Kamis, 31 Maret 2016

Talk on my novel BESIDE THE STILL WATERS

This is to announce that I will be speaking at the Agawam (Massachusetts) Public Library on my novel Beside the Still Waters and the destruction of four towns in Central Massachusetts for the building of the Quabbin Reservoir in the 1920s and 1930s.  I’ll be bring some poster-sized aerial photographs to illustrate the setting of the novel and the towns which were systematically dismantled.

More on the book:

Four towns, gone. Dismantled slowly while their inhabitants grieve for a history and heritage that has been voted away from them. The present threatens; the future belongs to the fearless.

Beside the Still Waters is a family saga based on an actual event which displaced four entire towns in central Massachusetts for the construction of a reservoir. Today, the Quabbin Reservoir provides water for millions of citizens, primarily in the greater Boston area.

Families are divided between those who protest the construction project, those who give up and leave, and those who help to build it. The central character is Jenny, a girl who comes of age facing the extinction of her community, who becomes the guardian of her family’s heritage, and ultimately, the one to decide what happens to them.

A rift between two brothers, Eli and John Vaughn, at the turn of the 20th Century continues through to the next generation as John tries to use Jenny, Eli’s daughter, in a plot to regain the family farm from Alonzo, who now runs it, who is Jenny's love. John is broke and eager to sell the farm to the state, which is buying up area property for the coming reservoir. Both Alonzo and Eli refuse to sell their properties, and protest removal by eminent domain. Torn between loyalty to her family and heritage, and the allure of a future beyond the valley, Jenny refuses to remain powerless like the men she loves, but looks for a way to take control. A disastrous decision may prove fatal in a race against time.

The talk is free to the public; please join us on Monday, April 4th at 7 p.m. at the Agawam Public Library, 750 Cooper Street, Agawam.



Selasa, 29 Maret 2016

Requiescat in pace, Patty Duke 1946 - 2016


Her name was Anna.  She was a star on Broadway while still a child in a role so deep and emotional, and so transparently played, it would always be identified with her.  She will always be young, defiant, touching, Helen Keller.

She won an Oscar at 16 for playing that same role in a feature film.  She won an Emmy for a made for TV movie playing "the other role" in that movie - Annie Sullivan.

Her work in numerous TV shows, including a show of her own when she was still a teenager, will always mark her as one of the greatest actresses of her generation.

Someday I would like to write more in depth on The Miracle Worker and some of her other roles.  For now, we must say goodbye.  Bless you, Anna.

Minggu, 06 Maret 2016

Requiescat in Pace



Though this blog is on hiatus for a few weeks, we must note the passing of Former First Lady Nancy Reagan.  Classic film fans will also recall her career as a Hollywood film actress, as Nancy Davis, and we discussed her role in The Next Voice You Hear (1950) in this previous post.

Condolences to her family and friends.

Kamis, 03 Maret 2016

In Search of Elegance - Kay Noske, Movie Star Makeover


Welcome to the third post in our monthly discussion on the current state of the classic film fan.  It’s an examination on our evolution, where we’ve been, where we may be going.  To recap, the first two posts are here:

From January – A Classic Film Manifesto.

From February – Discussion with blogger and author Cliff Aliperti of Immortal Ephemera and his new book on actress Helen Twelvetrees.
 
Today we visit with Kay Noske of Movie Star Makeover(whom we also heard from last week in our post on The New Loretta Young Show).  As we can tell from the name of her blog, Kay’s love of classic film has a great deal of bearing on her interest in style and fashion.

 

JTL:  One common theme among classic film bloggers I notice is that our love of old movies is a huge part of our lives: certainly personally, and for some of us, professionally.  Your blog reflects the close relationship between your passion for image consulting and your love of classic films.  I am fascinated by how your interest in classic films dovetails your Movie Star Makeover image consulting business.

From your website:

 Because I love both clothes AND old movies, I centered my image consultant business on Classic Hollywood, when studio image teams molded apparently ordinary women into stars. These studio experts began by looking at the individual and the type of woman she embodied, then helped her become the most complete expression of both.

This is so articulate and imaginative.  Your perspective on classic films and stars in terms of their image style is a unique among classic film bloggers.  While many of us profess an interest (even if only rudimentary) in the Hollywood fashions, your blog delves into the image of Hollywood stars in terms of fashion, hair, makeup, and breaks down all the components of style and interprets them, not only in terms of American pop culture, but what we can learn from and utilize today in our lives.  There are reasons, of course, for the Hollywood greats being icons, and much of that has to do with their look (abetted by some fabulous still photography, a pet interest of mine).  I love your posts for the information you give, your analysis of these elements of style, and most especially for the entertaining way the articles are written. 

KN:  Thank you! This is music to my ears. Bloggers hope they are not just writing for themselves, as it often seems (I mean, really, is it THAT hard to leave a comment??), so it’s sweet to know that the effort is appreciated. Especially so by someone as talented at writing as you!

JTL:  Thank you very much. Where does the classic film fan in you end and the image consultant begin?  Or are they inseparable?  (Since my focus is history, that is the window through which I view classic films, so I can well understand that it is difficult to not watch a film through a prism.)

