.

united artists theater marquee taming of the shrew mary pickford douglas fairbanks

In 1930, Warner Brothers was able to reduce the diameter of Vitaphone discs from 16 to 12 inches. Finer grooves were used to accomplish this. In 1931, a new and more forgiving record material was used in place of the brittle shellac. RCA’s “Vitrolac” was a somewhat rubbery and flexible material that was difficult to break during handling and shipment. Sound quality, though, was not as good as the shellac. But by now the handwriting was on the wall for the disc system.

Few Vitaphone turntables remain today. Most were pulled out of theatres in the 1930’s, bulky relics from the early days of talkies. Those still around in the early 1940’s were scrapped during wartime metal drives. The same, ironically, happened to the tens of thousands of steel stampers used to press the soundtrack discs. The Vitaphone Project uncovered the 1941 payment slip provided to Warner Brother for the scrap value of all of their stampers — just $971. They were melted down for the war effort. With thousands of shellac soundtrack discs missing today, these stampers would have provided the ability to still  restore sound to otherwise surviving mute 35mm prints.

– Ron Hutchinson, Founder of The Vitaphone Project, for Classic Movie Hub

You can read all of Ron’s Vitaphone View articles here.

Ron is widely recognized as one of the country’s foremost film historians, with special emphasis on the period covering the transition to sound (1925-30) and early attempts to add sound to film. As the founder of The Vitaphone Project, he has worked with Warner Brothers, UCLA, LOC and private collectors worldwide to find previously lost soundtrack discs and restore early sound shorts. Ron’s unique knowledge has  been sourced in over 25 books as well as documentaries for PBS and TCM, and commentary for “The Jazz Singer” DVD boxed set. He was awarded the National Society of Film Critics “Film Heritage Honor” for his work in film preservation and discoveries, and was the presenter of rare Vitaphone shorts at the 2016 TCM Film Festival. For more information you can visit the Vitaphone Project website or Facebook Group.

And, if you’re interested in exploring some of these newly discovered shorts and rarities, you can pick them up on DVD via amazon:

               

 

 

 

 

Posted in Posts by Ron Hutchinson, Vitaphone View | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Whales of August – Exclusive Interview with Producer Michael Kaplan

Posted on March 8, 2018 by minooallen

The Whales of August
An Interview with Michael Kaplan

The Whales of August poster

As I cozied up on my couch to watch The Whales of August on a delightful winter day, I had no idea what to expect. Well, that’s not entirely true…I did know to expect Bette Davis and Lillian Gish, but that was about it. The plot of the movie is simple: two elderly sisters spend the summer in their family home in Maine. But don’t let that fool you. What I found was, that although the film wasn’t plot driven, it offers an absolute abundance in character and performance. The film manages to create a beautiful sense of intimacy in how it touches upon the themes of family, old-age, and the looming inevitability of death. And despite the heavy subject matter, the film manages to be light enough to be perfectly enjoyable. The Whales of August is a treasure for anyone interested in strong female protagonists, the art of performance, and the legacy of classic film actors.   After watching the film, I was lucky enough to be able to interview the film’s producer, Michael Kaplan.

I would like to extend my gratitude to Michael Kaplan for taking the time to do this interview as well as to Kino Lorber for supplying CMH with a copy of the Blu-Ray!

1.) The Whales of August stars two of the most iconic women in film history, Lillian Gish and Bette Davis. How did you manage to get those two titans of the silver screen to agree to be a major part of this film.

The genesis of Whales was wanting to present Lillian to a modern audience in a major role that would equal her silent classics, Way Down East, La Boheme, The Wind, Broken Blossoms, etc.  I met and became entranced by her on The Comedians, in which I felt she stole the film from Burton–Taylor, et.al.  She responded to Whales when I took her to see David Berry’s play in New York.  It took 15 years to find the right property.

Bette was always the first choice for “Libby,” feeling this was a class project she could shine in. She had never shirked from acting with major female stars… Crawford, de Havilland, Miriam Hopkins, Mary Astor. She turned down the role the first time it was offered; accepted three years later when she had regained much of her stamina and financing was in place.

The idea of these two acting giants together – Gish and Davis – was an intoxicating dream. The greatest silent actress with the greatest sound actress.

The Whales of August bette davis lillian gishLillian Gish and Bette Davis star in The Whales of August

2.) The film also co-stars Vincent Price and Ann Sothern. What was it like working with Price, a master of his craft, and Sothern, who was the only cast member to be nominated for an Academy Award for this film?

