Enter June in the house of Morgan
Posted by ![[info]](https://i0.wp.com/l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vp19 on 2011.05.31 at 07:19
Current mood: 
cheerful
Among the many joys of classic Hollywood film are the huge array of character actors who populated the era’s movies; their talent and reliability made them mainstays with audiences, and many moviegoers found them every bit as indispensable as the stars. Frank Morgan, shown with Carole Lombard in 1930’s “Fast And Loose,” was one of those performers (http://carole-and-co.livejournal.com/287493.html).
Wednesday, June 1, marks the anniversary of his birth, and to commemorate, Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. is showing 10 lesser-known Morgan movies made between 1932 and 1940. If you only know Morgan from the likes of “The Wizard Of Oz” and “The Shop Around The Corner” (the latter is increasingly gaining renown as the definitive Morgan performance), you’ll enjoy seeing him in these roles and get a flavor of his ability to add zest to just about any film. Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
* 6 a.m. — “Secrets of the French Police” (1932) Frank plays a French detective trying to solve a murder in a case that may involve famed Russian Princess Anastasia. With Gwili Andre and Gregory Ratoff.
* 7 a.m. — “The Half Naked Truth” (1933) A fun pre-Code, directed by Gregory La Cava of later “My Man Godfrey” fame, featuring Lee Tracy as a carnival pitchman, as well as Lupe Velez and Eugene Pallette.
* 8:30 a.m. — “The Nuisance” (1933) Tracy’s top-billed in this one, portraying an ambulance-chasing attorney with Madge Evans as his leading lady; Frank plays a doctor.
* 10 a.m. — “The Cat And The Fiddle” (1934) Jeanette MacDonald and Ramon Novarro are the leads in this operatic romance, with Frank as a wealthy arts patron. (Above are Morgan, Novarro, MacDonald and Jean Hersholt.) The final segment of this film was shot in three-strip Technicolor, a year before “Becky Sharp” became the first feature to be entirely filmed in this new process.
* 11:30 a.m. — “By Your Leave” (1935) Frank was occasionally top-billed in lower-tier MGM films such as this one, where he and Genevieve Tobin portray a couple in a mid-life crisis. The cast includes Neil Hamilton, Gene Lockhart, Margaret Hamilton and a young Betty Grable.
* 1 p.m. — “The Perfect Gentleman” (1935) Another leading role for Frank, where he plays a struggling aristocrat who helps a singer (Cicely Courtniedge) make a comeback.
* 2:15 p.m. — “Piccadilly Jim” (1936) A romantic comedy of manners where Frank plays the father of London cartoonist Robert Montgomery. A strong supporting cast includes Madge Evans, Eric Blore, Billie Burke and Robert Benchley.
* 4 p.m. — “Beg, Borrow Or Steal” (1937) A story of con artists on the Riviera decades before “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels,” this co-stars Florence Rice, John Beal and Erik Rhodes.
* 5:15 p.m. — “Henry Goes Arizona” (1939) Frank’s a broke vaudeville dandy who inherits an Arizona ranch. Virginia Weidler and Guy Kibbee co-star.
* 6:30 p.m. — “Keeping Company” (1940) A domestic comedy, with Frank married to Irene Rich and father of daughters Ann Rutherford, Virginia Weidler and Gloria De Haven.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Looking back: May 1932
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.30 at 03:45
Current mood: 
curious
This month’s review of Carole Lombard items in the news from 79 years ago begins with an amusing anecdote regarding “Sinners In The Sun,” reported in the Milwaukee Sentinel on May 6, 1932:
“When Carole Lombard and Chester Morris were filming location sequences for ‘Sinners In The Sun,’ two wild mallard ducks flew into the scene. The ducks refused to leave, despite efforts of employes to chase them away, and the director found it necessary to use them in the scene and record their quacks!”
Maybe the mallards were looking for the “Horse Feathers” set (remember the ducks’ appearance when Groucho Marx sings “Everyone Says I Love You” to “college widow” Thelma Todd?) and settled for this film instead.
Later that month, “Sinners In The Sun” premiered at the Liberty in Spokane, Wash., and on May 18, here’s part of what the Spokesman-Review wrote about it:
“Miss Lombard is svelte and stunning in her lavish wardrobe, but Morris would be better if he wasn’t quite so resolute. Some opening scenes of Miss Lombard’s quarreling family are quite overdone, but amusing, but the picture’s chief merit lies in its style shows.”
On May 27, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, through its Hollywood columnist and former actress Eileen Percy, said Lombard and her husband were taking up a new activity:
“Bill Powell has discarded his tennis rackets for a set of golf clubs. No, Bill has not grown too old for the game of forty-love, but his wife, Carole Lombard, has been advised by her physician to take up golf instead of the more strenuous form of exercise. So now Mr. and Mrs. Powell are being taught the more gentle art of the drive and putt.”
How long did that last? Well, I’ve never seen a photo of Lombard playing golf, but plenty of her once she returned to this:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole and Marlene, via Maria
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.29 at 01:32
Current mood: 
productive
No human being is immune from having his or her share of contradictions, and Carole Lombard and Marlene Dietrich, Paramount stablemates for much of the 1930s, certainly were not immune. We’ve discussed their relationship in the past, and in this entry we’ll do so through the book, “Marlene Dietrich,” written not long after her death by her daughter, Maria Riva.
Riva’s book is hardly a “Mommie Dearest” expose — she clearly has affection towards her legendary mother — but at the same time, it doesn’t hide her foibles and eccentricities. Marlene was in many ways an admirable woman, but like the rest of us, she had her moments.
Lombard wasn’t one of Dietrich’s “pet hates” — according to Riva, that status belonged to Loretta Young, who Marlene detested for her overly pious nature — but Carole elicited some intriguing reactions from the German star.
When Dietrich’s husband, Rudi Sieber, arrived in Los Angeles to meet her in 1932, Marlene didn’t think much of Paramount’s roster, telling him:
“Here no women have brains. Certainly not at the studio and, with Jo (Josef von Sternberg), that’s the only place one sees. There is that vulgar (Tallulah) Bankhead, awful, chases the bit players. There is that ugly Claudette Colbert, so ‘shopgirl French.’ Lombard is pretty, but too ‘palsy’ American, and tries to look like me, and (Bing) Crosby’s chorines, and … who else is there? Now, at Garbo’s studio (MGM), there they have women — beautiful ones. I don’t mean that Norma Shearer — she’s a dead fish, and that new one, (Jean) Harlow, too low-class. But they have some that are very interesting, but with Jo, of course, impossible.”
When Marlene was preparing costumes for her film “The Scarlet Empress,” where she portrayed Catherine the Great, Riva wrote she overheard her mother conversing with Paramount design maven Travis Banton:
“Travis — I know we have a blacker black than this velvet. The nap is too short on this to look rich on the screen, and where is the georgette we didn’t use in ‘Blonde Venus’? Did you use it for Lombard? That old satin you draped her with for those publicity stills — really! — off the shoulder? A la ‘vamp’? Lombard? She looked silly…”
“Talk about silly, where did you get that sailor outfit they put on her? Really, Travis, you can’t do that!”
“Lombard can be very funny. If she gets the right pictures, she can become a big star. You have to watch what Lombard wears. She loves to look like me; why not make her a ‘Dietrich’ suit out of that white flannel we found — but she will need a shorter jacket than I wear. She has an American body. Also a behind, so watch the skirt line.”
Then came the 1935 Venice party, of which Riva wrote, “This was so rare that it created quite a stir in our lives.” Here’s how she described Dietrich’s reaction upon receiving the invitation:
“It says here, ‘Wear old clothes!’ What does she mean, ‘old clothes’? Just like her, trying to be ever-so-different and cutesy! Get me Travis at the studio.”
She got Banton on the phone, and Riva wrote her mother’s end of the conversation went something like this:
“Travis? Have you heard about Lombard’s big party? Well, what does she mean with ‘old clothes’? Old clothes ‘history’ or old clothes ‘no good anymore’? … Oh! Is a fun house really that dirty? Then why give a party there? Do you know what she is going to wear? Knowing her, she will have alerted publicity and there will be photographers. … Really? Now everyone thinks they can wear trousers — so, what do I wear? I am coming in! Think! We will have to make something ‘old clothes’!”
Marlene chose not to wear trousers, a decision she likely regretted, as Maria — who did not go to the party — said Dietrich came home “a bloody mess”:
“What an idea for a party? We had to sit on potato sacks and slide down enormous slides? I thought we were going straight through the wall into the ocean! … And barrels that rolled! We had to run through them trying not to fall! It was awful! Everyone was crashing on top of each other and they were laughing. They thought it was fun! You know those horrible mirrors that make you look like a midget or a giant or fat? She had those too. Who wants to see themselves fat? I can have that right here in my bathroom and not look like I have been in a war!”
Dietrich is shown above with Lombard, Lili Damita and Errol Flynn at the party. Riva described her knees: “They were really bad. She looked as though she had fallen off a bicycle at high speed on a gravel road. … We cleaned the caked blood off her knees and shins, then she soaked in a hot bath loaded with epsom salts.”
Meanwhile, Marlene kept on moaning:
“Of course, Lombard’s trousers protected her legs. Her legs should be covered!”
Dietrich is shown with Richard Barthelmess, her escort that night, and Cary Grant. The following morning, Marlene did a 180 when describing the party to friends on the phone: “I went to a marvelous party that Carole Lombard gave in a fun house! Well, let me tell you all about it! …”
She was conversing with Banton in 1936 when Lombard again entered the conversation:
“I saw a picture of Lombard in something you did for her — in that black monkey fur … you want to give her a banana? Really, Travis? But in that film …”
She then turned to Maria: “What’s the name of that film, where we saw the photographs and I said, ‘Finally, Lombard looks beautiful!’?”
Riva: “‘The Princess Comes Across.'”
“Yes — a bad title — in that film, you finally did something for her. She looks just like Dietrich. I hear she calls you ‘Teasie’ — how very cutesy-poo’!”
According to Riva, when Dietrich learned of Lombard’s death, she said this to her daughter:
“See? What do I always say? Never fly! Airplanes are dangerous. I never really liked her, but she could be beautiful when someone dressed her right. I wonder who Gable will find now?”
Typical Dietrich. According to Riva, Marlene’s closest friend at Paramount was, like her, an outsider, and also one whose style and personality signified no threat to Dietrich. We are referring to, of all people, Mae West:
Riva’s word portrait of Dietrich and her amazing life will at times delight, shock or exasperate you … but it will never bore you. It’s well worth a read.
For Memorial Day, this week’s header features Lombard with two servicemen during her eastbound rail stop at Salt Lake City on Jan. 13, 1942. Let us remember those who sacrificed for our country, and don’t let the unofficial summer kickoff obscure the real reason for the holiday.
Bid for Lombard…get an extra page free
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.28 at 00:59
Current mood: 
enthralled
Fan magazines are a wonderful resource for Carole Lombard items and images, even if some of the former have to be sifted with a skeptical eye towards the Hollywood publicity machine. At first, we weren’t sure what magazine the following page hails from, but thanks to Amy Jeanne, we discovered it was Movie Classic of July 1932:
Nice pic of Lombard, one that isn’t seen too often. Here’s what the caption says:
“Despite ill health, Carole stayed by her post until ‘Sinners In The Sun’ was completed — and THEN had a nervous breakdown. Unlike many a star, however, she didn’t play on public sympathy. The headline-hunters didn’t know of her illness until she was almost recovered. And were they mad? Almost as much as when Carole and William Powell got married secretly — a year ago June 26th!”
This page is being auctioned at eBay…and since it’s from an actual magazine, there’s something on the other side. Not an ad, not a table of contents, but photos of another actress, one far less remembered than Lombard.
Her name was Adrienne Dore. Born in 1910 in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, she moved to Los Angeles in her youth, was named Miss Los Angeles in 1925 and was a runnerup in the Miss America pageant that year (some biographies erroneously list her as having won the title).
Movie work followed; in fact, one of her early films was “The Swim Princess,” the 1928 Mack Sennett short featuring Lombard. By 1929 Dore had small roles in Clara Bow’s “The Wild Party” and the William Powell vehicle “Pointed Heels.”
By 1932, she was at Warners, appearing in a number of films including Kay Francis’ “Street Of Women” and Edward G. Robinson’s “Two Seconds.” She didn’t remain at the studio very long, and by 1934 was out of film acting entirely. She died in Woodland Hills, Calif., in November 1992. Dore is so forgotten by all but the most ardent film buffs that the seller for this eBay item lists her last name as “Dare.”
Bids begin at 99 cents (none have been made as of this writing), and bidding closes at 4:27 p.m. (Eastern) next Friday. If you’re interested in this rare Lombard image as well as some bath shots of an overlooked ’30s starlet, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Adrienne-Dare-Bathing-Beauty-/320705748642?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aab8d5ea2.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Get ready to place your bids
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.27 at 00:01
Current mood: contemplative
It’s no secret that Carole Lombard loved animals; well, it just so happens that another portrait of Lombard plus pet will be up for auction beginning this Sunday, thanks to Heritage Auctions. Take a look:
This is a 7″ x 9″ vintage Kodak nitrate negative, p1202-616 (from about 1934). According to Heritage, it’s an “unrestored negative that appears virtually unused. Closer inspection may reveal one or two minor flaws, such as some mild developer residue that should not affect the printing process. The image that is shown is a recent paper print taken from the actual negative being offered. With today’s digital technology available through Photoshop, these original negatives can easily be used to produce beautiful positive prints when correctly processed.”
Bidding on this item starts Sunday and lasts through the following Sunday.
Heritage has three other Lombard items which will be open for bidding on June 24 (the auction itself will occur July 16 and 17), and it’s just as well the date’s a few weeks off because two of them are 8″ x 10″ autographed photos that should go for a pretty penny, and this will give potential bidders some time to save the dough:
The top image has no p1202 marking; the bottom is p1202-1716, from 1937 and among Lombard’s last portraits at Paramount.
Of the top photo, Heritage writes: “Vintage gelatin silver, single weight, glossy photo. It has been inscribed: ‘Cordially, Carole Lombard. There are some very faint surface crinkles, and some minor corner creases.” Of the bottom: “This rare vintage gelatin silver, single weight, glossy photo has been autographed by Carole Lombard. There is some edge wear with minor corner bumps, surface crinkling, and scrapbook paper remnants on the verso.”
The fourth photo features Lombard with Clark Gable in “No Man Of Her Own,” when they were merely co-stars in a film and not in real life:
The back of the 7.75″ x 10″ is hand-marked with a date of Dec. 21, 1931, which doesn’t make sense since “No Man Of Her Own” wasn’t filmed until the fall of 1932 and came out that December. Heritage describes it as “Vintage gelatin silver, double weight, linen backed glossy keybook photo. This is a publicity photo from the only on-screen pairing of Carole Lombard and Clark Gable, and it’s a beauty! The photo has been studio linen backed for insertion into a keybook. There are only some very small surface dot bumps, and some very small corner bends.”
To see all four items and get bidding information, visit http://movieposters.ha.com/common/search_results.php?Nty=1&Ntk=SI_Titles&N=54+793+794+791+792+2088&Ntt=Carole%20Lombard.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Was Carole’s face red? Her hair seemingly was
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.26 at 01:44
Current mood: amused
When “Nothing Sacred” came out in late 1937, that’s how movie audiences first experienced Carole Lombard (and Fredric March, for that matter) in three-strip Technicolor. But Carole’s hair led to potential problems for what planned to be her color talking debut (segments of a few of her silent Mack Sennett shorts were shot in two-strip Technicolor).
We’re referring to a movie she never made, “Spawn Of The North” (http://carole-and-co.livejournal.com/137095.html). Lombard was announced for the Paramount film in June 1936, but while she had shown she could deliver good box office, the studio feared her fans might be confused. Why? Let Hearst columnist Louella Parsons explain in the Los Angeles Examiner of June 21, 1936, yet another clipping courtesy of Tally Haugen:
![]()
Under the headline “Carole Lombard Will Compete With Aurora Borealis” (some of the exteriors were to be shot well north of the continental U.S.), Parsons wrote:
“In making the color photography tests Carole and everyone concerned received a shock to discover that her gilded locks filmed as Titian as Jeanette MacDonald’s tresses or Ginger Rogers’ morning glory. And the studio was in one of those well-known, old-fashioned quandaries.
“What would happen, everyone asked, if Carole’s fans should be faced out of a clear screen with a Lombard gone redhead, redhead, gingerbread-head right overnight and without a word of warning?”
So what happened, Louella?
“…Carole came galloping to the rescue like a true United States Marine and changed the color scheme of her coiffure by permitting her hair to resume its naturally beautiful ash-blonde hue.”
And thankfully, she didn’t have to adopt a Marine cut to go with it, as she returned her hair to its appearance of earlier in the 1930s (although I doubt Carole went back to her 1931-32 ultrablonde look).
Also note the byline below Lombard’s picture: Otto Winkler, whose fate would sadly tie in to Carole’s slightly more than 5 1/2 years later. At the time, Winkler covered the film industry for the Examiner before joining MGM’s publicity staff.
Of course, Lombard never made “Spawn Of The North” (when it finally hit theaters in 1938, Dorothy Lamour had her part) and by the time “Nothing Sacred” was made, Carole had returned to a slightly reddish shade, though nowhere as vividly red as that of future RKO studio mate Lucille Ball:
Oh, and one final twist: “Spawn Of The North” was ultimately filmed in black and white.
Connie, not Carol(e), nearly made a ‘Racket(eer)’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.25 at 01:19
Current mood: productive
It’s no secret that Carole Lombard’s final film at Pathe, back when her first name didn’t have an “e,” was “The Racketeer” with Robert Armstrong (Kit Guard is between them in this still from the movie). But what you may not know was that Lombard’s last was initially announced as someone else’s first, someone whose path would intersect with Carole’s on several occasions…
…Constance Bennett. “The Racketeer” apparently was to have been her first movie after signing with Pathe, and her first talkie of any sort. (Bennett had brief stardom in silents in 1925, but married, moved to Paris for a few years and left the business.)
This is among a number of Lombard-related tidbits found in the files of Film Daily, specifically the May 23, 1929 issue (82 years ago Monday), through the Media History Digital Library (http://carole-and-co.livejournal.com/412516.html). Here’s the item in its entirety (http://www.archive.org/stream/filmdaily4748newy#page/n1241/mode/2up/search/Carole+Lombard):
Constance Bennett’s First Picture “The Racketeer”
“Constance Bennett’s first talking picture for Pathe will be ‘The Racketeer,’ from an original by Paul Gangelin. Readjustments of the studio’s production schedule made it advisable to put this story into production before the play which at first it had been planned to give her.
“In ‘The Racketeer’ Miss Bennett will play opposite Robert Armstrong. As Armstrong has completed rehearsals for a dramatic talking picture of newspaper life from the unproduced play, ‘For Two Cents,’ production on ‘The Racketeer’ will be held up until the completion of that picture, which is in production this week under the direction of Gregory LaCava. With Armstrong in the cast are Carol Lombard as feminine lead, Wade Boteler, Sam Hardy, Tom Kennedy, Lewis Payne, Warner Richmond, Bob Dydley, Gertrude Sutton, George Hayes and Fred Behrle.”
It’s apparent that “For Two Cents” was soon renamed “Big News,” a more descriptive fit for a newspaper yarn. But the reference “before the play which at first it had been planned to give (Bennett)”…what could that mean? A search for Constance Bennett items in Film Daily showed it was “This Thing Called Love,” which turned out to be Connie’s second film at the studio; the first was “Rich People.” (Both films were released in December 1929, and both are believed lost.)
Bennett had signed with Pathe in early April 1929. At first, the studio planned to make her pictures in New York, where she and sisters Barbara and Joan had grown up as the daughters of Broadway acting legend Richard Bennett, but by May, Pathe decided to send Connie to the coast.
By June 30, the feminine lead in “The Racketeer” was shifted to Lombard. Did Constance have second thoughts about the project? Was it a scheduling conflict that caused the change? Or did Bennett, whom Pathe projected as a potential major star, get first crack at prime properties? (We do know that Bennett was more than likely the catalyst for getting Lombard and fellow blonde Diane Ellis dismissed from Pathe’s roster in late ’29.) Whatever, it was Carole who ended up portraying Rhoda Philbrooke in this programmer, and its lackluster nature is shown on her face:
It takes two to ‘Rumba’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.24 at 00:48
Current mood: hopeful
In “Rumba,” released in early 1935, Paramount tried to make lightning strike twice with the dancing combo of George Raft and Carole Lombard, so sexy and successful at the box office in “Bolero” a year before. However, it was received coolly and didn’t make much of an impact.
Perhaps it was a case of going to the well once too often, or maybe the strict imposition of the Production Code — which came in between the pictures — lessened its appeal. (No Lombard dancing in lingerie this time, fellas.) Or maybe RKO’s Astaire-Rogers musicals, which featured better dancing, two stars who could sing, and songs from some of Hollywood’s top tunesmiths, had stolen their thunder and defined the genre.
Whatever, there are several items at eBay related to “Rumba,” and here are two of note. First, this photo of George and Carole:
This is an original 8″ x 10″ photo from a newspaper file, received Feb. 6, 1935, and you can buy it for $28.88. To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1935-Carole-Lombard-George-Raft-Rumba-Wire-Photo-/270727317044?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3f089b0634.
Next, a Lombard solo shot to promote the film:
The snipe on back reads, “GLAMOROUS CAROLE — The Lombard girl at Paramount, who is at present appearing opposite George Raft in ‘Rumba,’ being directed by Marion Gering.”
This original portrait, p1202-948, shows Carole in bangs and was received in February 1935 as well. It’s 7/5″ x 10″ and deemed in good condition, though it’s had some wear and minor creasing over the years. It’s also a “buy it now” item, though this will set you back $100. Interested? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1935-Carole-Lombard-Rumba-VINTAGE-1930s-Movie-PHOTO-26f-/380256193133?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5889090a6d.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Learn more about 1920s film…daily
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.23 at 03:39
Current mood: pleased
Researching film history in general is fascinating for me; when such history involves Carole Lombard, it holds added importance. And towards that end, here’s some welcome news involving a site I’ve mentioned before, the Media History Digital Library (http://www.archive.org/details/mediahistory). The library, whose items include Photoplay from 1925 through 1930, has just added another publication from that era — the files of Film Daily from 1922 through 1929.
Unlike Photoplay, which was a fan magazine, Film Daily was a trade publication, printed every day but Saturday. (The Sunday issues were traditionally larger and usually featured color in advertising.) It was basically meant for industry executives and theater owners, but there were updates on actors, directors and other personnel as well as brief film reviews on Sundays — not only for feature films, but many short subjects as well.
It’s remarkable to peruse the archives and get an idea of what the film industry was like, especially during 1928 — when Hollywood began to realize that unlike several previous attempts to make pictures talk, this time sound was not a novelty — and 1929, when the business was in tumult trying to retool itself for “talkies.”
Unlike microfilm, these scans are in full color, and some of the special advertising sections promoting individual studios are dazzling. Check out the June 18, 1929 section on Fox talkies (http://www.archive.org/stream/filmdaily4748newy#page/n1431/mode/2up), and the introduction of Radio Pictures on July 15 (http://www.archive.org/stream/filmdaily4950newy#page/106/mode/2up).
Another advantage of the Media History Digital Library is that these files are searchable. According to David Pierce, the man behind the site (and someone to whom all film researchers owe thanks), here’s how it works:
You can start here (http://www.archive.org/details/mediahistory) and choose a volume — such as this one (http://www.archive.org/details/filmdaily4950newy).
On the left, under “view the book” you can download the PDF and use the built in search function to do text searches. (If you own a copy of Acrobat (not the free reader), you can search across multiplevolumes at the same time.
Or you can open the volume using the “read online” option and there is a search box in the upper right corner.
I used the latter, and discovered that the first reference to Lombard in Film Daily came not in 1925, when she appeared in a few films for Fox, but on Feb. 20, 1927, in the following blurb:
Cameramen’s Frolic March 12
The Junior Cameramen’s Club is to hold its first annual dance and entertainment at the Hollywood Masonic Temple March 12. Hank Mann will be master of ceremonies assisted by Sammy Blum, Arthur Lake, Sammy Cohen, Nick Stuart, Carol Lombard, George Blandford and Barbara Luddy.
Lombard, trying to make her way back into the industry following her 1926 auto accident, may have hooked up with the Junior Cameramen while trying to learn the tricks of the trade (that’s strictly conjecture on my part). The only other name I recognize from that list is Lake, who years later would play Dagwood in the “Blondie” series of films.
Carole’s networking must have paid off, because the following ran in the June 24, 1927 issue:
Sennett Plans More Bathing Beauties
Hollywood — Mack Sennett will feature 12 girls in a series of the “Bathing Beauties” type, which Eddie Cline will direct. Sennett already has chosen Carol Lombard, Anita Barnes, Katherine Stanley, Leota Winter and Marie Tergain for the series.
Two items below the Sennett blurb was an announcement that Greta Nissen had been hired to play opposite John Barrymore in “Tempest.” That was the film Lombard had tested for just before her auto accident. But that was in the past, and Carole readied for her new status as a Sennett girl. Here she is in 1928’s “Run, Girl, Run,” watching diminutive Daphne Pollard kiss her beau:
This week’s header features Carole in triplicate. Enjoy.
Yet more from Tally
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.22 at 00:57
Current mood: excited
Tally Haugen’s recently acquired array of Carole Lombard newspaper and magazine clippings is the gift that keeps on giving for Lombard fans. And we have a few more assorted items to share with you.
From the reference to “Made For Each Other,” we know this is almost certainly from early 1939, and it’s unfortunate we don’t have the photos of Constance and Joan Bennett that are referred to (by this time, Joan had revitalized her career by turning brunette).
The slightly risque captions (not to mention Carole’s scanty outfit) are indications the clipping on the left is from Film Fun or a magazine of its ilk in 1932, when “Virtue” was released. Its partner is an advertisement for Old Gold, one of several cigarette brands Lombard endorsed over the years.
Two photos that appeared in the Los Angeles Times –– one from “Bolero” in February 1934, the next promoting “Now And Forever” six months later.
Finally, a photo split into two parts, showing Carole with Fernand Gravet and director Mervyn LeRoy during filming of “Fools For Scandal.”
Some fascinating stuff; we look forward to more.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A clearance on Carole
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.21 at 01:32
Current mood: enthralled
For a student of Carole Lombard’s still portraits, coming across a new one is always a delight, but difficult to do after years of searching. So this photo, p1202-742 from 1934, is welcome news. Even better is learning where it cam fron.
It’s among 94 Lombard photos, all 8″ x 10″, on clearance from a seller in Brooklyn; each can be bought outright for $12.50, or you can choose to make an offer instead. They aren’t originals, but were printed in the 1980s or thereabouts on photostock paper. To bid or learn more on the one above, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-30-/370504774742?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5643ce3456.
What makes this exciting is seeing that the batch includes several images I was not familiar with, some of the lesser-known Lombard portraits. There’s a good chance a few of these will be new to you as well. Here are some of mine:
This one is lovely, but unfortunately someone cropped out the p1202 number when reproducing the image, where Carole’s hands and hair come to the forefront. It is sold at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-12-/390308932978?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5ae039ad72.
Here’s p1202-857; we’ve seen similar photos of Lombard in that outfit, in that chair, but not in that pose. To buy or make an offer, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-40-/370504775055?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5643ce358f.
Can’t quite make out the p1202 number at the bottom, but just from the coat, I know that’s a portrait I’ve never seen before. Find it at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-36-/390308933323?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5ae039aecb.
Someone at Paramount should have had heeded the lesson of this photo, p1202-343, and used a dark marker for that earlier image. This one can be seen at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-55-/370505831686?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5643de5506.
This is p1202-1402, from late 1936 or early ’37. If you’re interested, drop by http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-66-/390310051600?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5ae04abf10.
And finally, p1202-676, a sleek, lovely Lombard (and with a dark marker on a light background). It is at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-56-/390310051622?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5ae04abf26.
The entire collection of Carole clearance portraits can be found at http://stores.ebay.com/machinist-43stuff/aa-one-8×10-photo-CLEARANCE-/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&_fsub=1676569011&_ipg=30&_sasi=1&_sid=723087901&_sop=1&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322&_vc=1. For some, the offers expire next Wednesday; for others, the following Sunday.
These clippings are ‘What They Wanted’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.20 at 00:01
Current mood: 
moody
“They Knew What They Wanted,” which was released in the fall of 1940 and would turn out to be Carole Lombard’s final excursion into drama, has a rather unsettled history. It’s been said Lombard and co-star Charles Laughton had little fondness for each other, and yet neither could claim prior ignorance of their differences, since they had teamed up never seven years earlier for the campy Paramount programmer “White Woman.”
In contrast, “They Knew What They Wanted” was a top-line item from the get-go. It was an adaptation of Sidney Howard’s Pulitzer Prize-winning play from the 1920s, though some of the story was watered down to appease Joseph Breen and industry censors. RKO hoped that with Laughton, a former Academy Award winner, and Lombard, a past best actress nominee, this would be a prestige production that could make some noise come Oscar time. (Neither of the leads would be nominated, though William Gargan secured a best supporting actor nomination.)
The latest batch of Lombard clippings scanned my way from Tally Haugen provides some background into the film, from both contemporary newspapers and fan magazines, as well as quite a few rare photographs. We’ll kick it off with sort of an alpha and omega — part of a Louella Parsons column from March 1940 stating Lombard and Laughton had been cast in the leads, alongside a review of the movie from Kate Cameron of the New York Daily News and a photo of Carole with director Garson Kanin and a floral horseshoe:
A fan magazine took a publicity photo of Carole and Charles, then added a caption:
The fan magazine Movies ran a two-page spread of location photos, including a trio of a jovial Lombard and Laughton at right:
Such poses weren’t enough to quiet the chatter that the co-stars were not on the best of terms. So a fan magazine (not sure which one) decided to “investigate.”
It’s hard not to get a kick out of the drawings of Lombard and Laughton in boxing mode (evoking memories of “Nothing Sacred”). And how about that photo of Stuart and Elizabeth Peters coming up to Napa to check out action on the set? (A little known fact: Elizabeth was at the Hollywood premiere of “Citizen Kane” at the El Capitan theatre in May 1941. One guesses that Lombard was invited by Orson Welles, but was reluctant to go for fear of antagonizing William Randolph Hearst and her good friend, Marion Davies. Welles arranged a private screening of “Kane” for Carole and Clark Gable later that year. Below is the exterior of the RKO lot in ’41; you can see the ad for “Kane,” and a note that the El Capitan was the only Los Angeles theater showing the film.)
So was there genuine tension between Lombard and Laughton during the filming of “They Knew What They Wanted,” or was it overblown? I’ll leave the verdict up to you.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
This month’s heiress: When Stanwyck went ‘Mad’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.19 at 06:55
Current mood: amused
The heiress was a frequent figure of comedies from the mid- and late 1930s. Carole Lombard’s Irene Bullock in 1936’s “My Man Godfrey” was among the most famous of such characters, though the first to reach popular consciousness came two years earlier, when Claudette Colbert portrayed Ellie Andrews in “It Happened One Night.”
Many of the great actresses of the era became comic heiresses on screen (including Myrna Loy, the de facto title character in “Libeled Lady”). This entry examines what happened when another classic star gave it a try…specifically, Barbara Stanwyck in an RKO film called “The Mad Miss Manton,” which aired on Turner Classic Movies the other day:
Stanwyck portrays East Side heiress Melsa Manton, ringleader of a group of fun-loving young socialites whose pranks exasperate police and give her a rather screwy reputation. This causes trouble for Melsa when she comes across a corpse in an empty mansion on 14th Street one night; in fact, editor Peter Ames (Henry Fonda) writes an editorial castigating Manton for causing more pain for city authorities.
Feeling like a libeled lady herself, Melsa visits his office to threaten a lawsuit, and while she and Peter initially can’t stand each other, as so often happens in such films, that negative attraction soon turns positive as he helps Melsa and crew track down the culprit. En route to solving the murder, Peter is frequently victim of the Manton troupe.
This was the first of three Fonda-Stanwyck teamings, and truth be told, during filming Henry often felt as constrained as his character did in that shot. “I was so mad on this picture — I resented it,” he later said of the film. Understandably so, as it was a female comedy vehicle and not the strongest of screwballs. (Philip G. Epstein of “Casablanca” fame wrote the screenplay, as he did with another unsuccessful screwball heiress film, Bette Davis’ “The Bride Came C.O.D.,” in 1941. Perhaps that’s why he decided not to make Ilsa an heiress.)
“Manton” is hardly prime Stanwyck, but she goes at it with her usual elan in a role one can imagine Lombard playing (though by mid-1938, when the film was made for an October release, Carole would have deemed it “been there, done that”). However, RKO initially envisioned this as a vehicle for Katharine Hepburn, a followup to the solid, if somewhat overrated “Bringing Up Baby.” Kate turned it down and Stanwyck, who needed an assignment, took over.
Manton’s army of seven demented debutantes — sort of a prelude to the “seven dwarfs” that would be seen in a later Stanwyck film, “Ball Of Fire” — parade around in fur coats much of the time. If you’re a fur fetishist, you’ll love this movie, which one site labels “the best fur fashion film of all time” (http://furglamor.com/2010/01/03/furs-on-film-the-mad-miss-manton/). But it wasn’t an easy shoot; exteriors were shot on the Columbia ranch in Burbank in midsummer 100-degree heat, not much fun in a mink stole.
Stanwyck is her usual professional self, and Fonda holds up well despite his obvious disdain for the film, but the best performance in “Manton” may arguably be Hattie McDaniel (billed on screen as “Hattie McDaniels”), a year before her Oscar-winning triumph in “Gone With The Wind.” She plays Melsa’s maid Hilda, but she’s no subservient black stereotype by any means.
Hilda greets Peter with a pitcher of water (though she actually likes him, telling him she used distilled water) and makes snide remarks about some of Melsa’s dimwitted society pals which her employer appreciates. When one of them says, “Comes the revolution, and we’ll start being exploited by our help,” Melsa glances at Hilda and says, “In my home, the revolution is here.”
Such impudence caused some tension in Hollywood, and Joseph Breen reminded RKO that it “may be objectionable in the South where the showing of Negroes on terms of familiarity and social equality is resented.” Some cuts were apparently made, but the core of Hilda’s character remained.
“The Mad Miss Manton” isn’t top-flight screwball, but it’s worth seeing once. And Fonda and Stanwyck would make a more memorable teaming in 1941 for Preston Sturges’ “The Lady Eve”:
Two more from p1202
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.18 at 00:01
Current mood: content
Above is p1202-10, one of the first Paramount portrait of Carole Lombard, probably taken in the spring of 1930 after she was hired to play a supporting role in “Safety In Numbers.” Over the next seven-plus years at Paramount, Lombard would be seen in about 1,800 such photos, as well as others listed and coded for specific films and some that simply were never coded at all.
Two of those original p1202 pics are currently being sold at eBay.
First, p1202-679, as Lombard proudly welcomes older brother Stuart Peters to the set of “We’re Not Dressing.” Carole’s co-star, Bing Crosby, looks a bit befuddled, as if he can’t make up his mind whether to appear in character or as himself for this shot.
It’s 7 3/4″ x 9 3/4″, in excellent shape (with a snipe on the back), and can be yours for $94.95. If interested, check out http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-HER-BROTHER-34-DBW-Candid-/380338214151?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588dec9507.
The same seller has this item, p1202-1411, from 1936:
It’s slightly larger than the other one (8″ x 10″), in sepia tone and in excellent shape. This is being sold for $249.95; to find out more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-Carole-Lombard-36-GORGEOUS-GLAMOUR-Portrait-/380338214148?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588dec9504.
Lombard, with some Spanish spice
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.17 at 00:00
Current mood: impressed
The year 1933 was an intriguing one for Carole Lombard. While she hadn’t quite gained complete traction as a film star, she continued to make advances as an actress. Her personal life was highlighted by a divorce from William Powell, though they remained friendly and even dated a few times after their split.
Early in the year, Feb. 5 to be precise, a magazine in Madrid, Spain, put Lombard on its cover:
Here’s a closer look at the top and bottom of the cover:
Spanish isn’t my primary foreign language, but I can make out enough to know the caption is commenting on Carole’s rather flimsy, “see-through” outfit.
The magazine, Cronica, measures 15″ x 11.5″, with 28 pages. Bids begin at $9.99 — no bids have been made as of this writing — and bids close at 5:08 p.m. (Eastern) on Monday. If you’re interested in this Lombard rarity, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Cronica-Large-Euro-Mag-1933-/310319444501?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item48407af215.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
CMBA Movies of 1939 Blogathon: “Made For Each Other”
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.16 at 01:00
Current mood: 
artistic
The biggest news Carole Lombard made in 1939 probably wasn’t on the movie screen, but in real life, when after several years of waiting, she was finally able to wed Clark Gable. That isn’t meant as a knock on her screen work that year, however. She made two movies in ’39, both opposite leading men reaching filmdom’s top tier. One was Cary Grant (“In Name Only”); this entry deals with her other co-star of ’39, James Stewart, who teamed up with her for a drama with comedic overtones called “Made For Each Other.” It would be part of a year’s cinematic output that put him on the map for good.
As ’39 began, Stewart was hardly unknown to the moviegoing public. He had appeared in “You Can’t Take It With You,” which would win the Academy Award winner for best picture of 1938, but it was an ensemble piece and he didn’t have to carry the film. Other notable appearances had been in “Born To Dance” with Eleanor Powell, in which he introduced the Cole Porter standard “Easy To Love” (although Stewart would have been the first to admit he was no singer) and “Vivacious Lady” with Ginger Rogers. While Stewart was engaging, he had yet to fully assert himself on screen. Of “Born To Dance,” Alistair Cooke wrote at the time, “There is James Stewart, trying to be ingenious and charming like Gary Cooper, but many tricks and light years behind.”
In 1939, Stewart would go beyond a mere Cooper clone, and it all began with “Made For Each Other” (filmed in the fall of 1938, but not released until the following February), which Stewart, an MGM contract player, made on loanout to Selznick International. He plays a young attorney who falls for Lombard; they get married and have a baby. The film, directed by John Cromwell (who would also direct “In Name Only”), well conveys the highs and lows of domestic life — although the final third of the movie, where their child’s life is endangered by a disease that needs a rare vaccine, devolves into melodrama — and James and Carole have a solid cinematic chemistry. (They would team up for several radio appearances over the next two years, and although each would perform “Made For Each Other” for “Lux Radio Theater,” it would be opposite other actors — Fred MacMurray with Lombard in 1940, Marsha Hunt with Stewart in 1945.)
“Made For Each Other” received warm reviews. Frank S. Nugent in the New York Times wrote, “It is a richly human picture they have created, human and therefore comic, sentimental and poignant by turns.” (His paper would list it among its top ten films of the year.) John Alden in the Minneapolis Tribune –– who said he still preferred Lombard in comedic roles — wrote, “Jimmy Stewart is becoming better and better, in our humble opinion, with every picture. His naturalness and freshness haven’t been lost, and at the same time they haven’t begun to pall on us.”
But did MGM notice? The first film Stewart made for the studio in ’39 was a lackluster vehicle called “Ice Follies Of 1939,” in which we see him partnered in a ridiculous romantic triangle with Joan Crawford and Lew Ayres, featuring spectacle from the real-life Shipstad and Johnson ice troupe in Metro’s attempt to cash in on the Sonja Henie ice craze. Fortunately, his next film at MGM was more substantial: a little comedy, directed by W.S. Van Dyke of “Thin Man” fame and co-starring Claudette Colbert, called “It’s A Wonderful World.” It’s plenty of fun, and because its title is similar to that of Stewart’s most famous film, it occasionally gets lost in the shuffle.
The eventual director of that other “Wonderful” film, Frank Capra (who’d worked with Stewart in “You Can’t Take It With You”), brought James back to Columbia to star in one of the year’s best-loved movies, “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington.” This movie, co-starring Jean Arthur, is arguably where Stewart as all-too-human hero comes to the fore; his speech before the Senate ranks as one of the high points of his career. The New York Film Critics named him best actor of 1939 for this performance, beating out the likes of Gable, Robert Donat and others.
Another studio (Universal), another leading lady (Marlene Dietrich!), another genre (comic western), and a completely different Stewart for “Destry Rides Again,” where James plays a sheriff who eschews violence a decade before making his series of acclaimed psychological westerns.
Not a bad way to close the year, arguably the best calendar year for an actor since William Powell in 1936 (although Powell’s output that year never had anything as tawdry as “Ice Follies”).
Stewart’s 1940 would be nearly as good: “The Shop Around The Corner,” directed by Ernst Lubitsch; “The Mortal Storm,” a look at life in Nazi Germany; “No Time For Comedy,” an adaptation of a play; and “The Philadelphia Story,” for which he would win an Oscar as best actor. For a two-year stretch, Stewart’s output would be difficult to beat. And following World War II, he returned as an actor of unique complexity, with a maturity and edge largely absent in his earlier roles. But Stewart’s star began to shine for good in 1939…and it all started with “Made For Each Other.”