KN:  They’re two sides of the same coin, I think! I have loved classic film as long as I can remember, but I had an epiphany in senior high, discovering that clothes really DO make the man, so to speak. I’d been given the part of a society matron (mostly because of my dead-on imitation of Margaret Dumont, Groucho Marx’s much-put-upon grande dame cinematic foil) and my drama teacher, Mr. Anzalone, garbed me in a sharp, ultra-tailored navy blue 1950’s ladies dressmaker suit. Now, since my normal attire was along the lines of men’s tuxedo pants and tight sweaters, this was a radical departure and, when I emerged from the costume closet looking like something from 1935 Vogue, complete with pulled back hair and red lips, my peers’ reactions told me everything I needed to know about the power of clothes. As I have said earlier, it was as if the hammer of Thor smote me between the eyes. I then started watching films to gather information about the transformative power of costume/clothing and used what I was learning.  

JTL:  How long have you worked as an image consultant, and to what degree has American pop culture of Hollywood’s heyday influenced your analysis of clients’ needs and shaped your advice? For instance, this from your blog:

Today, those wonderful Silver Screen goddesses still have plenty to share with modern women about how to make the most of their individual beauty–if you know how to listen!

KN:  I’ve been image consulting professionally for 3 years now, but for virtually decades, I’ve been offering advice (welcome or not) to friends, the actors I would costume and strangers on the street about what works and what doesn’t. When I was a costumer (for 5 years here in Rochester, NY), I learned a lot about what shapes, colors, and styles flatter, distract, add visual weight, tell the right story. It may sound funny, but I was inspired by the memory of being a very un-put-together teen. I wanted to help my “sisters”…but not the rich ones, no, my target client is the nice middle-class gal who wants to feel beautiful or pretty. They’re the ones who watch the movies and dream of glamour coming their way…so, they’re typically the ones who respond most eagerly to analysis that incorporates the elements of classic Hollywood glamour. They have had zero glamour in their lives—I love to show them how Hollywood style masters made over the stars from fairly normally pretty girls to glamour queens—without (in most cases) dissolving their identity. For me, the key was to first determine a person’s essential personality and style—then build on it. The gloss of Hollywood glamour is just for the fun factor!

American pop culture has been handy for the younger set…they’ve heard of Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly, Katharine Hepburn, Lauren Bacall, Sophia Loren, Marilyn Monroe, etc in various magazine features, fashion and beauty layouts, etc. The icons of style are usually instantly recognized by young and old…and it’s an approach that can connect my clients with something very appealing and exciting. For example, the latest Tiffany’s campaign features Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast at Tiffany’s—if there wasn’t any residual cache from Audrey, they’d never bother to make her such a prominent part of their campaign!

JTL:  I also like that you use old Hollywood to spin articles on health, exercise, and nutrition.  You are a public speaker as well—what are the most popular topics on which you’re asked to present a talk?

KN:  Oh, definitely, the MOST popular lecture is the one on “100 Years of Fashion” and my free-form series on the back stories of well-known and under-sung Hollywood heroines. No one wants to hear about health, exercise or nutrition! LOL! They love to hear about how Agnes Moorehead rose to the top despite being told she was too homely for anything but radio and how Hedy Lamar conquered the stereotype of “dumb and beautiful” by inventing a technology that allowed submarines to code crucial defense information; how Judy Garland fought her “girl-next-door” image to emerge as a beautiful woman with a stronger screen presence. They love the “underdog” stories the best. Anyone can lecture on Marilyn Monroe, but I feel that the more interesting stories lurk in the forgotten corners of Tinseltown. My audiences really want to identify with the subjects of the lectures, and, let’s face it, who can identify with Marilyn?

JTL:  Later on in the year, I’m going to discuss what we might expect for future classic film fans – and the possibility there may be fewer as younger generations will enjoy less opportunity to be exposed to them.  In general, are the demographics of your clientele (without getting into specific age groups) – receptive to learning about the elements of style as you might interpret them through classic film stars – or is the world of old movies too remote for them? 

KN:  As you can guess, I’ve got a bee in my Lilly Dache bonnet about this subject. I’ve spoken to several college age groups about developing a viable, polished career wardrobe after years of living in pajama bottoms and sweatshirts. The presentation I give uses classic Hollywood images, and I think the fascination of seeing timeless styles adds a unique angle, and provides them with inspiration without making them feel it’s unattainable. For example, when I use an image of Audrey Hepburn in capris to illustrate the proportion of ankle to shoe to pant hem, they get it. I do intersperse these images with modern ones to clarify how the principles that dictate good style are reflected in something they can buy at the Limited or Brooks Brothers, too.

JTL:  When it comes to discussing the style of Cary Grant or Loretta Young to your fellow old movie bloggers, you are, of course, preaching to the choir.  But I wonder if the general public of your clientele is as eager to grasp them for examples? 