Both were great to work with and were major talents whom audiences had followed and admired for decades… and like Bette and Lillian, offered a resonance of familiarity, bringing their history to us in their performances.

Vinnie really wanted to play ‘Maranov’ to display his versatility away from his ‘Master of Horror’ reputation. There was no doubt he could become the homeless Russian aristocrat who spent his life ‘visiting friends.’

Ann was a favorite of both director Lindsay Anderson and myself and brought a buoyancy to the film and the set. She and Lillian became great friends. Bette said when learning she was cast, “She’s a good actress; she could steal the picture.”

3.) Both Gish and Davis’ characters seemed to mirror what I would imagine both women were like in real life, with Gish reaching a level of almost saccharine sweetness and Davis always armed with a caustic comment. Did you find that to be true? How were they on set?

They were both consummate actresses who became sisters with opposing personalities in the film.  As a person, Lillian was always open and gracious, filled with imagination and curiosity. She could play sweet, but I would argue, never saccharine; her performances always had a strength and determination. Her biggest part in a sound film prior to Whales was in the classic Night of the Hunter, where, with steely resolve, she stands up to the threat of Robert Mitchum as she does to the menacing Haitian secret police in The Comedians.  Also watch her fighting the odds in The Scarlet Letter, Orphans of the Storm, etc.

Bette was frequently on the defensive, feisty and sharp, but that was only the surface.  She knew everything that was happening with the crew and memorized the script. Nothing escaped her and once she accepted an idea, she was masterful. Whales was her first theatrical film in many years and her best and biggest role since Baby Jane and Sweet Charlotte. Part of her character was caustic and protective; another side was emotionally moving and conflicted.

Both Lillian and Bette respected each other’s  talent.

4.) I found the film thoroughly engrossing despite the fact that, plot-wise, not much happens. It’s a difficult feat to achieve on a medium that is usually so plot reliant. What was the biggest challenge adapting material from the stage to the screen?

The dialogue and characters were well constructed in the play. Certain changes were added when Lindsay Anderson came aboard but the backbone of the movie was the play, to which everyone had responded.

The biggest challenge was going to be the location, which had to become another character in the film, re-enforcing the situations, bringing a realty to the seeming mundane. We lucked out on our second day of location hunting, seeing the cottage on the Pitkin Point peninsula of Cliff Island and finding Frank and Carolyn Lockwood Pitkin so open to the project.

The cottage had to be as significant and distinctive as the Victorian mansion in Giant, Bates Motel in Psycho or Tara in Gone with the Wind.  And we felt it was.

5.) Was there anything that surprised you while making this film?

The changing weather which necessitated changes in what we could shoot. We were concerned this would affect the comfort and preparation of the elderly cast but for the most part, they adjusted to the changes with the professional responsibility that was their second nature after years of experience.

6.) One thing I particularly liked about the film was how the characters were unapologetically old. I couldn’t help but draw comparisons to On Golden Pond and The Golden Girls­ – stories where the characters are very frank about the problems they face as they age. It seems very different from current narratives about the elderly that seem to revolve around recapturing youth as means of avoiding aging and the inevitably of death. Why do you think there has been such a shift in how stories of the elderly are presented?

It’s always been difficult dealing with aging in TV and film.  They are basically youth-oriented mediums. With Whales, there were no younger characters, deliberately, so that one became immersed in an elderly world, which was new information for many, and for others, who have seen the film again as they aged, it’s become more meaningful.

When seeking financing for Whales during the six year period it took to finally get backing from Shep Gordon and Carolyn Pfeiffer at Alive Films, I was frequently asked “Where’s the Jane Fonda character,” referencing On Golden Pond. Ironic that Fonda and Lily Tomlin now have a very well conceived TV series, Grace and Frankie, which deals honestly with many contemporary issues facing seniors.

The Whales of August castIt’s the whole Gang: Vincent Price, Ann Sothern, Bette Davis and Lillian Gish

7.) What was the most rewarding aspect of making this film?

Just making it happen. Watching the dailies each night, knowing that all the effort and stress in keeping it moving was well worth the effort, that something unique was being created with a cast that could never be duplicated.

8.) What was the biggest challenge you faced while making this movie?

Keeping it together when inevitable glitches arose.

9.) At this point the film is over three decades old – considering Hollywood’s current trend of remaking/rebooting anything and/or everything, who would you cast in a hypothetical remake of the movie?