This week’s header shows Carole on the phone, kicking up her heels. (Maybe she’s excited about this blogathon, too.)
For the list and links to the various entries, go to http://clamba.blogspot.com/2011/04/classic-movies-of-1939-blogathon-may-15.html.
A dictionary for the flapper flock
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.15 at 00:05
Current mood: amused
Carole Lombard is “The Campus Vamp” in a scene from that 1928 Mack Sennett short, using her wiles and sex appeal to wield power over just about every male student at that college. Was she a flapper? Most likely, but by that time flappers were nothing new.
They arrived on the scene at roughly the turn of the decade, at just about the time the Nineteenth Amendment gave women in all states the right to vote. An increasingly urbanized America was changing its mores, and the flapper character fit right in with the newfound feminine modernity.
By 1922, there was even a magazine dedicated to this new breed of womanhood, a Chicago-based publication appropriately called The Flapper:
Labeled “Not For Old Fogies,” the monthly magazine celebrated the flapper lifestyle. It apparently didn’t last very long — its first issue was dated May 1922, and I can’t find one past November — but it provides a fascinating glimpse into American youth culture of the time.
And, thanks to an April entry in the blog “Book flaps: Musings of a small-town book peddler” (http://bookflaps.blogspot.com/2011/04/flappers-dictionary.html), I discovered that the July 1922 issue of The Flapper featured something called the “Flapper’s Dictionary,” an array of terms to use in your crowd to emphasize that you indeed were not an old fogie. According to the anonymous author, “The flapper movement is not a craze, but something that will stay. Many of the phrases now employed by members of this order will eventually find a way into common usage and be accepted as good English.”
Here’s the list of lingo; judge for yourself whether the author was right. And remember these phrases for your next Roaring ’20s party or when you ride that time machine back to Prohibition days:
_________________________________________
Absent treatment -— Dancing with a bashful partner.
Airedale —- A homely man.
Alarm clock —- Chaperone.
Anchor —- Box of flowers.
Apple knocker —- A hick; a hay-shaker.
Apple sauce — Flattery; bunk.
Barlow -— A girl, a flapper, a chicken.
Bank’s closed -— No petting allowed; no kisses.
Barneymugging -— Lovemaking.
Bee’s knees -— See “Cat’s pajamas.”
Bell polisher —- A young man addicted to lingering in vestibules at 1 a.m.
Bean picker -— One who patches up trouble and picks up spilled beans.
Berry patch -— A man’s particular interest in a girl.
Berries —- Great.
Biscuit —- A pettable flapper.
Big timer (n. masc.) -— A charmer able to convince his sweetie that a jollier thing would be to get a snack in an armchair lunchroom; a romantic.
Billboard -— Flashy man or woman.
Blushing violet -— A publicity hound.
Blouse —- To go.
Blow —- Wild party.
Blaah —- No good.
Boob tickler —- Girl who entertains father’s out-of-town customers.
Brush ape -— Anyone from the sticks; a country Jake.
Brooksy -— Classy dresser
Bust -— A man who makes his living in the prize ring, a pugilist.
Bun duster -— See “Cake eater.”
Bush hounds -— Rustics and others outside of the Flapper pale.
Cancelled stamp —- A wallflower.
Cake basket -— A limousine.
Cake eater -— See “Crumb gobbler.”
Cat’s particulars -— The acme of perfection; anything that’s good
Cat’s pajamas -— Anything that’s good
Cellar smeller -— A young man who always turns up where liquor is to be had without cost.
Clothesline -— One who tells neighborhood secrets.
Corn shredder -— Young man who dances on a girl’s feet.
Crepe hanger -— Reformer.
Crumb gobbler -— Slightly sissy tea hound.
Crasher -— Anyone who comes to parties uninvited.
Crashing party -— Party where several young men in a group go uninvited.
Cuddle cootie -— Young man who takes a girl for a ride on a bus, gas wagon or automobile.
Cuddler -— One who likes petting.
Dapper —- A flapper’s father.
Dewdropper -— Young man who does not work, and sleeps all day.
Dincher -— A half-smoked cigarette.
Dingle dangler -— One who insists on telephoning.
Dipe ducat —- A subway ticket.
Dimbox -— A taxicab.
Di Mi -— Goodness.
Dogs -— Feet.
Dog kennels -— Pair of shoes.
Dropping the pilot -— Getting a divorce.
Dumbdora —- Stupid girl.
Duck’s quack -— The best thing ever.
Ducky —- General term of approbation.
Dud —- Wallflower.
Dudding up —- Dressing.
Dumbbell — Wallflower with little brains.
Dumkuff —- General term for being “nutty” or “batty.”
Edisoned -— Being asked a lot of questions.
Egg harbor -— Free dance.
Embalmer -— A bootlegger.
Eye opener —- A marriage.
Father Time —- Any man over 30 years of age.
Face stretcher —- Old maid who tries to look younger.
Feathers -— Light conversation.
Fire extinguisher —- A chaperone.
Finale hopper —- Young man who arrives after everything is paid for.
Fire alarm —- Divorced woman.
Fire bell —- Married woman.
Flap -— Girl
Flat shoes -— Fight between a Flapper and her Goof
Fluky —- Funny, odd, peculiar; different.
Flatwheeler -— Slat shy of money; takes girls to free affairs.
Floorflusher —- Inveterate dance hound.
Flour lover -— Girl who powders too freely.
Forty-Niner -— Man who is prospecting for a rich wife.
Frog’s eyebrows —- Nice, fine.
Gander —- Process of duding up.
Green glorious —- Money and checks.
Gimlet -— A chronic bore.
Given the air —- When a girl or fellow is thrown down on a date.
Give your knee —- Cheek-to-cheek or toe-to-toe dancing.
Goofy -— To be in love with, or attracted to. Example: “I’m goofy about Jack.”
Goat’s whiskers -— See “Cat’s particulars.”
Goof -— Sweetie.
Grummy -— In the dumps, shades or blue.
Grubber -— One who always borrows cigarettes.
Handcuff -— Engagement ring.
Hen coop -— A beauty parlor.
His blue serge -— His sweetheart.
Highjohn -— Young man friend; sweetie, cutey, highboy.
Hopper -— Dancer.
Houdini —- To be on time for a date.
Horse prancer -— See “Corn shredder.”
Hush money -— Allowance from father.
Jane -— A girl who meets you on the stoop.
Johnnie Walker -— Guy who never hires a cab.
Kitten’s ankles -— See “Cat’s particulars.”
Kluck -— Dumb, but happy.
Lap -— Drink.
Lallygagger —- A young man addicted to attempts at hallway spooning.
Lens Louise -— A person given to monopolizing conversation.
Lemon squeezer -— An elevator.
Low lid —- The opposite of highbrow.
Mad money —- Carfare home if she has a fight with her escort.
Meringue -— Personality.
Monkey’s eyebrows —- See “Cat’s particulars.”
Monog -— A young person of either sex who is goofy about only one person at a time.
Monologist -— Young man who hates to talk about himself.
Mustard plaster —- Unwelcome guy who sticks around.
Munitions -— Face powder and rouge.
Mug —- To osculate or kiss.
Necker -— A petter who puts her arms around a boy’s neck.
Noodle juice -— Tea.
Nosebaggery -— Restaurant.
Nut cracker -— Policeman’s nightstick.
Obituary notice -— Dunning letter.
Oilcan —- An imposter.
Orchid —- Anything that is expensive.
Out on parole -— A person who has been divorced.
Petting pantry -— Movie.
Petting party -— A party devoted to hugging.
Petter —- A loveable person; one who enjoys to caress.
Pillow case -— Young man who is full of feathers.
Police dog -— Young man to whom one is engaged.
Potato -— A young man shy of brains.
Ritzy burg -— Not classy.
Ritz —- Stuck-up.
Rock of ages -— Any woman over 30 years of age.
Rug hopper —- Young man who never takes a girl out. A parlor hound.
Sap —- A flapper term for floorflusher.
Scandal —- A short term for scandal walk.
Scandaler —- A dance floor fullback. The interior of a dreadnaught hat, Piccadilly shoes with open plumbing, size 13.
Seetie -— Anybody a flapper hates.
Sharpshooter -— One who spends much and dances well.
Shifter -— Another species of flapper.
Show case -— Rich man’s wife with jewels.
Sip -— Flapper term for female Hopper.
Slat —- See “Highjohn”; “Goof.”
Slimp -— Cheapskate or “one way guy.”
Smith Brothers -— Guys who never cough up.
Smoke eater -— A girl cigarette user.
Smooth —- Guy who does not keep his word.
Snake —- To call a victim with vampire arms.
Snuggleup —- A man fond of petting and petting parties.
Sod buster -— An undertaker.
Stilts —- Legs.
Stander -— Victim of a female grafter.
Static —- Conversations that mean nothing.
Strike breaker -— A young woman who goes with her friend’s “steady” while there is a coolness.
Swan —- Glide gracefully.
Tomato -— A young woman shy of brains.
Trotzky (sic) -— Old lady with a moustache and chin whiskers.
Umbrella -— young man any girl can borrow for the evening.
Urban set —- Her new gown.
Walk in —- Young man who goes to a party without being invited.
Weasel —- Girl stealer.
Weed —- Flapper who takes risks.
Weeping willow -— See “Crepe hanger.”
Whangdoodle —- Jazz-band music.
Whiskbroom —- Any man who wears whiskers.
Wind sucker -— Any person given to boasting.
Wurp -— Killjoy or drawback.
_________________________________________
Interesting terms, doncha think? One wonders if Jane Alice Peters was using any of the terms while at Virgil Junior High School in ’22, or if a few years later the renamed Carole Lombard, Joan Crawford and company said such lingo while dancing at the Cocoanut Grove at the Hotel Ambassador in 1925.
We can guess the teenage Lombard steered clear of any potential “smooth” or “potato,” made sure to stock up on “munitions” before enjoying any “whangdoodle,” and enjoyed being a “sip” while showing off her “stilts.”
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Leggy in linen
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.14 at 01:09
Current mood: 
flirty
Beginning with her starlet days at Fox in the mid-twenties, Carole Lombard was known for her attractive legs, which she regularly showed off (above is part of a publicity portrait for 1932’s “No Man Of Her Own”). So it’s understandable that during the early 1930s, Paramount frequently played up her shapely legs in photos. Here’s a sample, p1202-158:
This is an original linen photo from about 1931, measuring 7 1/2″ x 9 1/2″, slightly trimmed and sepia toned. We’ve seen Carole in similar photos using this setting, but this one, flashing plenty of gam, is new to me.
You can buy it for $49.99. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/30s-Sexy-Carole-Lombard-VINTAGE-Linen-Movie-PHOTO-924B-/200606904975?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb51a728f.
To paraphrase that old hosiery slogan, nothing beats a great Lombard leg.
This window card ‘Comes Across’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.13 at 00:00
Current mood: enthralled
“The Princess Comes Across” may not be top-tier Carole Lombard (shown with Alison Skipworth), but it has its charms, not the least of which is Lombard using a mock Swedish accent as she tries to pass herself off as a Swedish princess sailing across the Atlantic, bound for Hollywood and film fame.
An artifact from that film that I’ve never seen before is currently being auctioned at eBay. It’s a window card, but instead of measuring the usual 14″ x 22″, it’s a mere 14″ x 18″ (evidently the top part, in which the theater’s name and dates the film was playing would appear, was cut off; you can’t tell whether or not it had been used for that purpose):
Want a closeup of Carole? You’ve got it:
It’s got a few smudges and signs of wear, but for something three-quarters of a century old, it’s in reasonably good shape.
Bids on this begin at $149.99; as of this writing, no bids have been placed. Bidding ends at 9:03 p.m. (Eastern) next Tuesday. If you’re interested in this item, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-PRINCESS-COMES-ACROSS-WINDOW-CARD-1936-/380338909419?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588df730eb.
Carole plays nurse
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.12 at 00:59
Current mood: grateful
Today, May 12, is International Nurses’ Day, not coincidentally the day of Florence Nightingale’s birth. In honor of the day, and of all the wonderful work nurses do for us, some images from a film where Carole Lombard portrayed a nurse…
“Vigil In The Night,” directed by George Stevens and released in early 1940, is rarely considered one of Lombard’s top films, even though she gives an earnest, heartfelt performance. But it’s a drama, and a fairly solemn drama at that. To those who prefer their Carole on the lighter side, it’s not easy to watch. But after experiencing her share of days in the hospital for an array of ailments, Lombard certainly appreciated the work nurses did, and one guesses those recollections probably helped her in her portrayal. “Vigil” is still considered one of the better movies made about the nursing profession.
So for all you nurses out there, some stills from “Vigil”:
“Vigil In The Night” will be shown on Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. on Aug. 28, the day Lombard is honored during TCM’s 2011 edition of “Summer Under The Stars.” We hope the channel shows the ending shown in overseas markets, where Carole and the other characters react to Great Britain going to war in September 1939 following Germany’s invasion of Poland. (The movie is set in England.) TCM showed this alternate ending during the 2006 SUTS, though it hasn’t done likewise on subsequent airings of the film.
Carole and Fred, via Tally
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.11 at 01:10
Current mood: busy
What are Carole Lombard and Fred MacMurray doing behind bars, especially when we know it’s not from “True Confession”? (Fred has no mustache…and he isn’t fooling anyone with his scowl.) Looks like the photographer had some fun with it; supposedly it’s from “Hands Across The Table.”
That photo above comes from the latest batch of Carole clippings courtesy of Tally Haugen, and today we’re going to examine a few items related to the four movies Lombard and MacMurray made together (also her final four films at Paramount). “Hands” has been taken care of, so now let’s go to “The Princess Comes Across”:
There are two articles here. The first is from New York-based Norbert Lusk, a well-known writer of the time who worked for Picture Play, the Los Angeles Times (which is where I believe this came from) and other publications. Interesting to see her that Lusk focuses on the directing of W.K. Howard, someone not all that well remembered among directors of that era, though he does say, “Miss Lombard’s acting can only be compared with her hit in ‘Hands Across The Table,’ and there are some critics who refuse to credit her with acting in that, even. These die-hards acknowledge her ability in the new film, however, while those who have always been aware of her cleverness and inclined to think she exceeds every past effort.”
Lusk became friends with a number of actresses, notably Joan Crawford, and later did some film publicity work before his sudden death in mid-1949.
The other item comes from “across the pond,” specifically the British magazine Film Pictorial of Nov. 14, 1936. This article, “How Plain Jane Became Carole The Glamorous,” has some delightful quotes from her, such as:
“Hollywood has always placed so much emphasis on the importance of its stars that perhaps the players themselves are not entirely to blame for developing false ideas of their own importance. … I hear stars talking about ‘their pictures,’ ‘their public,’ as though they and they only were the cause of it all. I have never forgotten — and I hope I never will forget — how much we owe to the scriptwriters, the director and the cutter. Why anyone goes high-hat in this business I can’t imagine.”
Next up…”Swing High, Swing Low”:
This review was written by Rose Pelswick, a longtime movie critic for Hearst in New York (she wrote for the chain into the 1960s); this was from the New York Evening Journal, not long before it merged with the morning American to form the Journal-American. Pelswick generally approved of the film, and note that in the final paragraph she makes reference to “the Armstrong band” at the Paramount theater — that’s Louis Armstrong’s orchestra performing in between showings. Lombard and Louis in Times Square? Not a bad combo.
Finally, “True Confession,” from near the end of ’37, and guess what magazine did a piece on it?
Why, True Confessions, of course. (A little log-rolling never hurt.)
And to close, a photo of the acquittal scene, which I believe ran in the Los Angeles Times of Nov. 7, 1937:
Twice the woman she was before: Carole goes Gish
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.10 at 00:07
Current mood: chipper
We get two Carole Lombards for the price of one, thanks to the camerawork and mirrors employed by Paramount portrait artist Otto Dyar. But there’s another way to get multiple Caroles…trick photography. And here’s proof, and a quality version of an image I’ve been seeking for some time:
That’s Paramount p1202-736 from 1934, showing Carole, plus Carole. (Heck, the entry we ran the other day discussed her figurative ability to be two different women.) The snipe is headlined “ROLES THEY’LL NEVER PLAY,” where Carole would play twin orphans…”in which Carole would never stand being sent out into a snow storm for art or anyone else…”
It’s an obvious take-off on the 1922 D.W. Griffith film “Orphans Of The Storm,” starring Lillian and Dorothy Gish as waifs, one of them blind, struggling through the French Revolution:
Lombard probably saw the movie in her youth, and let’s face it — putting Carole in a costume drama didn’t play up to her strengths. (After her lone talking western, 1930’s “The Arizona Kid” at Fox, none of Lombard’s films was set in a time before the first World War, probably a reason she was never a serious contender in the Scarlett O’Hara derby.)
This photo has been a holy grail for some time; Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive had sent me a low-toned version, and I’m glad to finally have the image in high quality. It’s 7 1/2″ x 9 3/4″ and in excellent condition. Bidding begins at $94.95 (no bids have been placed as of yet), and bids close at 10:15 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. To bid, or to learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-34-UNUSUAL-DOUBLE-EXPOSURE-DBW-/380335373963?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588dc13e8b.
A fan magazine, en francais
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.09 at 00:00
Current mood: confused
Carole Lombard is dressed in fur for “Fools For Scandal,” which was partially set in Paris (or at least Warners’ interpretation of it, which hardly compares to the Paris supplied by Ernst Lubitsch at Paramount). We want to get you in a French state of mind, because the fan magazine excerpt in today’s entry — another item courtesy of Tally Haugen — just happens to be in that language.
It’s called “Carole Lombard et le marriage,” and I’m guessing it to be from 1938 or ’39. Unfortunately, I don’t know what magazine this is from, or even if it’s French Canadian or from France itself. We have three pages of the article, but it appears to be incomplete, judging from the rather abrupt ending.
Here are those pages, and even if you can’t read French, you can appreciate the photos, some of which are uncommon:
Interesting to see an article from the late 1930s bring up “Carole Lombard” and “marriage,” and yet there’s not a single reference to Clark Gable. That’s bizarre.
Anyone care to translate a few paragraphs to give us a better flavor of the piece? My French is a bit rusty.
We’ll leave you with this item, in English, showing Carole on the set of “My Man Godfrey,” evidently in a moment that’s been immortalized in a number of blooper compilations:
This week’s header shows Lombard the tennis player, in a shot taken by William Walling in 1936…and continuing the French theme, I believe we’re not far away from play on the clay of Roland Garros.
Mothers and movie stars
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.08 at 01:23
Current mood: loved
That’s Carole Lombard in August 1933, being welcomed home by her mother, Bess Peters, after Carole’s return to California following her divorce from William Powell. (Lombard established Nevada residency for six weeks in order to qualify for a divorce.) With Carole is noted aviator Roscoe Turner, who had flown her back from Nevada.
As you might guess, we’re running that photo in honor of Mother’s Day. And while we’re at it, how about some images of other stars from that era with their mothers?
We’ll start with Jean Harlow and her mom (who actually was named Jean Harlow; her daughter was christened Harlean Carpenter, and decided to use mom’s moniker as a movie stage name):
Here’s a mother-and-daughter pose of one of Lombard’s Paramount stablemates, Claudette Colbert and her mom, Jeanne Loew Chauchoin, a pastry cook:
One of Hollywood’s best-known mother-daughter combos was Ginger Rogers with her mom, Lela:
Finally, Bette Davis and her mother, Ruth Augusta Davis:
The happiest of Mother’s Day to you — and to your mother.
Pay a vintage visit
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.07 at 08:19
Current mood: nostalgic
A candid photo of Carole Lombard circa 1935, taken in the city she called home for more than four-fifths of her sadly brief life…Los Angeles. Until a time machine is invented, we can’t go back and experienced that rapidly-growing city as it was, the new chief metropolis of the West.
But thankfully, we can do the next best thing. And credit goes to a lady named Alison Martino, who grew up in LA as daughter of the late singer Al Martino (of “I Love You Because” fame and the film “The Godfather”). Now a TV producer, she experienced much of what made LA special in her youth — enough to comprehend what was lost when many of those venues fell victim to changing tastes and so-called “progress.”
Consequently, she began collecting items pertaining to Los Angeles of the past, initially focusing on the town in the ’50s through the ’80s, but expanding it into a Facebook site called “Vintage Los Angeles” (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Vintage-Los-Angeles/121097987946929), which at last count had close to 7,000 members. That in itself is impressive, but consider that it’s barely more than a month old. Obviously, Alison has struck a chord with thousands who either experienced vintage LA firsthand or, like me, are fascinated with a place they never visited. (I’m in the latter camp, as my first trip to LA came in June 1989.)
At last check, there were more than 1,400 photos, many from the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s but some that go back to pre-World War II Los Angeles, the city as Lombard knew it. For example, while people who lived during the 1960s might recall KHJ as a legendary Top 40 radio station, its heritage dates back much further; Bing Crosby regularly sang at the station in the early 1930s. And here’s the KHJ transmitting site in 1927:
Alison also has a blog dedicated to LA of the past, “Martino’s ‘Lost’ Angeles Time Table” (http://www.martinostimemachine.blogspot.com/), which features images such as the Earl Carroll Theatre on Sunset Boulevard:
By the late 1960s, that site was the short-lived Aquarius theater, and dig it in groovy, mind-blowing color:
It used to be fairly common to scoff at the concept of LA having a history. Thankfully, people now know better, and sites such as Vintage Los Angeles are a reason why.
Get your own Gable, gals: Here’s how
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.06 at 01:59
Current mood: happy
So, how did she do it? Just how did Carole Lombard bag one of Hollywood’s major stars — Clark Gable? (Okay, so technically he was married, but to borrow a title of one of Lombard’s films, the public knew it was “in name only.”)
The June 1939 issue of Movie Mirror supplies the answer, and thanks to Tally Haugen, I can share it with you. And that answer is: be multiple women.
No, Carole hadn’t come up with a 1930s version of cloning herself. But depending upon the situation, she could make herself be a paragon of femininity at one time, show toughness the equal of any man at another.
Here’s the story, “How To Get Your Own Clark Gable,” by S.B. Mook:
(Isn’t that a great photo of Carole with James Stewart, apparently in the same Selznick International office where Lombard played studio publicist for a week?)
As was the case with the fan magazine story in yesterday’s entry, many, if not all, of the “quotes” attributed to Lombard are probably from the writer. At the same time, Mook (whom I believe to be male) does provide a more authentic “voice” for Carole than the earlier piece; you can actually imagine her saying some of these things. Such as:
“When we (women) go out at night we have to be strictly feminine. Our escorts expect it. They want to be flattered, to be listened to. They like to think we’re helpless little things — and so we play our parts. But we’re only playing.”
“It’s up to every working girl, whether she earns ten dollars a week or a thousand, to be a regular businessman and she has to be prepared to face a roomful of men and tell them what’s what. And with no masculine shoulder to lean on, either.”
“The day of the clinging vine is gone and I, for one, don’t mourn her passing. It’s one thing to let a man teach you to swim or play golf or tennis, but can you imagine what would happen if girls started swooning all over the place as they used to do? Or uttering silly little shrieks and jumping on chairs every time a bug appeared?”
“The sporting sections of the papers are no longer written for and read exclusively by men. Women are just as interested in these things. They have to be in order to talk with even a semblance of intelligence to their boyfriends about the things in which the latter are interested.”
“The only marriages today that last are those where the husband and wife have a community of interest and you can’t have anything in common with a man if you’ve constantly to be taken care of.”
Lombard the feminist, Lombard the feminine…some splendid advice that’s applicable even if you’re not a celebrity.
It’s no wonder that in the next-to-last paragraph, Mook describes “Carole as a gallant modern girl who knows how to get her man — because she has the qualities to hold him and make him happy.” And without sacrificing her own happiness, either.
Marriage and movies can’t mix
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.05 at 02:15
Current mood: cynical
Oh, those happy loving couples, such as Carole Lombard and William Powell in 1931. So sure their marriage was eternal, so sure their romantic voyage would sail smoothly. By their second anniversary, that voyage had hit the rocks, and not long afterwards, they split — albeit absent of acrimony.
More than half a year following their divorce, in the May 1934 issue of Movie Story, Carole sat down with writer Sonia Lee and spoke her mind about why such marriages of celebrities are invariably doomed to failure. (OK, Lee likely paraphrased Lombard somewhat — I doubt most of these are direct quotes — but they probably are indicative of her feelings at the time.)
Intriguing reading, and just another sample from the colossal collection of Carole clippings that my friend Tally Haugen recently received and was generous enough to scan for me. Take a look:
Near the end, Carole says (or at least Lee has her say): “Some day, I suppose, I shall marry again, because no woman can determine her emotions.” And as fate would have it, on the front page of this article was a photo of Lombard in a love scene with Clark Gable, nearly two years before they became “an item” and close to half a decade before they would exchange vows.
(This issue also has a story on Carole’s new Hollywood Boulevard residence, described as “a home that could be a background for only a blonde.” Hope it’s stashed somewhere in Tally’s box.)
Finally, in memory of Jackie Cooper, who just passed away at age 88, here he is with Lombard on the Paramount lot from 1933, as Carole gives him a push in his go-cart “race” with Groucho and Harpo Marx:
‘Baby, let’s cruise…away from here…’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.04 at 07:10
Current mood: optimistic
That delightful nautical pose of Carole Lombard ties in with today’s entry, dealing with the recent TCM Classic Film Festival. It was a huge success, with attendance of about 25,000; passholders came from every state except West Virginia (what gives, Mountaineers?) as well as Canada, Italy, Romania, Poland, Australia, France and Argentina. Some of those fans can be seen inside Grauman’s Chinese Theater, waiting for one of the many classic film showings:
Consequently, the channel has announced that a third annual event will take place in 2012, but that’s not all. Before this year is out, TCM will sponsor its first-ever cruise. From the news release:
“The new TCM Classic Cruise is set for Dec. 8-12, 2011. It will be a five-day/four-night event aboard Celebrity Millennium. The multi-faceted, interactive experience is being planned by TCM in partnership with cruise production company Sixthman, the industry leader in theme cruises. The TCM Classic Cruise will sail from Miami to Key West and Cozumel.
“The TCM Classic Cruise will include live appearances by Hollywood legends, as well as exclusive events with [TCM host Robert] Osborne and TCM weekend daytime host Ben Mankiewicz. In addition to the ocean liner’s amenities, travelers will be treated to a wide variety of movie-themed events, from screenings and panel discussions to trivia contests and parties.”
Above is said boat, shown off the coast of Ketchikan, Alaska — a far cry from the terrain TCM cruisers will view this December.
More information on the event will gradually be announced in ensuing weeks. Again, from the release:
“Celebrity Millennium accommodates more than 2,000 passengers in 1,017 staterooms, 80 percent of which feature an ocean view. Pre-sale begins May 9 and run through May 19. Cabins go on sale publicly May 20. Prices for interior cabins start at $795, which also includes meals, entertainment, and onboard activities. Guests can visit http://www.tcmclassiccruise.com for more information and details on booking a reservation.”
All in all, another way for TCM to promote its brand to its zealous fan base and beyond. If you’re a landlubber and prefer to wait for the 2012 festival, go to http://www.tcm.com/festival for details, which will gradually be released.
Ready to set sail?
See Valentino for yourself this Friday
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.03 at 00:07
Current mood: excited
Even from the start, Carole Lombard’s career crossed paths with just about everyone in the film industry…but there probably were a few exceptions. One of them will be honored on the 116th anniversary of his birth Friday.
He’s Rudolph Valentino, legendary lover of the silent screen. While it’s possible that Jane Alice Peters, just entering her teenage years, may have spotted Valentino at a premiere or related event, by the time she got into pictures in late 1924 and adopted the screen name Carole Lombard, she didn’t work at the same studio he did (she was at Fox, he was at Paramount). And in August 1926, when Valentino died unexpectedly during surgery, Lombard — not yet 18 — had no time to mourn, as she herself was recovering from plastic surgery to heal the scars from an automobile accident earlier that year, which led to Fox canceling her contract.
I am certain she saw at least a few of Rudy’s pictures; he was incredibly popular, particularly with female audiences.
Friday, American viewers who know Valentino only as a 1920s sex symbol rather than as an actor can get an idea of what he was like on screen, as Turner Classic Movies will air six of his films as a birthday commemoration.
“The Sheik” (shown above), arguably Rudy’s most famous role, isn’t on the schedule. Thanks to its runaway success, “sheik” quickly became a major twenties term for any amorous male; in fact, Hollywood High School’s athletic teams are called the Sheiks (the girls’ teams are called “Shebas,” after “Queen of”). All six of the films TCM are showing are from 1921 and ’22, not long after Valentino rose to worldwide fame. Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
* 8 a.m. — “Beyond The Rocks” (1922). Many people have heard of Valentino but have never seen him act, and the same can be said for the silent-era output of Gloria Swanson. You can kill two birds with one stone in this film, thought lost for decades before it turned up. There’s some decomposition near the end, but you’ll get to see what these two legends were like in this mountain adventure.
* 9:30 a.m. — “Moran Of The Lady Letty” (1922). Rudy goes from the mountains to the sea in this tale of playboy Rudy (whose character is named Ramon Laredo!) rescues a young woman (Dorothy Dalton) who’s been kidnapped by smuggles (she’s the “Moran” of the film’s title). A fun movie with some good maritime sequences.
* 10:45 a.m. — “The Young Rajah” (1922). Here, Valentino portrays an American boy who learns that he’s really an Indian ruler and must desert his sweetheart to reclaim his throne. A bit absurd, but nonetheless fun.
* 11:45 a.m. — “Camille” (1921). This ran on TCM’s “Sunday Silent Nights” not long ago, and here’s your chance to see it again. Alla Nazimova plays the title character with Rudy in a supporting part, as the story is transferred to more contemporary times with some stunning set design. One guesses Greta Garbo saw this while a teen in Sweden, not knowing that years later, she would star in a version that talked.
* 1 p.m. — “The Conquering Power” (1921). Here, Valentino plays a young man who falls for his wicked uncle’s stepdaughter (Alice Terry). Not one of his better-known films.
* 2:45 p.m. — “The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse” (1921). This is the film that put Rudy on the map, as he plays an Argentine of French descent who fights for his father’s country during the World War…and dances a mean tango (with Terry) in the process. Brilliantly done, one of the landmarks of the silent era.
Had Valentino lived to witness the arrival of sound, would he have been a star in talkies? Recordings exist of his voice, which sounds consistent with his persona. Would he have adjusted to the differing style talking pictures required, or would it have crippled him as it did John Gilbert? It’s a question we’ll never have an answer for.
On Friday, however, witness the work of the Valentino we do know. His natural acting may surprise you.
It’s hard out here for a star
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.02 at 08:19
Current mood: working
Who’s with Carole Lombard in that picture, from the 1929 Pathe film “The Racketeer”? An actress named Hedda Hopper — that’s right, actress. Before gaining fame as a syndicated columnist based at the Los Angeles Times, Hopper (born 126 years ago today) acted on stage and in film.
Hopper indulged in a lot of gossip, the stock in trade of the Hollywood columnist, but her experience in the business gave her a perspective lacking in contemporaries such as Louella Parsons. Every now and then, she would write a column on what life in the film colony was really like, as if to show John and Jane Public that movie stardom wasn’t entirely glitz and glamour. In fact, much of it was grunt and grudgery.
Take this column, for instance, from April 30, 1939:
Regarding salaries, Hopper more or less confirmed what Carole Lombard had been saying the previous August about how high a percentage of taxes is taken from an actor’s salary (although Hedda, a staunch Republican, probably objected far more to their removal than New Dealer Lombard).
And the hours…as Hopper wrote, “Now let’s have a look at this easy life we hear about from those who have never lived it,” noting that studio employees — from stars to technicians — reported to studios at the crack of dawn to work. It wasn’t simply the early shift, either:
“Do you work 72 hours a week? A screen actress does when she’s on a picture. And if you’ve an idea our gals walk leisurely for coffee at 10 and call it a day at 4, you’re wrong. Movies aren’t made that way.”
Hedda also said the public’s fawning over stars had a flip side as well: “But when they try to snip a lock of hair as you go into the theater, or push you off the sidewalk and break your ankle, as they did Elizabeth Patterson — and it isn’t entirely healed yet — I don’t think that comes under the heading of ‘ease.'”
No doubt Lombard experienced some of that tension in public, but her fortright personality helped blunt any potential problems.
As Hopper concluded: “No, my friends, the money is never quite as big, nor the life as easy, as their paid press agents would have you believe.” Something stars like Carole and her one-time idol, Gloria Swanson, could vouch for.
This week’s header shows Lombard in lingerie (so you know it’s pre-Code) in a screencap from 1932’s “No Man Of Her Own.”
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.05.01 at 09:25
Current mood: confused
In her waning days as a teenager, Carole Lombard looks a bit bewildered in her role as a showgirl in the 1928 Pathe part-talkie programmer “Show Folks.” How did she get this way? An eBay seller provides a partial answer to those of us who haven’t seen the rarely-revived film. Check out this still photo of her with Eddie Quillan:
It’s easy to see how the Lombard of this era gained the nickname “Carol of the curves”; thanks to eating plenty of bananas (something suggested by Mack Sennett, her primary employer at the time), she looks more filled out than the sleek Lombard that gained fame in the ’30s.
This is an original 8″ x 10″ photo, listed in very good condition. One bid, for $9.99, has been made as of this writing, with bidding closing at 8:01 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. If you’re interested in this 83-year-old picture, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Show-Folks-ORIGINAL-1928-KEYSET-photo-/260773876881?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb7559491.
The same seller has another 8″ x 10″ photo of Carole, made a few years later and revealing a drastically different side of her:
That’s a stern-looking Lombard with plantation owner Charles Laughton in a still from the steamy 1933 Paramount jungle melodrama “White Woman.” You can buy it for $12.99 by going to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-White-Woman-ORIGINAL-1933-scene-still-/260776491078?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb77d7846.
About 300 of the couple’s family and friends were invited to the evening reception that was hosted by Prince Charles inside Buckingham Palace, according to
Us. And with her groom in a dapper tux, newlywed
Kate Middleton changed from her lacy wedding dress and veil into another
Sarah Burton gown and sweater.
Birthday Ball: A blogathon for Lucy’s centenary
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.30 at 00:01
Current mood: content
Given that April hasn’t even ended yet, we’ve been talking a lot about August lately. The other day, we reported (with pleasure) that American TV audiences will see Carole Lombard on Aug. 28 as part of Turner Classic Movies’ 2011 “Summer Under The Stars.” Twenty-two days earlier, Lucille Ball will receive similar honors…on the 100th anniversary of her birth, no less. (Three Augusts ago, TCM did likewise for Fred MacMurray’s centenary.)
Ball is understandably revered as a television icon, arguably that medium’s equivalent of Charlie Chaplin. (Would that make Milton Berle, whose TV fame came a few years before Lucy’s, the Max Linder of television?) But just as Chaplin initially gained renown in the English music hall and on the stage, Ball honed her skills in film — some comedies, some musicals, even a few film noirs such as “The Dark Corner.”
Lucy will not only be honored by TCM on her centenary, but by the blogosphere as well. The site “True Classics: The ABCs of Modern Film” (http://trueclassics.wordpress.com/) has announced a blogathon for that day, called the “Loving Lucy Blogathon,” and I’m delighted to say I’ve volunteered my services:
Ball is a worthy subject for a Lombard-related blog. Lucy got to know Carole in the mid-1930s, and they became good friends, especially after Lombard signed with RKO (the studio Ball and husband Desi Arnaz would eventually acquire for their Desilu production company) in 1939. (Ironically, as is the case with Jean Harlow, I have never come across a photo of Lucy and Carole together.) We’ll discuss the ties between Lombard and Lucy in our entry that day, but you’ll have to wait until Aug. 6 to find out our angle.
For now, a few more photos of the pre-TV Lucille Ball (who, believe it or not, was a few months past her 40th birthday when “I Love Lucy” premiered):
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Two rare Sennett photos, as well as two others
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.29 at 01:13
Current mood: nostalgic
Carole Lombard’s tenure at Mack Sennett raced by in less than two years, but she learned a lot about comedy during her time there. And while the image above, from “Run, Girl, Run,” one of her best-known Sennett two-reelers, is relatively common, there are some photos from that period you don’t come across very often.
Two of them, both original 8″ x 10″ stills, are being auctioned at eBay — but if you want them, you better hurry, as bidding is slated to end today.
First, Lombard from the 1928 film “The Bicycle Flirt”:
Lombard defines ’28 chic in her cloche hat and trim dress. Two bids have been made on this photo as of this writing, with the high bid at $13.15. Bids close at 4 p.m. (Eastern) today, so if you want to get in on it, don’t dally — ride your figurative bicycle over to http://cgi.ebay.com/ORIGINAL-1928-STUDIO-Movie-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/370504076687?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5643c38d8f.
“The Bicycle Flirt” is one of the better known Lombard-era Sennetts. The same can’t be said for the 1927 entry, “Gold Digger Of Weepah,” from which this still originates:
Lombard was an uncredited extra on this Billy Bevan vehicle; that’s her standing just below the “fortune teller” sign. Three bids have been made at the time of writing, topping off at $16.49, and bidding ends at 3:32 p.m. (Eastern) today. If you’d like to go prospecting after this picture, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/ORIGINAL-1927-STUDIO-Movie-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/370504068874?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5643c36f0a.
The seller of both of the above stills has a few more of Lombard available, of which two are of special interest. First, this 7 1/2″ x 9 1/2″ of Carole, from 1931’s “Man Of The World”:
As I write this, one bid, for $9.99, has been made; bids close at 6:23 p.m. (Eastern). To try your luck, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/ORIGINAL-1931-STUDIO-Movie-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/260773273484?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb74c5f8c.
Move ahead a year to 1932’s “No More Orchids,” and this 8″ x 10″ shot of Lombard with Lyle Talbot:
The slight tears may explain why no one has bid on this yet (bids open at $9.99). Bids will conclude at 3:49 p.m. (Eastern). To place a bid or learn more, check out http://cgi.ebay.com/ORIGINAL-1932-STUDIO-Movie-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/370504073796?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5643c38244.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A place to catch up on Connie
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.28 at 01:59
Current mood: curious
Both were sleek blondes with good legs, style icons whose chic fashion sense made a success of virtually anything they wore. Each was a fine actress, adept at witty comedy and talented at drama. One was among the biggest stars of the early 1930s, while the other fully came into her own in the second half of the decade (each was, for a time, the highest-paid actress in the industry). And their careers intersected on several occasions.
Thanks to this site and others, you know a lot about Carole Lombard. Now, there’s a place dedicated to the other star we’re referring to…Constance Bennett.
It’s http://www.constancebennett.byethost14.com, which refers to itself as “the first and only website, dedicated to the lovely Constance Bennett.” It’s admittedly a work in progress, but what it’s accumulated so far is substantial.
For example, did you know that Connie once made a movie with Joan Crawford? Above are Bennett, Crawford and Sally O’Neill in the 1925 silent “Sally, Irene And Mary.” (And no, Sally isn’t “Sally” — that’s Connie. Joan is “Irene” and O’Neill is “Mary.”)
Many of Bennett’s films are profiled with plot descriptions, contemporary reviews, lobby cards, posters and more. Fascinating stuff. (Her radio and television work is also noted, and the site owner also plans to review Connie’s stage work, which she did a lot of during the 1950s. A biography of Bennett is also on the horizon.)
And photos? My count showed 730 pics of Connie — most of which I’d never seen before — from her youth to her final film, “Madame X,” which she completed just before her death at age 60 on July 24, 1965. Bennett underwent a facelift for the film, her first in a dozen years, and more than held her own against star Lana Turner. Here’s Bennett on the set with director David Lowell Rich:
There is also information on books and magazines that feature Constance, including both stories and covers, such as this from Photoplay of March 1931:
Bennett wasn’t always the easiest person to work with — she had more than her share of feuds, and many of the stories about her aren’t all that flattering. But she was certainly among the great beauties of the Golden Age of Hollywood, and several of her films (“What Price Hollywood?”, “Bed Of Roses,” “Topper”) are among the most satisfying of the 1930s. This is a splendid place to learn more about her.
For 24 hours this August, Carole’s star will shine
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.27 at 06:25
Current mood: happy
What will Aug. 28, 2011 have in common with Aug. 17, 2006? A concentrated mega-dose of Carole Lombard while enjoying summer, that’s what.
Turner Classic Movies’ August U.S. schedule has been released, and for the second time since its “Summer Under The Stars” concept began in 2003, Lombard is being honored with a 24-hour marathon. Moreover, because Aug. 28 is a Sunday, many people can have company with Carole all day long. (It also means we’ll hear about Lombard from both Ben Mankiewicz, in the afternoon, and Robert Osborne, in prime time.)
Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
6 a.m. — “Brief Moment” (1933)
7:15 a.m. — “No More Orchids” (1932)
8:30 a.m. — “The Gay Bride” (1934)
10 a.m. — “Fools For Scandal” (1938)
11:30 a.m. — “Lady By Choice” (1934)
1 p.m. — “Virtue” (1932)
2:30 p.m. — “In Name Only” (1939)
4:30 p.m. — “Twentieth Century” (1934)
6:15 p.m. — “To Be Or Not To Be” (1942)
8 p.m. — “My Man Godfrey” (1936)
10 p.m. — “Hands Across The Table” (1935)
11:30 p.m. — “Nothing Sacred” (1937)
1 a.m. — “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” (1941)
3 a.m. — “Vigil In The Night” (1940)
4:45 a.m. — “The Racketeer” (1929)
If there’s a disappointment, it’s a comparatively minor one — that no TCM channel premieres are among its 15-film scheduled fare. It would have been nice to see a few of her more obscure Paramount vehicles, such as “Bolero,” “Rumba” or “No One Man,” in lieu of mediocrities such as “Fools For Scandal” or “The Racketeer” that TCM has shown several times before. Nevertheless, it’s plenty of Lombard, and it’s good to see “Hands Across The Table” (shown in a still above), arguably the best film Carole ever made at Paramount but one that receives comparatively little attention, get a prime-time airing. (One also hopes that TCM will follow what it did during the 2006 SUTS and show the rare European ending to “Vigil In The Night,” in which the characters react to Great Britain going to war with Germany in September 1939.)
As for the rest of the SUTS schedule, here it is, and it features some surprises:
1. Marlon Brando
2. Paulette Goddard
3. Bette Davis
4. Ronald Colman
5. John Garfield
6. Lucille Ball
7. Ralph Bellamy
8. Orson Welles
9. Ann Dvorak
10. Shirley MacLaine
11. Ben Johnson
12. Claudette Colbert
13. James Stewart
14. Charles Laughton
15. Lon Chaney
16. Joanne Woodward
17. Humphrey Bogart
18. Jean Gabin
19. Debbie Reynolds
20. Montgomery Clift
21. Cary Grant
22. Joan Crawford
23. Conrad Veidt
24. Joan Blondell
25. Burt Lancaster
26. Peter Lawford
27. Linda Darnell
28. Carole Lombard
29. Anne Francis
30. Howard Keel
31. Marlene Dietrich
Several of the “usual suspects” for SUTS — Davis, Stewart, Grant, Crawford (“What, no Katharine Hepburn this year?” he said sarcastically) — but many on this year’s roster either have never been SUTS selections or, like Lombard, haven’t received the honor in some time. Pre-Code devotees will be delighted to see days devoted to Dvorak and Blondell, while Gabin and Veidt may well be this year’s equivalent to what Thelma Todd was in 2010…stars unfamiliar to casual fans, but actors who played a key role in cinematic history. (As part of Veidt’s schedule, TCM is showing the classic 1919 German expressionist film “The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari.”) Fans of silents will thrill to the great Lon Chaney (several Ronald Colman silents will be shown on his day). And it’s wonderful to see Ralph Bellamy get his own day, highlighted not only as the perennially unlucky second lead but for his splendid turn as Franklin D. Roosevelt in “Sunrise At Campobello.” (Dietrich’s day, closing out SUTS, features four of her films with Josef von Sternberg, as well as “Rancho Notorious” and “A Foreign Affair.”) For the month’s schedule, go to http://www.tcm.com/schedule/monthly.html?tz=est&sdate=2011-08-01.
In coming weeks, TCM will unveil its artwork to accompany the 2011 SUTS campaign, and if tradition is indicative, it will be distinctive. (Oh, and if you’re going to the second annual TCM Classic Film Festival in Hollywood, which runs tomorrow through Sunday, make sure to thank channel officials for including Carole on this year’s SUTS roster.)
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A few more from Tally
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.26 at 00:13
Current mood: enthralled
Carole Lombard is described as “exquisite” in the above photo, which looks to be from 1933 or ’34. And we have several more images of Carole, courtesy of Tally Haugen and the big box of Lombard memorabilia she recently received.
First, “Carole Lombard presents” a pair of creations from Paramount design guru Travis Banton, who made sure Lombard’s loan-out to Universal for 1936’s “Love Before Breakfast” was sufficiently glamorous:
Next, two poses from 1932 and ’33; the one on the left is another Banton work, while the one of the right looks to be an ad for Doraldina cosmetics:
More of the same — Banton and Doraldina — but this time the ad is from ’32 and the Banton gown is from ’33, specifically for Columbia’s “Brief Moment”:
And one more Banton work:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
’39 CMBA blogathon schedule ‘Made’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.25 at 08:00
Current mood: pleased
That pic of Carole Lombard, James Stewart and baby — not to mention the subject header — should give you an idea of what I’ll be doing in a few weeks for the Classic Movies Blog Assocation’s latest blogathon, on the films of 1939:
Of course, having to do the entry from a Lombard perspective didn’t provide me with much of a choice, as Carole made but two films in ’39 — this one and “In Name Only.” I promise to come up with some interesting angles for the entry, which is scheduled to run May 16, three weeks from today. In fact, here’s the entire schedule (and the URLs for the member sites handling them), just to give you an idea of what to expect:
Sunday, May 15
It’s A Wonderful World
http://www.doriantb.blogspot.com/
The Women
http://www.myloveofoldhollywood.blogspot.com/
The Wizard of Oz
http://www.vivlandlarry.com/
Another Thin Man
http://www.reelrevival.blogspot.com/
The Cat and the Canary
http://www.twentyfourframes.wordpress.com/
Charlie Chan at Treasure Island
http://www.thrillingdaysofyesteryear.blogspot.com/
Dark Victory
http://www.amateurfilmstudies.blogspot.com/
Destry Rides Again
http://www.1001moviesblog.blogspot.com/
Dodge City
http://www.poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/
Five Came Back
http://www.caftanwoman.blogspot.com/
Gone With the Wind
http://www.silverscreenmodiste.com/
On Your Toes
http://www.classicbeckybrainfood.blogspot.com/
Monday, May 16
The Gorilla
http://www.myloveofoldhollywood.blogspot.com/
Q Planes
http://www.vivandlarry.com/
Stagecoach
http://www.themovieprojector.blogspot.com/
Gulliver’s Travels
http://www.distant-voicesandflickering-shadows.blogspot.com/
Hunchback of Notre Dame
http://www.via-51.blogspot.com/
Idiot’s Delight
http://www.dearmrgable.blogspot.com/
Golden Boy
http://trueclassics.wordpress.com/
Intermezzo
http://www.distant-voicesandflickering-shadows.blogspot.com/
The Light That Failed
http://www.classic-film-tv.blogspot.com/
Love Affair
http://www.flickchick1953.blogspot.com/
The Starmaker
http://www.bingfan03.blogspot.com/
Only Angels Have Wings
http://www.anotheroldmovieblog.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, May 17
The Lone Wolf Spy Hunt
http://www.warren-william.com/
Magalord
http://www.forgottenclassicsofyesteryear.blogspot.com/
Ice Follies of 1939
http://www.myloveofoldhollywood.blogspot.com/
Midnight
http://www.dawnschickflicks.blogspot.com/
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
http://www.classicfilmboy.blogspot.com/
Never Say Die
http://www.javabeanrush.blogspot.com/
Of Mice and Men
http://www.greatentertainersarchives.blogspot.com/
The Old Maid
http://www.macguffinmovies.wordpress.com/
Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex
http://www.eves-reel-life.blogspot.com/
The Rules of the Game
http://www.garbolaughs.wordpress.com/
The Rains Came
http://www.kevinsmoviecorner.blogspot.com/
We Are Not Alone
http://www.moirasthread.blogspot.com/
The Whole Family Works
http://www.forgottenclassicsofyesteryear.blogspot.com/
Wuthering Heights
http://www.bettesmovieblog.blogspot.com/
Watching A Year –- All the Films Of 1939
http://www.jnpickens.wordpress.com/
It should be a lot of fun reviewing this year, arguably the apex of classic Hollywood. And more than a few of the films to be profiled go beyond “the usual suspects” from that halcyon year (“The Lone Wolf Spy Hunt”? “We Are Not Alone”? “The Starmaker”?). All in all, this promises to be a slightly different approach to cinema ’39.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Happy Easter, from all at the farm
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.24 at 07:19
Current mood: jubilant
Best wishes on this Easter Sunday, with hope you are sharing the joy of the season with friends and family. That photo above, of Carole Lombard in a classy gown, is one of the items recently sent my way from friend Tally Haugen and her new collection of Carole clippings. The next three show Lombard and husband Clark Gable at their 14-acre Encino ranch, or farm, or however you wish to describe it. All come from late 1939 or early 1940, as “Gone With The Wind” was hitting theaters and Lombard’s drama “Vigil In The Night” was nearing release.
Gable is referenced in this 1932 clipping which cites Lombard’s return to Paramount for “No Man Of Her Own” after repeated disputes with the studio. It ends, “Playing his heroine is not exactly a setback to any career and Carol has had some pretty tepid pictures to combat.”
And to accompany the farm motif of this entry, check out this week’s new header, showing Carole (in pajamas) and her horses from 1937.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Marlene: Isn’t she ironic, doncha think?
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.23 at 05:43
Current mood: enthralled
Carole Lombard and Marlene Dietrich, shown with Cary Grant and Richard Barthelmess at Carole’s famed party at the Venice pier in June 1935, were studiomates at Paramount for several years. While they were hardly at each other’s throats, the relationship was occasionally rocky.
In the Dietrich biography by her daughter, Maria Riva, she described Lombard as one of Dietrich’s “pet hates.” It apparently stemmed from a time in the early 1930s where Carole — still seeking a distinctive “look” — briefly tried to appear as an Americanized version of Marlene. Compare Dietrich and Lombard in these Paramount portraits from 1931:
One can understand why Marlene was briefly peeved…and we emphasize briefly. Apparently later in the decade, the bisexual Dietrich erroneously believed she could recruit Carole into her army of bed partners (http://carole-and-co.livejournal.com/346936.html). And since Marlene always valued potential conquests for both body and soul, there must have been something about Lombard that she liked.
When Paramount imported Dietrich from Germany in 1930, it aimed to make her its answer to MGM icon Greta Garbo, failing to realize Marlene was an entirely different animal. Whereas Garbo immersed herself in her characters, transmitting her subtle passion to the film audience, Dietrich had a detached air about her; in fact, at the time, some viewed her as a Garbo with humor. (It wouldn’t be until “Ninotchka” in 1939 that “Garbo” and “humor” would be synonymous.)
In his excellent book on pre-Code female roles, “Complicated Women,” Mick LaSalle says this about Marlene: “She doesn’t take herself seriously. She doesn’t take her movies seriously. She is smarter than everyone in her films, and her attitude assumes that the audience is smart enough to be in on the joke — even if there is no joke.”
On the surface, that sounds like Groucho Marx breaking the fourth wall to the audience. But Dietrich’s detachment is altogether different. As LaSalle further writes, “Watching Dietrich today it’s no wonder that she lost most of her audience in the irony-impaired thirties. It’s also no wonder why her contribution came to be sometimes overestimated in the irony-drenched second half of the twentieth century.”
So you could argue Marlene not only paved the way for Madonna (and Lady Gaga, who’s more or less Madonna 2.0), but Alanis Morrisette as well.
Dietrich may be an enigma who zealously guarded her image, but once you get beyond that there’s much to admire about her. She was a talented singer who won wows for her musical performances from the 1950s to the ’70s, stood up to Hitler and Nazism from the start, then performed for and gave comfort to Allied troops during World War II.
I bring this all up because I’ve recently discovered a wonderful site about Dietrich, http://lastgoddess.blogspot.com, with numerous entries on Marlene, her life and times. It’s described this way:
“Almost two decades after her death, Marlene Dietrich survives as an archetypal celebrity in pop culture and academia. Through this blog, my co-bloggers and I report on what we consider the most fascinating online tidbits related to Dietrich. Since news is slow, I’d like to expand postings to include a wider array of topics that are nowadays associated with Dietrich. In that case, some things less will do!” If you’re a Dietrich devotee — and most fans of classic Hollywood fit that description — by all means, go check it out.
We’ll close with another pic from that ’35 party; this one features Lombard and Dietrich with Lili Damita and husband Errol Flynn.
‘Cover’-ing Carole
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.22 at 07:54
Current mood: excited
When Carole Lombard wasn’t busy reading scripts, she probably spent some time reading movie fan magazines. Not that she necessarily trusted everything she read in them (she was too much an industry insider for that), but to get an idea of how the public perceived her and other film personalities.
Magazines were an integral part of the classic Hollywood experience, and they are part of a site dedicated to what it calls “the Golden Age of American Illustration.” It’s http://magazineart.org, which features more than 11,000 covers and ads from all sorts of magazines. The site currently has more than 800 covers from vintage movie (and radio and TV) mags, and as you might guess, Carole is well represented. For example, here’s Lombard pictured by the renowned Zoe Mozert on the cover of the June 1936 Romantic Movie Stories:
Carole and Cary Grant, then in theaters with “In Name Only,” are shown on the October 1939 Movie Story:
Earl Christy renders Lombard in Photoplay’s famous “Blondes Plus Curves Mean War” issue of June 1934:
Another from Photoplay –– the famed artist James Montgomery Flagg draws Carole for the November 1936 cover:
Lombard shows off her shoulders in this sexy pose from the November 1937 Screen Guide:
All in all, a fascinating site, one worth checking out for any fan of vintage publications. It is also seeking notable covers and ads to add to the collection, so contact them at volunteers@magazineart.org if you have any to contribute.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Myrna fans roll a seven
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.21 at 07:19
Current mood: happy
Carole Lombard’s friend Myrna Loy is the topic of today’s entry, because DVD collectors will have much more of Myrna to watch in upcoming months — seven films, in fact.
Heading the list is a film that’s been largely unseen for nearly 70 years because of rights issues, one of MGM’s all-star extravaganzas:
“Night Flight,” a 1933 film with Loy, Clark Gable, Helen Hayes, Robert Montgomery and both John and Lionel Barrymore. It will be shown in public for the first time since 1942 at the TCM Classic Film Festival later this month, and the DVD will be made public June 7.
“Night Flight,” set in South America and dealing with fliers who transport mail and other items across the continent, is based on a novel by Antoine de Saint-Exupery of “Little Prince” fame. Loy plays the wife of a Brazilian pilot portrayed by William Gargan (who seven years later would gain an Academy Award best supporting actor nomination for the Lombard film “They Knew What They Wanted”). David O. Selznick produced this movie, and the concept of flying vaccine to aid a sick child, seen in his 1939 Lombard drama “Made For Each Other,” gets its first tryout here.
Six other films from Loy are being released through the Warner Archive collection. Two are 1929 Warners talkies, showing Myrna in her “exotic” phase — as a gypsy in “The Squall,” which also features Loretta Young (only 16 at the time) and Zasu Pitts, and as a Mexican temptress in “The Great Divide,” co-starring Dorothy Mackaill and Ian Keith. Three are from MGM: “New Morals For Old” (1932), with Robert Young; “The Prizefighter And The Lady” (1933), with Walter Huston and heavyweight champions Max Baer Sr. and Primo Carnera; and “Third Finger, Left Hand” (1940), co-starring Melvyn Douglas, where Loy portrays a publishing executive (the type of role more closely associated with her Metro “rival” at the time, Rosalind Russell). Finally, Warners gets hold of a 1946 Universal comedy-drama, “So Goes My Love” with Don Ameche.
There’s a LiveJournal site, myrnadaily, whose slogan is “Daily Myrna Loy Goodness.” (Unfortunately, it has been dormant for more than a year.) But thanks to DVD, you can experience plenty of that goodness this spring and into summer.
Looking back: April 1932
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.20 at 09:16
Current mood: annoyed
It’s time for the latest in our looks back at Carole Lombard in the newspapers, and this entry examines her in print in April 1932.
We’ve shown this photo of Carole Lombard in a swimsuit before, but never knew its colors (although in a hand-painted Australian poster, it was shown as gold and brown). Well, thanks to the St. Petersburg Times of April 10, 1932, we’ve finally learned its actual colors:
“There’s color in women’s sport wear this spring — whether it’s for swimming, lounging on the beach, motoring, traveling or just general wear. Carole Lombard of the films wears a distinctly 1932 bathing suit. It’s one of the popular ribbed models, and the top part is white with the trunks and designs in bright blue.”
Carole looks hale and hearty in that photo and this one, but it wasn’t a particularly healthy month for her, as the San Jose News reported on April 27 with this AP item:
“Seriously ill for the past two weeks as the result of a nervous breakdown, Carole Lombard, screen actress and wife of William Powell, actor, was reported out of danger today. Announcement that she had passed the crisis in her illness was the first word given the public she had been ill.”
Apparently, assignments given by her home studio didn’t enhance her state of being — or so syndicated columnist Mollie Merrick reported in The Day of New London, Conn. on April 16, following a report of a dispute between Paramount and Josef von Sternberg:
“Just to add more trouble to the Paramount situation, it is rumored that Carole Lombard has asserted herself about her next picture, ‘Hot Saturday,’ saying that she doesn’t like it and won’t appear in it.
“Perhaps this story is somewhat exaggerated, as it doesn’t seem a wise thing for one so newly prompted to big parts to say.
“Especially when her studio has done so much toward building up her popularity. Anyway, now that the Dietrich-von Sternberg argument has been brought to a head, we’ll see about Carole Lombard.”
In this case, when Lombard put her lovely foot down, she got what she wanted. When “Hot Saturday” came to theaters, the leads were:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Items up for bidding (or for sale)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.19 at 08:44
Current mood: impressed
It’s been a few days since I visited eBay to check for Carole Lombard-related items (at last check, there were more than 1,600), and here are a few new ones available.
We begin with the photo above, showing Carole sitting on a fence. I’m guessing it to be from around 1937, and may well come from the same session where Lombard, in the same khakis she has on, is shown standing outside a door (the pose used several decades later by the Gap chain to sell khakis). Unfortunately, if there was a p1202 number for this portrait, it’s been cropped out.
This measures 8″ x 10″, and five copies are available at $9.95 each. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8×10-B-W-PHOTO-VERY-SEXY-GLAMOUR-/350456771047?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5198d9f1e7.
Next up, a fairly rare portrait of Carole with Gary Cooper from 1931’s “I Take This Woman”:
It too measures 8″ x 10″; unlike the other, this is an original, not a reproduction, and is being auctioned. One bid has already been made, for $9.99, and bids will be taken through 9:32 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday. To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Photo-Gary-Cooper-Carole-Lombard-1931-AAH658-/350456524197?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item5198d62da5.
Finally, here’s Carole on the cover of a fan magazine — but it’s not a movie mag:
It’s Radio Mirror, from April 1939, and notice how Lombard is described as a “new radio queen,” though her reign didn’t last very long. Evidently, this story was commissioned at the time she began on the NBC series “The Circle”; by the time this hit print, she had left the show, and the series itself didn’t last much longer. Also note how the magazine plays up her ties to Clark Gable, though I’m guessing this issue hit newsstands before the two were wed in late March. There are some other film-related stories here, as subjects included Tyrone Power, Burns and Allen and others.
No bids have yet been made on this item; bidding opens at $12 and will end next Sunday at 12:44 p.m. (Eastern). You can find out more at http://cgi.ebay.com/Radio-Mirror-4-39-Carole-Lombard-cover-/160574897054?pt=Magazines&hash=item2563027b9e
Briefly a Ward of Rocky and Bullwinkle
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.18 at 09:37
Current mood: curious
Carole Lombard’s Mack Sennett shorts are now in public domain (which makes one wonder why no one has put them together into a DVD package), but one of the previous owners of the Sennett catalog — someone who kept the items in circulation — may surprise you. It was Jay Ward, the eccentric (and beloved) animation pioneer.
While Ward was popularly perceived as the creator of “Crusader Rabbit” and later “Rocky And Bullwinkle,” he actually handled the business aspects; the characters were created by veteran animator Alex Anderson, Ward’s college friend from the University of California. The Ward-Anderson team also worked for Quaker Oats in establishing such characters as Cap’n Crunch.
Ward corraled some of Hollywood’s top talent for his productions; William Conrad narrated the “Rocky” cartoons (at about the same time he was wrapping up his memorable work as Marshal Dillon on the classic “Gunsmoke” radio show), and the likes of Edward Everett Horton and Hans Conried did voice work on the program. Like “The Simpsons” two decades later, clever writing made it a series both adults and children loved. Here’s Jay with the voices of Rocky and Bullwinkle, June Foray (who still works regularly) and Bill Scott:
Ward also loved silent films; some of you may recall his non-animated series “Fractured Flickers,” which used clips of old silents for comedic effect. In the early sixties, Ward and Raymond Rohauer obtained the rights to 150 Laurel and Hardy films, then acquired rights to much of D.W. Griffith’s catalogue. In 1964, they obtained rights to some 200 of Sennett’s movies — which likely included at least some of those featuring Lombard in the late 1920s — for about $100,000. (Sennett, once a millionaire, had died in 1960 with relatively little to his name.)
I’m not sure what Ward did with these properties before his death in 1989. As for Anderson, who sued the Ward estate in 1996 over creation of the characters (it was settled out of court), he died last October at age 90.
This week’s header shows Carole relaxing on a hammock, one apparently created from a carpet.
One woman, two acts, one legend
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.17 at 06:36
Current mood: pleased
Carole Lombard’s triumphant, yet ultimately ill-fated war bond trip was the subject of a one-woman play, “Lombard,” written by veteran screenwriter/playwright/publicist/Hollywood historian Michael B. Druxman.
“Lombard” — part of a series of one-person plays Druxman has written about Hollywood legends — has been performed a number of times, and has been well received. Now the script has been published in book form, 74 pages.
The play is set as Carole “awaits word in an Indianapolis hotel room to see if she’s been successful in securing plane reservations for a flight back to Los Angeles. She’s anxious to get home, because she suspects that her husband, Clark Gable, is cheating on her.
“Drawing liberally upon her legendary sailor’s vocabulary, Ms. Lombard talks about her tragic affair with singer Russ Columbo, ex-husband William Powell, as well as George Raft, Gary Cooper, Joseph P. Kennedy and, of course, David O. Selznick and her ill-fated attempt to secure the role of Scarlett O’Hara in ‘Gone With The Wind.'”
As the audience knows what fate has planned for her, the subject might seem sad. But “Lombard” is “not a depressing play of approaching doom. It is a warm, funny story of a woman — the highest paid film actress of her day — who was a ‘fighter,’ both in her career and personal life.”
It’s hoped the book’s publication will lead to more productions of the play; at the very least, reading about Carole’s life may inspire other actresses. To purchase “Lombard,” which sells for $7.50, go to https://www.createspace.com/3591316.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A cottage for lease
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.16 at 07:55
Current mood: confused
If you were dreaming of living in Carole Lombard’s one-time house on Hollywood Boulevard, prepare to wait at least another two years. The Los Angeles Times reported earlier this month that the fabled residence Carole called home from 1934 to 1936 and the site of several of her most famous parties, has been leased:
“A house in the Sunset Strip area that actress Carole Lombard lived in during the 1930s came on the market in March for sale at $1,595,000 or for lease at $6,500 a month. It already has been leased out for two years.
“The French Regency-style home is set behind gates. It has an art studio, a music-media room, four bedrooms and three bathrooms in nearly 3,000 square feet of living space with original fixtures. A spiral staircase off the master suite leads to a loft. The separate guesthouse includes a kitchenette.
“Lombard, who died in 1942 at 33, was married to leading men William Powell and Clark Gable. She is listed among the American Film Institute’s top screen legends.
“The property last changed hands in 1994 for $420,000, according to public records.”
Look on the bright side: You get two more years to try to win the lottery that will give you sufficient funds to move into the place.
One more thing: “Carole & Co.” now has a new URL, http://carole-and-co.livejournal.com/. It’s a bit easier to remember than the old listing.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Some odds and ends
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.15 at 09:51
Current mood: hopeful
Here are a few more selections from what Tally Haugen calls “the box” — the huge collection of Carole Lombard clippings she recently received (with more stuff on the way for us).
First, a pair of portraits — one in character, one that isn’t — from the time of “They Knew What They Wanted” in the fall of 1940:
Next, some items related to the film “Made For Each Other,” with a few Max Factor ads from the mid-1930s mixed in:
Finally, a 1935 ad for Lux soap — must avoid that “Cosmetic Skin,” you know:
Edit Tag
No jump into the ‘Fire’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.14 at 10:06
Current mood: 
sympathetic
Carole Lombard was both leggy and alluring playing a showgirl in “Swing High, Swing Low.” And a few years later, she had a chance to show off those glamorous gams again in a similar costume, but turned it down.
We bring it up because that film will be shown at 8 p.m. (Eastern) Saturday as part of Turner Classic Movies’ “Essentials” series. It’s “Ball Of Fire,” from late 1941, and the actress who wound up as showgirl Sugarpuss O’Shea? None other than Barbara Stanwyck, who had some great gams of her own:
Actually, Lombard was not the first choice for the role in this Samuel Goldwyn film, directed by Howard Hawks with a script by Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett and starring Gary Cooper (who was under a personal contract for Goldwyn) as a linguistics professor who meets a slang-knowledgeable showgirl and becomes entangled with mobsters. The lead was initially offered to Ginger Rogers, who had won an best actress Academy Award the year before for “Kitty Foyle.” Rogers apparently believed that this type of role was a step back for her, the ground she had trod as “Anytime Annie” in “42nd Street” back in her Warners days. So she said no.
Why did Lombard decline? Hard to say. Perhaps the story, or character, simply didn’t click with her. Nearing the age of 33 in the summer of 1941, when this script would have come her way, Carole may have felt a bit too old for the part (though she was nearly 15 months younger than Stanwyck). It was also an aggressively urban role, more hard-edged and working-class than anything Lombard had played in some years (and, as it turned out, made to order for the Brooklyn-born Barbara).
But there has also been conjecture that “Ball Of Fire” could have been “Ball Of Fire” — as in Lucille Ball. She was tested for the role (as was Betty Field); some say Lombard suggested her for the part. Whatever, Lucy wasn’t hired, possibly because Goldwyn wanted a female lead of similar starpower to Cooper. (Jean Arthur, who Hawks reportedly didn’t want, was also a supposed candidate, although she wouldn’t appear to have had the requisite overt sex appeal for such a part.) Stanwyck was recommended by Cooper, who had just worked with her in “Meet John Doe,” and she quickly accepted.
Considering its urban milieu and that Hawks is directing it, “Ball Of Fire” moves at a surprisingly languid pace; this is no “Twentieth Century.” Nevertheless, it’s a charmingly funny film, and if you only know Stanwyck from “The Big Valley” onward, you’ll be amazed over how sexy she can be. To borrow a line from the film, “yum-yum.” (You are also ordered to watch “Baby Face,” “Night Nurse” and “Double Indemnity” — the last of which was directed by Wilder — ASAP.) It also capped off a stunning year for Stanwyck, who that year had not only made “Meet John Doe” with Cooper but two fine films with Henry Fonda — the classic “The Lady Eve,” a Preston Sturges creation, and the overlooked “You Belong To Me.”
The supporting cast in “Ball Of Fire” is also wonderful, including Dana Andrews and Dan Duryea as the mobsters, and Oscar Homolka and Richard Haydn among the fellow professors helping Cooper with his dictionary project.
“Ball Of Fire,” the last film Wilder would write before beginning his fabled directing career, was shown for a week in Los Angeles at the tail end of 1941 to qualify for the Academy Awards; Stanwyck was nominated, but lost to Joan Fontaine for “Suspicion.” Its New York premiere came in the same mid-January week of Lombard’s war bond rally and ensuing death in a plane crash.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A partial lesson in being modern
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.13 at 09:50
Current mood: hopeful
It may be three-quarters of a century after her heyday, but Carole Lombard’s appeal continues, largely thanks to qualities that transcend her time. Here’s an example, and it comes from the August 1935 issue of Motion Picture, featuring Lombard’s friend (and fellow Oct. 6 birthday girl) Janet Gaynor on the cover:
Inside is a Lombard article by William F. French, “Be Modern Or Be A Wallflower”:
Carole has some intriguing comments, several of which can be adapted into a 2011 mindset. (Human nature doesn’t change very much, after all.) Here’s what it says (up to a point), courtesy of Carla Valderrama’s unfortunately dormant site, CaroleLombard.org:
_________________________________________
BE MODERN OR BE A WALLFLOWER
The girl of today, says the ultra-popular Carole, must have a variety of interests and keep up with the times. She must be modern enough to stay ahead of the parade instead of lagging behind — a forgotten wallflower
By WILLIAM F. FRENCH
We WERE talking about what it takes to put a girl up where every girl wants to be, when Carole Lombard — fresh, healthy and confident, after two weeks rest in the mountains — aired her outlook on it all.
“No,” she replied, “I don’t think luck has much to do with a girl amounting to anything worth while. I think it’s more a matter of alertness, of being wide-awake and alive. These days a girl has to be modern or else be a wallflower. The year 1935 hasn’t time to stop and pay its respects to the old-fashioned girl who is sitting quietly in the corner. Instead of waiting to be asked, a girl has to get out in front of the parade, where she’ll be seen. The time is past when a girl can attract attention being a passive verb, so to speak. She must be active, and in time with the times. She must be modern.”
“Modern girls don’t have to get noisy and boisterous and cheap to get into things. They don’t have to be fast to live fast. A hundred sensible, constructive, progressive interests are open to them. They no longer have to clamp the lid on their energy until it explodes into unhealthy channels. The up-to-date girl has a variety of interests. She rides, she drives, she plays bridge, she reads, she follows the latest plays, she studies, she goes in for sports with a zest. She doesn’t putter. She doesn’t do things half-way. She does things with a will, never half-heartedly. Norma Shearer is an excellent example of being modern. There is nothing half-hearted about her, with her determination to progress and her score of interests. Joan Crawford is modern, knowing what she wants and going after it. Katherine Hepburn, with her independence of spirit, is ultra-modern.”
“Determination, independence, health, intelligence, zest, alertness and a variety of interests. Mix well and season with a happy sense of humor, and you have what it takes to be modern. But don’t forget that seasoning. It is the thing that makes all the others possible. And you must learn to stick with a thing until you whip it. These days a girl simply must go in for sports, both for health and for popularity. Men expect girls to swim with them, ride with them, play tennis with them and even, perhaps, go fishing or hunting with them.”
“I GO IN for athletics and sports as intensively as I do for work. When I took up tennis I had an instructor and, even now, though I’m rather good at it, I still coach. I’m taking up flying because I think it’s part of a present-day education, and because I think we will all be flying before long.”
“I can’t afford not to keep up with new things. And neither can any other girl, whether she is in society or in a bargain basement. She can find time and means to keep in step with the times. She simply must learn to dance well, to swim, to play golf and bridge. There are ways to accomplish this if she has the will. And if she hasn’t the will, and isn’t willing to pay the price and effort, she will never get the things her heart just aches for and longs for.”
“Don’t believe, girls, that you don’t have to do the things the movie stars do in order to get what you want. You do have to. Because life demands the same of you as it does of them. When you hear what a casting office asks of a girl, don’t marvel. That office asks: ‘Can you swim, can you dance, can you drive, can you play tennis, can you wear a gown attractively, do you know how to walk, can you make yourself interesting?’ Your employer and your friends may not be asking you those questions quite so bluntly. But they are finding the answers to them in their own way. And if you fall short you’ll get as little as little notice from them as the unprepared movie applicant gets at the casting office.”
“In the past fifteen years, women have gone a long way, and have claimed a lot of privileges, for which all women must pay. The progressive ones have crowded so far ahead that the ones who lag at all, are left behind and forgotten. We, as women, asked to be included in men’s sports, interests, activities and even in their political problems. We got our wish. And to live up to it, we must be modern. Perhaps it is unfortunate that all girls must keep up with the pace set by the most successful ones. But I, personally, don’t think so. Instead, I think it is forcing them all into broader, happier, more useful lives.”
“TODAY, the girl in the Iowa village, or the Pennsylvania hamlet, must keep up-to-date on styles and on manners, because the movies are constantly showing her friends how she ought to act, how she ought to look and what she ought to be able to do. She can’t hide from progress, no matter where she goes. The small city judges the girls on its local beach by the same standards as the world judges the stars at Malibu. And it has a right to do so. Don’t say that you haven’t a chance. Two out of every three stars in Hollywood didn’t have a chance either — once. They worked in department stores, restaurants, and even factories. They were home girls, chorus girls and starving extra girls. But they were modern, and made their ‘break’.”
“Being modern doesn’t mean going in for fads, wearing ultra-modern or spectacular clothes, or doing strange things. The girl of today has too many interests, too much to do, to waste her time that way. She centers on efficiency. She must! But she keeps up with the latest in everything. She reads the newest and best books even if she doesn’t like…”
_________________________________________
Doesn’t like what? And what else does Lombard have to say? Inquiring minds want to know. And the good news is, you can complete this fan magazine cliffhanger.
This issue is being sold at eBay for $19.99. It’s complete, although the seller calls its condition “Acceptable: A book with obvious wear. May have some damage to the cover but integrity still intact. … Possible writing in margins, possible underlining and highlighting of text, but no missing pages or anything that would compromise the legibility or understanding of the text.”
What else is in the issue? Articles about Carole’s Paramount stablemate Sylvia Sidney…
…and old Cocoanut Grove dance rival Joan Crawford…
…as well as Fred Astaire, Gary Cooper, Ann Dvorak, Basil Rathbone, Ginger Rogers and more.
To buy it, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/MOTION-PICTURE-JANET-GAYNOR-CAROLE-LOMBARD-SYLVI-SIDNEY-/400209093457?pt=Magazines&hash=item5d2e522351. And if you do, please forward the rest of the Lombard article to us. There are a lot of ladies out here who don’t want to be wallflowers.
Accentuating what you’ve got
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.12 at 08:52
Current mood: contemplative
There was a time in the late 1920s when Carole Lombard, working in Mack Sennett’s bathing-beauty comedies, had gained a few extra pounds at his behest (thanks to bananas) and was thus known as “Carole of the curves.” Not that she was exceptionally voluptuous by any means, but she was somewhat shapelier (the better to fill out a swimsuit) than the more recognizable Lombard from the mid- and late 1930s.
By the start of the 1930s, the curvy Carole had shed those extra pounds at Pathe’s behest and her body had become sleek and lithe. But by learning the photographic tricks of the trade — and working with some of the most talented portrait takers in the business — she had gained the ability to make herself seem buxom, even if she was actually no bigger than a “B” cup.
A case in point, pardon the pun:
That’s Paramount p1202-396, from late 1932 or sometime in ’33. Not sure who the photographer is (I’m guessing Otto Dyar), but the expert lighting, not to mention her stance, plays up her bosom — and while it may not transform Lombard into an early version of Marie Wilson, it does make her look more curvaceous than usual.
This is the type of photo that one eBay seller would typically characterize as “busty”…and while this item is available at eBay, it’s not from that seller. It’s 8″ x 10″, and is described this way: “The photo is in good condition with minor edge, corner and surface wear. There is also pinholes in the corners and along the side borders with 2 pinholes in the image that do not penetrate through the photo. The photo overall shows very well and these issues do not detract from this gorgeous and rare image.”
It’s being sold for $95. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-Orig-30s-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Art-Deco-BEAUTY-Portrait-/260765700010?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item3cb6d8cfaa.
Welcome to the working week
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.11 at 08:36
Current mood: working
For many of you, Monday means the start of another work week. (My schedule is a bit different, as I have Sundays and Mondays off; my “Monday” is your “Tuesday.”) To provide some inspiration while you toil in the office, some photos (and relatively rare ones) from Carole Lombard’s week-long sojourn in July 1938 handling publicity at Selznick International Pictures, more or less giving a break to its usual PR maven, the talented Russell Birdwell (shown above). It was good publicity for her, too.
Here’s Lombard doing all sorts of odds and ends. A lot different from acting, isn’t it, Carole?
Two more photos, including one showing Lombard with noted writer Gene Fowler, a close friend of one-time Carole co-star John Barrymore:
Both pages look to be from the same publication (probably from the fall of ’38), but I don’t know what magazine it is.
However, it should be noted in fairness that Carole worked both sides of the publicity game. In early 1936, she served as guest editor for Screen Book magazine, following in the footsteps of Ginger Rogers:
All these are from Tally Haugen’s newly-acquired collection of Lombard memorabilia, and I again give thanks to her for letting me share these with you.
This week’s header shows Carole looking over her shoulder from about 1933 or ’34.
Down on the farm
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.10 at 08:35
Current mood: productive
That picture of Carole Lombard with her beloved Palomino pony, Pico (Paramount p1202-1553) puts me in the mood for a few more photos of Lombard living the farmer’s life. Or should that be farmer’s wife, since these pics are from the Encino ranch she shared with husband Clark Gable.
This one is from the November 1939 issue of Motion Picture:
Next, a few assorted photos of Clark, Carole and livestock. Not sure what magazine this is from, but the reference to Lombard’s appendectomy leads one to believe that this was from the fall of 1939. And “Not Too Narrow, Not Too Deep”? That was the initial title of the Gable film later known as “Boom Town.” (Also love that line, “Like all wives, Carole knows how to get her hubby’s goat.”)
Both of this clippings are from Tally Haugen’s recently inherited collection of Lombard memorabilia.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
He learned what Breen wanted
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.09 at 08:56
Current mood: mellow
Carole Lombard may have looked nervous while viewing the dailies for “They Knew What They Wanted” with director Garson Kanin and co-star Charles Laughton, but she wasn’t the only one who was tied up in knots over the film. Just getting it to that point was a challenge, as the producer vouched in print.
Erich Pommer was one of the most respected people in international film, producing some of the best German movies of the Weimar era — “The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari,” “The Last Laugh,” “Metropolis” and “The Blue Angel,” among others. After the Nazis came to power, he left Germany, working for Fox, Alexander Korda and others (including two films with Laughton). In 1939, he signed a deal to produce films for RKO and decided to adapt Sidney Howard’s Pulitzer Prize-winning play, “They Knew What They Wanted.” What happened next was the subject of a story in a New York newspaper:
(This is from Tally Haugen’s recently-acquired treasure trove of Lombard memorabilia. Unfortunately, the item is incomplete, and I’m not sure what newspaper it’s from.)
“For the finished script came back from the Hays office with a sad letter and eight pages of objections.” Pommer knew he would have a difficult time with Joseph Breen, and was aware the play had been on the banned list. So Pommer decided to make an adversary his ally.
“First (Breen told) me his objections. Then he’d suggest a way to get around them. And it was he who suggested an ending. We hadn’t been able to find an ending. Joe Breen found one for us.”
For all the inveighing we’ve made against Breen at “Carole & Co.”, it must be said the guy liked movies. In fact, for a time in the 1940s, he left his position as industry censor and became an executive at RKO.
How did Carole get involved in the project?
“They wanted Carole Lombard for the waitress part, but they were sure she would never accept. A little scared they sent her the completed script. Next day arrived a hundred-word telegram thanking them for the chance to play the finest role she had ever had. Miss Lombard, it seems, is eager to prove she is not just a glamor girl nor yet just a comedienne. Her part does not compare in size to Laughton’s but the star accepted it and played it just as it was written and directed without one plea for more lines or closeups. Again Erich Pommer is grateful. It is, he says, a beautiful performance, and one with almost no comedy.”
Interesting that Lombard still had the “comedienne” tag after having appeared in the drama-tinged “Made For Each Other,” the romantic drama “In Name Only,” and the nearly somber “Vigil In The Night.”
“They Knew What They Wanted” received approving reviews for the most part, but if Pommer and RKO expected blockbuster business, they were disappointed. And if Lombard signed onto the film hoping it might be Academy Award material, she was disappointed, too; the only Oscar nomination it received went to William Gargan for best supporting actor.
As for Pommer, he suffered a heart attack in 1941, recovered, and returned to Germany in 1946. There, he helped rebuild the German film industry, but he never regained his earlier glory. Pommer, who had gained American citizenship in 1944, returned to California and died in 1966.
Does Debbie have Carole? The answer is yes
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.08 at 08:43
Current mood: pleased
We recently wondered whether Carole Lombard had any items included in the forthcoming part 1 of the auction of memorabilia from the collection of Debbie Reynolds.
The answer came last evening: “We do indeed.”
It’s a “Beige floor length gown with ornately pleated back panel and belt scarf, accented with embroidery wire, sequins, jet beads and seed pearls at neckline, on sleeves and tips of scarf and train. Sleeves on gown have been altered. Designed by Travis Banton.”
Okay, so what film was it used in?
“No Man Of Her Own,” Lombard’s lone film with Clark Gable, for Paramount in late 1932. Certainly something any fan of Carole’s can savor — and probably something that will go for a few thousand dollars (at least).