KN:  90% of my clients are NOT old movie weirdos, as it turns out! Some of them are completely clueless about the “classics”…many have never seen a black and white film. But, for whatever reason (and I think your brilliant question #8 nails why) it never fails to excite them when I show them my Pinterest board full of fabulous clothes on classic stars—in “their” Star Style. Essentially, it’s a perspective that allows me to indulge my adoration of these beautiful stars and their style while showing my clients the most obvious, clear examples of the style we’re going for. They would never think of Rita Hayworth as an example of who they are, but when they see Rita, they think “wow, I’m THAT kind of woman???” and it thrills them.

JTL:  How do you approach your work with a client?  Do you find that they already have a firm idea in their minds of what they want to project, or are many willing to put themselves in your hands, trusting you to navigate this for them?  Most, I imagine, are there for career help in discovering the part that their personal style plays in their professional image.

KN:  Yes, exactly! I send clients a little worksheet ahead of time so that when I descend upon their closet, they’re ready for real work. Most have NO IDEA of what they want to project—so we start with “what 3 words would you want someone to use to describe your work”…then I offer examples, like “approachable, friendly, open” or “professional, managerial, intelligent” or whatever. Once we establish those words, we have a good filter for the closet editing and a future buying list. Typically, they put themselves completely in my hands, which makes life very easy for me. I tell them about my experience as a costumer and consultant, and offer them choices they know will flatter them—they’ve seen the evidence before their eyes as I pull together viable outfits from their own closets that never occurred to them. Once they see it happening (and almost all of them say “it’s like MAGIC!”), they really get on board and start purging like mad, eager to assemble a closet full of outfits that genuinely flatter them. It’s so fun to see them smile like mad as they look in the mirror and realize, “hey, I’m beautiful!!” I’m telling you, there are sometimes tears of joy! 

 
JTL:  The future of classic film fans also brings me to something you mentioned in your email, about cutting back on watching TCM.  I know you’ve mentioned, possibly on Facebook, I think, about your concern of TCM’s shifting to programming many more newer movies, which I would call non-classic  or post-classic films.  You’ve also announced your decision recently to choose the Rochester Nitrate Picture Show film festival over the TCM Classic Film Festival this year, due to they’re both being scheduled at the same time, etc., as well as:

…the recent and undeniable TCM trend towards screening more and more modern fare made my decision quite a bit easier.  The Dryden’s Nitrate Picture Show is by its very nature “forced” to focus on what I deem true classic film…rend towards screening more and more modern fare made my decision quite a bit easier. The Dryden Theatre's Nitrate Picture Show by its very nature is "forced" to focus on what I deem true classic film, and the idea of sleeping in my own bed, relaxing in my own hometown, and seeing some truly wonderful pictures on a big screen surrounded by fellow film geeks...well, it was too tempting.

JTL:  Could you elaborate on your choice to cut down on TCM?  (I’m leery of TCM’s shift in programming myself.  Having been a fan of the old AMC channel before it went over to the dark side, as they say, (I still miss Bob Dorian and Nick Clooney) I’m mentally and emotionally trying to prepare for the day when, Robert Osborne-less, TCM becomes another overflowing sewer of gritty cop shows, “reality” shows, and topic-of-the-day dramas.  And infomercials.)

KN:  I really didn’t want to do this, Jacqueline, cut back on TCM, because it’s like leaving a relationship! LOL! However, I saw a similar thing happen at AMC and look where they are! I was thinking a lot about this and I believe, for me, it’s the idea that the classic films represent a way of looking at life that I can identify with—I am a very straight-laced, old-fashioned Christian woman of a certain age (as the French so delicately put it). I find no amusement or entertainment in sordid tales of mean, ugly people being hateful to each other. I don’t enjoy seeing images that lift up the worst aspects of humanity. It’s just not my cuppa. Life’s plenty tough without using my spare time to view something that doesn’t leave me feeling happy and hopeful. I guess that makes me a lightweight, but I don’t care! I’ve had enough pain and sorrow in my real life to not seek it out for my entertainment.

I used to know that I could turn on TCM at any hour and know I wouldn’t see something I’d be embarrassed to share with my mother or father. The uplifting or funny or heartfelt stories with heroines and heroes I can admire; a life lesson to be learned; some giggles or belly laughs that aren’t prompted by meanness, or some really great clothes to inspire my own wardrobe—that’s what I want out of movies. And that’s what I used to be able to count on, but now, TCM is showing R-rated films from eras I lived through…there’s nothing exotic or interesting about that to me. Boring as all get out! And I miss Bob Dorian and Nick Clooney too!! Overflowing sewer…yes, that’s exactly the image that comes to mind. Life’s dark…why make it darker? Less grit, more wit, please.