As Harry Carey, Jr. said, “There will never be another movie like this… Even John Ford, with his enormous ego, would want to be here to watch what was happening.”

In short, would never attempt a remake. It would be futile.  Why remake something that isn’t broken.?

…..

Thanks again to Michael Kaplan and Kino Lorber for this interview. If you would like to purchase the film (which you totally should!), you can order the film here.

If you want a sneak peek at what you would be getting, please check out the music video for You Can Never Tell. The song is by Michael Kaplan, performed by Tisha Sterling, the daughter of Ann Sothern, and is premiering right her on Classic Movie Hub!

…..

Minoo Allen for Classic Movie Hub

Posted in Interviews, Posts by Minoo Allen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Pre-Code Corner: Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum

Posted on March 3, 2018 by Kim Luperi

Warner Brothers Horror, In Living (Two) Color:
Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum

As part of their career retrospective Michael Curtiz: A Life in Film, the UCLA Film and Television Archive recently screened a superb pre-Code triple feature: Doctor X (1932), Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933), and The Kennel Murder Case (1933). If playing “which of these two is not like the other?” the last title would be the odd ball out, as Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum share so many similarities that I almost thought I was watching two adaptations in a row.

Warner Bros Horror - Doctor X (1932)

Warner Bros Horror - Mystery of the Wax Museum poster

These posters are too great, making it impossible to choose just one.

Warner Bros Horror - mystery of trhe wax museum ad

Well, I kind of was. According to Scott MacQueen’s April 1990 American Cinematographer article on Mystery of the Wax Museum, that picture was indeed intended as a follow-up to Doctor X upon the latter’s lucrative debut in August 1932. In the early 1930s, Warner Brothers hopped on the horror train when musicals began to wane in popularity, and the results in these two cases were rather curious entries combining the now-faded tinges of early two-color Technicolor, gruesome thrills, wild stories, and… wisecracking reporters?! Doctor X features a suspicious research scientist and his equally dubious team, all being investigated in connection with mysterious killings. Naturally, the reveal occurs during a murder re-enactment gone horribly wrong – and, spoiler alert – fake skin is involved. In Mystery of the Wax Museum, the madman is a wheelchair-bound sculptor who turns to a sinister solution to recreate his masterpieces after his wax gallery is torched and his hands are burned: stealing corpses and targeting people whose appearance match his vision to enshrine in wax. Yes, both stories are that bizarre.

All that said, below are select parallels Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum share – and how they differ in the details.

Warner Bros Horror Wray, posing as a Marie Antoinette wax figure in Mystery of the Wax Museum

No, this isn’t the movie in which Fay Wray plays Lionel Atwill’s daughter – that would be creepy. But that’s really Wray, posing as a Marie Antoinette wax figure in Mystery of the Wax Museum.

…..

Twinkle Twinkle Frequent Co-Stars

Besides Curtiz, many of the same names pop up in Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum, including cinematographer Ray Rennahan, art director Anton Grot, and leads Lionel Atwill and Fay Wray, playing slightly sketchy scientist father and daughter in the former and deranged artist and almost-victim in the latter. Atwill characterized men of varying degrees of insanity in each movie, a type of dark role he excelled at during this period, while Wray perfected her shrieking damsel in distress just before the public witnessed her most famous screaming lass in 1933’s King Kong. Fun fact: Atwill and Wray appeared together in another film cut from a similar horror cloth, 1933’s The Vampire Bat, released in between Doctor X and Mystery of the Wax Museum.

Warner Bros Horror - fire Mystery of the Wax MuseumFire appears much more threatening in color, don’t you think?

…..

“All in Technicolor!”

Two-color Technicolor produced an array of faded pistachios, dull peaches, and murky tans in both films, a palette that pairs well with the grim plots, though we do occasionally witness some more vibrant tones, which help inject life into the pictures. In my opinion, the color was most effective during Mystery of the Wax Museum’s early wax fire scene, in which the camera remained trained upon various figures slowly singeing, their peculiar likeness and hues melting away into pallid, viscous liquid during what felt like a purposefully protracted sequence. As Technicolor’s tepid tints amplified the wax figures’ realistic features (some were indeed living, breathing actors – not the burning ones, though!), the two-tone process also created a heightened sense of discomfort as the figures burned.