For more on the auction, go to http://profilesinhistory.com/debbie-reynolds-auction/event-and-catalog-information. And if this gown is a bit beyond your reach, don’t fret; there will likely be Lombard-related items among the 20,000 still photographs and several thousand movie posters scheduled to be in part 2 of the auction this December.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Loves to ‘Rumba,’ needs work
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.07 at 07:59
Current mood: optimistic
Almost sounds like a classified ad from a professional dancer circa 1935, doesn’t it? Actually, it applies to the item above, a rare window card from Carole Lombard’s Paramount film “Rumba” with George Raft, released in ’35. This is a design I’ve never seen before, and the seller admits it’s not in the best of shape…but adds that it can be restored:
“This ORIGINAL WINDOW CARD POSTER has a great need to be restored to its original grandness….but it is presentable in its current state. This ORIGINAL WINDOW CARD POSTER has been trimmed at the top blank theater talker space area down to the image line and now measures a full 13 1/2 x 17 inches and is in fair to good condition. The back of the card has been dot glued to a backing board and can easily be removed when restored. The colors are faded but are still recognizable. The top half of the card is red and the bottom half is yellow with the title ‘Rumba’ being red and black outlined. Lombard’s gown is a silver number with the inset head shots against a blue background…Lombard’s gown is green. There are some stains and a bit of surface paperloss to the white border areas. With all this going on I can tell you there are a number of lobby cards out there and there will be a JUMBO WINDOW CARD up for auction in a few months…..which has none of the wonderful graphics this piece has….but there are no accounts of this poster coming to market. This is a BEAUTIFUL WINDOW CARD!….don’t miss your chance to have a really outstanding piece of motion picture history. With a little TLC this poster will be a looker! I will list this piece just once more….then it’s off to either the restorer or the auction house.”
If you have sufficient TLC, and the talent to match (or the knowhow to find a capable restorer), this might be worth picking up. Of course, you’ll also need sufficient money to buy it — bidding starts at $359.99 (it just came on the market), and bids close at 7:47 p.m. (Eastern) next Wednesday. If you’re a serious memorabilia collector or a restorer, or simply want to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Rumba-1935-Carole-Lombard-George-Raft-DANCE-/330550981835?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf65fb4cb.
From Debbie, to auction
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.06 at 11:24
Current mood: excited
Carole Lombard and other Hollywood stars are the subject of a huge array of memorabilia. And some of the most sought-after of such items are to be auctioned in June, from the collection of one of filmdom’s most beloved stars:
It’s Debbie Reynolds (who turned 79 last Friday — a belated happy birthday!), shown in her 1950s days of MGM stardom. For many years, Debbie has collected memorabilia, including many costumes, with hopes of establishing a museum dedicated to classic Hollywood. Her dream never quite caught on, so Reynolds has decided to auction her collection through the Profiles in History firm. Perhaps you saw her publicize it in February on the Oprah Winfrey Show.
Well, the specifics have just been announced, and it’s big. The collection has more than 20,000 original photographs, several thousand original posters and more than 3,500 costumes. About 700 of those costumes will be auctioned in part one of the sale, on June 18; the rest of the collection will be auctioned in December.
What sort of items are available? Well, here’s a taste, direct from the site:
There’s even Elizabeth Taylor’s jockey costume from “National Velvet,” long before she became Debbie’s romantic rival (and eventual friend).
A 1925 painting from the Marion Davies estate and some other non-costume items will also be auctioned in June. No word on whether the Reynolds collection includes any Lombard costumes, but I’m certain Carole’s represented among the photographs, and possibly the posters as well.
To learn more about the collection, and to pre-order a catalog, go to http://profilesinhistory.com/debbie-reynolds-auction/event-and-catalog-information.
A Pathe star, on fox
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.05 at 08:34
Current mood: relieved
Didn’t know that Carole Lombard appeared in a fur advertisement, did you? (And as was the case with smoking, sensibilities in those days weren’t similar to what they are now; had Lombard grown up a generation or two later, given her fondness for animals, she might have had a substantially different view of wearing fur.)
It’s a highlight of a recent batch of items Tally Haugen e-mailed me from a treasure trove of Lombard clippings and such. It’s from Feb. 24, 1929 and presumably ran in a Los Angeles newspaper:
“Colburn’s Exclusive Fur Shop on South Flower Street, realize the necessity of light furs even in the summer-time for Southern California. Fox skins in all the new flattering shades will be worn for sports and afternoon costumes, and a long white fox scarf or two skins will take the place of summer wraps in many instances for evening. Carol Lombard, Pathe featured player, poses here in a coat created by Colburn, of grey Russian caracul bordered with platinum fox skin.”
Whether this photo was taken expressly for the ad or derived from a Pathe publicity photo, I do not know; in my far from complete listing of Pathe portraits, I didn’t see it. As for summertime furs, perhaps Los Angeles had cooler summers in the days before smog and widespread urban build-up.
I initially couldn’t see the entire ad copy because it’s covered by one of three photos in the next grouping:
At the top is Carole with Charles Laughton, in a promotional photo for “White Woman” in late 1933. Below are two photos from 1940 briefs, one to promote “They Knew What They Wanted” and the other from year’s end, when Lombard and husband Clark Gable were at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore.
Speaking of Carole and Clark, earlier in 1940 they were missing in Mexico, and it was big news:
Note that one of those in the MGM searching party was Otto Winkler, whose fate would be tied to Lombard’s less than two years later.
The other item shows Carole with her first husband, William Powell, in a publicity photo from 1936 for “My Man Godfrey.”
A pair of pics you’ve likely never seen
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.04 at 02:14
Current mood: cheerful
Ah, Carole Lombard being charmingly chic as only she can, even if it’s in the midst of sand dumped onto the portrait studio floor to create an ersatz beach. For the record, it’s Paramount p1202-282, but what’s it about? Fortunately, we have a snipe on the back, which not only informs us what film this is promoting (guess!) and why she’s wearing what she’s wearing:
It’s a vintage Lombard photo that has recently been put up for auction. And here’s another one that will probably be new to you:
It’s Carole with William Powell, taken on Powell’s Warners turf, and while I’m guessing from the January 1934 date on the back that it was taken following their divorce the previous August, it can’t be completely confirmed. We do know that Powell wasn’t long for Warners, jumping to MGM in early 1934, where he would meet Myrna Loy, and two years later have arguably the best calendar year for any actor during the classic era.
The “Sinners In The Sun” photo is the more valuable of the two, with the minimum bid going for $99.99 (no bids have been placed as of this writing); bids close at 9:05 p.m. (Eastern) next Sunday. The photo measures 7.5″ x 9.5″, and to bid or get more info, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-SINNERS-SUN-VINTAGE-PHOTO-H902-/380329731720?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588d6b2688.
Bids on the Powell pic, which is also 7.5″ x 9.5″, begin at $24.99 (no bids as of yet) and will be taken through 9:08 p.m. (Eastern) next Sunday. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-w-CREDIT-LIPPMAN-/380329732601?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588d6b29f9 for more information.
And this week’s header is from Lombard’s first Paramount film, “Safety In Numbers,” where she apparently hoped a pair of shiny silk stockings would help her get a leg up at the studio…and they evidently did.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
All sorts of happy stuff
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.03 at 12:34
Current mood: happy
To borrow a line from the Harold Arlen song, forget your troubles and just get happy. If you’re in the Northern Hemisphere, spring is here; if you’re in North America, baseball season has begun; and if you’re a Carole Lombard fan, I have some more long-lost treasures, courtesy of Tally Haugen and her new batch of Lombard goodies. Seeing these made me happy, and they should have a similar effect on you.
In fact, we’ll kick things off with an item entitled “Found — A Happy Star”:
About the only things that could make me happier about this article would be finding it in its entirety, and discovering when and where it was published (I’m guessing it to be from 1932 or ’33). A Google search under “found a happy star” yielded no success (though I did get the locations of several “Happy Star” Chinese restaurants!), and looking under the name of the “as told to” writer, Dorothy Wooldridge, proved similarly unfruitful — but I did come up with this photo of her:
It’s from 1926, on the set of Warners’ “Across The Pacific,” and the “native” girl alongside Wooldridge is none other than a young (and fabulous-looking) Myrna Loy.
Here’s another “happy” story; in fact, it concerns “Two Happy People,” namely Lombard and Clark Gable. Its author is James Street, who may well be the James H. Street whose story “Letter To The Editor” was the genesis for Lombard’s hit “Nothing Sacred,” and it’s from Movie And Radio Guide of May 11, 1940:
Is the title, “Two Happy People,” a take-off on the name of a current hit of the time, “Two Sleepy People”? An intriguing piece, and alas, another incomplete one.
We’ll stay with Clark and Carole, and in fact get a pictorial of life on the ranch in “At Home With The Gables.” Ida Zeitlin wrote this for Picture Play in August 1940, and again, it’s incomplete:
We’ll close by wishing a happy 89th birthday to a legend of both music and movies, the great Doris Day. Here’s my favorite record of hers, a 1947 version of the old ballad “Pretty Baby.” This is the only sample of the song on YouTube, taken from a 78 rpm recording (it can be found on many of Day’s CD greatest hits compilations, in far better sound quality). Love the arrangement by George Siravo, and Doris sings this beautifully and sensually — as close to a sexy lullaby as you’re going to get.
Here comes the bride…to be
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.02 at 01:24
Current mood: jubilant
Earlier this week, we noted the anniversary of Carole Lombard’s marriage to Clark Gable. This entry’s topic concerns Carole’s first marriage, to another Hollywood legend…William Powell.
While Lombard and Powell had been a social pair for several months, by June 1931 talk that their teaming could take the ultimate step soared to new heights. And that month, the couple decided to do just that — only to find the press had caught wind of their plans.
Acme Newspictures commemorated it with this photo:
Was Carole allowing the papers to see the gown she’d wed William in? Uh, not quite. Here’s the bad of the photo, followed by a closeup of the snipe, shown in greyscale for clarity:
“Miss Lombard, who is seen above in an appropriate costume…” (Also love the reference to Powell as “the suave racketeer of the talkies.”) And isn’t it interesting that Lombard listed her “real” name as “Carole Jane Peters”? The “Carole” was played up for recognition, while the “Alice” in her birth name was shunted down the rabbit hole. (At least she listed her genuine age, not shaving off a year as was often done.)
Okay, so when was the shot of this “costume” taken? Well, since there’s no p1202 number or other Paramount identification, it looks to be from a bit earlier — Pathe, perhaps, since it issued several photos of Lombard in bridal wear. But in my search of Lombard Pathe pics or those from its top photographer, William E. Thomas, I find nothing comparable.
It’s an attractive, demure portrait, nonetheless. And it’s being auctioned at eBay.
The photo measures 6″ x 8″, is considered in good condition, and bids begin at $49.99 (no bids have been made as of this writing). Bidding closes at 8:17 p.m. (Eastern) next Friday. If you wish to place a bid, or just want to learn more about the photo, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1931-Candid-Carole-Lombard-VINTAGE-PHOTO-w-Credit-949S-/380329211073?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588d6334c1.
Oh, and on June 26, 1931, four days after this was issued, Carole and Bill tied the knot, then celebrated with Lombard’s brothers, Frederick and Stuart Peters:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
No April fool: Only ‘Fragments’ are left
Posted by vp19 on 2011.04.01 at 01:14
Current mood: frustrated
Carole Lombard’s screen debut in 1921’s “A Perfect Crime,” when she was still Jane Alice Peters and all of 12 years old, has long been lost to history. Sadly, most movies from that era have shared a similar fate; according to film historian and Turner Classic Movies host Robert Osborne, up to four-fifths of films issued before 1930 have either disappeared or are damaged beyond repair.
Pretty chilling.
Sunday at 8 p.m. (Eastern), TCM in the U.S. will present a tantalizing glimpse at what’s disappeared in a two-hour special called “Fragments.” It contains clips of films that only survive piecemeal, taunting reminders of what we’ve lost. The special is produced by Flicker Alley, and features material from the Academy Film Archive, the UCLA Film & Television Archive and the Library of Congress Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation. (It’s similar to a presentation that was given at last year’s TCM Classic Film Festival.)
What makes “Fragments” all the more frustrating is that among the celluloid victims on display here are several of the most notable names of pre-1930 cinema, including director John Ford and actors such as Emil Jannings, Douglas Fairbanks Sr., Lon Chaney Sr., Theda Bara…and Clara Bow.
For much of the late 1920s, Bow was the biggest female star in Hollywood, a meal ticket for Paramount — and yet, several of her hits are either lost or survive in bits and pieces. Among the latter is “Red Hair,” and Sunday you’ll see the only known color footage of Clara, in two-strip Technicolor. Bow’s biggest contemporary “flapper” rival, Colleen Moore at First National, suffered similarly; in fact, when she died in 1988, she had outlived the last known copy of her breakthrough hit, “Flaming Youth.” Both were victims of an industry philosophy that viewed its work as generally ephemeral, with little or no emphasis placed on preserving product.
Even an Academy Award wasn’t enough to preserve a film; “Fragments” contains the only remaining footage of Jannings’ Oscar-winning performance in “The Way Of All Flesh.” (Jannings also won for “The Last Command,” which survives intact.)
Bara’s legendary 1917 portrayal of Cleopatra, long before Claudette Colbert or Elizabeth Taylor tried their hand at playing the legendary Egyptian queen, survives in a mere few seconds of film, and you’ll see it Sunday.
But fragmentary film isn’t solely a silent concern. Quite a few early talkies, including several embryonic musicals, survive only in segments, including the 1929 “Gold Diggers Of Broadway,” entirely shot in early Technicolor but now diminished to a few fragments:
Diana Serra Cary, best known as “Baby Peggy” and one of the few surviving performers from silent times, will be interviewed to complement a fragment from her 1923 film “Darling Of New York.”
The good news is that every now and then, films previously deemed completely or partially lost are found in places from New Zealand to Russia. So there’s always hope. In the meantime, the battle remains to preserve the film we already have before it falls victim to the ravages of age and time. (Among the films that have been restored at UCLA are “Nothing Sacred” and several of Lombard’s comedy vehicles for Mack Sennett.)
At 10 p.m., TCM’s historical evening continues with “Unseen Cinema: Early American Avant Garde Film 1894-1941,” featuring 16 experimental works by early filmmakers. It includes a 1941 production of “Peer Gynt,” featuring a 17-year-old from suburban Chicago named Charlton Heston; or how about future famed character actor Edward Everett Horton in the 1925 “Beggar On Horseback”? There are also pioneer dance and ballet segments dating back to the 1890s.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.31 at 00:38
Current mood: curious
Carole Lombard memorabilia comes in all kinds of sizes — some large enough to hang on your wall, others small enough to be stashed in a tiny drawer. Examples of each are in today’s entry.
We’ll begin with the large-scale Lombard, and while the following is by no means the biggest movie poster we’ve ever seen of her, it’s nonetheless striking…especially since you’ve probably never seen it unless you’re an Australian of age 90 or thereabouts. The Aussies* call this type of poster a “daybill,” and it measures 15″ x 40″ (which includes a few blank inches at the top, not seen here, that exhibitors could use to list the theater’s name and the dates it would be shown):
Isn’t that a knockout — but then again, most images of Carole in a swimsuit qualify for that description.
* Apologies to any Australians who may have been offended by the term “Aussies”; I’ve heard some bristle at that term, just as virtually every San Franciscan detests the contraction “Frisco.” No slight was intended to our friends Down Under.
That swimsuit was also seen in this Paramount portrait:
The daybill may be of Australian origin, but it’s found its way to the Northern Hemisphere, specifically Huntington, N.Y. It’s professionally linen–backed and listed in fine condition. You can purchase it outright for $1,250 or make an offer; the sale/auction runs through 4:21 p.m. (Eastern) April 28. If this piques your interest, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/SINNERS-SUN-CAROLE-LOMBARD-1932-DAYBILL-LB-/150584311613?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item230f863f3d.
From 15″ x 40″, let’s downsize to 1″ x 1 3/4″ (actual size — blown up below), and while Lombard’s image isn’t here, her signature is:
It’s a stamp from 1940 (check), Carole’s signature is in her customary green ink (check), but is it the real deal? For analysis, let’s go to autograph expert Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive:
“It’s absolutely a good signature. I also took a look at this seller’s other items and closed auctions — I haven’t found a ringer in the bunch. Generally if you stay with UACC Dealers (particularly Registered Dealers, such as I was), you are afforded a large measure of protection.”
But a stamp? Why would Carole sign a stamp?
“As to the Whys and Wherefores of signing a stamp — who knows? I’ve seen stranger things, including an Orson Welles-autographed tongue depressor stick.
“Nice find!”
It may well be, but no one is biting, possibly because many collectors find it hard to believe Carole Lombard would sign a postage stamp. Bidding begins at $49.95 — and as of this writing, no one has placed a bid. And time is ticking; the deadline is 9:54 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-d-1942-TO-NOT-BE-VIRTUE-/350451651666?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item51988bd452.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.31 at 10:06
Current mood: hopeful
Okay, so the studio’s name was actually pronounced “path-AY,” sort of defeating the pun, but no matter. Officially, it’s CL-197, a gorgeous photo of the young Lombard from 1929, when she was just 20, a recent Mack Sennett alumna still finding her way as a talkie starlet. (The seller lists it as being from “1929-30,” but I’m pretty certain that by the end of 1929, Lombard was no longer a Pathe employee, and the photo series of her is known to extend to at least CL-225.)
The photographer isn’t listed, but I’m guessing it’s William E. Thomas, head of Pathe’s photo department, who took more than his share of portraits of Lombard during her brief stay at the studio. His best-known shots of her are rather racy, but this proves he could also be sublime.
This 8″ x 10″ photo, said to be in excellent shape, can be yours — but it won’t come cheap. Bidding begins at $294.95, and closes at 11:15 p.m. (Eastern) next Wednesday. To learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-Carole-Lombard-29-30-GORGEOUS-Portrait-/400204535821?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2e0c980d.
Just something to excite you as we count the hours (about three) to the start of baseball season.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.30 at 02:11
Current mood: 
energetic
It’s the morning of March 29, 1939, and Carole Lombard and Clark Gable are leaving Los Angeles, heading to a wedding rendezvous in Kingman, Ariz. While Clark drives, Carole, in the front passenger seat, pulls out that morning’s copy of the Los Angeles Examiner and begins reading.
Clark: So what does Louella say today?
Carole: Hold your horses, Pa — you know there’s a lot of other things going on in the world right now. The talks between Poland and Germany over Danzig, for instance. But I’ll get to it. (A minute or two passes by, and Lombard finally turns to the entertainment section.)
Clark: You don’t think she knows?
Carole: (Laughs) About us? No, mum’s the word — haven’t told a soul outside family. And looking at Louella here, it’s apparent she doesn’t know, either. Neither did Hedda in the Times I saw before I left.
Clark: Good. What does she say?
Carole: You’re not in it, but I am. It concerns that British nursing property RKO has for me down the road, “Vigil In The Night.”
Clark: A.J. Cronin?
Carole: Yep, the “Citadel” guy. You know, they’ve been looking for an actress to play my younger sister. At first, RKO was talking about Ginger Rogers co-starring with me.
Clark: Might’ve been interesting.
Carole: (Chuckles) As Jean Harlow, rest her soul, used to say to you, snap out of it, Fred. It’s a supporting role, and Ginger’s grown out of that now.
Clark: True, but I’m concentrating on my driving; fortunately, the sun isn’t in my eyes anymore. Anyway, who are they talking about now in the part?
Carole: Wendy Hiller, you know, the actress who played Eliza in “Pygmalion” opposite your Ashley, Leslie Howard, and got the Oscar nomination. RKO just gave her a screen test in England.
Clark: And you didn’t know about it?
Carole: Right now, when it comes to non-wedding stuff, I’ve been concentrating on “In Name Only.” It’ll be fun finally co-starring with Cary.
Clark: Leslie’s told me a lot of good things about “Pygmalion,” which I really should see one of these days. You’re more the Shaw expert than I am. You choosing him for that list of 10 men outside of Hollywood in Look last year…
Carole: Hey, Shaw visited San Simeon a few years back, and Marion Davies loved him. And any friend of Marion’s a friend of mine.
Clark: So, what else does Louella say about this?
Carole: I quote: “Let’s have brunette Wendy Hiller with the blonde Carole if RKO can get her,” end of quote.
Clark: That and five cents…
Carole: Yep.
The couple continues driving eastward.
That information actually did run in Louella Parsons’ column that morning. I don’t have the Examiner on hand, but here’s how it appeared in the Minneapolis Tribune:
Hiller, born in August 1912, decided to remain in England instead of heading to Hollywood, and stayed there throughout the war. Primarily a stage actress who did occasional films, she also appeared in the movie adaptation of Shaw’s “Major Barbara” and in later UK classics such as “I Know Where I’m Going.” She was later named a Dame for her stage, screen and television achievements and died in 2003.
And, as we all know, the role of the younger sister went to someone born Dawn Evelyeen Paris in 1918, who gained some renown as a child actress named Dawn O’Day, then changed it to Anne Shirley — the name of the role she played in the film “Anne Of Green Gables” — in 1934. Her best-known film is probably “Stella Dallas,” for which she gained an Academy Award best supporting actress nomination, but she retired from acting after making “Murder, My Sweet” in 1944. She died July 4, 1993.
To close, a few more photos from Tally Haugen of Clark and Carole at the press conference at Lombard’s home on St. Cloud Road (their Encino ranch home was still being worked on) the day after the wedding:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.30 at 21:07
Current mood: busy
Rare items from films Carole Lombard made a decade apart are being auctioned at eBay.
First, from Lombard’s initial all-talking feature, “High Voltage” from Pathe in early 1929, this 6″ x 10″ promo:
It shows Lombard (billed as “Carol,” as was generally the case during her Pathe tenure) comforting Diane Ellis (her ill-fated good friend in real life) along with William Boyd, the picture’s star. It’s in good condition.
Two bids have been made as of this writing, topping out at $13.15; bids close at 8:45 p.m. (Eastern) Monday. If interested, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/20s-Carole-Lombard-High-Voltage-1929-Promo-PHOTO-966S-/200591946073?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb4363159.
Next, we fast forward to early 1939 and a rather unusual publicity photo from “Made For Each Other”:
What’s it about? Fortunately, the snipe’s on the back, and Selznick International publicity maven Russell Birdwell supplies the answer:
It’s Lombard taking care of a 10-day-old infant in a scene from the film.
Three bids have been made, with the top bid at $29.50, and bidding ends at 8:23 p.m. (Eastern) Monday. (It’s from the same seller as the other item.) To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-MADE-EACHOTHER-PHOTO-H945-/200591941489?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb4361f71.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.29 at 00:59
Current mood: loved
That’s right, it was 72 years ago today — March 29, 1939 — that Carole Lombard and Clark Gable sneaked out of Los Angeles, headed east on fabled U.S. 66, ended up in Kingman, Ariz. and finally got married.
After Ria Gable obtained her divorce a few weeks earlier, it was now a virtual formality that Carole and Clark were going to exchange vows...when and where were the questions. Many believed Arizona would supply the latter answer — but many expected Yuma, just across the California state line, to be site of the honors (it was a popular place for Californians to marry). Instead, the couple went much further north and about 30 miles inside Arizona, to Kingman, hometown of their good friend Andy Devine. As for the when, Clark and Carole kept things relatively low-key, getting married on a Wednesday, and at a time when neither had film work scheduled. (“Gone With The Wind” was on a brief production break, while Lombard had not yet started work on her upcoming movie, “In Name Only.”)
After the wedding, held at the Methodist Church in town, the couple drove back to Los Angeles — the story that they spent their honeymoon in nearby Oatman, Ariz. is strictly myth — and quickly arranged an interview with reporters.
In May 1939, one of the fan magazines — not certain which one — ran a few paragraphs on what Lombard wore. Thanks to the superb Gable site dearmrgable.com, here’s the item:
And the bride wore gray.
When Carole Lombard and Clark Gable announced their intentions to wed, the question of what the bride (a divorcee) should wear became important not only to Carole but to thousands of other women who were about to marry for the second time. Carole never faltered in her choice for a moment.
“A gray suit,” was her decision. But the problem wasn’t solved that easily. There are grays and grays, some flattering, some hard and cold in tone, some unkind to blondes, as every woman knows. So, in order to secure exactly the proper shade for her, Carole devoted “a gray week” to the selection of the color. Irene, who was to create the suit, began by sending to Carole sample after sample of gray materials ranging in tone from rose-gray to blue-gray.
Between his “Gone with the Wind” scenes, Mr. Gable would aid Miss Lombard in the elimination of tones, until, finally the exact “Lombard gray” was chosen.
So, when you gaze at pictures of the newlyweds, remember this little story behind the wedding suit and, with a smile of universal understanding among women the world over, wish the bride a long and happy marriage with no “gray” ending.
As we all know, that sadly wouldn’t be the case.
Incidentally, Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive has attempted to replicate the outfit Lombard wore that day, and after years of work has assembled all items but one — a gray scarf with white polka dots. Sampeck said she has long searched for material of that color description, without success. While she believes Lombard’s cravat was made of silk, she would settle for other fabrics. If anyone has a suggestion where she might find that shade, it would be greatly appreciated.
In honor of the couple, a few Gable/Lombard clippings from Tally Haugen. First, a story from a magazine called Screen Life; the title is “She Knew What She Wanted,” and it ran in the March 1941 issue:
Next, Clark and Carole at the track (Santa Anita) from March 1940, published in Screen Guide that spring. It’s a large page, and thus is divided into two parts that sort of duplicates in the middle (some of the Lombard pix in the upper left-hand corner aren’t in the best of shape), but it’s a fun look at the famed couple in public:
We often close entries with a song…and today, we’re going to give you two. The first honors the highway Clark and Carole traveled in order to get married…”Route 66,” of course. (Kingman’s even mentioned in the lyric.) Here’s the act that did the best-known version of that Bobby Troup standard, Nat “King” Cole and his Trio — but this isn’t the hit recording of it (or the stereo remake Cole did some years later). This is one of the “soundies” from the 1940s, video musical performances that could be played on large jukebox-like machines. Cole’s in fine form here:
Next, a song that should be played at more weddings, because its mood captures the devotion of wedded bliss beautifully. It’s from the Association, an act that had quite a few hits in the late 1960s, including several that made number one. This was one of them, and in my mind is their greatest achievement — the brilliant “Never My Love”:
As many know Elizabeth Taylor was entombed in the Great Mausoleum in Forest Lawn in Glendale, California last Thursday. What you might not know is that her final resting place is at the end of the entrance corridor leading to the hall where the stained glass window depicting the Last Supper is located. This is in a public area that is very near both the final resting places of Russ Columbo as well as those of Carole Lombard and Clark Gable.
The entrance to the Great Mausoleum (left) and (right) on the day of Elizabeth Taylor’s funeral, March 24, 2011.
Elizabeth Taylor is entombed beneath a large marble sculpture of an angel entitled In Memoria that was created 70 years ago by Italian sculptor Ermenegildo Luppi out of imported marble.
The floral tribute shown here includes the gardenias, violets and orchids that covered Elizabeth Taylor’s casket during her funeral service on March 24, 2011.
Looking toward the Last Supper Window. The Sanctury of Vespers is on the left, while the Sanctuary of Trust is to the right.
The Last Supper.
A full-sized copy of Michelangelo’s Pieta. Pope John Paul II knelt and prayed here during his visit to Forest Lawn in 1976 when he was still the Archbishop of Krakow. The statue is located right outside the Sanctuary of Vespers.
The Sanctuary of Vespers.
The Sanctuary of Trust.
May they all rest in peace.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.28 at 00:11
Current mood: cheerful
The great singer-songwriter Jackie De Shannon may never have made them a subject for a song, but Carole Lombard’s eyes were among her greatest assets. For proof, check out this photo:
It’s from Paramount in the early 1930s, and an original in excellent condition; I don’t believe it was part of its p1202 Lombard portrait series. There apparently was a snipe on the back, but it isn’t there anymore. The photo measures 7.5″ x 9.5″, and while Carole is wearing a hat, it’s still evident she’s one of “those charming, alarming blonde women” Marlene Dietrich used to sing about.
No bids have been placed on this yet, perhaps because the minimum bid is $249.95. Bidding closes at 11:30 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. If you want to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-30s-GORGEOUS-EYES-Portrait-/380325241848?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588d26a3f8.
Here’s another “eyes” photo, from Eugene Robert Richee early in Lombard’s days at Paramount (we know because there’s a reference to “Safety In Numbers”):
It’s also available for $294.95, but under the “buy it now” option. To purchase, or to look, head over to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-30-GORGEOUS-EYES-Portrait-RICHEE-/400204975820?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2e134ecc.
If both are a bit beyond your reach, here’s another Lombard photo that might be more your speed:
It’s Paramount p1202-857, from 1934, and Carole’s wearing the same outfit seen in the more common p1202-862:
857 is an 8″ x 10″ reprint on modern photostock paper from the 1980s or so. You can buy it now for $12.50 or make an offer; if unsold, it will be available through April 24. Interested? Then go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-ONE-8×10-bxw-photo-CLEARANCE-40-/370496204769?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item56434b6fe1.
And in honor of the upcoming baseball season (major league opening day is Thursday), this week’s header is a pic of Lombard throwing out the first pitch in 1938 at Los Angeles Wrigley Field. Play ball!
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.27 at 01:32
Current mood: happy
While you enjoy Carole Lombard in Paramount p1202-1008, taken by the great Eugene Robert Richee about 1934, some news from Lombard collector and good friend Tally Haugen about a box of Carole memorabilia she recently received — and, if her description is accurate, it’s a fairly big box:
“It is FILLED to the brim practically with several thousand clips all through Carole’s career. The lady tried to label the folders: FOOLS FOR SCANDAL, Lombard with MacMurray etc..I think based on the chief thing in that particular folder, but I have never seen so much!”
Just one word describes my reaction...wow.
Tally should have a fun time going through all that stuff — and the good news is that we’ll be able to partake of her discoveries, as she’s promised to scan and send some of the items my way. In fact, she’s already forwarded some odds and ends, a few of which I now will share with you.
In 1938, Lombard — who loved just about all facets of the film business — spent a week handling publicity for Selznick International Pictures. Several images have circulated regarding that memorable occasion, but here are a few more that probably haven’t been seen since they appeared in a fan magazine (not sure which one). Double-clicking will show them at just about the size they appeared in the mag:
(And remember, in 1938 the Surgeon General’s report on smoking was a long way from coming out, so don’t blame Lombard for lighting up. She didn’t know any better.)
Here are a pair of pictures of Carole with her beloved Palomino pony, Pico:
Both you and I await seeing more material from this treasure trove; if Tally is wondering, “I just don’t know what to do with all this,” I can’t say I blame her.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.27 at 18:31
Current mood: nostalgic
“No One Man,” in which Carole Lombard cavorts with Ricardo Cortez (top) and Paul Lukas, isn’t considered one of her prime Paramount vehicles. But it was a fairly prestigious property given for her to star in, an adaptation of a popular novel by noted author Rupert Hughes (Howard’s uncle).
And someone, somewhere, was enough of a fan of either Carole or the film to collect an array of advertisements and images for it.
From the names of the theaters listed, we know the “somewhere” — the San Francisco Bay area. Loew’s Warfield, on Market Street, which opened in 1922, was one of San Francisco’s better-known movie houses; the same applies to the Paramount, in Oakland, an Art Deco gem that opened in 1931, the year before “No One Man” showed in the East Bay. (Both theaters are still around and primarily function as performing arts venues.)
That water-skiing shot used in the ads is actually Paramount p1202-92, and its background reveals that whether or not Carole ever water-skied in her life, it certainly wasn’t on this occasion:
The seller also has bunches of clippings from other pre-Code films, including Jean Harlow’s “Red-Headed Woman,” “The Beast Of The City” and “The Public Enemy”; the Marx Brothers’ “Horse Feathers”; Barbara Stanwyck’s “Night Nurse” and “The Miracle Woman”; Greta Garbo’s “Susan Lenox: Her Fall And Rise,” “Mata Hari” and “As You Desire Me”; and Fay Wray’s “Dirigible” and “Doctor X.” For the entire list, go to http://shop.ebay.com/pipelinemba/m.html?_trksid=p4340.l2562.
As for the “No One Man” package, it has 14 clippings in all, wrapped in a protective mailer; bids open at $4.20 (as of this writing, no bids have been placed), with bids closing at 2:43 p.m. (Eastern) on Saturday. Interested? Visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Paul-Lukas-Film-No-One-Man-1932-/250794742315?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a6488122b to learn more.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.26 at 02:13
Current mood: confused
A reflective portrait of Carole Lombard, specifically p1202-1408, which would place it from 1936 or so. The picture is currently on sale at eBay, but what’s unusual about this image is what’s on back. You could call it a snipe, but it surely didn’t come from Hollywood:
Here’s a closeup image of the back:
The name is clearly “Carole Lombard” in Cyrillic (“Кароль Ломбард”); slightly more than three years ago, we ran an entry on the popularity of Lombard and other classic Hollywood stars in Russia (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/84481.html). The seller labels it a photo from the “Russian archives,” but because the alphabet on the snipe is Cyrillic doesn’t necessarily mean it’s Russian (just as the alphabet from which English is spelled also can connote French, Italian, Spanish and many other languages). According to Wikipedia, the following languages employ a Cyrillic alphabet:
* Slavic languages: Bulgarian, Belarusian, Macedonian, Russian, Rusyn, Serbo-Croatian (Serbian, Montenegrin and, sometimes, Bosnian standards) and Ukrainian.
* Non-Slavic languages: Abkhaz, Bashkir, Erzya, Kazakh, Kildin Sami, Komi, Kyrgyz, Mari, Moksha, Moldovan, Mongolian, Ossetic, Romani (some dialects), Tajik, Tatar, Tuvan and Udmurt.
Oh, and while Russian is clearly the largest language that uses Cyrillic, that alphabet was actually popularized by the First Bulgarian Empire in the 10th century.
So I’m not entirely certain the snipe is in Russian; it may well be one of the other languages cited above. (According to one response, it’s Serbian.)
The seller apparently believes the snipe comes from 1938 because “True Confession” (which would have arrived in Europe sometime that year, a few months behind its late 1937 U.S. debut) is mentioned. However, it’s apparent several other of Carole’s films were listed — I’m guessing the one directly above “True Confession” is a differently-titled “My Man Godfrey,” since the co-star’s spelling looks like William Powell’s; ditto for “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” and Robert Montgomery. And at the top, since Kay Francis is listed alongside “Cari Granton,” that’s probably a reference to “In Name Only.” It’s possible this snipe was made sometime during 1941, but it might also have been issued posthumously.
This is an 8″ x 10″ sepia, and here’s what the version for sale looks like:
The photo is being sold for $50, and will be available through 3:47 p.m. (Eastern) on April 4. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-SEPIA-PHOTO-8X10-RUSSIAN-ARCHIEVES-1938-/190516356034?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c5ba8e3c2.
And speaking of Russia: While listening to BBC World Service tonight for the latest on Arab political upheaval and the aftermath of the Japan earthquake/tsunami, I learned that today, the BBC is ending transmission of its Russian broadcast service for budgetary reasons, just as it recently ceased service to the Caribbean and the former Yugoslavia. (The BBC will retain an online Russian presence.) The service had begun in 1946, just as the Cold War was beginning, and for several decades the old Soviet Union often jammed the signal. But many people secretly listened to BBC Russian-language broadcasts to hear Soviet dissidents and “decadent” Western culture…including a band from Merseyside called the Beatles.
Fast forward to 2003, when Paul McCartney not only performs in Russia, but in Red Square –– and one of the highlights? “Back In The USSR,” of course, the Beatles’ clever take on the rock ‘n’ roll revival of 1968. With BBC Russian-language transmissions joining BOAC — and the USSR itself — in the dustpan of history, here’s Sir Paul, rockin’ the red:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.25 at 02:56
Current mood: peaceful
In “The Princess Comes Across,” released 75 years ago this spring, Carole Lombard plays Olga, a Swedish princess who really isn’t one; she’s actually a showgirl named Wanda Nash who hails from Brooklyn. And it just so happens that this Sunday, the borough hosts a pair of films Wanda might have seen a few years before her royal charade.
Lombard’s “Fast And Loose” (1930) and “No More Orchids” (1932) are being shown in a double bill at 2:30 p.m. (not sure which one goes first) as part of a series on “pre-screwball comedy” at Spectacle, which describes itself as “a collective of film collectors, filmmakers, editors, musicians, performers and misfits.” (Sounds like fun!) The series has been running on weekends throughout the month, and “No Man Of Her Own” has already been shown (sorry), but these two movies have a somewhat lower profile and are worth a look if you’ve never seen them.
“No More Orchids” really isn’t a comedy, as the ending (which we won’t give away) makes clear, but there are numerous comedic situations and clever lines, especially in the early part of the picture — and plenty of help from a fine supporting cast, including Lombard’s first work with superlative character actor Walter Connolly. As the site notes, “Ignore the largely nonsensical plot and enjoy the ribald ripostes, and, especially, Lombard looking gorgeous as she wriggles around with great vivacity in sexy lingerie.” This film was another example of Columbia showing it handled Carole more skillfully than did her home studio of Paramount.
“Fast And Loose,” the only movie Lombard ever made in New York (filmed one borough over in Astoria, Queens), gives her a largely supporting role (with Broadway emigre Miriam Hopkins getting the lead in her film debut), but Carole does get to work with another first-rate character actor (Frank Morgan), and the dialogue was written by none other than Preston Sturges, who Spectacle says “reconditions the frothy, Roaring Twenties era stage hit [‘The Best People’] into a witty, sophisticated romp.”
Tickets for this twin bill are $5, and it will be followed by another double feature (separate admission) at 4:50 — Lombard’s husband in 1932, William Powell, teaming up with Kay Francis for the saucy “Jewel Robbery” (watch Bill disarm his foes by giving them cigarettes laced with that “wacky tobacky,” marijuana)…
…and the 1933 Ruth Chatterton business saga, “Female.”
I don’t believe Wanda Nash’s specific Brooklyn neighborhood was noted in “The Princess Comes Across,” but Spectacle is at 124 South 3rd Street, some blocks north of the Williamsburg Bridge. It’s a few blocks’ walk from the Bedford Avenue station on the L train or the Marcy Avenue station on the J, M or Z trains. For more precise directions or information on the theater, visit http://spectacletheater.com/
Now let’s direct our attention 3,000 miles away to southern California, which 53 years ago wrested one of Brooklyn’s many civic treasures. However, we’re looking a few miles north of Dodger Stadium — specifically Glendale and its famed Forest Lawn cemetery, final resting spot for Lombard and second husband Clark Gable. Yesterday, they welcomed an afterlife neighbor, as Elizabeth Taylor was laid to rest at the Great Mausoleum.
Taylor, who everyone expected would be buried alongside her parents at Westwood Memorial Park, threw everyone a curve by going to Forest Lawn instead. Perhaps it was done because Forest Lawn’s tighter security would prevent those loathsome anti-gay picketers from contaminating the ceremony, Maybe Taylor wanted to be near good friend Michael Jackson (although apparently, her vault isn’t that close to Jackson’s). Whatever, as the Los Angeles Times noted:
“She will be buried in the expansive cemetery’s Great Mausoleum, the same building where her good friend, Michael Jackson is buried, the final resting place for stars from film’s golden age, such as Jean Harlow, Carole Lombard and Clark Gable.”
And somewhere, Lombard is chortling that she finally got billed above Gable.
(Check http://www.seeing-stars.com/buried2/ForestLawnGlendale5.shtml for more details on Taylor’s precise burial site as they become available — especially since it could affect the logistics of those wishing to visit Carole’s vault.)
I’ve never heard Lombard mentioned as an influence on Elizabeth, who certainly never met her. (While Taylor and Gable were MGM stablemates for several years and surely knew each other, they never made a film together. The young Elizabeth did make a pair of movies with Powell.) But I believe had Lombard lived, she would have liked Taylor, who developed a lively, somewhat bawdy sense of humor. (It’s unfortunate Liz didn’t make more comedies, as she certainly could have excelled in the genre.)
In retrospect, there’s a lot to like about Taylor beyond her amazing beauty — her acting talent, her tireless work for charities and such. But for someone who at her peak was arguably the world’s best-known movie star since Mary Pickford in her prime, Elizabeth had a good sense of herself…something one might not expect from a person who at times was more a celebrity than an actress. For example, Taylor bore three children and adopted another, but remarkably managed to keep them largely out of the public eye and along the straight and narrow. (Heck, I bet many casual fans even forgot she was a mother until seeing her obituary.) In these days, where actresses tend to use children as virtual props for publicity, that’s close to a miracle.