And what KILLS me is that I, as a teen in the 1960s, came to LOVE old movies because they were so “foreign” to my everyday life…they were another world that I could enter and swim around in. I loved the odd phraseology, the glorious style, the interiors populated with beautiful objects, the functions of which I could only guess at. It was time travel and I reveled in it. Going back to 1990…yeech. By “modernizing” their offerings, TCM is short-changing this generation, assuming that they can only relate to the near past. My 7 year old granddaughter sobbed her way through the climactic scene in Heidi where the Grandfather was wandering through the streets, calling out for Heidi. Her mom said she sat there, riveted, and started to cry saying “What will happen to the Grandfather????” (I get tears in my eyes just writing about it! LOL!) That’s powerful! Today, so many movies are re-treads and pre-fab emotions for these poor kids. When they see the real thing in black and white, they can tell it’s different. I pity this generation when TCM folds to the money men. That’s what killed the studio system and that’s probably what’s killing TCM. No visionaries at the helm, just money men. Happened to Disney, too!

JTL:  Do you have any of those other retro-stations like GetTV that program classic films, and do you expect they will, in future, take up the slack?  

KN:  From your mouth to God’s ear! I wish! Time-Warner Cable in my area doesn’t have those options, which is why I’m diligently seeking alternatives to get some of those channels! As for getTV and other retro channels, yes, I do expect them to pick up the slack with a vengeance. I have heard that they are getting mad kinds of popular numbers in social media, proving there’s a viable market for “old movies”…I suspect TCM will discover that it’s easy to lose a fan and hard to win one back, especially in this era of multiple, inexpensive, mass-deliverable options for viewing and enjoying classic Hollywood films.

JTL:  Speaking of the Rochester film festival, your Facebook updates on the series of films you introduce at the Dryden are terrific, and I think you must have quite a following by now of people who just want to see what you’re wearing to emulate the film of the evening.  That is such an innovative way to combine your knowledge of classic films and your expertise as an image consultant.  There’s always a touch of humor in the theatricality of your presentation.  I hope to get to Rochester some day to attend one of these events.  How did you come to have a relationship with the Dryden? 

KN:  I begged them plain and simple, about 10 years ago. I’d been attending the marvelous film screenings at the Dryden for a few years and thought “hey, wouldn’t it be fun to give introductions in costume?” So, I begged the then-box office manager to give me a chance. I think I literally said, “Put me in, coach!” I told him I was going to wear a vintage gown to introduce Gilda and he said “Oh. Okay. Sure, why not?” I think I had 2 proposals in the parking lot after the film. Again, I realized people are STARVED for glamour these days. So, I started wearing era-appropriate attire (of which I had oodles) to introduce all the films they’d let me have. Eventually, I got a reputation and if I dare to show up in “civvies” I get a lot of guff from my “fan club.” They almost always say “I love your dress!” and when they come into the theater and see me sitting there in some outlandish headgear or a swoopy, sequin-covered gown, they come over and say ‘Oh, goodie! You’re introducing tonight!!!” That’s so sweet of them and it’s fun for all of us. I love making the film-going experience 3-D in a REAL way!

JTL:  What’s in store for the rest of this year on the Dryden’s roster?

KN:  Believe it or not, I have no idea! They only send we presenters a list of potential, available films about a week or two before the months in question. I just presented The Philadelphia Story and Adam’s Rib in January, and A Room with a View and Camille in February, but who knows after that? HINT: I *do* happen to know that the Dryden is screening a HUGE James Bond series. When I presented From Russia With Love, I went in Moneypenny togs, as the Bond Girl attire is harder to pull off when you’re 60 years old! LOL! Oh, newsflash—just discovered that they are presenting a SLEW of Maureen O’Hara films—from Jamaican Inn to Our Man in Havana to Parent Trap!! Whoopie!!!!  

JTL:  Perhaps, by default, in a world where there is very little class or elegance left, our classic film stars are our best remaining examples.  And we have them preserved forever.  Your thoughts?

KN:  This needs to be made into a bumper sticker. That’s why TCM’s foray into the sloppy world of today’s cinema is so unsatisfactory—what can it offer you but the dubious sensation of knowing you—and your world—are essentially sucky. With small, sad moments of lifted gloom. Pathetic!

JTL:  Is there anything you’d like to add about your consulting business, about Loretta Young, about your appreciation of classic films, or anything else you’d like to discuss?

KN:  When I was a kid, I’d create the world I wanted to live in by make-believe and movies were there to provide me with fodder for dreams. That’s what I try to do by steering my clients towards classic cinema for their role models. I started my business with two objectives—to try and make my sisters feel beautiful (because I never felt beautiful as a youngster) and to encourage folks to watch old movies so they’d want to help preserve, conserve, and enjoy classic Hollywood.

Now, the funny part is that my area of the country is (judging by the appearance of 90% of the patrons in restaurants, airports, and on the street) basically uninterested in dressing stylishly. But that’s not really rare, is it? The dumbing-down and casualization of American clothing has cut a swath across all generations and classes. Few but the office-bound professionals dress above the bare minimum of style.

There’s a DEEP-seated spirit of conformity in my hometown. As a general rule, the folks here won’t spend money on learning how to improve their sartorial lot. So, my moonlighting image consulting business has become limited to lectures, which western New Yorkers love. But try to pry them out of their NFL jerseys and you’ve got a fight on your hands! (I should have realized this years ago, since there are NO image consulting businesses in this area per the yellow pages—zillions of nail salons and beauty salons, but no image businesses. That’s telling, isn’t it? LOL!)