Warner Bros Horror - Lee Tracy and Fay Wray Doctor XThere’s something slightly foreboding about this otherwise romantic shot of Lee Tracy and Wray, but I can’t put my finger on it…
Warner Bros Horror - Glenda Farrell Mystery of the Wax MuseumYou don’t want to know, Glenda Farrell.

 …..

Reporters Save the Day!

Because both films were produced by Warner Brothers, you can count on the studio incorporating their standard gritty, urban house style somewhere. Enter: wisecracking reporters. Warners cast two  sharp-witted contract players for both roles: Lee Tracy in Doctor X and Glenda Farrell, who would go on to play Torchy Blane in the late 1930s, in Mystery of the Wax Museum. As much as I enjoy Tracy’s mile-a-minute quips, I prefer Farrell’s unruffled ingenuity and slick witticisms.

Warner Bros Horror - Doctor X 1932 synthetic skinWill this mask make my skin softer, or just regenerate it?

…..

WTF Special Effects

Watching Dr. Wells (Preston Foster) apply synthetic flesh in Doctor X is akin to Fredric March’s transformation in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) but somehow more menacing CAUSE THIS GUY JUST CREATED A NEW, WORKING HAND FOR HIMSELF.

Warner Bros Horror - lionel Atwill mystery of the wax museumWow, that Atwill mask was really a work of art.

 …..

In a similar vein, Ivan’s (Lionel Atwill) 3rd act scorched face reveal in Mystery of the Wax Museum, which apparently horrified Fay Wray in real life, could have served as a precursor to Freddy Krueger’s hideous scalded mug.

Warner Bros Horror - Arthur Edmund Carewe and Robert Homans in Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) Looks like Sparrow (Arthur Edmund Carewe) has had a rough night – or life.

….. 

Arson and Dope and Dead Bodies, Oh My!

As far as pre-Code moments go, it’s hard to beat Farrell’s casual aside, “How’s your sex life?” to a cop taking peeks at a dirty magazine in Mystery of the Wax Museum. While the crowd in the theater expected some lascivious pre-Code quips, this one elicited audible gasps. Other honorable mentions in this picture include: Farrell jacking bottles from a coffin full of booze as the police turn a blind eye and Sparrow (Arthur Edmund Carewe), clearly addicted to some kind of substance, crumbling under police interrogation. Besides Tracy’s frisky flirtations in Doctor X, one line in particular, “Were the murdered women… attacked?” is strongly suggestive, so you can bet it met the wrath of several censor boards. Speaking of…

Warners vs. the Production Code Administration (PCA)

With comparable plot lines featuring murder, shocking effects, and immorality, it would be reasonable to expect the industry and state censors to react similarly to both pictures, right? Sure, and they did – for a while. (Just a head’s up, I’m going to start with Mystery of the Wax Museum below, which was released after Doctor X, and the dates will bounce around a bit, so bear with me.)

Warner Bros Horror - Mystery of the Wax MuseumI don’t recall actually seeing any of the corpses’ faces in Mystery of the Wax Museum, but sliding a body out the window was a sore spot for some censor boards.

…..

Mystery of the Wax Museum’s gruesomeness initially concerned the Studio Relations Committee (SRC), but they ultimately found the movie “very acceptable entertainment… and pretty well devoid of censorship difficulties” in December 1932. Tell that to B.O. Skinner, Ohio’s Director of Education, who wrote Warners a perturbed note upon his review in February 1933:

We are, as you know, approving this film with eliminations. I wish, however, to register a formal protest against the film. It contains so many elements we find objectionable, as setting fire to the museum to obtain insurance, naming a poison and telling how it could be taken to produce death, using of dope and also the general theme of horror. I feel it would be much better for all of us if the production of this type of film would be discontinued.

New York, Quebec, and British Columbia cut scenes largely in tune with Ohio’s complaints, but all in all, the edits weren’t staggering, and the picture passed without eliminations in Kansas, Pennsylvania, and Chicago (given an “Adult Permit” in the latter). Despite Ohio’s opposition, the PCA approved Mystery of the Wax Museum in 1936 when Warners requested a Code certificate for re-release.

One year later, the studio inquired about a reissue for Doctor X, but this time Warners was flat out denied. Looking back during the movie’s pre-production in March 1932, the SRC’s Jason Joy remarked that Doctor X’s script, handled more as a murder mystery, would be satisfactory “in ordinary circumstances,” but recently boards were excising scenes involving operations, morgues, and other frightening imagery. Despite the disclaimer, Joy felt “there is little cause for concern on our part that we will have another Frankenstein on our hands.”