I recommend this fine tribute to Taylor from cultural observer Camille Paglia: http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/feature/2011/03/23/camille_paglia_on_elizabeth_taylor/index.html. And I’ll leave you with this, my favorite picture of her, proof that Elizabeth was indeed one cool cat:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.24 at 02:48
Current mood: impressed
However, we’re not referring to the ending (the Indianapolis war bond rally of January 1942), but the beginning...a time when not only “Carole Lombard” was in the future, but so was California and motion pictures. Thanks to William Drew’s research, we find the birth of Jane Alice Peters in newsprint (even if she isn’t identified by name), specifically in the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette of Oct. 8, 1908, two days after her arrival:
It must have been a thrilling time at 704 Rockhill Street:
Here’s the entire page of the birth announcement, which was part of the society column:
But if you fear little Jane Peters never saw her name in her hometown paper before heading west, don’t fret. Five years later, it was part of the Journal-Gazette, specifically on Oct. 7, 1913, again in the society column:
That entire page of the Journal-Gazette:
Now, look at what is adjacent to the brief on Jane Peters’ birthday party. (You can’t make this up, folks!)
A demonstration of Thomas Edison’s talking pictures. (Edison himself was not in Fort Wayne that day; a representative of his company was on hand for the presentation.) If you saw the Turner Classic Movies documentary “Moguls & Movie Stars,” you know that experimentation with sound in motion pictures went all the way back to the 1890s, and while Edison wasn’t the first to promote talking movies, he hoped his clout and renown would make his method the industry standard.
Here’s how the Journal-Gazette reviewed the proceedings:
“Mr. Ramsey eloquently points out the possibilities of the talking machine, how it will preserve the personality and the voice of every public idol for the edification of posterity.”
It would take another decade and a half for sound films to be technologically adept and commercially viable; Edison would live to see talking pictures thrive, though by that time he had little to do with them. (In fact, he developed severe hearing problems soon before his death in 1931.)
Since we know Jane Peters was already movie-mad, she may have well been more excited over the idea of motion pictures that actually talked than the report of her birthday party. We don’t know if she and her family attended this demonstration, but one guesses they were at least semi-regulars at the Majestic, which normally showed live stage plays:
The theater on West Berry Street, which opened in 1904, was eventually renamed the Capitol, and ultimately demolished.
Finally, one more goodie from this era, but we go from Fort Wayne to Kansas City in March of 1911:
As eventually would be her daughter.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.23 at 10:23
Current mood: thankful
That’s Carole Lombard, just about ready to leave teenhood, dancing up a storm on screen in the Mack Sennett two-reeler “The Campus Vamp” from September 1928. But years before that, Lombard was among the youthful set cavorting at the famed Cocoanut Grove of the legendary Hotel Ambassador on Wilshire Boulevard.
That is no secret; biographers have frequently cited that part of her life. However, now we have documented proof of it — along with a snippet of information from a time when next to nothing is known about her…1926, when she was recovering from an automobile accident that scarred her face and caused Fox to drop her from its roster.
William M. Drew has done yeoman work of late on my behalf, going above and beyond the call of duty for Lombard research. I had asked him to get some items from the Los Angeles Times of the mid-1920s that I was unable to access; not only did he come through, but he also came up with some things I was unaware of.
The other day, we ran a column from the Times 1927 called “Society of Cinemaland.” The year before — Sept. 19, 1926 to be precise — this is what the column looked like:
It sort of blends a society column with an early version of Hollywood gossip; note the lead item concerns Clara Bow’s surprise engagement to director Victor Fleming (it’s no spoiler to say it never went any further). Ironically, the bottom of the first column lists a party given by actress Hedda Hopper, who years later would gain more fame as a Times Hollywood columnist than she ever did for acting.
But that’s the article as a whole. Here’s the segment we’re interested in:
We learn that the previous Thursday (Sept. 16), the Cocoanut Grove had the finals of its dancing contest, and one of the competitors was none other than...Jane Peters. (Perhaps her family’s society ties led the Times society writer to refer to her by that name rather than her professional moniker of Carole Lombard.) By the fall of 1926, Lombard had likely recovered from the accident — and what better therapy than dancing?
Looking at some of the names provides an idea of the “crowd” the teen Lombard hung out with. Lloyd Pantages was the only name here that was also on the 1927 “Society of Cinemaland” Jane Peters segment, so he may have been Carole’s date. Stars (or future stars) shown here include Billie Dove (who like Lombard would have a romantic attachment to Howard Hughes, albeit a far longer and more serious one), Joan Crawford and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. (who later would marry).
Drew, who knew Dove in her last years and interviewed her extensively for his book, “At the Center of the Frame: Leading Ladies of the Twenties and Thirties,” provided a comment on his research regarding the accident:
“I did check for items in the LA Times regarding the accident with Harry Cooper but could find nothing. Since I do not have Larry Swindell’s bio of Carole, I’m assuming from your posts that he did not include an exact date for the accident. The fact that it was not reported in the Times, however, does not mean that it might not have appeared in one of the other LA papers, such as the Los Angeles Examiner. But as these have not been digitized and placed online, I have no means of searching them for this. I would guess that any accident report that reached the local press would have used her real name of Jane Peters rather than her stage name of Carol (or Carole) Lombard, limiting the possibility that it might have been more widely reported. …
“My guess is that Carole’s accident occurred around early 1926 or possibly even late 1925. By the end of summer or the onset of the fall of 1926, she had made her remarkable recovery and was now able to rejoin Hollywood society, a reappearance that, within a few months, made it possible to work in films again. This participation in a dance contest may have been a kind of coming-out party for her.”
Drew notes that a contemporary of Carole’s was also involved in an auto accident, and here’s how the Times covered Thelma Todd’s collision in November 1927:
As for Carole’s accident, if anyone around Los Angeles has the time to go to the history department of the main library downtown and check, it would be greatly appreciated. Among the other dailies in Los Angeles in late 1925 and early ’26 were:
* Hollywood Daily Citizen
* Los Angeles Daily News (not to be confused with the current San Fernando Valley-based newspaper of the same name)
* Los Angeles Evening Herald
* Los Angeles Examiner
* Los Angeles Record
Perhaps someday we can finally establish the particulars of when and where this pivotal event in Lombard’s life happened.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.22 at 01:24
Current mood: excited
Today’s entry is a potpourri, and the photo of Carole Lombard with James Stewart, followed by one of her with Cary Grant (and Peggy Ann Garner in between them), are from the two films Lombard made during 1939. And speaking of that year…
…the Classic Movie Blog Association will be doing another blogathon in mid-May, this one examining that epochal year, arguably the apex of the studio system — and I’m pleased to say that I’ll be among the participants. What will I be writing about? Well, as you might guess, there will be a Lombard angle to my entry; as for specifics, well, you’ll just have to wait and see.
You won’t have to wait until mid-May for the next subject of today’s entry…
…just until tonight, if you live in the U.S. and have Turner Classic Movies on your satellite or cable system. That’s because TCM is continuing its Jean Harlow star of the month programming in March with the six films she made with Clark Gable, kicking off (or should that be skating off?) at 8 p.m. (Eastern) with “Wife Vs. Secretary,” where Harlow is the latter, Myrna Loy the former, and Gable the husband/boss. (Stewart is also in the cast,)
It’ll be followed by “Red Dust,” “Hold Your Man,” “China Seas,” “The Secret Six” and “Saratoga” (in which Harlow died during shooting and her scenes were completed by a double). Gable and Harlow made a charismatic couple on screen — though they were no more than good, devoted friends off screen — and if you’ve never experienced their chemistry, here’s your chance.
Finally, have you ever searched for “Carole & Co.” via Google? If you have, you’ll find some other endeavors with similar names listed in addition to this blog, and one of them is a real estate appraiser in Seminole, Okla. named “Carole & Company”; its broker is named Carole O’Daniel (wonder if she was named for Lombard?).
Carole & Company also has a branch office in Maud, Okla., on the 100 block of Wanda Jackson Boulevard. If you’re a rock or rockabilly fan, you know who Wanda Jackson is — she’s a rockabilly pioneer (from Oklahoma) who had several hits in the late 1950s and early 1960s, moved into country and gospel for some years, but has returned to her roots, proving grandmothers can rock. She’s toured extensively in recent years and has just released a CD that’s getting good reviews. (Not long ago, she was interviewed by Terry Gross on the popular NPR program “Fresh Air.”)
To honor Wanda, and by extension our favorite real estate office, here’s what I consider Jackson’s greatest record, one of the best “B” sides in rock history — “Funnel Of Love,” from 1961. It was the flip of “Right Or Wrong,” a decent pop hit that became her entry into the country market, but had this received a push from Capitol, Jackson’s career might have been entirely different. It’s an excellent production with superb guitar work from Roy Clark (yes, the same guy who was on “Hee-Haw”; he was in Wanda’s band and was one of the best session men in the business). Now considered a classic, this is still a staple of Wanda’s shows. One listen, and I think you’ll love it as much as I do.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.21 at 02:05
Current mood: ecstatic
Wait, there’s more! As in more early Carole Lombard stories from the files of the Los Angeles Times, and by “early,” we mean up to 1927; the portrait above was used to promote the Mack Sennett comedy “The Girl From Everywhere,” released in December of ’27. William Drew uncovered a few more items hitherto unknown…perhaps because they don’t refer to Lombard, but to “Jane Peters.”
First, we’ll examine the Times of July 24, 1927, and a lengthy column called “Society of Cinemaland” by a Myra Nye:
The days of people in the film industry being treated as second-class citizens by the leading lights of Los Angeles had long since passed; the movies meant too much to the city’s economy and self-esteem.
It makes a good read, providing an idea of how Hollywood and society intersected, even if many of the names won’t be familiar unless you regularly watch “Silent Sunday Nights” on Turner Classic Movies. But in case you don’t have the time — or the inclination — to read the entire story, we’ll isolate the relevant stuff:
The previous Sunday (July 17), a reception was held to bid farewell to the Duncan sisters, one of vaudeville’s premier acts:
Some of the notables on hand included Dolores Del Rio and her husband, Louella Parsons, Lloyd Pantages of theater fame, Claire Windsor, Lois Moran and “Jane Peters.” (Why was she listed by that name here? Perhaps at the time, she had been out of the business for so long — more than a year, which by 1920s standards was a virtual eternity — that she had been forgotten professionally.) Perhaps Carole, who still had many friends in the industry, was trying to “network” and land another film contract.
In the Feb. 4, 1925 Times story in which “Carole Lombard” made her debut in the paper, she was referred to as Jane Peters, a “society girl.” And slightly more than two months earlier — Nov. 30, 1924 — that “society girl” had been listed in the Times, as part of an even longer society roundup; we’ll show only the cogent item:
So we learn that Jane Peters, who had turned 16 the month before, was maid of honor at a wedding on Friday, Nov. 28, and that she wore a gown “of soft ping [pink?] crepe with trimming of crystals and rhinestones and she carried an arm shower of Ophelia roses and ferns.” I have no idea of the Peters family’s ties to bride Ursula E. Barker or groom Eugene E. Silver.
Incidentally, a few months before this ran, specifically on Sept. 7, 1924, the Times society column mentioned someone else who would gain fame in the following decade:
Not sure who we mean? Again, let’s isolate, focusing on the bottom of the first column and the top of the second one:
“Miss Harlean Carpenter” would make a name for herself a few years later, signing with Hal Roach in 1929 and taking her mother’s name…Jean Harlow:
Also note this week’s header, a straight-on head shot of Carole from the mid-thirties.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.20 at 01:11
Current mood: frustrated
Carole Lombard’s budding film career continued in the summer of 1925 with a female lead in the Buck Jones western at Fox, “Hearts And Spurs.” However, the Los Angeles Times, the leading newspaper in the capital of the film industry, had no mentions of Lombard in its pages in 1925, beyond the items we showed in the first two parts of this series.
There’s Lombard in a lobby card from “The Road To Glory,” a Fox film directed by Howard Hawks (who, more than a decade later, directed an unrelated film of the same name) and released in February 1926. Unfortunately, that’s about all we have of Carole for the entire year; the Times apparently didn’t print a single item on her for all of ’26.
For the Lombard researcher, 1926 is a virtual black hole, largely because she was in an automobile accident that caused a noticeable scar on her left cheek that required plastic surgery and an extended period of healing. It also led Fox to drop her from its acting roster. We’re aware of that general information, but as far as specifics, no luck.
No biographer has ever provided a definite date to when the accident happened, or precisely where it occurred. Perhaps it’s hidden somewhere in Los Angeles police files, but if it exists, it’s never been retrieved. One would believe at least one of the city’s newspapers ran something on it, but if one did, it remains hidden.
At a dead end where 1926 is concerned, we move forward to 1927, where Carole gained work as a member of Mack Sennett’s bathing beauty troupe in two-reelers. Her Sennett debut came in “Smith’s Pony,” released on Sept. 18 — and as fate would have it, that day the Times ran Lombard’s picture as part of a rotogravure display:
Let’s isolate and run a closeup of that Lombard portrait:
Somewhat resembles a 1927 version of Christina Aguilera, doesn’t it? Here’s what the caption says:
“The loveliness that so charmed the eye of Mack Sennett is revealed in this photograph of Carol Lombard. Small wonder that the comedy king has signed Miss Lombard to appear in his two-reelers. — Photo by Hesser”
As in Edwin Bower Hesser, the noted glamour photographer. Also note that her first name has no “e”; might it have been to give her a new persona, distinct from that long-ago Fox player (whose past isn’t mentioned here)? Whatever, it’s a stunning photo, and the blonde hair certainly makes her look different from the Fox Lombard.
Less than a month later (Oct. 13), Lombard was back in the Times, this time in the news section, and it’s also the first report of the auto accident in the paper:
Note she is listed as “Carole Jane Peters” (although her legal name was still Jane Alice Peters), and she was suing Harry Cooper and his parents for $35,000 for damages suffered in the accident. It doesn’t give us any detail on when and where the incident occurred (also note that Lombard, whose professional name this time does have an “e,” is listed as being 17, even though she had turned 19 the week before). Moreover, it says nothing about her prior work with Fox.
Two days later, we learned the result (thanks to Bill Drew for uncovering this) — as often happened in such cases, it was settled out of court before going to trial:
And Carole apparently came out of it with $3,000, so for her it was a victory of sorts.
That’s where Carole Lombard stood as 1927 ended, as she continued to gain expertise in a type of acting far different than what she had done at Fox. If only we knew more about the incident that had sent her career in this new direction.
Carole Lombard lunching with Roger Pryor, possibly during the filming of “Lady By Choice” in 1934 or later.
Carole Lombard and director, Walter Lang, (soon to be husband of “Fieldsie” Carole’s close friend and social secretary), on the set of “Love Before Breakfast”.
Leslie Howard, Zeppo Marx, Carole Lombard, Gary Cooper and Mrs. Zeppo Marx at a social gathering.
June Knight moving in as a roommate with Russ Columbo and Roger Pryor in 1934’s “Wake Up and Dream” made just before the code was in full force.
Roger Pryor, June Knight and Russ Columbo as a team of vaudevillians in “Wake Up and Dream”, 1934.
Carole maintained friendly relations with many of the people she knew with and through Russ Columbo to the end of her life. Pryor was her co-star in “Lady By Choice”. Andy Devine, who also co-starred with Russ in “Wake Up and Dream” was invited, along with his wife, to Carole’s very private funeral in January of 1942. Walter Lang and Zeppo Marx both served as pall bearers for Russ Columbo in 1934 and then again for Carole in 1942.
It is interesting what a very private person Carole was for all of her public aura of being an extrovert. She made a clear distinction between what was “on the record” and what was “off the record”.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.19 at 01:40
Current mood: curious
In the middle of 1925, the first film starring a 16-year-old actress named Carole Lombard (shown with Edmund Lowe), “Marriage in Transit,” made its way across American movie theaters. The largest daily in the movie capital, the Los Angeles Times, already had taken note of this teen actress several times that spring, and her name would resurface on a few more occasions as the year continued.
On May 13, the Times published a lengthy story by Katherine Lipke on “Re-discovering Discoveries,” in which Lombard is mentioned in the initial paragraph (“dancing one evening and acting the next”) but not at all thereafter:
Of course, with the angle “rediscovering discoveries,” Lombard didn’t really qualify (unless you wanted to count her 1921 one-shot as Jane Peters in “A Perfect Crime”). It nevertheless makes a good read, as some of the top people in the industry discuss who rediscovered whom.
Move slightly more than three months ahead, to Aug. 23, and Lombard’s name comes up again in the Times –– but in an item that had little, if anything, to do with the movies. (And to be honest, I had no idea this existed until Bill Drew dug it up.) It’s part of resort notes, and for us, the relevant stuff is at the bottom:
To wit:
DIVING CONTEST
Lake Arrowhead resorts report full houses for last week during the women’s swimming meet with expectations of full houses Saturday when Fred Cady will stage the fourth annual mile-high diving meet. Among the well-known people registered last week at Cottage Grove, Camp Fleming and Lake Arrowhead Lodge, were Miss Carole Lombard of the Fox studio, Tim Waring and Roy Fox. …
This tidbit opens up an array of questions. Did Carole compete in the swimming events (and if so, how did she fare?) or was she merely a spectator, a celebrity guest? And who were Tim Waring and Roy Fox? (The first name isn’t listed at all at the Internet Movie Database, and the oldest date of work for one of the three Roy Foxes listed was 1971.) Were either her date, and might Roy Fox have been related to studio owner William Fox?
I’ve never seen a photo of Lombard in a swimsuit in 1925, but here’s how she appeared in one later that decade:
And here’s Carole at Lake Arrowhead in 1937, where she was filming scenes from “True Confession”:
Lombard visited Lake Arrowhead quite a few times over the years; in fact, it was where she was staying Labor Day weekend in 1934 when she received word of the accidental shooting of Russ Columbo.
One more interesting detail in the resort notes: The lead item concerns an A.B. Spreckels amateur golf tournament. A.B. Spreckels Jr. would later marry a model and actress named Kathleen Williams, who subsequently became the fifth and final wife of Clark Gable.
Finally, that Lombard and Lowe photo at the top (thanks to Tally Haugen for her work on it) is on sale at eBay for $8.99; it’s not an original picture, but it is a few decades old. If interested, go http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-EDMUND-LOWE-MARRIAGE-TRANS-vintage-photo-/220756298574?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item336619cb4e.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.18 at 01:11
Current mood: nostalgic
As in Los Angeles Times, the dominant newspaper in southern California — and by “early,” we’re referring to the mid-1920s, the first instances of Jane Alice Peters being publicized for her new name and new profession.
We’ve noted a few of these items in the past, but we’ve never shown them to you as they actually ran in the newspaper. Thanks to Bill Drew, we’ve obtained a number of articles that ran in the Times, and you can get an idea of how they must have thrilled a teenage girl who had long dreamed of movie stardom, emulating the notables she had watched in moviehouses since early childhood.
The first part of this series is from early 1925, as Lombard — still closer to age 16 than 17 — embarked on her journey to stardom. We’ll begin with what may be the first time the name “Carole Lombard” appeared not just in the Times, but perhaps any newspaper. (Perhaps someone can study other Los Angeles papers of the period — G.D. Hamann, where are you? — to learn if any other daily beat the Times to the punch.) Here’s the entry, from the Times of Feb. 4, 1925:
Jane Peters, “another lovely society girl”…Elizabeth Peters, “society leader”…”Incidentally Miss Peters has taken the name of Carole Lombard.” (From the start, that first name has an “e”!) We learn how she won an interview with Fox’s Sol M. Wurtzel, impressed them enough to win a five-year contract, and was given the female lead opposite Edmund Lowe in an upcoming film called “The Best Man.” (The world would come to know it as “Marriage In Transit.”) Pretty heady achievement for a girl of sweet sixteen — although her previous debut with Monte Blue is noted.
About a month later, March 8 to be exact, the name “Carole Lombard” would again appear in the Times, in an article written by Edwin Schallert, whose son William was then two years old — he’s still going strong today and continues to get work as one of the industry’s most beloved character actors (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/190884.html):
“Girls who have the least suspicion of talent are not only being given small supporting parts in the pictures, but in several instances they have been put right into leading roles.” Lombard is one of those cited, along with other actresses of note, including Sally O’Neill, Dorothy Sebastian, Greta Nissen, Constance Bennett and a new Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer played named Lucille LeSueur, whom Carole by now might have met on the dance floor at the Cocoanut Grove and who soon would be renamed Joan Crawford. It’s an intriguing article, as Schallert evaluates this trend in the industry.
Later that month, March 25, Carole’s photograph likely made its debut in the Times, as part of a salute to filmdom newcomers:
“How do you like these newcomers?” Very much, thank you.
Lombard’s in the lower right-hand corner. Want a close-up?
Of Lombard, it says she “walked into the films via the ballroom. Her beauty attracted attention at a recent dance and Fox immediately signed her up.” (Funny, but that wasn’t mentioned in the account the previous month.) “She is playing opposite Edmund Lowe in ‘The Best Man.'” And it appears that shot is taken from a wedding scene still from that picture.
Fascinating stuff from about 86 years ago, and one can imagine the Peters family buying up a few extra copies to mail to friends back home in Indiana, and perhaps saving a copy or two for the family scrapbook. Our next entry will feature Lombard items from later on in the year.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.17 at 02:31
Current mood: frustrated
It’s Nov. 22, 1929, and already the buzz is going around Hollywood over who’s going to be named award-winners. No, not the Academy Awards, but a figurative prize for young actresses — the WAMPAS Baby Stars. Every year since 1922, a baker’s dozen (13) starlets received the honor, presented by the Western Association of Motion Picture Advertisers (WAMPAS).
That day, the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Evening Independent ran a column from syndicated Hollywood writer Dan Thomas on the upcoming selection. Thomas chose six likely contenders, and guess who one of his six was?
Of course it was Carole Lombard (if it wasn’t, would we be doing this entry?) She was deemed a starlet whose voice would lead her to prominence, a new element in the WAMPAS star search. Here’s what Thomas said of Lombard (whose first name was listed with an “e,” yet another crack in the myth that it lacked that letter until “Fast And Loose” was released nearly a year later):
“Carole Lombard, who started in pictures on the Mack Sennett lot several years ago, is now under contract to Pathe. During the past year she has appeared in seven productions at that studio and is touted by executives as one of the most promising prospects in some time.”
Now, it’s entirely possible that at the time this hit print, Lombard and stablemate Diane Ellis had already been informed by Pathe officials that their services were no longer needed at the studio, although no one at the studio would admit the reason for their dismissal was because newly-signed Constance Bennett wanted no blonde competition on the roster.
The other five Thomas cited were Marion Byron, Kathryn Crawford, Mary Doran, Dixie Lee and Lillian Roth.
So who among the six got the WAMPAS honors? None of them did…but then again, neither did anyone else. WAMPAS declined to make selections for 1930 for at least two reasons — the recent stock market crash and the industry upheaval over the transition to sound.
Lombard would become by far the biggest star of the six Thomas selected, as none of the other five achieved more than minimal Hollywood success. Crawford worked with Carole in Lombard’s Paramount debut, “Safety In Numbers,” but made only six films thereafter; Byron, Buster Keaton’s leading lady in “Steamboat Bill, Jr.”, soon descended into bit parts; Doran hung on slightly longer; and Lee and Roth achieved brief stardom before being derailed by alcoholism. (Lee married singer Bing Crosby, whose fame soon eclipsed hers.)
As for the WAMPAS awards, they were revived in 1931 and ’32, suspended in ’33, and given out one more time in 1934 before being ditched for good.
To close, an appropriate song — “I’m Nobody’s Baby,” which has been done by a number of artists, including Marion Harris, Mildred Bailey and Judy Garland. Here’s Ruth Etting’s version from 1927:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.16 at 10:52
Current mood: nostalgic
Last October, we noted that Carole Lombard’s legendary home at 7953 Hollywood Boulevard was available for sale or rent (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/344899.html). Five months later, that’s still the case — apparently the slow housing market is affecting even luxury home sales in Los Angeles — although the pricing has changed.
The bad news: The rental price has increased from $5,800 to $6,500 per month (with a year’s lease in each case). The good news, relatively speaking: The sale price has shrunk by nearly half, from $2.7 million to $1,595,000…though that number still dwarfs what most of us mere mortals can afford. (Until we win the lottery, invent the latest high-tech app or such.)
The house, built in 1926 and occupied before Carole’s two-year stay from 1934 to 1936, remains a showplace, at the far western end of famed Hollywood Boulevard just before Laurel Canyon Boulevard. Here’s an aerial view of the neighborhood:
And here are a few new photos of the house’s interior at it looks today:
Note the third photo features some Lombard memorabilia, including a reproduction of a poster from “No Man Of Her Own” and Carole’s 1937 Lucky Strike advertisement.
This shows Lombard not only slept here, but showered here (and used the medicine cabinet, too):
The kitchen now includes a microwave and some other modern fixtures (Carole may have been ahead of her time, but not that far ahead!):
Now, a question perhaps Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive or someone else can answer: Has the rear of the property been significantly altered since Lombard lived there? I ask because here’s a vintage picture of Carole at her pool behind the house:
In contrast, two current photos of the rear, which show no pool but a guest house (did it exist when Carole called it home, and was it where her personal assistant, Madalynne Fields, resided?). It’s a bit confusing:
You can learn more about this piece of Hollywood history at http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/03/carole_lombards_hollywood_bachelorette_pad_returns.php#lombard-2 and http://www.redfin.com/CA/Los-Angeles/7953-Hollywood-Blvd-90046/home/7116221.
As we did in the October entry, we’ll close with the song “A Cottage For Sale.” This charming version of the Willard Robison standard was recorded by jazz legend Jack Teagarden in January 1962, about two years before his death.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.15 at 01:51
Current mood: contemplative 
“No One Man” is among the Carole Lombard films I’ve yet to see, so I don’t know who the man at the desk is that Carole and Ricardo Cortez want to do business with. He’s probably a hotel clerk, or possibly a railroad stationmaster. In either case, his other duties might include work for Western Union, handling telegrams.
Today, sending messages via Western Union seems almost quaint; the company’s current principal business is money transfers and bill payments. (Sam Goldwyn’s famed quote to screenwriters, “If you want to send a message, use Western Union,” is an anachronism.) These days, messages are sent via smartphones, laptops and other methods of instant, portable communication. (For the recent Jean Harlow Blogathon, the charming site Via Margutta 51 imagined what the Harlow film “Red-Headed Woman” would have been like if Twitter had been around in 1932 — check it out at http://via-51.blogspot.com/2011/03/read-headed-woman-twitter-version-part.html and http://via-51.blogspot.com/2011/03/red-headed-woman-twitter-version-end.html
.)
We know Western Union was a part of Lombard’s life; a few years ago, we noted a telegram Carole and Clark Gable sent to Hollywood columnist Jimmy Starr, wishing him and his family a happy holiday season:
Well, at least several other Lombard and Starr-related telegrams have surfaced, and you’re going to see them.
One was sent by Lombard on June 28, 1935, giving best wishes on the wedding of Starr and his wife:
The other three weren’t sent by Carole, but she is mentioned in the copy. The first is from May 13, 1937, and it looks to be about that a friend of Starr’s married the nurse who helped in the recovery of Lombard’s aunt in Palm Springs (what?):
On Dec. 18, 1939, someone wired Starr, noting that Santa Claus received more mentions than Gable, Lombard, Norma Shearer and “Gone With The Wind” the previous week, and wondering just who was St. Nick’s press agent:
And finally, one from Jan. 21, 1942. It was sent by the Young & Rubicam advertising agency, noting that Jack Benny had returned to the top of the Crosley ratings and that he would be back on Sunday night’s show after his absence the previous week out of respect for Lombard’s passing:
All four of these telegrams are being auctioned at eBay. The one sent by Lombard is the most expensive of the bunch, with bids beginning at $49.99; it’s at http://cgi.ebay.com/Western-Union-Telegram-Jimmy-Starr-Carole-Lombard-/330542200449?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf5d9b681. Next, with bids starting at $29.99 each, are the 1937 telegram (http://cgi.ebay.com/Western-Union-Telegram-Carole-Lombard-Jimmy-Starr-/360352080667?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e6a8631b) and the one from 1942 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Western-Union-Telegram-Carole-Lombard-Jack-Benny-/360352079245?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e6a85d8d). The lowest opening bid, $24.99, is for the 1939 Santa Claus wire (http://cgi.ebay.com/Western-Union-Telegram-Jimmy-Starr-Carole-Lombard-/360352084971?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e6a873eb). Bidding ends on all four items between 4:27 and 4:49 p.m. (Eastern) next Monday, and as of this writing, none have been bid on.
To close, an appropriate song from the “Iceman,” Jerry Butler — “Hey, Western Union Man.” Chicago native Butler co-wrote this with Philadelphia music mavens Kenny Gamble and Leon Huff, and it reached #16 on the Billboard pop charts and #1 on its R&B chart in November 1968. (Incidentally, Butler is still touring; he appeared at Washington’s Blues Alley last month.) Enjoy some smooth Chicago-meets-Philly-style soul, even if you younger folks have no idea what he’s singing about…
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.14 at 00:12
Current mood: artistic
The snipe on the back of Paramount p1202-277 admitted that Carole Lombard was perhaps with a bow and arrow “for the Olympic games,” but in early 1932 just about everyone in Los Angeles had Olympic fever. And why not? That summer’s event represented the city’s coming-out party, an opportunity to show it was indeed a world-class metropolis. And its best-known industry, the movies, joined in the enthusiasm.
In fact, Carole — who by then had called L.A. home for more than 17 years — was so excited, she either designed a commemorative hairstyle or let herself become its best-known proponent. And 79 years ago today, March 14, 1932, Lombard let the world know about it.
That morning, readers of the Los Angeles Times saw this item (thanks to William M. Drew for retrieving it):
Yes, Lombard was promoting something called “the Olympic bob,” which she termed a sculptured headdress. But how is it done?
The story said “the hair should be about two inches above the shoulder line, a light fringe of bangs covering the forehead being slightly curled upward at the ends. The rest of the hair is severely combed back off the face and ears with one slight wave at a line parallel with the ears.” The story added:
“Miss Lombard declared treatment of the ends of the hair is most important, the hair being curled on an iron so it clusters closely to the nape of the neck and extends up under the ear lobes.”
I have no idea whether this became a popular ‘do that summer (and how would it look in 2011? Perhaps one of our Lombard ladies should try it and report to us), but I do know that the Olympic bob was featured in several smaller newspapers in ensuing weeks and presumably was also shown in fan magazines of the time.
Moreover, we do know that Paramount’s Eugene Robert Richee took the two views of the hair bob picture. Here’s a better version of the first one:
(Oh, and it’s far bigger, too, because this image comes from the Heritage Auction Galleries site that supersizes photographs for its bidders. Double-click on it, and Carole’s face looks truly Olympian, goddess-like in its larger-than-life scale — so much so that in order to stand eye-to-eye with her, you’d need a small stepladder!)
The Heritage photo also has a snipe publicizing the Olympic look, noting that Lombard is wearing the style in her latest film, “Sinners In The Sun”:
As coincidence would have it, this Richee image of Lombard is being auctioned at eBay, and while it’s not blown up to the giant scale you’d view it above when double-clicked, at 13″ x 19″ it’s still considerable. The seller initially labeled it “flapper era,” but either did some additional research or was corrected by somebody, because it’s now referred to “exquisite and beautiful” (right on both counts!). It sells for $9.99 under the “buy it now” option; if you’d like to put an Olympian Lombard on your wall, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-Exquisite-Beautiful-HUGE-WALL-POSTER-/250788068585?pt=Art_Prints&hash=item3a64223ce9.
Hope you like this week’s header, Lombard stretching out those lovely legs of hers during a break on “Nothing Sacred.”
Two more things, the first for the baseball fans among us. If you have the MLB Network on your cable or satellite system, watch “MLB Tonight” at 7 p.m. (Eastern) to watch rare, high-quality footage of three of baseball’s legendary stars. Here’s the background, from Sports Illustrated baseball writer Tom Verducci:
Back in 1922, the Pathe Brothers Company of Paris developed 9.5 mm film, an inexpensive format that became popular in Europe. Two years later, somebody took a 9.5 mm film camera to Yankee Stadium, then scarcely more than a year old, and shot film of some of the greatest legends in baseball history, who could have been there taking part in some sort of exhibition game: Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb and Walter Johnson. The film may have been part of an instructional series that was distributed in Europe and then essentially forgotten for nearly a century.
MLB Productions recently acquired three minutes of this rare, high-quality footage. The fascinating up-close look of Ruth and Cobb hitting and Johnson pitching will be shown on “MLB Tonight” Monday at 7 p.m. on the MLB Network. (Disclosure: I work for MLB Network, though not in 9.5 mm.)
The rare film is captivating because it brings these baseball ghosts closer to life than almost anything else you might have seen: the uncoiling of Ruth’s rotational power, which was innovative back then; a clear look at how Cobb awkwardly began his swing with his hands apart and brought them together as his bat came forward; and the unique slingshot style of Johnson, who, with his velocity and arm angle, must have been particularly frightening to right-handed hitters. Watching these greats, you understand how far (and how much better) the mechanics of the game have evolved.
The stars were not far from the top of their game when the film was made in 1924. Johnson, then 36, won the pitching Triple Crown; Ruth, 29, and still five years from wearing his famous number 3, nearly won the hitting Triple Crown; and Cobb, 37, hit .338 with 211 hits, the last of his nine 200-hit seasons.
Should be fascinating to see these three greats in film beyond the herky-jerky images so associated with baseball movies of that era.
Secondly, with most of America now on Daylight Savings Time, it seems appropriate to play this tune — “(There Ought To Be A) Moonlight Savings Time,” which was popular around 1930 and ’31. Several versions of the song can be found on YouTube; even Maurice Chevalier recorded it. The one I’ve chosen is by the great Annette Hanshaw from May 1931, and it’s simply a wonderful pop record.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.13 at 01:23
Current mood: thankful
It’s one of the most popular pictures of Carole Lombard, and you’ve probably never seen it look quite this good before. That’s because it’s also one of the most difficult images of her to find, a holy grail of sorts.
Seen on the rear dust jacket of “Screwball,” the 1975 Larry Swindell biography of Lombard, it’s proven virtually impossible to track down; even Swindell has no idea what happened to the photo that was used on the dust jacket. Last July, a copy of the photo emerged from the archive of the Chicago Tribune, but it had been used for publication and featured crop marks (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/323736.html).
But good news — a relatively untouched copy of the photo was found, put up for auction and was won by our good friend Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive. She cleaned up the few edit marks, was nice enough to share it with me, and I in turn am delighted to share it with you. Enjoy that image of Lombard, so full of joy. (It was likely taken near the Encino ranch in 1940, and was used as a publicity photo at RKO for “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.”)
Another friend of “Carole & Co.” is Tally Haugen, who has provided many images to this community — and she’s come up with one more. It’s from 1937 or thereabouts, and features Carole with three of her canine companions:
I know that the dachshund Lombard is holding is Commissioner, and that the Pekingese cuddled up against her lower leg is Pushface. But who’s the third dog? According to Tally, “Carole had two cocker spaniels, Dudley and Smokey, so I’d guess that’s Smokey.” (One presumes Dudley had fur of a different shade.)
It’s a charming picture for any dog lover, and if you’d like an 8″ x 10″ print of it for your very own, you can. It’s being sold for $8.75, and the good news is that the seller currently has 10 copies available (if you’d like to buy multiple copies for friends). Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8X10-Photo-Dog-Lover-ER439-/280643423590?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item4157a6cd66 to learn more.
We know that Lombard was a good friend of Marion Davies, who along with William Randolph Hearst adored dachshunds — at one point, the San Simeon ranch that was the publisher’s principal residence was home to 75 dachshunds. A few were given to friends who requested them (and whom Hearst and Davies believed would be trustworthy owners); might Commissioner have had a Hearst Castle lineage? (Sampeck says no, that Carole got the dog from a local fire chief, hence its name.)
I bring up Davies because Sampeck supplied me with another photo, a version of one we ran in January to mark the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s inauguration — an event Marion attended (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/374767.html). We wondered just where Davies was at the inauguration, and Sampeck believes she’s found it:
Horace Brown, Davies’ husband, and Marion are directly above their names, according to Sampeck:
“…the specific fellow in the top hat is recognizably Horace Brown. I believe the small woman to the right of him in the image is Marion. There is another female on his other side, but she is much too large a person to be MD. The lady’s eyebrows are the high arches Marion favored, and there is substantial luggage below her eyes as well, which dovetails with MD’s appearance in the last year or two of her life. I’m fairly confident of my thinking on this — plus Horace would have been a gentleman and let his wife sit closer to the action so she could see it better, I think.”
Davies, a substantial contributor in both money and resources to the JFK campaign (she let him take over her Beverly Hills mansion as a headquarters while the 1960 Democratic convention was being held at the Los Angeles Sports Arena), was a few rows behind the outgoing president, Dwight Eisenhower, and the incoming first lady, Jacqueline Kennedy (a one-time photographer for the old Washington Times-Herald).
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.13 at 09:31
Current mood: amused
…if you have Turner Classic Movies in the U.S., that Carole Lombard’s final film (and certainly one of her best), the original “To Be Or Not To Be,” will air at 1 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (have you moved all your clocks an hour ahead?). Most of you have likely seen this Ernst Lubitsch classic, but if you haven’t or want to view it again, enjoy.
Before that, at 11 a.m., is the fine “After The Thin Man” with the beloved William Powell and Myrna Loy (“And you call yourself a detective!”).
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.12 at 02:34
Current mood: mischievous
Cute picture, isn’t it — Carole Lombard, looking seductive and glamorous, perched in front of a model ship around 1934 or so. It might not be the easiest thing to accomplish, but through Photoshop or some other image alteration program, one might be able to isolate Lombard and ship, superimpose them on an oceanfront background, and voila — you’ve magically created a Carole colossus (a Lombardzilla?), although she appears in far too gentle a mood to wreak havoc on Hollywood.
Yesterday’s entry on the large one-sheet poster of “White Woman” made me dig further into the files of Heritage Auction Galleries; if you’re a member, one of the advantages is that you photographically examine items it has handled, even those it has previously sold. And since people who purchase Hollywood memorabilia are painstakingly thorough about what they bid on, the “view closer” option not only applies to posters, but photographs, too. In fact, they can be magnified to such an extent that a photo measuring 8″ x 10″ or thereabouts can be viewed at poster size.
Seeing photographs at that scale (as you can do with the shot above, Paramount p1202-964, after double-clicking) is a revelation. Whether it be an actual publicity photo or an inverted negative, a Lombard image at mega proportions allows one to fully comprehend the work that went into creating it, both from the photographer (from lighting, angles or even retouching) and from Carole herself (her study of cinematography, initially done to help disguise the scar she received in her 1926 automobile accident, made her a master at knowing how to produce an effective portrait).
This entry will limit itself to Heritage’s photographs (or inverted negatives) in the fabled p1202 series; double-clicking will magically boost their size five- or six-fold. Unlike usual policy at “Carole & Co.”, the borders of those images will not be trimmed off. Get ready to bask in the Brobdingnagian beauty of one of the giants of Hollywood…and in this instance, it’s almost literally so. (Oh, and even those of you with the largest monitors, prepare to do some maneuvering.)
First, p1202-43, followed by 189 and 203, the last of which is a close-up in which, at giant size, you can view Carole’s face in incredible detail:
Next up, p1202-393, 594 and 649:
The next three are p1202-897 (from “Supernatural”), 1021 and 1344:
And to close, p1202-1346, 1624 and 1715:
But wait, there’s more! Whereas all those images above are from previous auctions, here’s an item you can bid on now. It’s a Kodak nitrate negative of p1202-1177, showing Lombard relaxing between games of tennis. While you can view the inverted negative supersized, the winning bidder won’t get it at that scale. (It would be difficult to develop in a non-commercial darkroom!) Here it is, and get ready to be awed at the remarkable detail when double-clicked:
The negative measures 7 3/4″ x 9 3/4″, and as of this writing the higher of the two bidders is at $3. (However, seven people are tracking this item.) Bidding concludes at 11 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. To those interested, go to http://movieposters.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=161111&Lot_No=51058.
Oh, and someone should tell Carole to stop smoking. Doesn’t she know it will stunt her growth?
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.11 at 03:07
Current mood: envious
Prepare to be overwhelmed.
“White Woman,” arguably the most outrageous film of Carole Lombard’s career, has its share of fascinating artifacts. Among them is a poster that we’ve shown in the past (albeit not in a long time), but chances are you’ve never seen it like this before. That’s because this full-bleed one-sheet, measuring 26 1/4″ x 39 3/4″ (yes, slightly more than one meter long!), is being auctioned by Heritage Auction Galleries this month.