So, I’ve basically limited my consulting to word-of-mouth after a few years of hustling like mad only to gain a onesie-twosie amount of clients, both locally and by Skype. Happily, the majority of my clients have become friends, so what a lovely by-product! One probably CAN carry coal to Newcastle, but why bother? Life’s too short and I have too many other cool projects to tackle to worry about it! I’m sure Loretta would have said something like that!

****

My thanks to Kay Noske for sharing her enthusiastic input from her perspective as a classic film fan on our unique little blogging corner of the world.

 

Next month, in our fourth entry in this series, we’re going to ruminate on the evolution of the classic film fan—from the 1950s television “late-late show” to art house film festivals, to the nostalgia boom of the 1970s, cable, Netflix, Internet streaming, big-screen showings, and the future for classic film fans.  We may have reached a golden age.  Can we expect a decline in years to come?  Join me Thursday, April 7th, for this post.

This blog will go on hiatus for a few weeks in the meantime.

Let me pause here a moment to note that this Saturday, March 5th, will mark the 9thanniversary of Another Old Movie Blog.  Thank you for the pleasure of your company.

 

Kamis, 25 Februari 2016

Loretta Young and The NEW Loretta Young Show - 1962-63


Today we’re going to talk about a TV show and its star.  The New Loretta Young Show (aka Christine’s Children) ran a single season, 1962-63.  It is a striking example of Loretta Young’s abilities both as an actress and as the CEO of her personal brand.  Few have displayed such a canny mastery in the managing of one’s career.

Reinventing oneself is probably one of the greatest assets to a long career and one of the most difficult to achieve. In the acting profession, where reputation is based on roles already played, it is especially confounding. Loretta Young’s career is remarkable. Longevity is only a part of her unique place in Hollywood.  This woman of sizzling Pre-Code films, polished 1930s dramas, an Oscar® for a comedy, and a long-running television anthology show, The Loretta Young Show, in the 1950s, was able to effectively change with the style of the current era and for what was suitable for her as she aged.

The New Loretta Young Show is unlike any other 1960s era family sitcom.  It is imaginative, gutsy, intense, and most refreshingly absent of trite templates of sitcoms before and since.  It is, most especially, a tribute to Loretta Young as an actress and a businesswoman in an industry famous for tossing out female stars once they hit a certain age.

Though I was familiar with her first series that ran for eight years from 1953 to 1961, I knew nothing about this second series until Kay Noske of Movie Star Makeover posted her impressions of the show and interviewed one of its cast members, Beverly Washburn, in May 2015. That interview is here.




Beverly Washburn, whom we’ve mentioned from time to time in her various childhood roles, including here in Here Comes the Groom (1951) and Old Yeller (1957), is one of my favorite child actresses.  In The New Loretta Young Show, she plays the 15-year-old daughter of Loretta Young.  Loretta plays a widow with seven children.  Celia Kaye plays college student Marnie, twins Dirk and Dack Rambo play her 17-year old sons Peter and Paul, Carol Sydes plays the hyperkinetic Binkie, then Beverly Washburn as the sensitive, intellectual and shy Vickie; followed by Sandy Descher as 13 year-old Judy, and little Tracy Stratford as the youngest, six-year-old Maria.

I was, frankly, astounded by the show’s excellence – in terms of bold story ideas, scripts, acting, and directing.  Much of it looks like film cinematography – not the usual two-camera setup of sitcoms of the period.  In style and theme, many episodes really packed a punch.

The pilot episode – innovatively funny – introduces the cast and show by way of a live TV interview program such as was popular in that era with Edward R. Murrow’s See It Now and Charles Collingwood's Person to Person.  The living room is a mass of chaos with cameramen and this family standing in each other’s way, not knowing what to do, giving the most funny, off beat answers, looking for all like reality television.  Someone’s head in profile pops up in front of the camera, getting in the way.  The old town mayor, a feisty ancient Yankee, keeps getting his rehearsed speech interrupted.  From the start, Beverly Washburn stands out in a funny double take when the harried announcer, played by Ted Knight (later famous for playing anchorman Ted Baxter on The Mary Tyler Moore Show) calls her name and she jerks her body with shock, as if wishing the floor would open up and swallow her.  She effectively, and without a word, establishes her character in only a moment. 

Here Loretta Young sets up the show by explaining her attitude toward her children and her role as a mother.  She does not believe in togetherness, which shocks and agitates the announcer, but rather she promotes individuality, confessing that her family do not always like each other.  It’s a breath of fresh air.

Throughout the series, an episode or two will focus on one of the children, but always in relation to how the other family members fit in with that character’s life.  As a twin myself, I can state that I like the depiction of the twin sons and their obvious bond with each other as blessedly positive.  The Rambo boys, and some of the other kids who were new to acting, are used very intelligently, according to their abilities and bringing them along carefully in the series.  It must have been a great learning environment for them.

Some of their experiences are harrowing.