Warner Bros Horror - doctor x Can we agree that those fingernails alone are more terrifying than Frankenstein?

…..

The SRC offered no suggestions on the horror front after reviewing the finished picture in May 1932, and Doctor X was approved without eliminations in Ohio, New York, Kansas, Pennsylvania, and Quebec, while recording only minor changes in Chicago, Australia, and Ontario; on the whole, the picture notched fewer concerns than Mystery of the Wax Museum would about six months later.

With this in mind, it’s quite curious that in 1937 the PCA’s Vincent Hart deemed Doctor X “un-Codeable” due to its “gruesome theme,” and thus requested that Warners withdraw their request as the film wouldn’t be approved for re-release. So what made Mystery of the Wax Museum, originally more harshly judged by state boards, satisfactory to the PCA in 1936 and the similarly themed Doctor X, which more easily passed censor entities, unacceptable just one year later? We’re talking the PCA here, so your guess is as good as mine; I got relatively equal cases of the creeps watching both.

…..

–Kim Luperi for Classic Movie Hub

You can read all of Kim’s Pre-Code Corner articles here.

Kim Luperi is a New Jersey transplant living in sunny Los Angeles. She counts her weekly research in the Academy’s Production Code Administration files as a hobby and has written for TCM, AFI Fest, the Pre-Code Companion, MovieMaker Magazine and the American Cinematheque. You can read more of Kim’s articles at I See A Dark Theater or by following her on twitter at @Kimbo3200.

 

 

Posted in Posts by Kim Luperi, Pre-Code Corner | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Classic Movie Travels: Josephine Hutchinson

Posted on March 3, 2018 by Annette Bochenek

 

Classic Movie Travels: Josephine Hutchinson
Seattle Washington and New York City

Josephine HutchinsonJosephine Hutchinson

While the name Josephine Hutchinson may not immediately come to mind when reflecting upon the stars of the 1930s, Josephine showed great promise as a Warner Brothers star. With acting in her blood and a formal education in dramatics, Josephine appeared in a string of films and was poised for success as a film actress.

Josephine D. Hutchinson was born on October 12th, 1903, in Seattle Washington to aspiring actress Leona Celinda Doty or Leona Roberts and Charles James Hutchinson. Her father was a proprietor at a fuel, sand, and goods store and her mother was an actress. On September 20th, 1909, Josephine’s little brother, O’Neil Tom Hutchinson, joined the family. The Hutchinsons remained in Seattle through 1920 until Leona and Charles divorced.

Leona’s ambitions to become an actress led her to debut on Broadway in 1926, causing her to appear in about 40 productions between 1926 and 1945. Most of her roles were supporting ones. In fact, her younger sister, Edith Roberts, was a film actress with experience as a child performer in vaudeville prior to arriving in Hollywood in 1915. Edith would achieve over 150 screen credits before retiring from acting in 1929 and passing away six years later.

At the same time as her Broadway debut, Leona also began a film career as the lead in Poor Mrs. Jones (1926), produced by the United States Department of Agriculture. In 1937, she went to Hollywood and played in over 40 films, again in mostly motherly or supporting roles. She is best known for her portrayal of society gossip Mrs. Meade in Gone with the Wind (1939) alongside Harry Davenport, who played Doctor Meade. She can also be spotted in Bringing Up Baby (1938) with Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn, Of Human Hearts (1938) with James Stewart, and The Blue Bird (1940) with Shirley Temple.

Josephine Hutchinson long shot with gown

Through her mother’s show business connections, Josephine was able to make her film debut at the age of 13 in alongside Mary Pickford in The Little Princess (1917). Afterwards, Josephine enrolled at the Cornish School of Music and Drama and then relocated to New York City. There, she started to act in live theater. Once the 1920s arrived, Josephine transitioned from working in silent films to talkies.

Around this time, Josephine met stage director Robert W. Bell. While they were married in 1924, she met actress Eva La Gallienne and became involved in an affair with her in 1927. Josephine worked as a member of Le Gallienne’s Civic Repertory Theatre company and garnered much critical praise for her work as Alice in the 1932 production of Alice in Wonderland. Robert and Josephine separated in 1928 and were divorced in 1930. The press became intrigued and wrote about Josephine as Eva’s lover. Despite the scandal, both actresses were able to continue on with their individual careers. While Josephine would marry twice more–next to James F. Townsend in 1935 until their divorce, and then to Staats Jennings Cotsworth Jr. on September 23, 1972, until his death in 1979–Eva did not marry.