On its website, Heritage offers an option to “view larger size,” and in this case, large means large –– if it’s not full-size, it’s awfully close to it. So here’s the poster; double-click to view it in all its gargantuan glory:
If you’re a bit hesitant to work with something of that size, I’ve isolated Carole’s head being gazed at from below by co-star Kent Taylor, but at the same scale as the entire poster, a less problematic double-click:
While not the biggest poster from one of Carole’s movies (that honor probably goes to an 80-inch one-sheet from “Love Before Breakfast” that showed a full-length Lombard at slightly larger than life–size), it’s nonetheless impressive. As Heritage puts it:
“On this rare and dramatic one sheet, Lombard’s classic blonde beauty is rendered to perfection along with co-stars Laughton and Kent Taylor. This is the first time we have ever seen this full-bleed one sheet and the only one we are aware of; a sensational item for eager collectors. It had only a pinhole in each corner, which have been professionally restored. Very Fine on Linen.”
Unfortunately (and, as you might guess), you’ll need to have a giant bank account in order to acquire this rarity. The current high bid is $7,500, and the minimum next bid is $8,000 — and in some auction circles, that might be considered a bargain, because Heritage appraises its value as between $15,000 and $25,000.
If you have that kind of dough lying around, be aware that absentee bidding ends at 11 p.m. (Eastern) March 24, with a live auction the next day. Want to bid, or at least online window shop? Go to http://movieposters.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7035&Lot_No=83277.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.10 at 01:40
Current mood: accomplished
Gregory La Cava (shown with Carole Lombard, Alice Brady, Mischa Auer and William Powell) is understandably best remembered today for “My Man Godfrey,” as well as the fine ensemble drama “Stage Door” and the Depression-era political fantasy “Gabriel Over The White House.” But La Cava directed more than 20 sound films and about a dozen silent features. (His film career dated back to the teens, when he directed animated versions of Hearst comic strips.)
Today marks the 119th anniversary of his birth, and to celebrate, Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. is airing nine lesser-known La Cava films during the day. Six of them are comedies, where his semi-improvisational style was put to best use. (La Cava reportedly once said that a script exists only to be ignored.) He worked with a wide range of actors, invariably eliciting good performances — eight received Academy Award nominations, including all four above for “Godfrey.”
Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
* 6:45 a.m. — “Laugh And Get Rich” (1931) Hugh Herbert and Edna May Oliver, two solid characters, play husband and wife; he perpetually comes up with get-rich-quick schemes that never work. Dorothy Lee, best known for her work in Wheeler & Woolsey films, plays the couple’s daughter.
* 8 a.m. — “Smart Woman” (1931) Mary Astor stars in this adaptation of the Broadway play “Nancy’s Private Affair,” as a woman who discovers her husband (Robert Ames) is two-timing her…so she gives him a dose of his own medicine. John Halliday and Edward Everett Horton co-star.
* 9:15 a.m. — “The Age Of Consent” (1932) This campus romance, with an air of frank sexuality, stars Dorothy Wilson in her film debut; a Hollywood secretary, she was taking dictation from La Cava when he decided to give her a screen test and gave her this role. Richard Cromwell, whom more than one reviewer at the Internet Movie Database called a dead ringer for Leonardo DiCaprio, is the boyfriend.
* 10:30 a.m. — “Symphony Of Six Million” (1932) Ricardo Cortez, so often cast as an oily pre-Code heel (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/162206.html), gets a good-guy role in this drama as an earnest Jewish doctor who strives for Park Avenue riches but can’t escape his Lower East Side past. Irene Dunne, of all people, plays his Jewish love interest.
* 12:15 p.m. — “Bed Of Roses” (1933) Constance Bennett and wisecracking Pert Kelton play former Mississippi River prostitutes faced with starting a new life after being released from prison, and Connie falls for riverboat skipper Joel McCrea. A smart blend of pre-Code comedy and drama.
* 1:30 p.m. — “The Half Naked Truth” (1933) La Cava co-wrote the screenplay of this lively romp, starring Lee Tracy as a carnival pitchman, Lupe Velez as the sexy dancer whom he turns into a star and Frank Morgan as an ersatz Florenz Ziegfeld. (TCM will again air this film on June 1, the anniversary of Morgan’s birth.) Eugene Pallette, who would work with La Cava in “Godfrey,” has an intriguing supporting turn.
* 3 p.m. — “What Every Woman Knows” (1934) — Helen Hayes stars in this adaptation of James M. Barrie’s comedy about romance and intrigue in Scotland; the cast also includes Brian Aherne, Madge Evans and Lucile Watson.
* 4:30 p.m. — “She Married Her Boss” (1935) That more or less explains the story, “she” being Claudette Colbert, “her boss” being Melvyn Douglas. Colbert, who La Cava had directed earlier that year in the drama “Private Worlds,” is capable as always, but the script has dated badly. Edith Fellows, a talented child star, plays the boss’ spoiled daughter, and Jean Dixon plays Colbert’s older sister(!). An adequate comedy, but little more.
* 6 p.m. — “Living In A Big Way” (1947) Gene Kelly stars as a postwar GI who finally gets to know his war bride (Marie “The Body” McDonald). Kelly is engaging as always, but this shouldn’t be rated among his triumphs. This was La Cava’s last directorial credit, although he did some uncredited work on the 1948 Ava Gardner film “One Touch Of Venus”; he died in 1952, nine days short of his 60th birthday.
A nice batch of films, but there’s one more I wish TCM would air someday — the movie La Cava made with Lombard seven years before “Godfrey,” the rarely seen Pathe newspaper saga “Big News.” with Robert Armstrong:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.09 at 01:47
Current mood: nostalgic
That photo, from the Jan. 25, 1939 Minneapolis Tribune, shows Carole Lombard with Clark Gable at the premiere of his new film, “Idiot’s Delight.” And to the delight of both Clark and Carole, Gable’s wife, Ria Langham, had just moved to Las Vegas in order to establish a six-week residency to qualify for a divorce. (It was a procedure Lombard knew well, because she spent six weeks in Reno in the summer of 1933 in order to divorce William Powell.)
The morning of March 8, the Tribune reported, to use a later term, that all systems were go:
Incidentally, I had never heard the term “Gretna Greens” before; a Google search showed it refers to a place where people go to get married. The original Gretna Green is in Scotland, just over the border from England, and Scotland’s relatively lax marriage rules (no residency requirements, both members of the couple must be at least age 16) meant it was a popular place to take vows.
Apparently in 1939, both Las Vegas and Yuma, Ariz., were “Gretna Greens” for the western U.S. (Perhaps the East Coast equivalent is Elkton, Md., just across the state line from Delaware, where couples from states along the northeast corridor would get married. I know this because my parents, both Brooklynites, married in Elkton on Dec. 21, 1942.)
In 1939, according to the blog at WorldVitalRecords.com, “California passed a law that required a medical examination before marriage. During one year of the enforcement of this California marriage law, Yuma recorded 17,000 marriages for a town that had only 5,000 residents. Both Yuma and Las Vegas became the place for Hollywood stars and the everyday person to get married.”
So it was understandable why in March 1939, many people in Vegas and Yuma expected the “king” and his screwball queen-to-be would soon pay a visit.
On March 6, columnist Sheilah Graham’s column, which ran in the Tribune, added more conjecture (the Gable-Lombard segment is at the bottom of the first column):
“Clark Gable and Carole Lombard have confirmed the chatter that they will have as quiet a wedding as possible under the circumstances — i.e. with the whole country alert to their plans. They want Gail Patrick and her husband, Bob Cobb, as witnesses, but this will be a last-second decision, depending on last-second circumstances.”
Patrick, who first worked with Carole on “Rumba” and then gained renown as her antagonist sister in “My Man Godfrey,” was a close friend of Lombard’s; her husband, Robert Cobb, owned the Brown Derby restaurants (Clark proposed to Carole at the Vine Street Derby) as well as the Hollywood Stars of the Pacific Coast League.
I don’t think it’s any spoiler to announce that when the vows were finally taken in Kingman, Ariz., roughly 150 miles north of Yuma, Patrick and Cobb were not there. Had they backed out because their whereabouts might have given things away? Were they too busy to accompany Clark and Carole? (I’m not sure if Gail was making a movie at the time, but Robert not only had his restaurants to oversee but construction of the Stars’ new home, Gilmore Field, which would finally open for business in May.) Did Clark and Carole decide to elope without alerting them? I’m really not sure.
Oh, I should also note that in early March of ’39, Lombard was back in the moviehouses, co-starring with James Stewart in “Made For Each Other.” Here’s an ad from the March 2 Tribune:
Two days later, it was reviewed by the Tribune’s John Alden, who raved about Stewart (it would be a sensational year for him), but was somewhat cooler about Carole’s going dramatic. (Double-click each segment to view at enlarged size.):
Incidentally, all the Minneapolis Tribune material is from a thread at the “Your Favorites” Turner Classic Movies message board, as part of the thread called “1939 — Hollywood’s Greatest Year — Day-By-Day — as it happens!” (http://forums.tcm.com/jive/tcm/thread.jspa?threadID=157427&tstart=0&start=0). It’s a wonderful way to immerse yourself in what ’39 was like for a film buff who was living it. (Even the oldest members or readers of “Carole & Co.” were at most probably toddlers or pre-teens in 1939.)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.08 at 01:07
Current mood: artistic
As promised, here’s part two of our tribute to George Hurrell, who redefined Hollywood portrait photography through his work, such as this image of Carole Lombard, taken about 1933. Yesterday, we examined the women who were subjects of his; now, we’ll look at how he handled the men he photographed.
Male Hollywood portraits get a fraction of the attention given to those of women, but such images can be crucial in creating, or revamping, an actor’s persona. And the first film star to have photographs taken by Hurrell was late 1920s star Ramon Novarro (both were friends with aviatrix Pancho Barnes); Novarro raved about Hurrell’s work to Norma Shearer, who was seeking a more sophisticated image for sound pictures, and the rest is history.
We’ll start with Hurrell’s photographs of Carole’s husbands. First, a photo he took of Clark Gable in 1932, when Clark — who had risen to stardom the year before as a man whom women found irresistible despite his brutish, rough exterior — was trying to add texture to his persona so as to avoid becoming a one-note character. Images such as this one helped give Gable an image more conducive to long-term success:
Flash forward to 1935, when Lombard’s first husband, the now-divorced William Powell, sat down for a Hurrell session. Powell was already renowned for his dapper, urbane style, and Hurrell retained much of that feel but placed the actor in a far more informal setting, enabling viewers to perceive him in a different way:
For many years, Gable’s primary rival as a rugged yet sophisticated leading man with sex appeal was Gary Cooper. This is how Hurrell captured him in 1937:
Here’s Hurrell photographing the dashing Errol Flynn; I don’t have the precise year for this, but it looks to be from the late ’30s or early ’40s, when Flynn was riding high at Warners:
Another one of the era’s great leading men was Robert Montgomery, who was a Hurrell subject in 1932 — the same year the actor’s daughter Elizabeth was born:
From 1929 to 1932, Hurrell worked exclusively for MGM, and thus worked with actors you wouldn’t normally associate with him. An example is this elegant 1931 photo of comedic genius Buster Keaton, as this session helped him take refuge from both his stormy tenure at Metro and a deteriorating marriage to Natalie Talmadge:
Here’s a Hurrell image taken more than a half-century later of musician David Byrne of Talking Heads fame. You may ask yourself, what was David Byrne doing in a Hurrell portrait? Well, classic photography is “same as it ever was.”
All these show that timeless images aren’t limited to one gender, and prove the magic that took place at Hurrell’s fabled studio on Sunset Boulevard.
Incidentally, I wish to thank everyone who took part in the voting for the silents/1930s division of the “All Good Things” March Madness tournament. Although Carole Lombard was defeated by Irene Dunne in the finals by a tally of 58-43, it was fun while it lasted.
The competition continues, now in the 1940s division. There are eight first-round matches involving many of that decade’s top actresses:
#1 Bette Davis vs. #16 Esther Williams
#8 Rita Hayworth vs. #9 Hedy Lamarr
#4 Vivien Leigh vs. #13 Ann Sheridan
#5 Lauren Bacall vs. #12 Jane Wyman
#2 Katharine Hepburn vs. #15 Betty Grable
#7 Gene Tierney vs. #10 Greer Garson
#3 Ingrid Bergman vs. #14 Jeanne Crain
#6 Olivia de Havilland vs. #11 Lana Turner
To vote, go to http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/ and cast your ballot before 10 p.m. (Eastern).
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.07 at 14:38
Current mood: mellow
It’s arguably the most famous still photo ever taken of Carole Lombard, the one she signed, “Pa, I love you. Ma” to Clark Gable, who cherished it for the rest of his life. It was taken by George Hurrell, the man who revolutionized the art of Hollywood portrait photography through his approach to lighting and background.
That’s Hurrell in 1980, promoting an exhibit of his work in Palm Springs.
I’ve been thinking a lot about Hurrell lately, perhaps because two of his most famous subjects have been in the news lately with last Thursday’s centenary of Jean Harlow’s birth and the passing last week of Jane Russell. Hurrell probably captured Harlow’s ethereal beauty better than anyone else through a number of iconic portraits, and he also established Russell’s “mean…moody…magnificent” persona through the publicity photos he did for the Howard Hughes film “The Outlaw” — and because of censorship problems, most people became aware of Russell through those photos rather than the long-delayed movie.
So I thought it proper to honor Hurrell — who photographed film greats from the end of the 1920s to the start of the 1990s — with a gallery of his portraits, today the ladies, tomorrow the gentlemen. The idea came through a glance at this then-unidentified photo on the Web the other day:
“That couldn’t be her...could it?” I thought to myself, and a further investigation revealed that it was. “Her,” in this case, being Farrah Fawcett, who apparently had a session with Hurrell in 1979, resulting in this portrait, the subtly sophisticated antithesis of her famous swimsuit poster — 1970s glamour given a ’30s touch. (Not long before Hurrell’s death, Sharon Stone, narrator of a documentary about his work, was a portrait subject.)
Here are some more Hurrell portraits of actresses, these from the classic era. Since we initially noted Harlow and Russell, we’ll start with a relatively obscure shot of Jean from 1934, followed by one from Jane in 1941 and an image of Russell working with Burrell at a 1942 photo session:
Here’s Joan Crawford from “Grand Hotel.” followed by a 1933 portrait, before and after retouching — a perfect example of the photographer’s art:
In 1930, Hurrell had a session with Greta Garbo, a creature of habit if there ever was one. Their personalities didn’t quite mesh, and Garbo thereafter returned to her favorite portrait photographer (and a good one), Clarence Sinclair Bull, but here are two samples of what Hurrell ended up with that day:
Now for four more Hollywood legends photographed by Hurrell — Marion Davies (from 1931), Marlene Dietrich (from 1938), Myrna Loy (not sure of the date, but it looks to be around 1933 or ’34, when she was making the transition from vamp-ersatz Asian to the “perfect wife”) and Gene Tierney (from 1944):
Finally, a few actresses you wouldn’t associate with Hurrell for one reason or another — such as Veronica Lake from 1941, sans peek-a-boo ‘do:
’30s actress and later radical Karen Morley (up to her death in 2003, she was a regular contributor to WBAI and other Pacifica radio stations) got the Hurrell treatment:
In 1935, two years after making what would be her final film, silent-era legend Mary Pickford was a Hurrell subject:
And here’s brassy Ann Sothern getting her brassiness toned down, Hurrell-style, in 1940:
There are so many legendary actresses whose beauty was further enhanced by Hurrell, from Norma Shearer — whose career was revolutionized by his portraits and who helped put George on the map — to Rita Hayworth. To learn more about this master of shadow and light, go to http://www.hurrellphotos.com/hurrell_home.asp?ID=2 and http://www.hurrellphotography.com/.
We’ll leave you with one more Hurrell image of Lombard, this from 1937:
Oh, and if you haven’t voted in the “All Good Things” poll between Lombard and Irene Dunne in the finals of the silents/1930s tournament, do so at http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/ before the 10 p.m. (Eastern) deadline. Carole has narrowed the margin to 43-34, and can still pull it out with a late surge.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.07 at 01:08
Current mood: 
determined
That second go-round for Carole Lombard in the finals of the silents/1930s division of the “All Good Things” actresses tournament (http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/) currently isn’t going so well for her. As of 1 a.m. (Eastern),fourth-seeded Carole trails 10th seed Irene Dunne 29-16, and voting concludes at 10 p.m.
So, it’s rally time. If you haven’t done so already, go to the site above and vote. If you have done so, tell your friends to vote for Lombard. We want to win this, yes, but fairly.
This week’s header is an edited version of one of the more than 2,000 screencaps of “No Man Of Her Own” that we noted yesterday.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.06 at 01:48
Current mood: hot
There’s plenty to smile about at “Carole & Co.” This marks our 1,500th entry since this community began on June 13, 2007 — that’s roughly about 1 1/4 entries per day. A further check of the user info showed that we currently have 296 members, an all-time high. (Tell your friends who love classic Hollywood about this site, and we can surpass 300 sometime during March!)
To celebrate, here’s something I just uncovered — and it concerns one of Carole Lombard’s most popular films. The movie is “No Man Of Her Own,” where Lombard shows off her skills (and lots of other stuff) as she portrays small-town librarian Connie Randall, who makes a big change in her life. (And there’s this leading man brought in from MGM named, uh…oh yes, Gable.)
So what’s this all about? Screencaps. Lots and lots and lots of screencaps — more than 2,000 in all.
This gargantuan undertaking is the handiwork of someone at LiveJournal who goes by the title “Peppermint Fox.” Apparently, this fox likes to go on the hunt for screencaps, because past entries include screencap collections for the likes of the original Barbara Stanwyck “Christmas In Connecticut” and more recent fare, including “The Wedding Singer” and “Salt.”
The “No Man Of Her Own” screencaps can be found at http://peppermint-fox.livejournal.com/5594.html. They are divided into three segments, totaling about 150 MB. So, what’s it like? Well, here’s a sample:
That’s screencap 0359, the first one featuring Lombard — and double-clicked, you’ll find that it, and all the other screencaps, measure an impressive 1067 x 800. (The first part of the film establishes Clark Gable and his character.) What’s the first one with Gable and Lombard together? It’s screencap 0439, as Gable, who’s just hightailed to the upstate New York town of Glendale, is at a newsstand when librarian Lombard comes by:
Clark’s character likes what he sees, and not much later, in screencap 0456, he drops by the library to check out not books, but Carole:
Lombard has to climb a ladder to visit the shelves in screencap 0528, but at 0531, we find Gable is more interested in her stockinged ankle:
Screencap 0615 gives one an idea of what the Paramount people went through to construct a set that so resembles a small-town library circa 1932:
But you want to see Lombard, not a library, and so you shall. In fact, here’s Carole in a cabin in screencap 0805, as she prepares to call it a night:
Okay, gang, here’s the pre-Code payoff — lots of Lombard in little lingerie. specifically in screencaps 0815, 0819 and 0821, the last being full-frontal lingerie Lombard. (A reminder, especially to those of the male gender: do not salivate over your keyboard.)
We have other screencaps from the film, but honestly, what can follow that?
So enjoy the “No Man Of Her Own” screencaps as sort of my gift to you.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.06 at 02:40
Current mood: bouncy
There was lots of Carole Lombard news to report in entry #1,500, but I decided to hold this one because it deserved its own entry. Carole is in the finals of the “All Good Things” March Madness tournament for silents/1930s actresses. Lombard, the fourth seed, posted a 59-41 conquest of ninth-seeded Myrna Loy (famed for being named “queen of Hollywood” in a 1936 fan poll) in one of the semifinals.
Carole’s foe in the finals won’t be easy — she’s 10th seed Irene Dunne, who’s won her three matches by large margins, most recently a 64-36 victory over sixth-seeded Claudette Colbert. Note that vote total is 100, same as the Lombard-Loy battle. That may indicate the voting booth can only take so many ballots.
What’s that mean? Time is probably of the essence. Voting will begin at about 8 a.m. (Eastern) today, and while it’s slated to end at 6 p.m. Monday, there’s an awfully good chance that it will reach 100 votes well before then. In other words, don’t delay. As soon as you can, go to http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/ and cast your vote for Carole. The winner will advance to face the winner of the other tourneys for 1940s, 1950s and 1960s actresses.
And if you need a reminder why to vote for Lombard, well, here’s another lingerie screencap from “No Man Of Her Own” (specifically screencap 0830), as Carole exhibits her schoolgirl track star form — in high heels, no less. Let’s see Irene try that.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.06 at 17:33
Current mood: frustrated
If you voted this weekend between Carole Lombard and Irene Dunne in the finals of the “All Good Things” silents/1930s actresses tournament, you’ll have to go back to the site (http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/) and do it again. Some apparent chicanery at the polls forced a re-vote.
According to site administrator Monty Hawes, this time the site is using a Blogger poll, not one from Zoomerang — and I believe this one can accept more than 100 total votes. Following the balloting was weird, since the original election had more runs than a pair of 99-cent pantyhose. Lombard jumped to a 10-1 lead…then Dunne went ahead 28-12…then Lombard pulled to a 66-34 edge when the Zoomerang voting reached its limit. Frank “I am the law” Hague of Jersey City machine infamy would be proud of that, but no true fan of Carole or Irene would be.
So return to “All Good Things” and cast your vote — but please, do it once. And just to give you a reason to vote, look above to another Lombard lingerie screencap (0812) from “No Man Of Her Own.”
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.05 at 02:22
Current mood: impressed
For the third time this week, “Carole & Co.” is pleased to offer an entry on Carole Lombard’s good friend and fellow legend Jean Harlow, whose centenary was Thursday. It’s been a great week for “the Baby,” as she’s received all sorts of salutes in newspapers (for example, Susan King’s fine tribute in Friday’s Los Angeles Times, http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-jean-harlow-20110304,0,6813494.story) and, of course, the blogosphere, most notably the Kitty Packard Pictorial (http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/), where at last count 34 different blogs have done Harlow-related entries.
This entry will look ahead and show how you can brush up on your Jean screen expertise. First, this Sunday, the Egyptian Theater on Hollywood Boulevard — where I’m certain several of Harlow’s movies played during her lifetime — will honor the centennial of her birth. At 2 p.m., Harlow historian Darrell Rooney will present a slide show that will, I’m sure, have many rare images of the beloved star. At 3, Rooney and co-author Mark A. Vieira will sign copies of their new book, “Harlow in Hollywood: The Blonde Bombshell in the Glamour Capital, 1928-1937.”
Once that’s done, it’s back inside the theater for a movie, one of Jean’s best — the delightful 1933 satire “Bombshell”:
For more on the event, visit http://www.americancinemathequecalendar.com/content/jean-harlow-centenary.
Can’t make it out to Hollywood for Sunday’s fun? Never fear — if you’re in the U.S., you can still see plenty of Harlow this month thanks to the good folks at Turner Classic Movies. Jean is the channel’s star of the month for March, and most of her notable films are being shown (“Hell’s Angels” being the principal exception) over four consecutive Tuesday nights. Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
March 8
8 p.m. — “Red-Headed Woman” (1932)
9:30 p.m. — “Three Wise Girls” (1932)
10:45 p.m. — “Riffraff” (1936)
12:30 a.m. — “Suzy” (1936)
2:15 a.m. — “City Lights” (1931)*
*What’s this Charlie Chaplin classic doing here? Harlow appears in this film as an extra, in a scene filmed before she reached stardom.
March 15
8 p.m. — “The Public Enemy” (1931)
9:30 p.m. — “Bombshell” (1933)
11:15 p.m. — “Libeled Lady” (1936)
1 a.m. — “Reckless” (1935)
2:45 a.m. — “Personal Property” (1937)
“Bombshell” will also run at 6:15 a.m. March 20.
March 22
8 p.m. — “Wife vs. Secretary” (1936)
9:45 p.m. — “Red Dust” (1932)
11:15 p.m. — “Hold Your Man” (1933)
1 a.m. — “China Seas” (1935)
2:30 a.m. — “The Secret Six” (1931)
4 a.m. — “Saratoga” (1937)
Harlow’s half-dozen (or should that be 5 1/2?) films with Clark Gable
March 29
8 p.m. — “Dinner at Eight” (1933)
10 p.m. — “The Girl From Missouri” (1934)
11:30 p.m. — “Platinum Blonde” (1931)
1:15 a.m. — “The Beast Of The City” (1932)
It’s unfortunate some of her rarely seen pre-MGM films weren’t available — heck, “The Saturday Night Kid” would have made more sense than showing “City Lights” — but otherwise, it’s a good schedule. (Attention to TCM: If you can, show the separate footage of “Hold Your Man” that features both a black and a white minister; the latter was used in a version for southern U.S. markets. During the 2006 SUTS Lombard salute, you showed the ending of “Vigil In The Night” made expressly for European markets, and there’s no reason you can’t do likewise here.)
Finally, some rare Harlow pics, from the superb Jean Harlow Yahoo! site (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jeanharlow/), which is now 13 years old and full of avid fans and information on the first of the blonde bombshells. We’ll start out with a promotional still for “Bombshell”; double-clicked, this has been enlarged to such a gigantic size that if you were sitting face-to-face with a Jean who was this scale, when she stood up, she’d likely bump her head against the ceiling:
We’ve been “reflecting” on Harlow this week; now it’s her turn to do so:
This charming photo shows Jean, whose legs were as splendid as the rest of her figure, filling a pair of silk stockings nicely:
Finally, a pair of MGM legends, both of whom left us far too soon — Jean Harlow and Irving Thalberg:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.05 at 02:51
Current mood: 
tired
Carole Lombard needs your help, and she needs it now.
It’s the semifinals of the March Madness competition for actresses of the silents and 1930s at the blog “All Good Things,” and Lombard, the fourth seed, is in a tough battle with ninth-seeded Myrna Loy. Myrna, who routed both Jean Harlow and top seed Greta Garbo in earlier rounds, took an early lead before Carole went ahead, leading 39-28 at one point before Loy whittled the margin to a too-close-for-comfort 44-40. Lombard has since added more votes and currently has a bit of breathing room at 59-41, but it’s no time for Carole’s fans to be complacent, especially against a worthy rival like Myrna. If you haven’t yet voted in this round, do so immediately, as Saturday marks the closing day for the semis. Go to http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/ and cast your ballot; the deadline is 8 p.m. (ET).
In the other semifinal, 10th seed Irene Dunne, who’s shown more staying power than expected, has a similar lead on sixth-seeded Claudette Colbert, but it’s only 46-30 (which means Lombard-Loy is drawing substantially more interest).
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.04 at 00:41
Current mood: optimistic
To call it a rout would be an understatement. In the second round of the silents/1930s actress tournament at the “All Good Things” blog, fourth-seeded Carole Lombard — already up 54-8 after one day — cruised to a 71-9 victory over fifth-seeded Marlene Dietrich. That means Carole moves on to the semifinals against arguably her most formidable foe to date.
We’re referring to Myrna Loy, the ninth seed, who defeated an MGM stablemate for the second straight time. After a surprisingly easy first-round win over Jean Harlow, Loy posted a 60-13 upset over top-seeded Greta Garbo. The other semifinal features 10th-seeded Irene Dunne (who had no trouble in upsetting second seed Barbara Stanwyck, 59-38) against sixth seed Claudette Colbert (a 50-24 conqueror of third-seeded Norma Shearer).
If this were boxing — a sport Lombard loved to watch — the Lombard-Loy match would be a contrast in styles. Lombard, with her raucous, manic physical humor, could be the female comedic equivalent of Jack Dempsey. In contrast, the cool, more subtle Loy could be viewed as a Gene Tunney type. (If you’re confused by the analogies, in the 1920s Dempsey was a no-holds-barred knockout artist; Tunney was considered a “scientific” boxer, a fighter with finesse rather than a heavy puncher.)
Dempsey and Tunney fought twice, with Gene wresting the heavyweight title from Jack in Philadelphia in 1926 and retaining his crown the following year in Chicago in the controversial “long count” fight. But that’s ancient history, and perhaps Carole (who took boxing lessons in her youth from lightweight champion Benny Leonard) can win one for the brawlers. (Hey, remember “Nothing Sacred”?) And you can help.
You should know the drill by now: matches last two days, and you cast your vote by going to http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/. Polls are expected to open at 6 a.m. (Eastern).
Oh, and while I’ve long expressed my admiration for Loy — a talented actress and a fine person — make no mistake whom I’m backing in this round. After all, this community isn’t known as “Myrna & Co.”
While we’re at it, a reminder to go to the Kitty Packard Pictorial (http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/) for the continuation of the Jean Harlow Blogathon. To date, more than 30 sites have been “blogging for Baby,” and the range of entries has been something to behold. One of them is from the splendidly nostalgic “Thrilling Days Of Yesteryear,” which examines Harlow’s work with Laurel & Hardy — including the 1929 two-reeler “Double Whoopee,” where a mishap involving bellhops Stan and Ollie, a taxi door and a dress caught when it closed enables us to see much more of Harlow’s character than she intended. (Not that viewers minded.)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.04 at 02:10
Current mood: sympathetic
Carole Lombard and Clark Gable probably didn’t see much sun (lower case) during their stay at Johns Hopkins Hospital in wintry Baltimore, as 1940 turned into 1941. However, they probably saw a lot of the Sun (upper case).
As in the famed Baltimore Sun, once the home of sage H.L. Mencken and coverage of Washington (government) news that often outdid D.C. rivals. (Actually, there was a morning Sun and the now-defunct Evening Sun, two different entities; they were often referred to as the “Sunpapers.”)
The newspapers, locally owned for decades, were eventually sold to Times-Mirror (owners of the Los Angeles Times, among other dailies), a firm which in turn was sold to the Tribune Corporation. And just as the company recently sold vintage photos from the Chicago Tribune, now it is doing likewise with the Sunpapers’ photographic archive. (Will the Times, a likely treasure trove of classic Hollywood-related images, be next to auction off items? We’ll have to wait and see.)
The photo above, minus the crop marks, is from Dec. 31, 1940, showing the couple’s arrival at Hopkins. Here’s what the back looks like, including a watermark with the Sun logo:
The Dec. 31, 1940 stamp is visible, and this picture was also used in June 1980 for an “I remember” story. Underneath those dates, you can faintly make out a “Jan 17, 1942,” so this photo was probably used to accompany the story on the plane crash.
While that is the only locally-generated Lombard photo being auctioned, there are several more photos of interest from Sun archives. Take this one of Carole with William Powell from Sept. 26, 1933, barely five weeks after their divorce had been granted:
Here’s the photo as it actually exists (minus the watermark, of course), from front and back, with (most of) the snipe:
Back to Lombard with Gable — a photo, taken just after their marriage, which apparently arrived at the Sun on April 4, 1939:
There are six photos in all, each with a starting bid of $24.99 — and as of this writing, none of them have been bid on. Bidding is slated to close between 7:32 and 11:38 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday night. (Thanks to Tally for her work on these images.)
Want to get in on the action, or simply learn more? Go to http://stores.ebay.com/TribunePhotos/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&LH_SellerWithStore=1&LH_TitleDesc=1&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_sasi=1&_sop=1.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.03 at 00:56
Current mood: happy
Today marks a very special day for all classic Hollywood fans, and I know that somewhere, Carole Lombard is delighted to honor the centenary of not only a friend, but someone she genuinely liked, respected and admired. We are, of course, referring to Jean Harlow (who replaces Carole in the avatar for this entry), arguably the top sex symbol of the 1930s, even if she sadly didn’t complete the decade. This marks my second contribution this week to the Jean Harlow Blogathon at the Kitty Packard Pictorial (http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/):
For someone who only lived slightly more than 26¼ years, Harlow accomplished a lot. And what makes it all the more remarkable is that Jean did it without a genuine zeal for the business. It’s entirely possible she might never have pursued a film career had she not followed up on Fox casting director Joe Egli’s suggestion in mid-1928 that she apply with Central Casting. Egli was entranced with the 17-year-old’s beauty; over the next nine years, millions of moviegoers would follow suit.
(Harlow, born Harlean Carpenter, had lived in Los Angeles earlier in the 1920s with her mother, the original Jean Harlow, who unsuccessfully tried to break into films. As was the case with most youths of the 1920s, the daughter loved movies, and was particularly a fan of western star Buck Jones –- so there’s a good chance Harlean saw her future friend Lombard in a few of Jones’ Fox westerns of 1925.)
It’s no secret that MGM stablemate Joan Crawford was one of the few people in the industry who didn’t like Jean. Perhaps Crawford, for whom stardom was the be-all and end-all, couldn’t understand Harlow, who certainly worked hard at her craft (critics, who derided Jean in the early 1930s, came around to her side by 1932 or ’33) but never let it consume her the way it did Joan -– had Harlow never achieved stardom, one could imagine her writing or doing something completely unrelated to film. (Lombard was sort of in between ‘20s pal Crawford and ‘30s buddy Harlow; while she certainly was driven to become a star actress, she enjoyed the movie business as a whole and became expert at many facets of it -– lighting, cinematography, publicity, etc. Had Carole lived longer, perhaps she would have become a producer once her acting career wound down.)
Yes, Jean’s sex appeal was considerable, although some elements of her style might not resonate with audiences three-quarters of a century after her fame. But those who worked on film crews met all sorts of sexy, attractive people. What made Harlow so popular, so beloved, in the film community was her genuine niceness and lack of pretense. As was the case with Lombard, people on the low end of the totem pole felt a kinship with her, a quality that transcended glamour. And unlike Marilyn Monroe, the de facto successor to Harlow a quarter-century later, Jean was ever the professional on the set (although, to be fair, Monroe had a far rougher upbringing and less education than the relatively well-off Harlow).
Today isn’t just Jean’s centennial birthday -– it also marks the opening of a special Harlow exhibit through Sept. 5 at the Hollywood Museum (located at the old Max Factor building where Jean dedicated the “blonde room” in 1935).
All sorts of Harlow memorabilia will be on display, including the famous 1932 mural Paul Bern commissioned depicting Jean and several other MGM stars as Elizabethan types. This will mark the first time it’s ever been on public view. Below is an image of the mural as it hung in the Harlow-Bern house.
And next Wednesday, Darrell Rooney and Mark A. Vieira, authors of the eagerly awaited “Harlow In Hollywood,” will hold a grand opening book signing from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m.
All this is a wonderful way to honor the memory of one of filmdom’s icons, a talented actress and a likable person who has been called “the most real of the sex symbols.” And deservedly so.
To close, some candid shots of “the Baby”:
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.03 at 01:40
Current mood: hopeful
Is Carole Lombard waving “bye-bye” to Marlene Dietrich? It could very well be. After one day of the two-day second-round March Madness competition for actresses from the silent era and 1930s at the “All Good Things” blog, fourth-seeded Lombard has a commanding 54-8 lead over her fifth-seeded Paramount stablemate. However, that’s not the most lopsided battle as of this writing. While Carole has 87 percent of the vote so far, ninth-seeded Myrna Loy has 89 percent (51-6) as she appears on her way to a rout of top seed and MGM cohort Greta Garbo. Americans 2, foreigners 0?
The other two matches are somewhat more competitive. Fifth-seeded Claudette Colbert has a 39-18 edge on third seed Norma Shearer, while tenth seed Irene Dunne is surprising second-seeded Barbara Stanwyck, 51-29 (it’s interesting to see that battle’s drawing far more votes than the other three). As things stand, Friday’s semifinals will pit Lombard versus Loy (my two all-time favorite actresses) and Dunne versus Colbert.
But nothing’s in the bag just yet, so fans of Carole shouldn’t get overconfident. If you haven’t voted, do so today at http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/, where the blog is also honoring Lombard as its classic movie goddess of the month. (That in itself is a reason to visit.)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.02 at 02:35
Current mood: curious
The big news for Carole Lombard in March 1932 was her latest film, “No One Man,” which after its release in late January was rolling out into medium-sized and smaller cities. Artistically, it was little more than a programmer, but at least it was keeping Carole in the spotlight.
This type of film, one writer noted, was quite similar to what another blonde — one currently more popular than Lombard — was doing at the time. This is from the St. Joseph (Mo.) News Press of March 18:
Hollywood writer Robbin Coons said Lombard was being used as a rags-to-riches Constance Bennett type, “and she is wearing glittering creations which she sets off quite as beautifully as the rival star. But she has a right to be considered on her own merits, and she will, you may be sure.” (Coons also said Bette Davis, then a Bennett-like ash blonde still some years away from becoming queen of the Warners lot, was in a similar situation.)
One wonders whether the writer was aware of the backstory regarding Bennett and Lombard, in that Connie reportedly had Carole and her blonde buddy Diane Ellis thrown off the Pathe roster in late 1929, about the time Bennett signed with the studio.
In March of ’32, Carole was hard at work on her next film, “Sinners In The Sun,” from which Mollie Merrick, whose column ran in the Spokane Spokesman-Review, received fodder for at least two columns. On March 7, she wrote that a mock newspaper was created for a scene:
“They had lots of fun at Paramount the other day getting together a real Sunday newspaper (to be used in “Sinners In The Sun,” which is being made now).
“Under the fictitious title, ‘New York Mercury,’ a lot of ex-newspaper men turned out an unusually interesting paper, which only reached a total of 15 copies. Just enough for the picture.
“A real newspaper could not be used, as the studio would thereby be open to any number of suits from syndicates because of the strict copyright laws in regard to photographing copyrighted material.
“Being an argumentative sort, I asked why they had to make an entire newspaper — why wouldn’t the front sheet be enough?
“But it happens that in the story one of the scenes shows a family grabbing the parts of a Sunday paper. For instance, Chester Morris gets the sports section, Carole Lombard the help wanted section, Adrienne Ames the society, and Alison Skipworth the woman’s page, which necessitated a complete paper.
“So while they were going that far they made it truly realistic and made a funny page featuring the four Marx brothers, Stuart Erwin and Jack Oakie.”
Had this film been made at MGM in 1932, it probably could have used a Hearst paper (in this case, the Sunday New York American), thanks to Hearst’s MGM ties at the time. And, of course, the Marxes, Erwin and Oakie were all Paramount players when this was made.
Two weeks later, in the March 21 paper, she ran this tidbit:
Merrick discovers 1910s stars Florence Turner and Florence Lawrence both in the cast of “Sinners In The Sun.” Alas, she merely acknowledges their presence and doesn’t talk to them — or to the stars they were supporting. (Lombard probably saw their films while growing up in Fort Wayne.) For more on Lawrence and her fascinating, yet ultimately tragic story, go to http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/268617.html.
On March 30, Hearst columnist Louella Parsons reported that Lombard and co-star Chester Morris had lunch on the lot with the Earl and Countess of Strafford and the honorable Robert Bruce of London. According to Parsons, “They were visiting the paramount studios and Carole and Chester did the honors and did them mighty well.” How reassuring to the Anglophiles among us.
To help promote “Sinners In The Sun,” Lombard, Paramount designer Travis Banton and William De Mille selected 11 extras from several hundred candidates to appear in the film. This ran in the Meriden (Conn.) Daily Journal on March 19:
None of the 11 achieved any notable stardom, although Muriel Evans worked on quite a few 1930s westerns, including at least one with John Wayne, and was a frequent leading lady of Charley Chase in his later two-reelers.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.02 at 08:50
Current mood: giddy
History has not recorded whether Carole Lombard ever faced friend and fellow actress Ginger Rogers in tennis — both were pretty good at it — but in their latest competition, Carole prevailed in surprisingly convincing fashion.
Leading only 11-10 at one point, a second-day Lombard surge enabled the fourth-seeded star to conquer #13 seed Rogers, 35-18, in the first round of the March Madness challenge of silents and 1930s actresses at the “All Good Things” blog. Other opening-round battles went like this:
#1 Greta Garbo def. #16 Gloria Swanson, 26-22
#9 Myrna Loy def. #8 Jean Harlow, 36-13
#5 Marlene Dietrich def. #12 Mary Pickford, 34-12
#2 Barbara Stanwyck def. #15 Joan Crawford, 42-8
#10 Irene Dunne def. #7 Clara Bow, 28-13
#3 Norma Shearer def. #14 Marion Davies, 29-18
#5 Claudette Colbert def. #12 Louise Brooks, 40-8
Second-round action has just begun, and once again Carole is facing a leggy former studio cohort, this time from Paramount rather than RKO, in the form of Marlene Dietrich. Lombard once more needs your support, so go to http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/ and vote. You again have two days to do it.
Other second-round battles pit Loy against another MGM rival, this one Greta Garbo; Barbara Stanwyck, fresh off a lopsided win over Joan Crawford, takes on Irene Dunne; and Norma Shearer, who outlasted scrappy Marion Davies, faces Claudette Colbert.
Also, a reminder that the Jean Harlow Blogathon is continuing (remember, tomorrow is Jean’s actual centenary!), and among the contributors is Michelle Morgan, a longtime friend of “Carole & Co.” who’s currently working on a Clark Gable project. Find links to all the contributions at http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.03.01 at 01:40
Current mood: thoughtful
If it’s March, it must mean madness…and so it does, and not just in basketball, either. As noted the other day, the site “All Good Things” is staging a tournament of its own among 64 classic actresses. This week, 16 stars from the silents and 1930s are waging battle, and Lombard, seeded fourth, is facing #13 seed Ginger Rogers in the opening round. As of this writing, Carole maintains a lead by the narrowest of margins, 11-10, after one day of the two-day competition.
