Douglas Sirk

Interview video accompanying WRITTEN ON THE WIND on Criterion is worth it. Robert Stack says some interesting stuff. Sirk says he wanted to work with James Dean, had noticed his star quality early on, but the studio passed, and somehow Rock Hudson became his leading man instead.

Sirk says Hudson was a truck driver (which is true) and that he “took him off the truck.”

Dorothy Malone was a big prude in real life!

Which of course makes perfect sense in the end.

Robert Stack RIP

That stinks. He was an interesting guy. Not a great actor, but he worked with and was respected by Ernst Lubitsch, Douglas Sirk, etc. In fact Sirk said he was the only lead actor in _Written on the Wind_ and _The Tarnished Angels_ to understand Sirk's ambitions for these films. Apparently during down time on set they would hang around and talk about Eastern philosophy.About 10 years ago my friend spotted him wandering around a L.A. movie theater, wearing an _Unsolved Mysteries_ jacket.

I did hear about Dorothy Malone being a prude somewhere along the way

Zugsmith and Sirk both talk at length about having to convince her to do the famous dance in WotW. Sirk says some very interesting stuff about the dual nature of actors. Malone herself says that the difference between her onscreen persona and her offscreen self made for problems in her personal life, her own version of Rita Hayworth’s observation about how “‘men fall in love with Gilda, but they wake up with me.” (When did she actually say this, if she indeed said it)

She had very pretty eyes, it’s a shame she was a prude. Cindy Wilson of the B-52s has similar eyes.

"Lava" is about that last scene in WOTW.

Holy shit

Is it really?

Oh I see.

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum Geburstag!

Here comes Mona to deliver the birthday cake

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/574f0b9a37013b939ab0b866/1476107320628-INCNB0USJP565YJ5WY1Y/image-asset.png?format=1000w

<3

Still a few days left to watch THUNDER ON THE HILL!

There's a Douglas Sirk retrospective on at AFI Silver (https://silver.afi.com/Browsing/EventsAndExperiences/EventDetails/0000000080) and The National Gallery of Art (https://www.nga.gov/calendar/film-programs/douglas-sirk-torture-ecstasy.html). Any recommendations? Anyone going?

The last 10 minutes of Imitation of Life...the only time I weep in American film.

A few times in All That Heaven Allows do it for me also

I'm supposed to join friends at a bar, but, uh, Imitation of Life is on.

Wondering if that means you are born to be hurt.

I've had a sudden urge to get back into Sirk, so have been catching up on a few things (ordered a Blu-ray that compiles Imitation of Life – one of my favorite movies, period – with the 1930s version, for $12!).

Re-watched WOTW last nite... what a film. It's been decades since the first cluster of times that I saw it, and I think I "appreciate" it even more now (some things hit different as you get older). I won't rehash any praise for it, other than to note that Robert Stack's performance is just fantastic.

It did leave me with a few tangential thoughts/reflections:

a) When Kyle, in his climactic rant, says that Mitch has always been sponging off the Hadleys (or something to that effect), there seems to be a kernel of truth to it. Why does Mitch live with them? I don't think it's ever made clear, but my assumption is that Mitch's mother died at some point, and his father felt he couldn't raise him; and Jasper Hadley (Kyle & Marylee's father) was happy for Kyle to have Mitch's influence in his life? Did I miss this being spelled out(?) Even if so, Mitch is a grown man now... why doesn't he have his own place?

b) Speaking of which, is Kyle & Marylee's mother ever mentioned? It's kind of fascinating how the mothers are totally absent, and the boys' backstory is set up (in Kyle's airplane conversation with Lucy) as structured by the competing influence of these two imposing fathers – but neither father seems particularly full of "rizz." Mitch's dad is pretty mild-mannered for a supposedly legendary rancher; and despite Kyle's talk about how both he and his own father know that Kyle could never fill his dad's shoes, Jasper Hadley doesn't seem disappointed in Kyle or his playboy lifestyle (he just wants him to stay sober, and maybe settle down). For a powerful oil baron who owns a town, Jasper comes off as a semi-distracted, managerial type who's fairly benign, and even friendly enough (if quick to reach for a gun when his daughter is disparaged).

Is it a "fault" of the film that the fathers don't loom over the story the way it seems like they should; but instead recede in the background? Or just a reflection that its real focus is elsewhere?

c) The film's Wikipedia page has this "Social Commentary" section:

In terms of its social criticism, the picture is best understood as a parody of the ultimate achievement of the American dream. The Hadleys have achieved the American ideal of material affluence, but they are unhappy and isolated. Their acceptance of materialism's ideology makes it impossible to question its foundations. The Hadleys rule their town, and the film's opening scenes show endless rows of phallic oil towers and the massive corporate skyscraper; the Hadleys are everywhere, but emotionally and spiritually they are nowhere. One of the film's central topics is the impact of 1950s materialism on the American character.

Also, I watched a bit of an interview w/Sirk himself (in the disc's bonus materials) – he says the central theme of the film is "the death of the American middle class"(!), and that's why it resonates so strongly. Obviously I can't (and won't) reject these interpretations – but am I wrong for feeling that the Hadley's wealth actually isn't so important to the central story? The film presents itself as a saga of a wealthy family (and prefigures, maybe influenced, true sagas like Dallas) – but the story is not really so epic so scope, and in fact centers around a rather small-scale domestic love triangle and one character's feelings of inadequacy.