Josephine Hutchinson 1932 production of Alice in WonderlandJosephine Hutchinson, 1932 production of Alice in Wonderland

Josephine was soon signed to a contract with Warner Brothers and appeared in her first credited role as Joan Bradford in Happiness Ahead (1934) alongside Dick Powell and Frank McHugh. She plays a society heiress who rebels against her mother’s choice of a future husband and pretends to be working class girl. Along the way, she begins dating a window washer. After portraying Joan Bradford, Josephine went on to fulfill several other film roles. Among her many film roles, she can be seen in The Story of Louis Pasteur (1936), in Universal’s Son of Frankenstein (1939) as Elsa von Frankenstein, in Love is Better Than Ever (1952), and in North by Northwest (1959) as Mrs. Townsend.

Josephine Hutchinson

Josephine’s career spanned through film, television, and radio, and granted her many opportunities to work as a supporting actress. She made four guest appearances on Perry Mason between 1958 and 1962. Additionally, Josephine appeared in Rawhide, The Twilight Zone, and Gunsmoke.

Josephine Hutchinson OlderAn older Josephine Hutchinson

After carrying out a career that spanned several decades, Josephine passed away on June 4th, 1998, at the Florence Nightingale Nursing Home in Manhattan. Her brother died on December 31st, 1979, in Beaverton, Oregon. Josephine had no children and her ashes were scattered near her niece’s home in Springfield, Oregon.

While Josephine is no longer with us, there are several places of relevance to her life that exist to this day. In 1910, the Hutchinson family was living at 965 20th Ave in Seattle, Washington. Here is a picture of the property today, which is privately owned:

Josephine Hutchinson house 965 20th ave Seattle WashingtonJosephine family home, 965 20th Ave, Seattle, Washington

By 1920, the family moved to 1620 32nd Ave in Seattle, Washington. The property is privately owned. Here is what it looks like today:

Josephine Hutchinson house 1620 32nd ave Seattle WashingtonJosephine Hutchinson family home, 1620 32nd Ave, Seattle, Washington

Josephine’s alma mater, the Cornish School of Music and Drama, has now grown into the Cornish College of the Arts. It is located at 1000 Lenora St in Seattle, Washington.  It is now nationally recognized as a premier college for the visual and performing arts, and as one of only three fully accredited private colleges in the entire nation dedicated to educating both performing and visual artists in an interrelated manner. This is the school as it stands today:

Cornish College of the Arts alma mater of Josephine HutchinsonToday’s Cornish College of the Arts, alma mater of Josephine Hutchinson

In the 1970s, Josephine moved to New York. She resided at 360 E. 55th St in New York, New York. Here is the property today:

Josephine Hutchinson NYC address 360 e 55 stJosephine Hutchinson NYC address at 360 E 55 Street

The Florence Nightingale Nursing Home is no longer in operation due to several violations.

I strongly encourage you to remember Josephine and her career by watching Happiness Ahead, among many of her other works.

 …..

–Annette Bochenek for Classic Movie Hub

You can read all of Annette’s Classic Movie Travel articles here.

Annette Bochenek of Chicago, Illinois, is a PhD student at Dominican University and an independent scholar of Hollywood’s Golden Age. She manages the Hometowns to Hollywood blog, in which she writes about her trips exploring the legacies and hometowns of Golden Age stars. Annette also hosts the “Hometowns to Hollywood” film series throughout the Chicago area. She has been featured on Turner Classic Movies and is the president of TCM Backlot’s Chicago chapter. In addition to writing for Classic Movie Hub, she also writes for Silent Film Quarterly, Nostalgia Digest, and Chicago Art Deco SocietyMagazine.