The littlest one, Maria, wisely used sparingly, avoiding clichéd cuteness, has a strong episode towards the end of the season when she is nearly kidnapped in a bizarre and tense episode when a psychotic stranger enters the house, thinking the little girl is his deceased daughter, whose death he never accepted.  A nail biting episode.  What makes it especially poignant is that when this man tells her he is her father, she is enchanted, because her father died before she could form any memory of him.  She is the only one of the kids who cannot remember her father.

Another episode where Beverly Washburn, (unlike some of the other kids, a veteran actress of many years) wanting life experience as a budding writer, detours from her New York City trip to the eye doctor to investigate Greenwich Village and a beatnik coffee house.  But what we might expect to be a funny episode full of humorous oddballs turns quickly sinister as she is unwittingly involved in a drug deal, and is arrested for passing marijuana.  She spends the night in jail with a couple of hard customers not very much older than she, living desperate lives.  One is a streetwalker—not the kind with the funny quip and the heart of gold, but a tough young girl who makes no disguise of her trade and throws it in Beverly’s face. 

Drugs and prostitution on an early 1960s sitcom?  This show is unique not only for its subject matter for a situation comedy, but for the intelligent, sensitive, and classy way it tackles these subjects and these characters.  The topics are not tackled for shock appeal, but as real-life news encroaching upon this suburban family.

Most especially classy, forthright, and intriguing is how Loretta pursues not only a writing career, but a romance with a New York magazine publisher.


Their relationship is developed slowly, leaving no room for the audience to take them for granted, to assume where it’s going.  We really don’t know.  He could be written out next week.  He has to get used to the kids.  They have to get used to him.   But mostly, it's about the relationship between him and Loretta and their adult romance.  Toward the end of the series, his ulcer, due to stress from his job – a plot device introduced in the first few episodes  – ruptures.  Loretta finds him on the floor, passed out, blood dripping from his mouth. He is rushed to the hospital, and she pretends to be his wife so she can be at his bedside.  The doctors wink at it.  He is in critical condition and suffers a kind of stroke so that his speech is impaired.  She knows he has finally come out his coma because there are tears in his eyes, he is crying.  We see his agony and hers.  She takes him home after his release from the hospital to care for him, scandalizing the neighbors.

This is new for a sitcom.

She smokes.  She drinks.  After a particularly bad day, she confesses to her gentleman friend of not liking her children at that moment, ready to scream if they call, “Mom!” one more time.  Their romance is sensual.  They kiss, not a chaste peck on the cheek, but deeply and passionately.  They cuddle and they ache to be alone, and they leave the kids to fend for themselves more than once to accomplish this. Loretta can barely keep her hands off him.

A 1960s sitcom.  You won’t see this on Donna Reed or Leave It to Beaver, none of the shows whose living rooms we came to know as well as our own.

But the 1960s is the real-life background.  There are references to the space race, and they mention it is 1962.  The littlest girl announces she is Caroline Kennedy, at the latest in her game of changing her name.  Loretta spoofs Mrs. Kennedy’s White House Tour television special in the pilot.  It’s a period full of optimism and energy, and we can see it in this show.

Usually on sitcoms of the era, even today, we see a cast positioned precisely around a set the way a little kid might place dolls in a dollhouse – carefully, consciously, serving a purpose to the plot.  The New Loretta Young Show has a casual feel, the characters are randomly everywhere, though this is obviously skillfully orchestrated.  It’s only meant to look casual.  We see her and the kids in the kitchen one chaotic morning, then the camera pulls back and we see what we did not expect – her love, Paul Belzer, the gruff, man’s man editor, sitting off in the distance in the living room, reading the newspaper by himself.  The shot tells us he has spent the night.  He is not quite part of the family yet (though he sleeps in the boys’ room when he stays overnight), and we wonder how they will bridge the gap between them.  I really like James Philbrook in this role.  He is as strong and interesting an individual as she is.

And I like his young assistant at the magazine, played by Allen Emerson, his hard New York accent, with his goatee, very 1962, like Peter Yarrow and Paul Stookey of Peter, Paul and Mary.  He is the image of urban and hip, but with the hint of stickball in his speech.

Another surprising episode where she invites her love’s boss to dinner could have ended up the typical 1950s-60s blustering boss charmed by a home-cooked meal routine.  Instead, it’s a riveting drama where the big cheese, played by Leif Erikson, is an ass, so overbearing and mean, that his longsuffering wife has become an alcoholic.  Loretta, displaying compassion for her, sneaks vodka to her to steady herself under the evening’s onslaught of dinner conversation.  The boss is bullying to Paul, and their combative relationship will continue for many episodes, reaching a crisis point toward the end of the season.  Loretta mouths off to the boss, putting Paul’s job on the line.  There is no happy resolution. The evening ends with bitterness.  It’s actually unpleasant listening to this blowhard trample over everybody in the dining room.  One marvels at the emotional intensity for the viewer, who cannot help but be engaged in this train wreck of a dinner party.