You can help Lombard out by going to the site, http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com/. On the right side of the site are the eight opening-round matches, where you can cast your vote — but remember, you must do it today. And if you need a reason why you should vote for Lombard, well, just look at the top of this entry.
Here are the other matches, along with the voting as of this writing:
#1 Greta Garbo leads #16 Gloria Swanson, 12-9
#9 Myrna Loy leads #8 Jean Harlow, 19-3
#5 Marlene Dietrich leads #12 Mary Pickford, 15-5
#2 Barbara Stanwyck leads #15 Joan Crawford, 17-5
#10 Irene Dunne leads #7 Clara Bow, 16-5
#3 Norma Shearer and #14 Marion Davies are tied, 10-10
#6 Claudette Colbert leads #11 Louise Brooks, 16-4
Some observations:
* While I love Loy, I am surprised she has such a commanding lead over her “Libeled Lady” castmate — and in the week of Harlow’s centenary, too.
* Interesting battle between Shearer and Davies. Is William Randolph Hearst waging a campaign from the hereafter to avenge Shearer beating out Davies for “The Barretts Of Wimpole Street,” a decision that led Hearst to transfer Davies (and her giant studio bungalow) from MGM to Warners?
* I have no doubt that if Carole saw the seeding, she would be a bit embarrassed to rank ahead of Pickford and Swanson, two stars she idolized in her youth.
Again, remember that today marks the final day of voting for this round, so please take a second and give Carole your support.
Also, don’t forget to keep up with the continuing Jean Harlow Blogathon at the Kitty Packard Pictorial ((http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/).
I would be remiss not to acknowledge the death of Jane Russell Monday at age 89. For years considered by many as merely a sex symbol, as time goes on her cool style, never taking herself all that seriously, looks better and better. (It also probably explains why she had such wonderful chemistry with Robert Mitchum.)
Last June, I posted an entry on Russell, noting several films Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. was to show on her birthday, June 21 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/314886.html); TCM just announced its June schedule, and what would have been a 90th birthday celebration will now be a memorial. (I also expect the channel to run some Russell films this month as a salute to her passing.) The link above features her fine performance of “One For My Baby” from “Macao.”
Thanks for your contributions to classic Hollywood, Jane.
Jean Harlow Blogathon: Harlow, Lombard…let’s switch!
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.28 at 00:01
Current mood: cheerful
For the centenary of Jean Harlow’s birth (which occurs this Thursday), I tried to find a way to commemorate it -– especially since this will be part of a Harlow blogathon at “The Kitty Packard Pictorial,” a superb site on Harlow, classic Hollywood and popular culture (http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/).
At last count, 19 blogs are contributing Harlow-related material (or, as it’s being called, “Blogging For Baby”). The blogathon is also designed to promote the fine new book that we’ve mentioned several times here before, “Harlow in Hollywood: The Blonde Bombshell in the Glamour Capital,” by Darrell Rooney and Mark Vieira (http://www.angelcitypress.com/harl.html).
An entry linking Carole Lombard and Harlow isn’t easy. Although they were good friends and were beloved by casts and crews throughout filmland, no picture of them together has ever been discovered –- a holy grail among both fandoms. Carole’s first husband, William Powell, later had an intense, but ill-fated, romance with Harlow, and Lombard’s second husband, Clark Gable, was renowned for his steamy romantic films with Jean (although in real life, they were good friends, never lovers).
So, what’s a writer to do? Use imagination, that’s what. I’m going to create an alternate universe where Lombard stars in Harlow’s movies, and vice versa. How might these silver screen goddesses have fared in each other’s films?
Some ground rules:
* Our ”altered” period begins in 1930 (when both settled into the business) and ends in early 1937 (before Harlow died).
* We’re generally focusing on Jean and Carole’s acting work; their romances will be mentioned solely in passing.
So imagine you’re poring through one of the big Sunday newspapers on Feb. 28, 1937, with the Oscars a few days away, and you see this story in the entertainment section:
_________________________________________
February 28, 1937
Blonde Beauty Buddies Cheer Each Other On
Jean, Carole Ascend In Film Firmament
HOLLYWOOD -– Do Jean Harlow and Carole Lombard have a mutual admiration society?
“You might say so,” Miss Lombard replied with a laugh as fellow blonde Miss Harlow nodded with approval. “Jean is such a sweet and charming lady.”
“The same can be said for Carole,” Jean said over lunch at the Brown Derby as customers passed by their booth and politely gave their regards to both.
Miss Harlow is now linked with William Powell, Carole’s ex-husband, and she doesn’t mind their romance a bit. “The two make a marvelous couple, and would make an even better husband and wife,” said Miss Lombard, now frequently seen in public with one of her regular M-G-M co-stars, Clark Gable.
Both actresses –- considered among the most luminous ladies in filmland — are riding high in popularity. Miss Lombard, who’s been one of Metro’s most valuable properties for five years now, will soon star opposite Robert Taylor in the comedy “Personal Property.” Meanwhile, Paramount has high hopes for “Swing High, Swing Low,” which will come out in about a month, co-starring Miss Harlow and Fred MacMurray in a musical where Jean actually sings a bit.
“Just a bit,” Jean said in self-deprecation.
“Don’t worry, hon, I’m not much of a golden throat either,” Carole added, laughing. “I guess she and I are the anti-Boswell Sisters.”
Both are looking forward to this week’s Academy Awards. Each have received nominations, Jean for best actress in “My Man Godfrey,” Carole for best supporting actress for her role as a bride perennially left at the altar in “Libeled Lady.”
“It’s good we’re not in the same category, though if we were we’d be ladylike about it,” Jean said, smiling.
Carole nodded approvingly. “You want to see us competitive? Come to the tennis court, where Baby rarely takes a set from me.”
“But on the golf course, it’s a horse of a different color,” Miss Harlow responded, referring to her mastery on the links.
The two blondes became friends in late 1931, when both were being considered for parts as gold-diggers in Samuel Goldwyn’s saucy comedy, “The Greeks Had A Word For Them.” Neither was cast, but it didn’t stop either’s progress in Hollywood.
Carole, about a year and a half older than Jean, reached stardom first, as Howard Hughes cast her as love interest Helen in his 1930 air epic “Hell’s Angels.” She admitted the role was “ridiculous -– and so was the dialogue,” but it catapulted her into the limelight after working with Mack Sennett in two-reel comedies.
She had her ups and downs for a little over a year, making a few programmers along with supporting roles in hits such as “The Public Enemy” (“What actress wouldn’t want to work with James Cagney?” Miss Lombard said) and “Platinum Blonde.” In the latter, she dyed her hair to that color to play the title heiress, “and some in the industry thought I was copying Jean.” Carole then sighed, saying she still wistfully remembered Robert Williams, who died not long after its release.
At the time, Miss Harlow was a relatively obscure player at Paramount, which had signed her to a contract at the suggestion of Clara Bow after Jean had a small role in “The Saturday Night Kid.”
“Clara did a lot to encourage my career,” Miss Harlow said. “I’m sad that she’s no longer in the business, but I’m happy for her in that she seems happier the few times I see her.”
However, Miss Harlow’s rise was slow and steady. With Paramount’s stable of starlets, she gained experience on lower-tier features, such as Buddy Rogers’ “Safety In Numbers” in 1930 and the Gary Cooper vehicle “I Take This Woman” the following year. “Coop was great to work with, and I had a ball riding a horse!” Jean said of that film; they worked again three years later in “Now And Forever,” with everyone’s favorite moppet, Shirley Temple.
“Shirley deserves her fame and praise,” Jean said. “For her youth, she has remarkable composure and poise on the set.”
The year 1932 was a good year for both blondes’ careers. Carole was signed by M-G-M after a good supporting turn in “The Beast Of The City,” getting her breakthrough role in “Red-Headed Woman,” where the normally blonde Miss Lombard won wows for not only her new hair shade, but her mastery of comedy.
“People only viewed me through the prism of sex -– I said prism, not prison, though it might as well have been,” Miss Lombard said, eliciting a laugh from Miss Harlow. “Okay, so I have sex appeal. Big deal. Making people laugh –- now that’s an achievement!”
“That’s true,” Jean added. “People who don’t know us think we’re obsessed with glamour, but that really isn’t the case. Yes, we’re very dedicated to our work, and we take it seriously. We follow what goes on in the business, just as anyone does in their trade. But we keep up with world events, do plenty of reading and so on. Being glamorous doesn’t mean being stupid.”
Carole followed up “Red-Headed Woman” with the torrid “Red Dust,” vying for Gable’s manly charms with Mary Astor, a distant relative of hers. “I have such fun on screen with Clark,” she said. They’ve subsequently teamed up a number of times -– “Hold Your Man,” “China Seas,” “Wife Versus Secretary” (“Watch out for that James Stewart, he’s going places,” Miss Lombard said) and they’ll soon be together again in “Saratoga.”
In ’32, Miss Harlow also worked with Gable, when Metro loaned him out to Paramount for “No Man Of Her Own.” Asked about Clark, Jean said, “Sure I’d like to work with him again.” She also gained success on a loanout of her own, visiting Columbia and winning praise for “Virtue.”
Still, Jean appeared stifled at Paramount, seemingly unable to gain a distinctive screen personality, whereas in contrast Carole was riding high at Metro with the delightful “Dinner At Eight” and the satiric “Bombshell.”
“You can’t imagine how many guys have said they wanted to run barefoot through my hair,” Carole said, citing a line from the latter film and chuckling.
But Miss Harlow finally found her stride in 1934, again at Columbia. Playing a salesgirl turned petulant star in “Twentieth Century,” she was every bit as hilarious as John Barrymore, whose praise for her was effusive. On the other hand, Jean finally got the M-G-M treatment that fall in “The Gay Bride,” and while she looked beautiful, it didn’t provide the boost she expected.
That wouldn’t come until 1935, when Paramount gave her a romantic comedy worthy of her talent — “Hands Across The Table,” directed by Mitchell Leisen and co-starring MacMurray. “It was fun playing a manicurist digging for gold and learning bigger lessons,” Miss Harlow said.
Last year, Jean and Carole gained greater stature, each through working with the dapper Mr. Powell. Miss Lombard enjoyed portraying the luckless Gladys Simpson in “Libeled Lady,” noting that “working with Bill, Myrna (Loy) and Spencer (Tracy) is a pleasure and a challenge simultaneously. You have to keep up with them, but the good news is that they make it so easy.”
“Even when your ex reeled you in?” Jean replied jokingly, referring to a scene where Carole’s character is hooked by Powell’s fishing rod while in a hotel suite. (If that doesn’t make sense, you haven’t seen the movie.)
“True comedy requires pain,” Carole replied sarcastically. “By the way, you were wonderful as Irene Bullock in ‘Godfrey.’”
“Given the popularity of this thing called screwball, I was tempted to play her as a flighty sort, but that really isn’t me,” Miss Harlow said. “So instead, I emphasized her blend of sweetness and naivete. With all those fine actors in the cast, it worked.”
“We’ve both achieved a lot,” Carole said. “Who knows, if things had gone slightly differently somewhere along the line, we might be in each other’s shoes.”
Would Misses Lombard and Harlow like to appear in a movie together?
“I’d love it!” Carole said. “Trouble is, most pictures that aren’t adventures or westerns, whether they be comedies or dramas, cast a guy and a girl as the leads -– ‘Libeled Lady’ was the exception to the rule. When two women are the leads, it’s usually one of those two-reel comedies, the kind Thelma Todd made, rest her soul.”
Jean concurred. “I’m sure some writer out there -– Ben Hecht, Norman Krasna, somebody -– could create a script that would make Carole and I distinctive and different characters,” she said. “Would a studio be interested in that type of property? I don’t know. But someday, I would enjoy making a movie with her, though it’d probably be at Metro -– L.B. considers Carole too valuable to loan out.”
With that, they extended their arms over the table and shook hands.
_________________________________________
While it’s highly unlikely film history would have proceeded precisely this way, you could make the case for Lombard traveling Harlow’s career route and vice versa. Jean did have a small role in “The Saturday Night Kid” (another Jean of later fame, Miss Arthur, also had a supporting part). Had a Paramount executive seen something in Harlow and signed her to a significant contract, she might well have spent her next several years based on Melrose Avenue in Hollywood rather than Washington Boulevard in Culver City.
As for Carole, she did have a brief, discreet relationship with Howard Hughes in 1929; had Harlow been unavailable, would he have cast Lombard in the sound version of “Hell’s Angels”? It might well have happened. Darwin Porter makes a case for this in his 2005 Hughes bio “Howard Hughes, Hell’s Angel,” but his purported dialogue, which naturally can’t be corroborated, paints a portrait of Lombard that doesn’t mesh with what we know about her at that age. (For more on Porter’s book and his rather spurious account, see http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/57165.html.)
In short, it’s not hard to imagine a Paramount Harlow, as well as a Lombard who somehow finds her way to MGM (perhaps not through Paul Bern). In this alternate universe, I’ve tried to avoid shoehorning Jean’s personality into Carole’s films, and vice versa, although a Harlow left to fend for herself at Paramount during its financial struggles in the early thirties might have become somewhat different than the Harlow we’re familiar with.
Conversely, just because Lombard’s lone film at Metro was the lackluster “The Gay Bride” doesn’t mean she couldn’t have succeeded there as a studio star rather than a hired hand. Irving Thalberg probably would have made sure she received good scripts, and without a Harlow on hand, an MGM Lombard might have been cast in those sexy comedies, as well as other properties tailored to her talents.
It’s a fascinating “what if” to ponder.
Oh, and three other things to note:
* Harlow and Lombard apparently really were among the candidates for “The Greeks Had A Word For Them,” according to contemporary accounts.
* The Lombard-Cagney comment is sort of ironic. In real life, Carole had a chance to work with him, but refused a loanout to Warners to make “Taxi!” (Loretta Young got the female lead), a decision Lombard long regretted.
* That one-and-a-half year age difference between Carole and Jean was an intentional error. At the time, studio publicists had Lombard born in 1909, not 1908.
Incidentally, I hope you like this week’s Lombard header image, showing Carole in a pensive mood.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.27 at 01:50
Current mood: nostalgic
That’s Carole Lombard, playing a princess (or, should we say, playing a character passing herself off as one) in the 1936 Paramount comedy “The Princess Comes Across.” Two years earlier, one of Hollywood’s most notable moguls labeled her a queen — in print.
And what’s most interesting about this is that it came from a man who would never work professionally with Lombard.
He’s Darryl F. Zanuck, shown in 1940 when he was head of one of the industry’s top studios, Twentieth Century-Fox. But six years earlier, there was no “Fox” in that title, as Zanuck ran Twentieth Century Pictures, the upstart studio he had co-founded the year before after leaving Warners. (The merger with ailing Fox would come the following year.)
In January 1934, Zanuck wrote a newspaper article on “The Nine Queens Of Hollywood,” and yes, Lombard was one of them:
This is from the Winnipeg Free Press of Jan. 13, 1934. One would think this was a syndicated piece, that Zanuck wasn’t writing expressly for a daily in central Canada, but so far I can’t find this in another newspaper.
You can see Carole in shorts, showing off her legs, at right, with Joan Crawford’s disembodied head at her feet, both dwarfed by Jean Harlow at left.
It’s interesting that Zanuck chose Lombard, who at the time was possibly better known for her legs than for her acting. “Twentieth Century” (the film, not the studio!) was a few months away, and may have just started production when this came to print.
So we know three of the other nine; who were the other six? (Hint: Myrna Loy, who would be named “queen of Hollywood” in a 1936 fan poll, was not one of them.)
Three of the queens aren’t all that surprising for the time — Constance Bennett, Norma Shearer and Loretta Young (the last of whom would work for Zanuck for many years at Twentieth Century-Fox):
But the other three might surprise you with their “royal” lineage, even though one of them had won an Academy Award.
That’s Helen Hayes, who would trade in her Hollywood “queendom” for the comforts of being Broadway royalty. Zanuck’s other two queens, far more obscure today, never quite became big stars — Anna Sten, who Samuel Goldwyn vainly tried to make into another Greta Garbo, and Constance Cummings, a friend of Carole’s best known today for being Harold Lloyd’s leading lady in 1932’s underrated “Movie Crazy”:
I’d love to tell you more about this column, about what Zanuck had to say about Carole, the two Constances and others. Unfortunately, I can’t enlarge this page to the point where the print would be legible. However, you can purchase this page through eBay for $17.50 through its “buy it now” option, or you can make an offer. (If unsold, the offer will end March 28.) Interested? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/100236CQ-HOLLYWOOD-JEAN-HARLOW-CAROLE-LOMBARD-JAN-1934-/390292755434?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adf42d3ea. (And if you do get it, forward me what it says.)
In honor of Zanuck, we’ll close with him speaking and introducing a tour of the Twentieth Century-Fox studios (much of which is now gone, replaced by the Century City development), part of a film the company made for industry people attending a convention. It’s listed as being from 1935, but references to “Cafe Metropole” and “On The Avenue” indicate it’s actually from 1937. You’ll even see Shirley Temple (speaking of royalty!) at the end.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.27 at 13:33
Current mood: excited
Ever the competitor, Carole Lombard is preparing for a tournament, ready to face her peers. But this isn’t tennis — no, it’s a competition being staged by Monty at the site “All Good Things” (http://poohtiger-allgoodthings.blogspot.com), and it’s scheduled to start tomorrow. He calls it “March Madness (Classic Movie Goddess style),” with 64 of classic Hollywood’s greats squaring off.
Some of you college basketball fans may be saying, “64? Doesn’t Monty realize there are 68 teams in the tourney now?” True, but that’s in the men’s tournament; the women’s event still has 64 entrants. (So Monty, when you do something like this with actors, make the field 68.)
According to at least one biographer, Carole did play some basketball in school (not that surprising, considering that for many in the early 1920s, it was as much an activity for women and girls as it was for men and boys). But she won’t have to practice her jump shot here, because this competition will be fought by fans.
Monty explains the criteria this way: “I broke down the actresses into 4 groups: I combined the silent era with the 1930’s; the 1940’s; the 1950’s; and the 1960’s. There will be 16 women per section and I’m currently ranking them 1 to 16 based on their popularity, success, award achievements, and acting prowess.”
Wonder if Marion Davies made the cut?
Here’s how it will work, according to Monty:
“Once I have all 64 actresses chosen, they will be paired up in matches and I will have the voting take place on my sidebar. So the first round will have 8 matches taking place. I will start with the silent/30’s era for the first week beginning on Monday, February 28th until the final actress is left standing. And then week 2 will be for the 40’s era, week 3 for the 50’s and week 4 for the 60’s. You will have two days to vote for each round so please come by and vote quickly. And then the final four to determine the most popular actress will begin on March 28th. Two days for each semi-final match and then the final match beginning on April 1st. I will let that match run 3 days so I can crown the champion on Monday.”
That means that the first-round battle involving Lombard could come as early as Monday, so I beseech all of her fans (the “Team Carole” noted in the subject line) to visit “All Good Things” every day, to vote for her when her event takes place as well as to vote on the other bouts. The top seeds in each category are Greta Garbo, silents/1930s; Bette Davis, 1940s; Audrey Hepburn, 1950s; Doris Day, 1960s.
And there’s another reason to visit “All Good Things” tomorrow and in the upcoming weeks. Monty has a feature called “Classic Movie Goddess Of The Month,” and guess who happens to have the honor for March?
Lombard, whom Monty says “also happens to be my favorite actress of all time.” Clearly, this is a man of taste.
One immaculate lady, man
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.26 at 01:46
Current mood: contemplative
In purely artistic terms, “Ladies’ Man” was a programmer, little more. But it was Carole Lombard’s second film with William Powell, whom she’d marry in late June 1931, not long after its release. Powell had already made a few films with Kay Francis, although their splendid chemistry would reach full flower when both went to Warners in 1932. (And, of course, Lombard and Francis would work together in the 1939 drama “In Name Only.”)
When I saw “Ladies’ Man” at the old Theater 80 St. Marks in lower Manhattan in the late 1980s, I didn’t think much of Lombard’s performance. Based upon the lone comment made about the movie at IMDb, perhaps I should give it another look, though it’s difficult to track down. (Unlike Powell’s first film with Carole, “Man Of The World” — made earlier in ’31 — it has received no official DVD release.)
I thought about “Ladies’ Man” after coming across a publicity still made by ace Paramount portrait artist Eugene Robert Richee (1896-1972), who took plenty of magnificent pictures of Carole. Richee, for several years head of Paramount’s still photography studio, captured her glamour as well as any photographer of his era. The photo below makes that evident:
That is the type of portrait that dares you not to double-click it to view at its full, glorious size, just to examine Carole’s stunning face. (Also note two “tricks” she uses to disguise the slight scar from her automobile accident five years earlier — she’s photographed at a slight angle away from the scar, and she’s also placing her fingers over the scar, simultaneously giving the impression she’s deep in thought. Which she may well be.)
This solo shot could well be part of Paramount’s p1202 collection of Lombard images…but it isn’t. Instead, it is marked 828-65, “828” being the code number for “Ladies’ Man.” It’s a 7 1/2″ x 9 1/2″ original, slightly trimmed and in excellent condition.
And if you want it, prepare to pay. Bidding for this photo begins at $294.95, and as of this writing, no bids have been made. There’s plenty of time, though, because bidding ends at 11:30 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday.
If you’d like to place this in your collection, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-31-GORGEOUS-Portrait-RICHEE-/380317415563?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588caf388b.
Just as a point of comparison, here’s another Richee portrait from that session, also released as part of the “Ladies’ Man” issue:
Maybe it’s me, but I prefer the first picture, the one being auctioned. In the second one, she appears less sure of herself, almost seeming vacant upstairs.
Break on through to the Other Side
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.25 at 01:48
Current mood: calm
Ever wonder what Carole Lombard and Clark Gable are up to these days? That’s right, I said “these days.”
No, I have not been partaking of any controlled substances, nor have I suffered a bump on my head that leads me to believe I’m in 1940. Yes, I know Lombard hasn’t been with us for nearly 70 years, and that Gable has been gone for more than half a century. But that’s here where they’re in the past tense; there could be a “there” where they live on.
And a best-selling author believes she’s tracked them down. Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the latest offering from noted psychic Sylvia Browne:
“Afterlives Of The Rich And Famous” was released earlier this month by HarperCollins, and according to Browne, Clark and Carole were the impetus behind this book:
“It was very strange. One night I was lying in bed and I was thinking about Clark Gable and his love affair with Carole Lombard. I asked my spirit guide (Francine) if they ever got together, and she said that they’re very much in love ‘over here.’ When she says ‘over here,’ she means the Other Side. They rowboat together, they walk together.”
But do they hunt together? (That’s Clark and Carole from their 1941 trip to South Dakota.) Perhaps on that astral plane, the pheasants feel no pain. (The preceding sentence is arguably the weirdest one I’ve ever written.)
And Browne says the afterlife has no clouds or harps:
“In actuality, the afterlife is 3 feet above our ground level. People keep looking up to the sky -– which isn’t correct. When people see ‘ghosts,’ they always say they’re floating. They’re not actually floating, they’re walking on their own solid ground. It has libraries, it has record centers, it has concert halls, it has everything except the negativity.”
Three feet off the ground? I guess that means anyone who found a way to visually experience both planes simultaneously would be eye level to all sorts of afterlife kneecaps.
I haven’t come across the book yet, but online there are some snippets of references to Lombard (I’m not sure whether she’s one of the 40 celebrities profiled or merely mentioned as an adjunct to Gable):
* On page 206, it says one celebrity, whose identity I can’t immediately discern, is “performing with an unending series of plays, particularly with her old friends Laurence Olivier and Carole Lombard.” (Has the afterlife Lombard suddenly developed a hankering for the theatre? If so, the afterlife Broadway and West End are in for a treat.)
* On page 248, there is a reference to “high-spirited, outspoken actress Carole Lombard. Legend has it that it was Carole Lombard who first suggested the idea of Clark Gable for…” (I’m pretty sure this refers to Rhett Butler, all you “Gone With The Wind” fans.)
* The facing page, 249, has this: “It was January 16, 1942, three years into this marriage of kindred souls. Carole Lombard had just finished her film ‘To Be Or Not To Be’ and boarded TWA Flight 3…” Alas, we know the rest.
* Finally, this from page 251: “…at rest beside the body of Carole Lombard, where he’d yearned to be for so many years. From Francine: The first face he saw when he arrived Home…”
Anyone here bought or seen the book? I’d be fascinated to learn more about how Browne and Francine envision the afterlives of Carole and Clark.
The subjects profiled in this book include the usual suspects — Marilyn Monroe, Beatles John Lennon and George Harrison, Princess Diana, Michael Jackson, Heath Ledger and Anna Nicole Smith, subject of a recent opera (yes, opera) in London:
But there are some celebrities who one might be surprised to find, such as veteran newsman Walter Cronkite and comedian George Carlin, known for his skepticism regarding organized religion. I’ve seen part of Carlin’s afterlife description, and it’s pretty interesting. According to Browne’s conduit, Francine:
“I wish you could have seen the look of shock on George’s face when he emerged from the tunnel and discovered there really is life after death after all. And when he found his first wife, Brenda, waiting to greet him, he was stunned into a long silence while he held her, after which I’m told he gaped at the hundreds of spirits and animals who gathered for the reunion and said, ‘I’ll be damned.'”
After which I fully expected that a loud voice — maybe resembling Bill Cosby’s Almighty in his famous “Noah” routine — would tell Carlin, “No, you won’t.” Because, to borrow the title of an Elvis Costello song, God’s comic.
Sounds like a fun read, no matter what your views on the hereafter — even if when you hear the name “Jean Dixon,” you don’t think of the psychic (didn’t her first name have an “e,” a la Lombard?), but the fine, unrelated character actress who portrayed the maid in “My Man Godfrey”:
A blogathon for Harlow’s 100th
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.24 at 01:44
Current mood: excited
It seems likely that for several years, when March 3 rolled around, Carole Lombard sent a card — or made a phone call — to wish Jean Harlow a happy birthday. They were good friends, simpatico in so many ways: as skilled comedic actresses, sex symbols of a sort, people who were genuinely beloved by studio subordinates for reasons that extended far beyond their considerable physical beauty. Plus they had the same men play major roles in their lives — William Powell (romantically for both) and Clark Gable (romance for one, a close friendship for the other).
In that spirit, we are delighted to announce that, with the centenary of Jean’s birth coming up a week from today, a blogathon in her honor has been created:
It’s being organized by a fine site, the Kitty Packard Pictorial (http://kittypackard.wordpress.com/). What’s it about? Let its creator explain:
The Kitty Packard Pictorial is the lovechild of an LA gal suffering from an apparent glitch in the Space-Time Continuum. (Not that I don’t love our iPods and Crackberry’s … but freshly pressed 78s and coded telegrams are much more fun.)
The Pictorial was created as a very necessary means of self-expression, as well as to provide a platform through which we could fuse past with present—looking at the world each day through Black and White (and Technicolor!) glasses. The aim is to create a sense of then in our everyday nows through movies, photos, music, essays, news articles, books, art and anything else that happens to strike my fanciful whim. (what are blogs for, after all, if not to indulge one’s fanciful whims!)
Those whims are wonderful, by the way. And “Kitty Packard”? I think most of you should get the allusion…and why this site is administering this blogathon.
And in the best tradition of friendship, “Carole & Co.” is proud to announce it will be among the participants in this blogathon. I had a delightful time taking part in the recent CMBA Alfred Hitchcock blogathon, and this should be equally as satisfying.
So in honor of Harlow’s 100th, a few photos of “the Baby” in advertising of the day. (All three are from the early 1930s, essentially her pre-MGM days.) Here’s “Howard Hughes star” Harlow for Coca-Cola:
Jean in 1931, pitching Luckies:
In 1932, Harlow was seen in magazines such as Photoplay endorsing something called the “Vita-Tonic Wave”:
Heck, Jean spent much of her time at beauty salons:
The cat’s meow, and more
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.23 at 02:43
Current mood: busy
As we’ve often noted, Carole Lombard adored animals. I’m not sure what pets were in her household during her youth as Jane Alice Peters, but there probably were a few. It also explains why she adjusted so well to life on the ranch in Encino. some distance away from the Hollywood-Beverly Hills area where she had heretofore spent much of her time.
Is that a nice pic with a cat? Sure, but as Al Jolson would say, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. For sheer adorableness, I doubt any Lombard photo beats this one:
Carole plays mama cat with this cute quartet of kittens (one of which is staying close to Lombard for warmth), and she’s clearly enjoying all this feline company.
This is the highlight of several photos being auctioned at eBay by a Memphis company, Historic and Vintage Images, which has acquired original photographs from newspapers such as the Detroit Free Press, the Detroit News, the Denver Post, the Chicago Sun-Times and others. Here’s the back of the photo, including a snipe:
The photo was issued by RKO in 1940 for “They Knew What They Wanted,” but it apparently didn’t enter this newspaper’s library until December 1944.
And believe it or not, as of this writing no one has placed a bid on this rare and charming photo. Bids begin at $9.99, with bids closing at 2:53 p.m. (Eastern) on Saturday. This would be a purr-fect (say that in your best Julie Newmar Catwoman voice) gift for the cat lover in your life. Interested? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1944-press-photo-Carole-Lombard-American-Actress-US-/280632690303?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item415703067f.
But wait — there’s more from this seller, also from “They Knew What They Wanted.” Here she is, leaning on a fence:
Again, there’s a snipe:
One interesting note — the snipe lists Lombard’s character as “Ann Peters,” but in the film she’s Amy Peters. Was it changed? And there’s a 1945 date printed above the snipe.
Like the cat photo, bids start at $9.99 and no bids have to date been placed; this picture has an earlier bidding deadline — 5:03 p.m. (Eastern) on Thursday. If you’d like to bid, or merely want to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1945-press-photo-Carole-Lombard-Charles-Laughton-/270708056273?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3f077520d1.
Those photos have not yet been bid on; in contrast, the following pic has received four, despite having cropmarks:
Here’s how the photo looks without it (thanks to Tally for the work):
And the back:
The image, first received at the newspaper in August 1937 (you can see part of the “Carole Lombard Paramount Pictures” stamp near the top), was used on Oct. 6, 1980 on the anniversary of her birth — though the writer erroneously listed her birth name as Janice Alice Peters.
Four bids have been made on this, topping at $48. If you want to strike late, you don’t have me; bidding closes at 5:18 p.m. (Eastern) today. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1937-press-photo-Carole-Lombard-actress-film-star-/270707623411?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3f076e85f3.
Finally, here’s one more Lombard photo from this dealer, Paramount p1202-1050 from 1935:
The back of the picture looks like this, although I’m showing it upside down:
There are two visible stamp dates for this photo, both from the 1950s, as well as a “TV” marking; by this time, many of Lombard’s films had been released for television. There’s a small blurb that apparently accompanied this image when it was printed, and note the erroneous date of her passing –– June 16, 1942, not Jan. 16.
No bids have been placed on this as yet. Bids start at $9.99, with bidding closing at 4:31 p.m. (Eastern) Thursday. To place a bid or get more info, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1957-press-photo-Carole-Lombard-actress-Clark-Gable-/290535700671?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item43a546f8bf.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Early reflections, plus a ‘castle’ at night
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.22 at 00:22
Current mood: artistic
Mirrors were often a part of Carole Lombard’s photo shoots, enabling multiple angles of what she was wearing (and multiple Caroles as well!). This photo is Paramount p1202-712, probably taken around 1934.
I bring this up because I just came across what may be the first photo — from Paramount, at least — showing Lombard with a mirror. It’s p1202-51, probably taken in mid- to late 1930:
It’s a rather striking image of Lombard next to a planter; I have no idea who took it, though I would guess it was Otto Dyar, the studio’s head photographer at the time. The photo was probably taken from above, at an angle where the camera could not be seen, so the actual Lombard is the one on the bottom.
The photo is 8″ x 10″, struck from the original negative, and can be yours for $14.99. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-8×10-Photo-D6-/120680433041?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c191d4591.
In the past, I’ve often raved about Hearst Castle at San Simeon, where the newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst built an incredible palace over more than two decades…a place Lombard visited on several occasions thanks to her good friend Marion Davies. I’ve toured the “ranch,” but here’s a whole new take on the place — highlights from one of the nighttime tours. Early on in this, you’ll see the famous outdoor pool at dusk, and it looks spectacular. Then, you’ll go inside, get a feel for what the guest rooms were like come evening time, and even see some of the docents dressed in 1930s wear. You can imagine what it was like when Davies and Hearst entertained everyone from Lombard to George Bernard Shaw.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘Ad’ these to your collection
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.21 at 01:21
Current mood: working
Carole Lombard enjoyed making movies; advertising made sure the public knew about them and said films could thus make money. Today’s entry features seven ads for Lombard movies that are up for auction at eBay, and curiously, none of them have been bid on as of this writing. All have an opening bid of $9.99, and bidding ends on the items between 10:03 and 10:35 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday.
We’ll do this alphabetically by film, the only reason this kicks off with the lackluster “Fools For Scandal”:
Actually, had the movie been as attractive as the ad, it might have been fairly good instead of a disappointment. I like that line in the lower left-hand corner — “Their romance is scandalicious, scandalovely, scandalirious!” Also note at the bottom that the ad apparently ran in the May 1938 issue of Screen Book magazine; a message reads, “When answering advertisements, please mention Screen Book magazine.” It measures 7 1/4″” x 10 1/2″ and is in very good condition. To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1938-ad-Fools-Scandal-Carole-Lombard-Ralph-Bellamy-/220740932534?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item33652f53b6.
Next, a newspaper ad for what would be Carole’s next film, “Made For Each Other” with James Stewart:
The ad states in the upper right-hand corner, “Carole Lombard makes a brilliant transition from comedienne to dramatic star!” It measures 8″ x 11″ and is from the Portland (Ore.) News-Telegram. Find out more at http://cgi.ebay.com/1939-Made-Each-Other-James-Stewart-Carole-Lombard-/270707712440?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f076fe1b8.
Next, my favorite in the bunch, for RKO’s “Mr. & Mrs. Smith”:
The A-B-C angle to sell the film is delightful; the photo of Carole in the upper-left corner is sublime. RKO was certainly hoping that returning Mrs. Gable to her comedic milieu would pay off, and it did, with substantially better box office than her previous dramatic turns. The source for the ad isn’t listed, but the 7″ x 10.25″ probably indicates it’s from a magazine. It’s listed in very good condition, and more information can be gained by going to http://cgi.ebay.com/1940-ad-Hitchcocks-Mr-Mrs-Smith-Carole-Lombard-/270707711255?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f076fdd17.
Now, let’s head back to the fall of 1936 and Lombard’s hit for Universal, “My Man Godfrey”:
Nothing especially significant about this ad, though it’s characteristically clean and stylish. We do learn that author Eric Hatch, whose Liberty magazine serial, “Irene, The Stubborn Girl,” became the original source for the film, also wrote a novel called “My Man Godfrey.” (One guesses this version was more in line with the changes made in the movie, such as making Lombard’s Irene Bullock character younger than sister Cornelia, rather than older.) Again, I have no idea where this ad ran — it measures 7 1/4″ x 10 1/4″. it’s at http://cgi.ebay.com/1936-My-Man-Godfrey-ad-William-Powell-Carole-Lombard-/270707715456?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f076fed80.
Now to “Nothing Sacred,” and some confusion:
The seller lists the ad as being from 1940, when “Nothing Sacred” opened in late 1937. I know the movie was reissued in 1942 as a posthumous salute to Lombard, but there might have been a reissue of sorts in 1940, when Selznick was having some financial problems despite the runaway success of his “Gone With The Wind.” You can check out the ad at http://cgi.ebay.com/1940-Nothing-Sacred-ad-Carole-Lombard-Fredric-March-/220740937800?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item33652f6848.
In the spring of 1937, Lombard and Fred MacMurray were packing them in for “Swing High, Swing Low” (Paramount’s biggest moneymaker of the year), and here’s an ad that ran for it:
This charming ad refers to MacMurray’s two previous collaborations with Carole, “Hands Across The Table” and “The Princess Comes Across.” It’s 7 1/2″ x 10 1/2″, in very good condition, and at http://cgi.ebay.com/1936-ad-Swing-High-Swing-Low-Carole-Lombard-F-MacMurray-/270707708955?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f076fd41b.
Finally, an ad for one of those RKO dramas that critics tended to like but audiences found disconcerting, 1940’s “Vigil In The Night”:
That you see spot red in this ad indicates that RKO was giving “Vigil” a push as one of its prestige pictures. and indeed this ad, measuring 8 1/4″ x 11 1/4″, ran in the March 1940 Screenland magazine, probably in the inside front or back cover. The ad understandably emphasizes “The intimate secrets of a private nurse,” rather than its downbeat atmosphere. For more about this ad, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/1940-ad-Vigil-Night-Carole-Lombard-Brian-Aherne-/270707718440?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f076ff928.
Also, hope you enjoy this week’s horizontal header of a languid Lombard.
Plenty of goodies on the Jersey side
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.20 at 09:33
Current mood: accomplished
For those of you out skiing — cross-country or downhill — over this Presidents’ Day weekend in the U.S., a gift to those using a laptop at the lodge. It’s Carole Lombard, dressed up for winter fun as her character Ann Smith, in a publicity still for “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” a testament to the deceptive power of studio snow. (This was almost certainly taken on the RKO lot.)
It’s an 8″ x 10″ original, in very good condition, and the seller says it includes a seven-line snipe on the back. (Unfortunately, the snipe is not shown nor its exact wording stated.) You can buy it straight up for $20, although the sale will end at 12:53 p.m. (Eastern) on Monday. To purchase, or learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-41-Hitchcock-Original-Photo-/260697385170?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb2c668d2.
The seller, the Motion Picture Arts Gallery, is located in East Rutherford, N.J., best known to the world as home of the sports complex where the NFL’s Giants and Jets play (and, not long ago, the NHL’s Devils and NBA’s Nets). It’s owned by the former chairman of the Film Society at Lincoln Center (which did a Lombard retrospective back in 1987), and prides itself on selling strictly original material — no reproductions.
The eBay sale site links to the gallery’s website, and a quick search for Carole Lombard leads to all sorts of fascinating things. Perhaps the most exciting, from my perspective, is this lobby card from 1925’s “Hearts And Spurs,” a Fox western now deemed lost (as is the case with all the films Lombard made before her 1926 automobile accident):
Lombard, then all of 16 (this film was released in June 1925), is probably the woman standing in the white outfit; she and Jean Lamott are the only women listed in the cast. This Buck Jones vehicle (the movie, not the car!) was directed by W.S. Van Dyke, who would become an MGM stalwart in the 1930s for “Trader Horn” and the first two teamings of William Powell and Myrna Loy, “Manhattan Melodrama” and “The Thin Man.”
The price on that lobby card is $300, also the same price as this lobby card rarity from Carole’s first film at Columbia, “Virtue”:
Superb art work, with a lovely rendering of Lombard in a red dress as she meets Pat O’Brien and his fellow New York cabbies. It’s a still image I’ve never seen before — either as a lobby card or as a publicity pic — and in very good condition.
We’ve previously run a photo of Lombard, co-star Fred MacMurray and director Mitchell Leisen meeting Paramount mogul Adolph Zukor on the set of “Swing High, Swing Low.” Here’s another one from that shoot; here, all four are seated:
This 8″ x 10″ still is being sold for $75. So is this still, inadvertently credited from the website as being from “Nothing Scared“:
Hey, the idea of a squirrel on my shoulder would’ve made me “scared,” too…especially if I had been previously injured by a wild animal (as Lombard was a few years earlier, when a monkey scarred her arm during the filming of “White Woman”). Aside from that incident, Carole must have had an almost supernatural rapport with animals. A snipe from Selznick International is attached to the back, and perhaps publicist Russell Birdwell can explain just why this rodent is perched on her shoulder.
To learn more about the Motion Picture Arts Gallery, go to http://www.mpagallery.com/intro/index.asp.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
One more for the ‘Book’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.19 at 02:02
Current mood: satisfied
Ever wonder what Carole Lombard’s favorite fan magazine was? She certainly wouldn’t have announced it publicly, but one logical candidate would probably be Screen Book. And why not? Not only had she been featured on its cover several times, but on one occasion (the April 1936 issue) she served as guest editor (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/213419.html):
So it should come as no surprise that the magazine’s photographer, Jack Albin, took a photo of Carole reading Screen Book while seated in the Hollywood auditorium that “Lux Radio Theater” called home:
Interesting outfit, although those ankle-strap shoes really don’t become her.
The seller of this photo says it was taken in 1939, and was done while Lombard — who by now had appeared twice on the program — waited for Clark Gable to finish a rehearsal. A check of the “Lux” log shows Gable made but one appearance on the series in 1939…to reprise his Academy Award-winning role opposite Claudette Colbert (reprising hers) in the radio adaptation of “It Happened One Night,” a program that aired on March 20. (One wonders whether Carole and Clark had already agreed to elope before month’s end.)
