Lauren Bacall crtisizes contemporary Hollywood and gets tongue's wagging about what makes a true star

(one indicator that Bacall holds tight to the past is that her style hasn’t really changed throughout the decades. But, when you originate from an era of style as classy as hers, I’d say that’s a good thing.)

Ms. Bacall has a good point when referring to old Hollywood. She’s not so much saying that current Hollywood isn’t as good as her era, she’s saying that current Hollywood doesn’t present or portray itself as well as in her era. Hollywood was all about fantasy, dreams, escape. You didn’t see the scars, scabs, and dirt because there was little. And when there was any, you had publicity people that cleaned you up fast. Your career depended on it.

Ms. Bacall has a good point in that respect. Current Hollywood wears their scandals and improprieties like a badge of honor. It’s become the norm to assume that any “trash” can become a star and surely everyone is finally getting their 15 minutes. You can get out of your car with no underwear, flash your cuter and it’s become the norm. You can father 10 kids from 10 different women and as long as you pay your child support, you’re a great guy. Stars are no longer people we look up to and aspire to be. They’re us now. They’re no different than you and I except they assume they exude glamour because some whoring designer dresses them for an award show. They get to be crappy people publicly and feel no backlash.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000002/board/nest/66876164?p=4

And, I would also add that there was something iconic about all the big actresses of Bacall’s day. Now, it seems that the only way to be iconic is to be a pop-star, and the badder, the better. Oh, I know that there are a few iconic folks in the movies today, like Julia Roberts, who’s 1,000 watt smile is known the world over. But, there is a definite reason why during Julia’s episode of INSIDE THE ACTOR’S STUDIO (in 1997?), she was introduced by professor/host, James Lipton, as a real movie star, following his statement that the era of *movie-star* had ended somewhere in the 1950s (though I think it ended in the 1960s). Why? Because the real movie star, with that special *star quality* is so hard to come by today, that when one is found (like Julia) who possess that certain something, we just know.

Back in Lauren’s time, they took it for granted that if you weren’t a starlet or character-actor/actress, then you were a star, and that was that. But, today, we unfortunately see that that isn’t the case. Not anymore.

If there is any good to come from our modern understanding, it is the recognition that true stars are now farther and fewer between than ever before. By knowing what a true star is, we can hopefully rebel against what a star isn’t. And, that’s the point.

If anyone wishes to contest this point, just look at reality TV, and the “stars” it churns out! That’s proof of the problem, of not just showbiz, but of societal taste. For, after-all, Hollywood is but a micronism of society as a whole and a reflection of its virtues (or lack-thereof), for the most part. So, I propose charm-school and style-lessons for everyone!

[gallery]

People have remarked how much the late British actress, Natasha Richardson (seen here in sills from the 1998 remake of the 1961 Disney classic looks like fellow Brit star, Emma Thompson. And, as you can see from the Emma image below, they are quite right.

 

But, I’d like to take this comparison a step further and say that they both sound almost identical! I was listening to Natasha talk about her favorite sorts of movies on a 1990s AFI WOMEN IN FILM special, chronicling the different types of characters women have traditionally played in movies, and how those representations have changed through the decades, (located here, in-case anyone is interested), and I swear, every-time she uttered a word, I either thought of Jennifer Saunders or Emma Thompson—-and no, it’s not just because they’re British. I mean, I certainly wasn’t thinking of Julie Andrews, Maggie Smith or Emma Bunton!

Both lovely women, with very lovely, very distinct voices! And, I tell you true, the more I see of this Natasha Richardson, the more I like her! The Parent Trap turned me on to her, and now, I am a fan. Too bad I was such a late bloomer in that regard, though… I wish she was still with us.

I even procrastinate the things I want to do.

This is totally me right now! Because I want to add more to my blog, but guess what?…

Grand Hotel (1932)

In light of my earlier post about film-restoration, brought on by my recent viewing of Grand Hotel (1939), I feel compelled to elaborate on the film itself.

Some films made in the 30s are timeless — such as the Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, and others. But this film preceded them all. And, glory, hallelujah! This is one of those rare surviving gems from Hollywood’s pre-code days (aprox. 1920s-1934), which, by certain measures, makes it even more special!

But, as mentioned in my previous post, one thing that struck me, unfortunately, was the annoying background sounds — the fizzing, the muffled sentences, the loud and soft speaking voices of certain characters, all these things that could only be attributed to one problem — decay. I’m referring to film decay — the process by which an old film deteriorates. And, while this film certainly isn’t the only one to suffer from such a condition, the brilliant cast and modern design of the film make its considerably warn condition all the more noticeable. Yes, I’d say Grand Hotelis in need of a grand renovation!