Another, much softer, example of quite unexpected realism in the show is the way Beverly Washburn, after a discussion with her mother as the camera follows them through the hallway, gets ready for bed and casually kneels before it, making the sign of the cross.  Her sister in the next bed, already half asleep, stirs, emits an inelegant muffled grunt, and rolls over.  The prayer is not the focus of the scene, she’s not praying for anything special.  It’s just nighttime and she’s got curlers in her hair, and it’s just what she does. 

I have to say, as a Catholic, I was blown away by that.  Usually prayer in movies and TV shows is reserved for crisis, and is played up as a melodramatic moment.  Usually, Catholics are depicted as jovial priests or ditsy nuns.  The quiet, pleasant normality of this scene is charming.  (I can remember a documentary about The Nat King Cole Show, and an African American woman, recalling the moment decades later in a TV interview, said she called up her friends with the alarm, “Hey!  There’s a Negro on TV!”  I actually hollered, to myself, when I saw the scene, “A Catholic on TV!”  And not a caricature of one.)

Later in the season, we see a snippet of a Catholic wedding ceremony held in an actual Catholic church—though obviously not a High Mass.  Even many Catholics flicking the TV dial might not sit still for that.

Also of note, in the very first episode when Loretta is being interviewed by Ted Knight, he asks about the piano in the room and wants to know who plays it.  Dumbfounded, she answers nobody.  (As if to say, "Why would anybody want to play a piano?  It's not to play, it's just to have.") It is a comic moment, but then we perceive that perhaps her late husband played the piano. She speaks lovingly of him, of a piece of furniture he made, and of his work as a writer.  Much later in the series, we see her new love, Paul Belzer, sit casually at the piano and begin to play it, as if it has been waiting for him all this time.  A wonderful, subtle image of a man coming into a family that will be his, that he has a place here, that he is successfully taking the place of another.  The continuity between the episodes is very skillfully done.


Loretta also has a terrifically natural way of interacting with the kids.  She grabs them, tickles them, kisses their faces, their necks, touches them while speaking to them.  Running her hand through their hair. They flop on her on the couch, and hang on her. They appear to have a comfortable physical relationship with her.  It all looks quite real.  She nags at one girl for constantly talking too fast and mumbling her words. The girl rolls her eyes at her mother, sighing, slumping, and fidgeting, forgetting what she was about to say.  Loretta throws water in her son’s face to wake him up in the wee hours. She does not mince words when they mess up, but she is always supportive.  When she has a meltdown over her romance, she cries in bed and her oldest daughter—who transforms from college kid to new woman friend—cuddles her and comforts her in a fascinating role reversal.

Loretta is also generous as a star, focusing the camera and the attention on her young cast mates when they are in a pivotal scene. In one episode where Beverly Washburn dissolves into tears, Loretta lets her have the scene entirely. She embraces Beverly, but keeps her back to the camera so Beverly can play out her pain in the scene as the more important person in it.  That is generosity, and also shows confidence in herself and in Beverly as a fellow professional.

Loretta Young created this character and supervised every detail of the show including the children who played her kids, the scripts, the costumes, hair and makeup—we must assume director Norman Foster at least took charge of the camera work.  It’s a great accomplishment and a splendid example of an actress of many talents, able and willing to take charge of her career in a way that allowed her to remain producing excellent work when other careers floundered according to the whims of the studio, the public, and the changing times.

Speaking of changing times, I wish this series had lasted longer.  I can only imagine the depth of story angles, the sparks as those kids came of age in the 1960s.  War, civil rights, the generation gap, I know this show would have tackled all of it.  Maybe even the ghastly and tragic assassination that happened some months after the show ended.  Sometimes we hear of something being ahead of its time.  I suppose The New Loretta Young Show was, but it was also a beautiful artifact of its time, and a woman changing and growing with the times—both the character and the intuitive actress playing her. 

In recent years, Loretta Young’s Pre-Code films have gotten long overdue attention, and a lot of raised eyebrows for their sauciness.  I hope this show gets a second look as well.  In its quiet own way, it is equally daring.  It is available on DVD, a four-disc set, including interviews with cast members.

I’d like to thank Kay Noske for blogging about the show last year, or I might never have known about it.  Next week, I’ll be posting an interview with Kay as the third entry in my year-long monthly series on the current state of the classic film fan.  Here’s what we discussed about The New Loretta Young Show:

JTL:  You have called Loretta Young your muse.   One thing I thought I’d bring up is her commanding presence in that show. It speaks a lot to the self-confidence of style.  She seems to project someone who is so totally comfortable in her own skin in a way that is elegant and “old world” and yet rivetingly modern.  There is a great strength and power in her television character that is natural and comfortable.  (Modern female characters, even the strong ones playing cops or doctors or superheroes, are usually riddled with angst.  I suppose a reflection of our times.)

KN:  I have to pause here…you said a MOUTHFUL here, Jacqueline. I’ve never been able to put my finger on why these women do NOT inspire me, but bingo, you nailed it! How can anyone be inspired by angst? Existentialism and I have never been compatible.