Posted in Classic Movie Travels, Posts by Annette Bochenek | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Gene Coon: From Beatrice Nebraska to Star Trek and Beyond

Posted on March 3, 2018 by Annmarie Gatti

Gene Coon: From Beatrice Nebraska to Star Trek and Beyond
Interview with Local Historian Jeanelle Kleveland, Gage County Classic Film Institute

“To me, in many ways, Gene L. Coon was the heart and soul of Star Trek.”
-David Gerrold, screenwriter, The Trouble with Tribbles

This weekend the Gage County Classic Film Institute in Beatrice Nebraska celebrates the career of native son Gene Coon, writer and/or producer for many beloved classic TV shows including Dragnet, Wagon Train, Maverick, Bonanza, and Star Trek. Coon joined Star Trek as a screenwriter and producer during its first season and is credited with developing the Klingons and the interpersonal dynamics between Captain Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

The 3-day event kicks off Friday evening, March 2, with a screening of the fan-favorite Star Trek episode The Trouble with Tribbles hosted by ‘Tribbles’ screenwriter David Gerrold.  Saturday’s schedule includes discussions with David Gerrold, local film historian Jeanelle Kleveland and librarian Laureen Riedesel, and features screenings of Bonanza, Wagon Train and Star Trek episodes. The event winds down on Sunday with a screening of the first Star Trek movie.

gene coon star trek event

…..

That said, we are delighted to have been able to sit down for a minute to chat with Jeanelle Kleveland about the event.

CMH: Hi Jeanelle, can you tell us a little bit about yourself and the Gage County Classic Film Institute?

JK: I grew up, and live, in Beatrice, Nebraska, a town of about 12,000 people, about 40 miles south of Lincoln. I graduated from high school in Beatrice and then attended the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, where I got my undergrad degree and law degree.

The Gage County Classic Film Institute was founded by a small group of people to create events that celebrate famous people in the entertainment industry that have connections to Gage County. It still amazes me that we have so many talented celebrities from such a small community – among them Hollywood legends Robert Taylor and Harold Lloyd; three-time Oscar winner for special effects, John P. Fulton, and his father, special effects Oscar winner Fitch Fulton; character actor Janet Shaw who appeared in over 30 films; and television writer, Gene L. Coon, best known for his major contributions to the original Star Trek.

Before our Institute was formed, I attended two events celebrating Robert Taylor in Beatrice, organized through the Gage County Museum and Beatrice Public Library. I then became involved as a volunteer, and have been flattered to be asked to be involved with putting together these programs.

I’ve been collecting movie memorabilia for quite some time, primarily focusing on famous Nebraskans – and I have made it my personal mission to educate people about stars from here – Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift, Fred Astaire and Henry Fonda to name a few.

CMH: When did the Gage County Classic Film Institute organize?

JK: We started organizing in 2014 and have had four events, two of which featured Robert Taylor. The first Taylor event was in celebration of his 105th birthday (August, 2016) and featured discussions with two authors who wrote books on Taylor. His children, Terry and Tessa Taylor were in attendance. We also screened the Taylor film, Escape, co-starring Norma Shearer and Alla Nazimovaz, and featuring character actor Janet Shaw from Gage County. At our second Taylor event, we screened Quo Vadis.

We’ve also done two events about John P. Fulton’s special effects. The first one featured speaker Joanne Fulton Schaeffer (John P. Fulton’s daughter) and included a screening of The Ten Commandments for which John P won an Oscar for Best Special Effects. Our second Fulton event last March featured Jill Fulton McClure (John P. Fulton’s granddaughter) who brought along Fulton’s Special Effects Oscar for Bridge at Toko Ri. We were so surprised and thrilled that we all had the opportunity for a photo opp holding the Award!

the trouble with tribbles star trekStar Trek fan favorite, The Trouble with Tribbles

…..

CMH: What is the next event you have planned?

JK: On March 2-4, 2018 we are celebrating Gene L. Coon – one of the early writers and creatives on Star Trek. He invented the Klingons and developed much of the personalities of the main characters. He was known as the ‘other Gene.’ Coon was born in Beatrice Nebraska in 1924. His family moved to Glendale, California when he was a teenager. He was a teenage newscaster on the local radio station in Beatrice.

This event will feature David Gerrold as our keynote speaker, who was mentored by Coon on Star Trek. Gerrold wrote The Trouble with Tribbles and Coon produced it. We are showing this episode as a free event at the Beatrice Public Library on Friday night and will be having a reception with Star Trek refreshments. I can’t wait to see them!

On Saturday, we will be discussing the Beatrice years and showing two westerns written by Coon – an episode of Bonanza and an episode of Wagon Train that Coon co-wrote with his brother, Bloise. I will be discussing the similarities in Coon’s stories for westerns and science fiction. In the afternoon, we will feature two Star Trek episodes and keynote speaker David Gerrold. We have two more free events at the library on Saturday night and Sunday afternoon. You can see the entire schedule here: Gage County Museum Info.