Obviously, Kyle's anxiety and despair over his perceived "impotence" is related to not living up to his legacy, being able to fill his father's shoes, etc... and his obsession with having offspring seems more related to wanting to serve in a "father" role himself than actually wanting a kid or family. But all that is not necessarily tied up in his family's wealth or power... you could tell the same (or very similar story) involving characters of much more modest means. Not sure where I'm going with this, other than I think the "rich oil family" aspect is – if not necessarily misdirection – than at least a kind of "window dressing" to what's really at the core of the film.

Oh, one more thing: why does ask Mitch to drive her to town on that morning when she’s going to see the doctor, and then insist he pick her up after the appointment? Kyle and Marylee observing them in the car sort of sets the final sequence of events in action… I’m sure Lucy didn’t intend for that to happen(?) Was she anticipating the positive news from the doctor, and thinking that she could nip Mitch’s feelings in the bud (which he was basically on the verge of laying out for her) by revealing her pregnancy to him then and there?

*why does Lucy ask Mitch(…)

WOTW is what Giant shoulda been (I like Giant).

I didn’t realize or remember, until Sirk mentioned it in that interview, that James Dean had an early role in a film of his… Has Anybody Seen My Gal?

Man, that scene in All That Heaven Allows where she meets his friends for the first time and they’re all having a big party. That’s the part which really stayed with me, only saw it for the first time this holiday.

I didn't know any of this (from the Wikipedia page for WOTW) – it's really interesting. I had assumed the underlying novel was pure fiction, maybe with a lot of excess detail that had to be extracted for brevity:

The screenplay by George Zuckerman was based on Robert Wilder's 1946 novel of the same title, a thinly disguised account (or roman à clef) of the real-life scandal involving torch singer Libby Holman and her husband, tobacco heir Zachary Smith Reynolds, who was killed under mysterious circumstances at his family estate in 1932. A film version of the novel was optioned by RKO Pictures and International Pictures in 1946, but the project was shelved because of threats from the Reynolds family. Universal Pictures acquired the rights to the novel after absorbing International Pictures, and began developing the film in 1955. Zuckerman made numerous alterations in his screenplay to avoid lawsuits from the Reynolds family, among them shifting the setting from North Carolina to Texas, and having the family fortune originate in oil rather than tobacco.

I wonder if that's why Lauren Bacall's character, Lucy Moore, feels somewhat marginal and only sketchily developed in the film... to avoid a lawsuit from Libby Holman? It's not really clear why both Mitch & Kyle fall so hard for Lucy – which isn't a slight on Bacall, she's just not given a lot to work with.

And she wasn't a compelling actress when not with Bogart tbh

Someone needs to watch The Fan again

Someone needs to watch these commercials:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtUyGTwy6dY

MMMMMM

It's telling that when Sirk followed up the success of WOTW with The Tarnished Angels, featuring the same lead actors in (very roughly) analogous roles, those actors were Stack, Hudson, and Malone... Bacall wasn't in the picture, so to speak.

God, the guy made so many f'in movies in the '50s... between 2 and 4(!) every year, from '51 to '58.

Finished the 1934 Imitation of Life (“I want my quack-quack,” indeed); then started up the Sirk version and watched through the Christmas scene before turning in for the night. This movie just vibrates on an incredible frequency… there’s nothing like it.

Think I finally need to watch Summer Storm.

I’ve been watching Imitation in chunks… due in part to time constraints, but also to “savor” it yet purposefully dilute its impact, in a way. Certain scenes are almost overwhelming to me, even after multiple past viewings. I’m not generally affected by films, on that kind of an emotional level. This one’s a masterpiece, though, and it seems to become more powerful as I get older.

OTM. There’s some clunkiness with the nominal leads which needs to be put in perspective, the same way the romantic leads in Marx Brothers movies need to be ignored, and sometimes one has to overcome any kind of initial resistance to the message and being preached to, but man does it pack a punch.

still need to read that book, Born to Be Hurt.

Just thinking about the scene when Juanita Moore brings the snowboots to school and young Sarah Jane slides under her desk in mortification might make me well up a bit.

xp Huh, I’ve never heard of that book… just looked it up.

Have you ever read Movie Love in the Fifties? I read it years ago, and loved it. I don’t really know anything about the guy, but his passion and analysis are wonderful. (He also has a very good, though somewhat different, book about 1930s romantic comedies.)

That book is kind of famous but I haven’t read. Took the other one out of the library recently but didn’t really have enough time to dig into it

It's a marvelous book; it's rare that I agree with every one of a critic's insights like I do Harvey's about IOL.

The 1934 version is good in its own way. Colbert is well-cast.

Think I finally need to watch Summer Storm.

James – I watched this over the weekend (knew nothing about it). Have you seen it yet?

No

I remark that it is still available on TUBI though.

George Sanders and Linda Darnell though. I liked them in Forever Amber and Hangover Square. And Edward Everett Horton!

It is indeed on Tubi, and worth watching. Very good script and performances… It’s “literary”-feeling (based on a Chekhov novel), but in a way that works. Darnell is really something… first time I’ve seen her, I think.

Buncha Sirks on Prime rn: Heaven Allows; Magnificent Obsession; Written On The Wind; Tarnished Angels; A Scandal In Paris; and Lured.

ooh written on the wind is on there now!? yay!