JTL:  Though she opens and closes the episodes with a “thought for the day”, a kind of moral to the story, she does not really lecture the kids during the show, which is refreshing.  The family has its adventure, or crisis for the episode, and any lesson the kids, and the audience, takes from it is by her example, how she faces crisis.  She simply is; her dress, her appearance, her behavior, and how she expresses herself.  Someone else’s example is the most compelling incentive we have for change in our own lives, including for self-improvement. 

KN:  EXACTLY! If we can see that someone else did it, so can we. (Unless you’re angst-y, then you assume that no matter how many others did it, you’ll be the pitiful exception to the rule. Groan!). Loretta’s fully in control of her image, her persona, and her expression. She knows what she wants, knows what’s right and knows exactly how she will present it. Since I have a similar iron-clad belief in the power of a single-minded heart, I love her for showing me how it’s done! Her strength comes from an unshakable belief that she’s RIGHT about things, that there is a right and wrong way to live, that mistakes can be corrected, that people are typically GOOD, that God’s in His heaven, and that He is a loving, good force in the lives of everyday people. That’s unstoppable in my book. I love that she uses little quotes to reinforce her position. She was/is a product of her zeitgeist, I think, too, in that she was raised in a world that believed in right and wrong. Today, the arrow simply spins in the compass and signals confusion. For Loretta, her show was a chance to express her faith in what was good and right. That’s what I believe, so, naturally, I love seeing this most elegant, warm, and lovely expression of a powerful, strong, yet utterly feminine woman.  

 ***

Come back Thursday for our visit with Kay Noske of Movie Star Makeover, and our discussion on the current state of the classic film fan, TCM, and how her interest and expertise in image consulting has its roots in classic Hollywood.

*********************


 "Lynch’s book is organized and well-written – and has plenty of amusing observations – but when it comes to describing Blyth’s movies, Lynch’s writing sparkles." - Ruth Kerr, Silver Screenings

"Jacqueline T. Lynch creates a poignant and thoroughly-researched mosaic of memories of a fine, upstanding human being who also happens to be a legendary entertainer." - Deborah Thomas, Java's Journey

"One of the great strengths of Ann Blyth: Actress. Singer. Star. is that Lynch not only gives an excellent overview of Blyth's career -- she offers detailed analyses of each of Blyth's roles -- but she puts them in the context of the larger issues of the day."- Amanda Garrett, Old Hollywood Films

"Jacqueline's book will hopefully cause many more people to take a look at this multitalented woman whose career encompassed just about every possible aspect of 20th Century entertainment." - Laura Grieve, Laura's Miscellaneous Musings

"Jacqueline T. Lynch’s Ann Blyth: Actress. Singer. Star. is an extremely well researched undertaking that is a must for all Blyth fans." - Annette Bochenek, Hometowns to Hollywood




Ann Blyth: Actress. Singer. Star. 

by Jacqueline T. Lynch

The first book on the career of actress Ann Blyth. Multitalented and remarkably versatile, Blyth began on radio as a child, appeared on Broadway at the age of twelve in Lillian Hellman's Watch on the Rhine, and enjoyed a long and diverse career in films, theatre, television, and concerts. A sensitive dramatic actress, the youngest at the time to be nominated for her role in Mildred Pierce (1945), she also displayed a gift for comedy, and was especially endeared to fans for her expressive and exquisite lyric soprano, which was showcased in many film and stage musicals. Still a popular guest at film festivals, lovely Ms. Blyth remains a treasure of the Hollywood's golden age.



The eBook and paperback are available from Amazon and CreateSpace, which is the printer.  You can also order it from my Etsy shop. It is also available at the Broadside Bookshop, 247 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts.

If you wish a signed copy, then email me at JacquelineTLynch@gmail.com and I'll get back to you with the details.


**************************

My new syndicated column SILVER SCREEN, GOLDEN YEARS, on classic film is up at Go60  or check with your local paper.

Rabu, 17 Februari 2016

The 22nd Academy Awards - March 1950


In this Academy Awards season, let's turn back the clock to March 23,1950 and the Pantages Theater for the best in 1949 films.  Hosted by Paul Douglas, with radio commentary from Ronald Reagan and Eve Arden, you can see segments of the award ceremony here on YouTube
 
Unfortunately, the delightful performances of the nominated Best Songs is not included in these clips -- but you can hear them in the entire show as it was broadcast on radio at the Internet Archive site.  Among the performers singing are Ann Blyth, Ricardo Montalban, Gene Autry, and others. (Ann Blyth sings "My Foolish Heart" at about 25:10 into Part 1.)


22nd_Academy_Awards_Ceremony_Part_1.mp3   
  
22nd_Academy_Awards_Ceremony_Part_2.mp3    
  
22nd_Academy_Awards_Ceremony_Part_3.mp3    
   
22nd_Academy_Awards_Ceremony_Part_4.mp3  
    
22nd_Academy_Awards_Ceremony_Part_5.mp3    


It was the year Olivia De Havilland won for The Heiress, which we discussed here.  Recall the elegance of dress, of manners, and of speech.  The disgust and repugnance that the modern ceremonies engender can be forgotten under the spell of old Hollywood glamour.