CMH: Does the Gage County Classic Film Institute have any future events planned?

Next year we are planning to spotlight the legendary Harold Lloyd. He lived in Beatrice as a child, and was born in Burchard, Nebraska about 25 miles away. We are very excited to be developing this event. Please feel free to follow us on Facebook at Gage County Classic Film Institute to see what we have in store for the future and to also find out about ‘our stars’ on television.

We want to thank Classic Movie Hub for helping us to advertise our event and putting us on the CMH calendar.

We hope we will have a big turnout for Gene L. Coon, one of my famous Nebraskans.

CMH: Thanks so much Jeanelle for spending time with us. Good luck with the event!

–Annmarie Gatti for Classic Movie Hub

 

Posted in Classic TV, Events, Interviews, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Win Tickets to see “TCM Big Screen Classics: Grease” (40th Anniversary) (Giveaway runs through March 24)

Posted on March 2, 2018 by Annmarie Gatti

Win tickets to see “Grease” on the Big Screen!
In Select Cinemas Nationwide Sun April 8 and Wed April 11!

“If you can’t be an athlete, be an athletic supporter.”

Yay! The contest is over and the winners are: Liliana, Jodi, Javier, Diana, Jlwthe2nd, Migdalia, Tracy. Due to some ineligible entries, we only were able to award 7 prizes this month.

CMH continues into our 3rd year of our partnership with Fathom Events – with the 4th of our 13 movie ticket giveaways for 2018, courtesy of Fathom Events!

That said, we’ll be giving away EIGHT PAIRS of tickets to see “TCM Big Screen Classics: Grease” – The highest-grossing movie of 1978 directed by Randal Kleiser, starring John Travolta, Olivia Newton-John, Stockard Channing and Jeff Conaway — on the Big Screen!

In order to qualify to win a pair of movie tickets via this contest, you must complete the below entry task by Saturday, March 24th at 6 PM EST.

We will announce the winner(s) on Twitter on Sunday, March 25, between 6PM EST and 7PM EST. If a winner(s) does not have a Twitter account, we will announce that winner(s) via this blog in the comment section below.

TCM Big Screen Classics GREASE

The film will be playing in select cinemas nationwide for a special two-day-only event on Sunday, April 8 and Wednesday, April 11 at 2:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. local time. Winners will be responsible for their own transportation to the Event. Only United States entries are eligible. Please click here before you enter to ensure that the Event is scheduled at a theater near you and that you are able to attend. (please note that there might be slightly different theater listings for each date)

ENTRY TASK (2-parts) to be completed by Saturday, March 24 at 6PM EST…

1) Answer the below question via the comment section at the bottom of this blog post

THE QUESTION:
Although not officially a classic-era film, what in your opinion makes “Grease” a classic? And, if you haven’t seen it, why do you want to see it on the Big Screen?

2) Then TWEET* (not DM) the following message:
I just entered to win tickets to see “TCM Big Screen Classics Presents: Grease” on the Big Screen courtesy of @ClassicMovieHub & @FathomEvents #EnterToWin #CMHContest link here: http://ow.ly/UKRx30iIbH9

*If you don’t have a Twitter account, you can still enter the contest by simply answering the above question via the comment section at the bottom of this blog — BUT PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU ADD THIS VERBIAGE TO YOUR ANSWER: I do not have a Twitter account, so I am posting here to enter but cannot tweet the message.

NOTE: If for any reason you encounter a problem commenting here on this blog, please feel free to tweet or DM us, or send an email to clas…@gmail.com and we will be happy to create the entry for you.

ALSO: Please allow us 48 hours to approve your comments. Sorry about that, but we are being overwhelmed with spam, and must sort through 100s of comments…

Olivia Newton-John and John Travolta in Grease

About the film: Grease is the one that you want! Go back to high school with Pink Lady Sandy (Olivia Newton-John), leader of the bad-boy T-Birds, Danny (John Travolta), and a rockin’ and rollin’ all-star cast. This 40th Anniversary event includes exclusive insight from Turner Classic Movies.

Please note that only United States residents are eligible to enter this giveaway contest. (see contest rules for further information)

BlogHub members ARE also eligible to win if they live within the Continental United States (as noted above).

You can follow Fathom Events on Twitter at @fathomevents

Good Luck!

–Annmarie Gatti for Classic Movie Hub

Posted in Contests & Giveaways, Fathom Events | Tagged , , , , , | 17 Comments