Make no mistake about it though, this was (and is) a high-quality film, with a great intricate story, and fine pacing. There was scarcely a chance to get bored, if one pays attention to the characters. That said, it is impossible not to realize that the noise interference does impose upon the enjoyment of the movie quite significantly — this is especially true if you have a keen ear for music, voices, and the above average appreciation for beautiful sound. But, luckily, this is the type of movie from which almost every one of us can find something to appreciate.

Grand Hotel (1932) has everything, including romance, drama, comedy, and crime! All depicted in a rather light-hearted, feel-good way. Highly recommended!

**** out of *****

Just a shout out to let all you lovely folks out there know that if any of you are classic movie fans, if you think Turner Classic Movies is possibly the best channel on TV, if you actually enjoy black and white films and think they are beautiful and highly artistic, and if you worry about the state of our arts and fashion today, then this blog might be right up your alley!

Follow me to keep up, cause I plan to update often! (^_^)

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzgMHP4cu8o?wmode=transparent&autohide=1&egm=0&hd=1&iv_load_policy=3&modestbranding=1&rel=0&showinfo=0&showsearch=0&w=500&h=374]

oskybledindigo:

“That’s queer rough talk for a nice girl the  like of yourself..”

“Decent? Who told you I was?”

Is it just me or does Greta Garbo look a whole lot like British comedian, Jennifer Saunders—-especially Jennifer in this clip! They have almost the same bone structure AND they seem to be the same with privacy and dealing with the press and fanfare; Saunders is well-known for her ardent disdain for interviews and being around crowds of fans (though no big star has quite broken Garbo’s record for that as yet).

(Source: http://www.youtube.com/)

I must confess, sometimes it hurts to be a classic movie fan—-sometimes, it really, really hurts…

I was watching a Greta Garbo movie the other day, called “Grand Hotel” (1932).

The film starred Garbo, Joan Crawford, Lionel Barrymore, and John Barrymore. And, while I would highly recommend the film as one of the finest of the 1930s (considered Hollywood’s first true ensemble film, and believed to be the inspiration behind many Robert Altman films from the 1970s to now…), my enjoyment of it was somewhat disturbed by the fizzy sounds of background static that has developed as the result of neglect and subsequent deterioration. This is perhaps the most prominent burden that a classic film fan must bare—-sitting through a movie that is so much less enjoyable than it could be—-and worst of all, for reasons that were (and are) preventable!

Do you know the harrowing details?! According to The Film Foundation, “Half of all American films made before 1950 and over 90% of films made before 1929 are lost forever. ” I think it is of the utmost importance that every film lover learn the harsh facts—-as heartbreaking as they are. Because if we want to keep our films around indefinitely, then we mustn’t go along our merry way enjoying our beloved movies without taking the proper steps to also save them. 

And, please, whatever you do, do not make the mistake of believing that those endangered films are of little interest to fans of mainstream Hollywood movies. Because sadly, quite the opposite is true. In fact, I can think of quite a few big-name stars whose films have fallen victim to this tragedy:

(Carole Lombard)

(Gloria Swanson)

(Jack Benny)

(Irene Dunn)

And even…

…just to name a few! These are all well-known stars of Hollywood’s Golden Age and the silent era, and to think, there are films of theirs that we can’t even know about! This is truly unacceptable! And, we must not let these horrible percentages climb.

As a movie lover, films are of extreme importance to me. So, it literally makes me want to cry, thinking of all that has been lost! Yet, there is a bright side to all of  this, starting with the fact that some movies thought to be lost not long ago have been found. So, there is hope for many others as-well. And, with movies more readily available than ever before, there is more of an awareness of the issue than ever before, and much effort is being made by many non-profits to combat it. However, it is also up to us individual fans. And, this is the second most significant burden we must bare.

So, how can we do our part? Well, it starts with being a fan. So, be a fan—-but, be a “friendly fan”. Share these movies with your friends. Educate them on what they’re missing. The more they know, the more likely they’ll be to eventually support crucial foundations, such as the one mentioned above. And, this leads me to burden number 3—-taking action. Support the film foundation in any way you can by becoming a financial contributor or a spokesperson for the cause, and this leads right back around to being a fan.

Yes, there is a lot to consider when it comes to being a classic film lover. And, sometimes, it’s quite a burden indeed. But, as a fan, it’s a burden I’ll gladly bare.