Lombard’s likely looking at the March issue of Screen Book, although perhaps the April issue had hit the newsstands by then. We know it’s not the February issue, because guess who was on the cover?
The photo of Lombard with the magazines measures 11″ x 14″; it’s not an original but was struck from a vintage negative. You can purchase it for $15, and it will be up for sale through 5:54 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. Interested? Check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-11×14-B-W-publicity-portrait-c-1939-/200568615575?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb2d23297.
Oh, and Screen Book wouldn’t be finished with Carole for 1939. In fact, armed with a new logo for the November issue, the magazine literally got her goat:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.18 at 02:27
Current mood: exanimate
…but no one is in danger, although Carole Lombard certainly has some “weapons” at her disposal. We’re going to examine a few images of her on postcards, including several I don’t believe I’ve previously run at “Carole & Co.”
We’ll start with this one, which isn’t new but hasn’t run here in a few years. It’s the first postcard of Lombard produced by Germany’s famed Ross-Verlag publishing house (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/52279.html), and I’m guessing the photograph was taken late in her tenure at Pathe, although this card wasn’t issued until 1930:
Now, a few cards issued during her stay at Paramount. First, one for those of you who just adore bare shoulders:
The next two are considerably more sedate, but do have their own charm:
This one lists Lombard as an RKO star:
Now one I can’t figure out at all. The card shows Carole as part of “Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer,” which I could see if this photo was from “The Gay Bride.” But it’s clearly from “The Princess Comes Across,” a Paramount feature issued some 18 months after “The Gay Bride,” the lone movie she made for MGM. And, of course, the image of her with a cigarette on her lips may have signaled sophistication back then, but today at least looks ludicrous (in addition to being dangerous for your health). Here it is, anyway:
This postcard was issued to promote Selznick International’s “Made For Each Other,” and it’s an image of Lombard as her character, Jane Mason, that relatively few have seen over the years:
One popular topic of movie star postcards was pictures of the actors’ homes. This image, probably issued in 1937, shows Lombard in front of her Beverly Hills residence:
And lo and behold, someone actually used it as a postcard, mailing it to a daughter at the Georgia State College for Women (GSCW) in Milledgeville, Ga. (The institution became co-educational in 1967, and is now known as Georgia College.)
In the card, dated April 10, 1938, we learn that Dad went deep-sea fishing that day, without much success. But if you want to reel in this card — which the seller admits shows signs of aging — you can. It’s on sale for $3.99 at eBay; to learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CA-BEVERLY-HILLS-CAROLE-LOMBARD-MAILED-1938-M47520-/150489020120?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2309d836d8.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.18 at 09:47
Current mood: amused
While monitoring eBay for intriguing Carole Lombard memorabilia, it’s often easy to spot the handiwork of particular sellers even from the thumbnails — a particular description or style in the listing gives it away.
One of these sellers invariably uses terms such as “sexy,” “leggy” or “busty” to describe a photo, although the third adjective almost never is accurate where Lombard is concerned. (Had Carole been born 20 years later and come to prominence in the 1950s, she might have had to market herself as an Audrey Hepburn-style gamin; she certainly wouldn’t have been seen as a rival to the buxom likes of Marilyn Monroe or Jayne Mansfield.) This seller, perhaps hoping said terms will bring potential buyers to the site, also tends to use “sexy” in the most questionable of contexts (the bond rally?).
Okay, now that we’ve got that “rant” out of the way, a photo — and an attractive and rare one — even though it’s headlined “CAROLE LOMBARD BUSTY DBLWT Original 8X10 Photo.” (“DBLWT” is an abbreviation for “doubleweight,” a common term for photo memorabilia.) Is she “busty” here? Decide for yourself:
I personally don’t think there’s much heft to her bosom here (one of the reasons Lombard rarely wore a bra), but that’s not the point, pardon the pun. What matters here in Paramount p1202-810 (placing it sometime in 1934) is that we see Carole in an attractive gown, and we know the man in the photo is studio design maven Travis Banton. But who’s the woman?
Fortunately, we have an answer, because this original doubleweight photo has a snipe on the back:
It reads:
CAROLE LOMBARD, Madame Frances Spingold, famous New York designer, and Travis Banton, Paramount stylist, declare that Carole’s blue chiffon gown she wears in scenes of “Now And Forever” will create a new trend in evening gown creations. Banton is a former pupil of Madame Frances’, having studied with her in New York ten years ago.”
Did her blue chiffon gown (thanks for describing the color, Paramount publicists!) create a new trend? We’ll let the fashion historians answer that. But it’s a stunning photo, and it can be yours — but you don’t have much time. The photo, in very good condition, is being sold for $44.99, and the deadline for purchase is 9:43 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. Interested? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-BUSTY-DBLWT-Original-8X10-Photo-/400189404006?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2d25b366 to learn more.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.17 at 00:40
Current mood: nostalgic
That’s Carole Lombard taking a break from shooting her 1934 comedy “The Gay Bride”; it looks as if she’s poring over the script. Looking over her right shoulder is the film’s director, Jack Conway. Peering over her left, co-star Chester Morris.
This was taken on the MGM lot, and it would be the only film Lombard would make at Metro. She may be smiling, but the finished product produced the opposite reaction, as Carole would call “The Gay Bride” her worst film. (As I’ve stated many times before, as long as prints of “Fools For Scandal” exist — and I’m not advocating their elimination — “The Gay Bride” won’t be the worst film in her catalog. In fact, it also rates ahead of “High Voltage,” “The Racketeer” and a few of her early Paramount offerings.)
But from 1936 on. Lombard was no stranger to the MGM studio, thanks to her relationship with its top male star, Clark Gable. As Carole was one of the film community’s most popular people, she was always welcome.
We bring this up because of a book called “M-G-M: Hollywood’s Greatest Backlot,” which we discussed here last July (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/320911.html).
Okay, the title isn’t technically correct, as Metro was actually located in Culver City, several miles from the Hollywood district of Los Angeles. But for roughly a quarter-century, MGM was generally considered the gold standard of studios for its huge stable of stars and impeccable production values.
Those days are long gone. Yes, MGM is a corporate entity today, but that’s about it. The lot the lion called home lo those many years on Washington Boulevard now belongs to Sony, the outgrowth of scrappy Columbia, a studio age underdog. Much of the acreage MGM used during its reign has been converted into apartments, condominiums and homes.
However, you can finally get a feel for the legendary lot because the book — which was initially scheduled to be released last fall — was issued this week. It includes interviews with Betty Garrett, an MGM musical star who we lost last weekend at age 91, and Richard Anderson, as well as an introduction by Debbie Reynolds, who likely spent some time working at stage 6, shown below, when it was topped with the MGM logo, not Columbia’s.
The book is available at Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/MGM-Hollywoods-Greatest-Steven-Bingen/dp/1595800557), where all six reviewers to date gave it five stars out of five. If you’ll be in southern California March 13, the three authors — Steven Bingen, Stephen X. Sylvester and Michael Troyan — will have a book signing at 4 p.m. at the Egyptian Theater, followed by a classic MGM twin bill of “The Band Wagon” (1953) and “That’s Entertainment” (1974). For more on the book, visit http://www.mgmbacklot.info/.
To close, here’s a clip of Carole from “The Gay Bride,” where she has some fine comedic interaction with the always-reliable Nat Pendleton and Zasu Pitts, before her showgirl character sits around and looks pretty on stage during the singing of the insipid “Mississippi Honeymoon.”
For the Lombard fan, a Lombard…fan
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.16 at 01:23
Current mood: curious
While this photo was taken indoors, Carole Lombard at least tries to give the impression that it’s a sunny summer afternoon somewhere, and she’s trying to beat the heat.
And, as it turns out, she can help you do just that. Ladies and gentlemen, one of the most unusual Lombard-related items I’ve ever run across…
…an honest-to-goodness Carole Lombard fan. And this fan doesn’t collect memorabilia; it is memorabilia. I’m certain it got plenty of use each January and February.
What?
Oh, I forgot to mention — this fan comes from Argentina. In fact, it was sponsored by a pharmacist:
From the photo, I’m guessing this was issued between 1935 and 1937; the picture likely came from the same session that produced the top photo.
I have no idea whether this fan phenomenon was peculiar to Argentina, or whether movie star images were used on fans elsewhere. Some other Hollywood folks were similarly honored, including (no surprise) Latin American favorite Dolores Del Rio:
And here’s someone I didn’t expect to get the fan treatment — Astrid Allwyn, who had a supporting role in the Lombard vehicle “Hands Across The Table”:
It’s perhaps no surprise that while the eBay seller has a $25 price for both the Lombard and Del Rio fans, the one for Allwyn sells for a mere $16 US. (Did Carole and the other stars know their photos were being used for fans? They were certainly aware that their names and images were employed for an array of marketing purposes, and I doubt they received any share of the licensing in those days of studio contracts.)
For more on the Lombard fan, which measures about 6 1/2″ x 13″ and is being sold under eBay’s “buy it now” option, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Antique-Hand-Fan-CAROLE-LOMBARD-c-1930-argentina-/270700179945?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f06fcf1e9. (If unsold, it will be available through March 2.) To see it and the other star fans, visit http://stores.ebay.com/El-Juguete-Ilustrado/_i.html?rt=nc&_sid=199717288&_trksid=p4634.c0.m14.l1513&_pgn=1.
But if you get the fan, be careful how, and when, you use it. Remember what happened to Alice after she waved a fan…
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.15 at 01:39
Current mood: cheerful
How do you make people who have either never heard of Carole Lombard, or know only that she was married to Clark Gable and died young, fans of hers? If you live in the U.S., Turner Classic Movies tonight is a good place to start. At 8 p.m. (Eastern), it’s showing “My Man Godfrey,” one of the best screwball comedies ever made (if not the best), and it won Lombard an Academy Award best actress nomination for her portrayal of the dizzy heiress Irene Bullock.
Oscar nominations abounded for “Godfrey.” Carole’s ex-husband, William Powell — who lobbied for her to get the role — was nominated for best actor as the film’s title character. Alice Brady. as Irene’s daffy mother, and Mischa Auer, as mom’s weird “protege,” were nominated in the new categories of best supporting actress and actor. (The night’s theme is “Oscar firsts,” and among the other films tonight are 1963’s “Lilies Of The Field,” in which Sidney Poitier became the first black man to win an best actor Oscar, and 1961’s “Two Women,” where Sophia Loren was the first non-American to win best actress for a foreign-language film.)
Gregory La Cava, who brought a semi-improvisational style to “Godfrey,” was nominated for best director, and Morrie Ryskind, whose past credits included the Marx Brothers’ “A Night At The Opera,” was nominated for best screenplay. All four acting nominees plus La Cava are shown below, taking a break on the set.
None of the six won.
Nevertheless, “Godfrey” may be better remembered than most of the other films that won Academy Awards that year. From its stylish art deco opening credits…
…to a wonderful supporting cast that includes Gail Patrick (foreground) as Irene’s antagonistic older sister Cornelia (in real life, Patrick was slightly younger than Lombard) and Eugene Pallette as the exasperated paterfamilias of this menagerie of screwballs…
…to a social message running as an undercurrent, but never usurping the comedy, “My Man Godfrey” is a gem of a film. Unfortunately, since it fell into public domain, that gem often resembles fool’s gold or zirconium. TCM will probably find a good print to run tonight, but keep your fingers crossed just in case. (For those who would like to make “Godfrey” a permanent part of their home, Criterion issued a fine DVD print of the film that includes all sorts of delightful extras — including the 1938 “Lux Radio Theater” adaptation where Lombard, Powell and Patrick reprise their film roles.)
So tell your friends, gather them around the TV set tonight, and have them soak in the timeless magic created by Lombard and her cohorts. More likely than not, they’ll be asking for more.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.15 at 11:38
Current mood: curious
Here are some Carole Lombard goodies you can acquire through eBay if you hurry.
First, take a look at this stunning pic, a lobby card for the rarely seen 1931 Paramount film “I Take This Woman” (and to whomever has the rights to this rediscovered movie –– please find a way to get this issued on DVD or at least shown on Turner Classic Movies!):
Looking stylish in her equestrian outfit, Carole’s character, Kay Dowling, tells her aunt Bessie (Helen Ware), “He’s bad for wild horses and — wild women…”, the “he,” of course, being Gary Cooper. (And we presume in this context “bad” means desirous; if it’s the other definition, call the police and the humane society.)
This photo is from the collection of Gerald T. Robert, who owned the Capitol Theater in Trois Rivieres, Quebec. It became a movie house in 1929, and Robert retained all the lobby cards until his death. There’s a slight, unobtrusive stamp of his in the lower right-hand corner; in the upper right-hand corner, there’s a seal of approval from the Quebec Censorship Board.
The collection also features a photo from the film Lombard made just before this one, “Up Pops The Devil”:
The Robert stamp is visible in the upper left corner, as Lombard’s Anne Merrick puts her foot down and tells Joyce Compton’s Luella May Carroll to stay away from her husband (Norman Foster). “Get out! I’m making the money, this is my place,” Anne says; she’s a dancer playing the breadwinner while her husband is writing a novel.
No one has made a bid yet on the “Up Pops The Devil” photo, for which bids begin at 99 cents. Two bids have been made as of this writing on the “I Take This Woman” photo, topping out at $5. To bid or learn more on the “Devil” photo, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-LOMBARD-Up-Pop-Devil-movie-still-photo-1931-/300524271482?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item45f8a4777a; for the “Woman” photo, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-LOMBARD-take-Woman-movie-still-1931-/300524271508?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item45f8a47794. But you don’t have much time for either, as both auctions expire at 7:39 p.m. (Eastern) tonight.
In the past, we’ve run several entries on Hollywood Patterns, the Connecticut company that sold patterns of outfits which either were worn by stars or inspired by them. Another pattern with Lombard’s image on the package is now available:
This is pattern 1017, a one-piece frock with detachable peplum, and it’s actually part of a two-pattern package being sold on eBay; the other one, #1177, features Claire Dodd. The seller says of Lombard, “loved her,” but Dodd? “I don’t know who that is either.” Okay, to answer:
Dodd, shown above in 1932, was an Iowa native born nearly three months after Lombard, who had a small uncredited part in “Up Pops The Devil.” She later moved to Warners, where she was never quite a star but played supporting roles in a number of films, including “The Match King,” “Footlight Parade” and “Hard To Handle.” You can also see her in the Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers-Irene Dunne musical “Roberta.”
As of this writing, four bids have been made on the patterns, with the high bid at $13.26; bidding is slated to end at 1:59 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. To check it out, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/2-Vintage-30s-Hollywood-Patterns-Carole-Lombard-Dress-/140510650401?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b7166021.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.14 at 02:14
Current mood: nostalgic
A happy Valentine’s Day to all, with hopes things are going better with your valentine than they are for the fictional Ann and David Smith, portrayed by Carole Lombard and Robert Montgomery in “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.” This entry will focus on life with Lombard and her real-life husband at the time, Clark Gable, though we’ll turn the clock back a bit to mid-1939, a few months after they tied the knot.
For this, we thank someone who played a major role in their lives — Jean Garceau, who had been Carole’s personal secretary, then linked up with Gable following Lombard’s marriage to him. She would remain a part of life at Encino for many years to come.
Garceau gained a bit of celebrity herself for her ties to filmdom’s top couple. In fact, she would be featured in the October 1939 issue of Movie Mirror, an issue with Olivia De Havilland, getting ready for a day at the links, on the cover:
At the bottom of the cover is the promo, “Read Clark Gable’s Private Correspondence.” That sounds rather titillating, but you can be sure Gable, Lombard, Garceau and MGM publicists made certain nothing of a really intimate nature made print. Nevertheless, it does provide a feel for day-to-day life at the ranch for these newlyweds.
The article, entitled “The Private Affairs of A Married Man — Mr. C. Gable,” was reprinted the other day at the blog “An Elegant Obsession” (http://goldenagedames.wordpress.com/), which has been running plenty of Gable-related items this month. Here’s how it ran in Movie Mirror, followed by my comments:
_________________________________________
A letter to
Miss Miriam Sparks, Cadiz Ohio.
Dear Aunt Miriam:
Well, you always were sentimental, weren’t you — and now you want a picture of Carole and myself for that fancy mantelpiece of yours … by the way, am I still up there as a baby? You know, that picture with the lace collar and the curl that you so carefully arranged?
Incidentally, Carole has a copy of that picture and it’s the only picture of me she has displayed on her dressing table.
She trots it out for visitors just like used to do.
In re-reading your letter I note that you want a photo of us, with Carole carrying her wedding bouquet. Well, I have to disappoint you about the bouquet, because what she carried wasn’t exactly a bouquet. I didn’t dare risk ordering her one, or having anyone else order one, either, because out here florists always check up on wedding bouquets — whom they’re for, etc, — and we wanted to keep our elopement a secret. I did buy her a rose, with a couple of sprigs of lily of the valley, though, from a sidewalk vendor as we left Hollywood. We had hoped to preserve the bouquet until the ceremony by placing it in the glove compartment of the car, but the desert heat got at it and it was a sorry sight when we brought it to light at Kingman — not at all photogenic. But Carole has pressed the rose and if you ever come out this way, Aunt Miriam, she’ll be glad to let you have a whiff of it.
Anyway, I’m sending you one of our favorite pictures — Carole and me at The Farm. From it you can get sort of an idea of where we live, too.
Thanks again for writing, and Carole sends along her best wishes, too.
Your devoted nephew, CLARK
Note:
Call the Farmers’ Carton Company and have them make up sample egg cartons and submit with prices, etc. Ask them to please print up several styles and get them to work in “The Farm” somehow and the name of Mr. And Mrs. Clark Gable at the bottom — something not too commercial, because we’re going to give the eggs away to friends and neighbors.
I don’t know exactly how many we’ll need, but they ought to be able to figure a half year’s supply from the fact that we now have five hundred chicks and about a hundred of the red leghorn hens have begun laying.
Notes:
Call Mr. Price at Holden’s and ask him to pick up Carole’s convertible at the RKO lot this morning. Tell him I want it turned in on a new sedan. He can phone me about a possible deal over on the set. Make it plain to him that I don’t want anything but a sedan… no more convertibles for her. A Convertible is too dangerous. And if Carole phones, don’t say anything about it… she might object, but I’m her safety director from now on. Tell Price I think she’d prefer black.
Notes:
A MESSAGE to Bob Taylor; if you him, try Barbara — and tell him that we’re sorry but we have to cancel our dinner date for Friday, because it’s Carole’s mother’s birthday and she’s coming over.
That reminds me: you’d better start a little section in your notebook devoted to in-laws’ birthdays. Put Mrs. Peters’ birthday down, so I won’t forget it again; also Carole’s brothers’; that kid niece of hers, too. And any other dates you think I shouldn’t forget — Mothers’ Day and dates like that.
Notes:
PLEASE call the store where we bought our porch furniture and ask them to send someone out to refinish the chairs along the front rungs. Mrs. Gable says she’s always catching her stockings on them.
And that reminds me — now that I’ve got Mrs. Gable’s car changed, I want to begin working on her horse. She never told me that that animal was a bad actor… I found it out myself this morning when I tried to ride him over to Andy’s. He nearly threw me! Buck Jones said he had a Palomino he might sell me … I think the horse was called Pavo, or some Spanish name like that. Then call that company that rents horses for pictures … I forget the name … but tell them that I have a wild pinto that they can have cheap. They use those pintos mostly in Indian fights and those Indians are the people who can ride him. I don’t think Carole will really mind, because from the sample I had of that horse this morning he’s no fun — all work and no play. She’s just been trying to be brave, that’s all.
Speaking of horses, will you phone Andy or Mrs. Devine and ask when little Tad’s birthday is. I think it’s this month and I heard him say, he wanted a pony. He’s still got Scarlett, that donkey I gave Carole, but I’m sure he’s got his heart set on a pony now. Find out for sure, though.
Letter to:
Sears, Roebuck and Co.,
Chicago, Illinois.
DEAR Sirs:
Will you please send me, at the above address, your latest catalogue.
Sincerely yours,
Clark Gable
Another one:
Department of Agriculture, Federal Building, Los Angeles, Cal.
DEAR Sirs:
When the government appraiser in the grape division comes out from Washington, as I understand he will shortly, will it be possible for him to appraise my vines in the San Fernando Valley? If you will let me know when an appointment may be made, I will be glad to arrange it at his convenience.
Sincerely yours,
Clark Gable.
And another:
Refrigeration De Luxe,
San Francisco, California
DEAR Sirs:
Some time ago you delivered a special game refrigerator to me, but I believe that lit needs some sort of adjustment or repair, because, just recently, I have discovered that the venison does not seem to be ageing properly. Will you please let me know whom I can call for this service, or will it be necessary for you to send someone down?
As a matter of fact, if you will let me know exactly what sort of repair is necessary, I may be able to do it myself. The only fault I can find with it is this one compartment. The other sections are functioning perfectly.
Sincerely yours,
Clark Gable.
TO attend to:
Look, here’s an outline — of some publicity plans that the publicity department submitted. I want it returned and will you please take a note to add to it:
Dear S. L: Sorry I can’t drop in with this myself and talk it over with you personally, but as you know I’ve got a pretty tough schedule over here on the Gone with the Wind set. Anyway, I’m sure you’re going to understand when I say that Carole and I have talked it over and have finally decided against giving out any routine marriage stories, especially those double-truck stories that usually appear under the titles of “My Wife,” by the husband, and “My Husband,” by the wife. It’s awfully difficult talking about each other publicly and, in sheer defense of our privacy, we’ve come to this decision. In the same way, we’ve decided to allow pictures of the exterior of The Farm, but are turning down requests for interiors … and, what’s more, I think you’ll understand. Maybe we might do it later, but not now. Thanks for giving me a chance to look over these requests and I hope I’ll be able to get in a day or so.
Clark.
A letter to
John Cromwell,
RKO Ranch
DEAR John:
Just to let you know that that cow which you planted on our front lawn before we returned from Kingman has since borne a calf … and so we are doubly grateful and consider it one of our very nicest wedding presents. Carole says we’ll save the christening until you come over, so be sure and give us a call.
By the way, it really looked like it had rained cats and dogs, sheep and goats, cows and what not when we returned. There were four-legged wedding presents all over the front yard and not a silver platter among them. We had open house all day and looked for your bright mug hourly, but no sign of you. Come on over soon, will ya?
Best from both of us,
Gabe.
NOTE:
If Jimmie Fidler calls, tell him that that report about our going to Europe on our belated honeymoon is a lot of baloney. You can tell him, though, that Metro has postponed “The Great Canadian” for a while to give us a decent break and that I’m going to have two months’ vacation, but we think we’ll stick pretty close to home, because there is a lot to look after around the farm. We’ll probably take just some short trips, hunting up north and fishing down south. By the way, will you please call some travel agency and get us a folder on Mazatlan and Acapulco.
Make a note:
REMIND me to order some turpentine. Last time I whitewashed the fence I got it in my hair and couldn’t get it out. We need some around the place, anyway. Oh, and will you find out how much electric clippers for horses are? They charge two-fifty over at the stable just to clip one horse and I think I can probably save money by buying the clippers. If they’re under twenty-five dollars, have them send out a pair. And will you call Mrs. Gable on the “In Name Only” set and tell her I’ll be late in picking her up tonight, because I’ve got to stop at the Tractor Supply Company before it closes and pick up a part. I just talked to her now, but, of course, I forgot to tell her about that. She spent the whole time talking to me about curtains!
TO DO:
CALL the phone company and request a new unlisted number. Mrs. Gable and I were awakened four times last night by somebody who just thought he was being funny. Those workmen around the place must have picked up the number from the phone, and I guess they’ve been handing it out to their friends. I don’t mind except that we’ve been working so hard lately we really do need our sleep.
Call Mike over at the barber shop and tell him never mind about coming over to give me a haircut. I thought I could get rid of this mop, this week, but we still got some more scenes to do
A letter to:
Pete Elmo, The Duck Club, Lakeport, California
Dear Mr. Elmo:
MRS. GABLE has asked me to request membership for her in the club, but I’m just wondering if my membership isn’t a family one and sufficient? Will you please let me know about this and, at the same time, I’m enclosing my quarterly dues. Incidentally, that advice you sent us about packing freshly killed ducks in lard, when no ice was available, worked out fine.
Best regards,
Clark Gable.
A letter to
General Hospital, Los Angeles, California
DEAR Sirs:
Just today the government expert has estimated that my grape crop this fall will be around two and a half tons. I would like to donate the entire crop to your institution, so am letting you know now, in order that you may make provision for it. If you will let know how you — can best use it, whether for wines or jellies, I will have it prepared accordingly.
Sincerely yours,
Clark Gable.
Letter to
Acme Oil Leases,
San Bernardino, Cal.
Dear Sirs:
HAVE turned over your letter concerning The Hardrock Land Co. to the treasurer of this company, Mrs. Clark Gable, who has asked me to reply that it is the decision of the board that nothing be done at present about granting oil leases.
We purchased this land solely for our own personal use, as a hunting and fishing retreat, and we are not interested in promoting it commercially. Thanking you for your interest, however,
Yours truly,
Clark Gable.
Note:
WILL you please phone a book store and order “Grapes of Wrath” for Mrs. Gable. And while you’re phoning you, might as well ask them to send along a new-edition dictionary. Mrs. Gable and I are always arguing about the pronunciation of some word last night it was p-r-e-c-e-d-e-n-c-e. She insists the accent comes on the second syllable. She’s probably right, but in the future I want to know I’m right before I start arguing!
A letter to
Mr. Spike Grimes,
Rocky Mountain, Arizona
THANKS for writing me, Spike, about the new camping equipment, but I’m afraid I’m not going to get down there this year — and a part of me kind of hates to say that. But, as you may have heard, I’ve married recently and I don’t think I’d like to take my wife on the trail of a wildcat, though I expect she could handle one if she had to. She’s heard so much about my hunting experiences down there with you that she’d like to come along, but I think we’ll just stick to deer and duck this year. Say hello to the boys, though, will you? And if things do get too tame for us (you can’t tell) we might show up. But I thought I’d better let you know not to count on it.
I think I’m going to be able to send you another customer, though, Victor Fleming, a swell director and a swell guy. He may write you and if he does, prepare the best for him and thus oblige your old pal,
Gable.
Note:
WILL you please call Bob Taylor and tell him that I’m sorry but we can’t have them over for dinner this Friday either, because I have some night shooting to do. I guess we’d just better not make any more social engagements at all until we’re both cleared up with our pictures.
And, while I think of it, near that little section in your notebook, where you’ve got birthdays, etc., to be remembered, put down this: gloves, size 6¼; stockings, size 9; lingerie, size 32. I think those are the sizes she gave me this morning. Anyway, I want them written down, in case I go birthday shopping.
Oh, and the most important thing and date of, all to remember! Don’t let me forget this! Put it down somewhere in big letters: March 29, 1940. First year’s anniversary! And don’t let me forget among other things that I want to get her then; I want to be sure to buy her one limp pink rose with two feeble sprays of lily of the valley.
_________________________________________
Some thoughts and observations:
* Thanks to the reference to the birthday of Lombard’s mother, we can pinpoint that item as coming from mid-June; Elizabeth Peters turned 63 on June 20.
* We learn how careful Clark and Carole had to be concerning their elopement. (Wonder if the sidewalk vendor Gable bought the rose from had an inkling of what was about to happen?)
* Clark, playing “safety director,” was trading in Carole’s convertible for a sedan, in fact removing it from the RKO lot. (For all we know, Lombard may have chafed at her husband’s decision, but she had driven sedans before.) And she probably understood that in a sedan, she wouldn’t stand out in a crowd — probably a good idea in her new role as Mrs. Gable.
* We discover that Lombard’s stockings often get caught on the rungs of the porch chairs (which will have to be refinished) and that she wears size 9. (Memo to Gable: Make sure and remember that next May, because Carole will want to be among the first to wear those newfangled nylon stockings.)
* Anyone know anything about “The Great Canadian”? Did Clark make that film under a different title, was it handed to another actor, or was it even made at all? (Have never heard of it until now.)
* The perils of celebrity are explained in the Gables’ need to get another unlisted telephone number.
* Lombard was probably reading “The Grapes Of Wrath” for her own literary enjoyment, not with a future acting gig in mind. There was only one significant female character in the John Steinbeck novel, and I doubt Carole envisioned herself as Ma Joad.
* The photo near the reference to Victor Fleming is of the director with Gable and Myrna Loy in 1938’s “Test Pilot.” (Just to remind everyone that Fleming and Gable worked together multiple times, not just on that film David O. Selznick made about the Civil War.)
* And I’m sure Robert Taylor and Barbara Stanwyck eventually did get to enjoy dinner at Clark and Carole’s ranch.
P.S. This week’s header pic is one of my favorites of Lombard, so full of joy and fun. And what red-blooded American male of the 1930s wouldn’t have wanted a roll in the hay with Carole?
Since it’s Valentine’s Day, let’s close with one of the great love songs of the rock era, “Dedicated To The One I Love.” The Mamas and Papas’ 1966 version, you say? Nope. The original version by the Shirelles? No, not that 1961 pop hit — and it wasn’t the original. That came in 1958 and was a significant R&B hit, but only reached #81 on the pop charts. It’s by a group from North Carolina called the “5” Royales, who had numerous R&B successes, but their sound was too gospel-like and down-home to register with white audiences of the time. Their best-known record is “Think,” which was later reworked by James Brown, but I think you’ll enjoy this “Dedicated” (co-written by the group’s fine lead guitarist, Lowman Pauling). In fact, you’ll note this was released on 78 rpm, in the waning days of that format, along with the by-then more familiar 45 rpm recording. This is dedicated to all you lovers out there…
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.14 at 11:38
Current mood: loved
Carole Lombard may not have been as obsessed with jewelry as some other actresses of her day, but she certainly understood its importance as an accessory for milady’s wardrobe. She proves it in this color photo which was part of a 1940 advertisement for 1847 Rogers Bros. cutlery. (The company sponsored the CBS radio series “Silver Theater,” where Carole appeared several times.)
Another actress aided by jewelry was Lombard’s friend, Jean Harlow; one of the places she made it evident was in the 1936 comedy “Libeled Lady.” While Jean’s character, Gladys, isn’t particularly well off (not compared to Myrna Loy’s heiress character, at least, although Gladys does have a maid), she evidently recognizes and appreciates its value, as this still from the film makes clear:
To further illustrate, a close-up of Harlow with Spencer Tracy; note the brooch on Jean’s dress (as well as the radio and other decor from MGM’s crack set design staff):
That brooch was on display this past weekend at a memorabilia show in Burbank, Calif., and thanks to the people at the wonderful Jean Harlow Yahoo! group (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jeanharlow/), here’s a color photo of that splendid accessory. Double-click on it to see it at several times larger than life-size; at that gargantuan scale, you can appreciate its delicate beauty:
I am not sure whether this was personally owned by Harlow or was part of MGM’s accessories department. I do know its current owners aren’t selling it, but merely exhibited it over the weekend.
To close this entry, a natural for today: the Rodgers and Hart standard, “My Funny Valentine.” I was looking for Elvis Costello’s stunning acoustic version, with no luck, but I think you’ll like this one. It’s the luminous Michelle Pfeiffer, from “The Fabulous Baker Boys” (with Beau and Jeff Bridges), featuring assorted clips from that fine film. A happy Valentine’s Day to all.
Sweetheart on ‘Parade’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.13 at 00:51
Current mood: excited
Autumn 1940 is approaching, and chances are when thoughts turn to Carole Lombard, they more often than not are in the context of her husband Clark Gable, only a few months removed from his triumph as Rhett Butler in “Gone With The Wind.” Some of it was because of the films Lombard had been making since the start of 1939, quality dramas in which she performed pretty well but not the Carole that had caught the fancy of the public — the beloved madcap of 1934 (“Twentieth Century”) through ’37 (“Nothing Sacred,” “True Confession”). Part of it was Lombard herself; now in her early thirties, she was temporarily subjugating herself to Gable, eying her future as a mother before re-establishing herself one way or another.
In the midst of this, a magazine called Movie Stars Parade hit the newsstands with its autumn 1940 issue:
The cover featured Gable and his three co-stars in MGM’s “Boom Town” — Claudette Colbert (her first teaming with Clark since “It Happened One Night”), longtime Gable pal Spencer Tracy, and European import Hedy Lamarr (who won the respect of a skeptical Lombard by making no amorous advances towards Clark).
Inside were profiles of some of the day’s current stars, including Lombard. Here, through the fine site DearMrGable.com, is what readers saw as temperatures, and leaves, began to fall:
A few nice shots, and a splendid lead: “Zestful is the word for this lithe and vital lady who has, and conveys, such abounding joie de vivre.” There are several errors, mind you; the caption of the picture of her with William Powell states they married in 1929, when it actually came two years later. As was often the case elsewhere, Lombard’s birth year was moved a year ahead to 1909, and in the ever-uncertain argument over Carole’s height, she’s shown here on the short side at 5-foot-2.
No matter — the name page, a stunningly beautiful sepia portrait, more than makes up for it:
While no photo credit is listed, there’s more than a 50-50 chance this was taken by Ernest Bachrach, RKO’s longtime photographer. (Lombard was in the midst of her contract with the studio.)
All in all, a reminder to the public that Carole Lombard was more than Mrs. Clark Gable.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
With Eddie, Oakie, plus the new, improved Gingery dog
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.12 at 01:12
Current mood: thankful
Just as a classic era movie star relies on portrait photographers to give her that special look (as Carole Lombard did here with George Hurrell in this 1933 Paramount still, p1202-602), so does a blogger rely on friends to give entries extra kick. Two people in particular have done so much to make “Carole & Co.” the success that it is, and I salute both of them in today’s entry.
Tally Hauser helps upgrade many Lombard pics I come across, erasing watermarks (never to promote or produce counterfeit copies, mind you, strictly to show photos as historical documents). She sent me this image the other day; I’m not sure of the condition she came across it in, but it’s definitely something worth seeing — because it shows Carole alongside someone I figured she knew, but had never seen her pictured with:
Yep — in between Clark Gable and Carole is none other than the great Edward G. Robinson. And while I don’t know if Clark idolized him to the same extent he did Spencer Tracy, he probably deemed it a professional injustice that Robinson not only never won an Academy Award, but was never even nominated. From “Little Caesar” to his final film, “Soylent Green,” Robinson provided many a memorable performance. Like his Warners stablemates James Cagney and Humphrey Bogart, Robinson initially gained fame playing gangsters, but showed he had far more stuff than that. (For proof, watch his work as an insurance officer in the great Billy Wilder film noir “Double Indemnity.”) Off-screen, Robinson was a man of taste and intellect, among the most respected men in the film community.
Also in the photo is Jack Oakie, who made several films with Carole, most notably “From Hell To Heaven.” The remaining two folks I don’t recognize, but I’m hoping someone here does.
The other person I’m honoring in this entry is Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive, who has provided all sorts of assistance over the years and sent me a fun photo the other day. Unfortunately, her scanner wasn’t working properly, and the image wasn’t all it should have been. She just bought a new scanner, resent the photo, and I think this time you’ll get a bit more out of it. So once again, here’s Carole Lombard, Ginger Rogers and a charming Chihuahua protected from the chill via more than what nature provided:
I additionally sharpened it a bit to improve the background. You can make out the dog a lot better, as well as see the coats worn by Lombard, Rogers and the Chihuahua.
Oh, and regarding the dog…I asked for more information at the fine blog “Gingerology” (http://jwhueyblog.blogspot.com/), a great source for all things Rogers, and here’s what the administrator had to say about it:
Now THAT is a pic I haven’t seen before! Ginger with a chihuahua garbed in a fur? Priceless! Carole and Ginger must have been pretty good buds… nice to know that! As to the ‘identity’ of Ginger’s critter, well, heck…she mentions quite a few in her bio, but I don’t remember a chihuahua specifically mentioned… I’m pretty sure the little dog in ‘Shall We Dance’ was really hers — whatever breed that was… Thanks for the pic, VP!!!
Well, thanks really should go to Carole Sampeck, for both providing the photo and improving on our original transmission. And it is nice to know Carole and Ginger were pretty good buddies — though I would still like to learn if they ever faced each other in tennis. (While I don’t believe Rogers had any ties to world-class players such as Lombard had with Alice Marble, I hear she was pretty good with a racquet…and from her dancing prowess, Ginger was certainly athletic.)
Finally, a note for those of you with Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. Today, TCM is honoring that memorable year of 1939 by showing all 10 films that were nominated for best picture: Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
8:15 a.m. — “Dark Victory”
10 a.m. — “Of Mice And Men”
noon — “Ninotchka”
2 p.m. — “Wuthering Heights”
4 p.m. — “Stagecoach”
5:45 p.m. — “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington”
8 p.m. — “The Wizard Of Oz”
10 p.m. — “Gone With The Wind”
2 a.m. — “Goodbye, Mr. Chips”
4 a.m. — “Love Affair”
Pretty potent lineup, doncha think?
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Watch like an Egyptian (yeah, yeah, yeah)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.11 at 01:40
Current mood: giddy
…and no, we’re not referring to the tumult taking place in that north African land, riveting happenings if you’re following it via the BBC or CNN.
No, this deals with a place a teenage Carole Lombard was probably familiar with when this Fox publicity portrait was taken in 1925. It’s the Egyptian Theater on Hollywood Boulevard:
That’s how the Egyptian courtyard was decorated in 1924, two years after it opened, for Douglas Fairbanks’ swashbuckling epic “The Thief Of Bagdad.” I have to believe that the movie-struck Lombard saw a number of films there during the 1920s; it was the first major theater in the rapidly growing Hollywood section of the city, not far from where she and her family lived on North Wilton Place. No longer was downtown the only place for movie fans to see their favorites on screen, in splendor.
For all we know, Lombard might have been part of the crowd below attending the premiere of King Vidor’s “The Big Parade” (made by MGM, not Fox) in 1925. (At least one Lombard film, “True Confession,” premiered at the Egyptian.)
In 1927, impresario Sid Grauman, whose palatial decor for the Egyptian thrilled audiences, opened another theater on the other side of Hollywood Boulevard. The Chinese stole the thunder from its sibling, thanks in part to that little stars-in-cement ritual, but the Egyptian is still a stunner. Now operated by American Cinematheque, this famed venue shows a wide variety of films, enveloping its guests with nearly 90 years of cinematic history.
And if you’re in the Los Angeles area this weekend, it would be well worth a visit.
First, this Saturday at 10:30 a.m., take a docent-led tour of the place, getting a behind-the-scenes feel for this landmark. As the theater’s website notes, “See what it would have been like to be in a Grauman stage show with a visit to the dressing rooms and singers’ boxes.” (I note that one of the Egyptian’s stage performers was a teenage Myrna Loy.) “Check out our state-of-the-art projection booth and more! Discover the painstaking restoration work and the marriage of modern technology with a landmark of Hollywood history. … You will see the old dressing rooms, the singer’s boxes and the projection booth (not normally included on our tours).”
The tour lasts 60 minutes, and is followed by “Forever Hollywood,” a 55-minute film produced by the American Cinematheque that “celebrates a century of movie-making history and the eternal allure of Hollywood glamour. The unique story of Hollywood, the bountiful farming suburb, turned movie capital of the world, is told through interviews with some of today’s best known stars and filmmakers.”
It’s $5 for just the tour, $10 for the tour and movie.
But if you’ll be in Hollywood tonight, the Egyptian will host some welcome rock ‘n’ roll history at 7:30 and 11 p.m. — a restored version of the Beatles’ first concert in the U.S., which took place 47 years ago today at the Washington Coliseum, a fairly decrepit minor-league hockey arena several blocks north of Union Station. (The building still stands as a storage facility.)
The Beatles made a side trip to D.C. (where their first Capitol release, “I Want To Hold Your Hand,” had received its first U.S. airplay on WWDC in December 1963) in between gigs on “The Ed Sullivan Show” from New York. More than 8,000 people jammed the arena for the event, which was filmed. A month later, it was aired via closed-circuit to theaters across the country:
The closed-circuit telecast added concert footage from two other hot acts in early 1964, the Beach Boys and Lesley Gore. (Neither was on the bill at the Coliseum; that night’s supporting acts included Tommy Roe — who had toured with the Beatles in Britain the year before — the Chiffons and the Righteous Brothers.) While the Coliseum concert has been available from a number of sources, this marks the first presentation of the closed-circuit show, including the Lesley Gore/Beach Boys material, since March of ’64, and its visual and aural quality are reportedly first-rate.
If you were too young to experience Beatlemania (I was eight, and remember it well!), here’s your chance to see what it was all about, and what made 1964 such a vibrant year in music history. (And here’s something I find hard to believe: More time has elapsed between that concert and today than between that Lombard portrait above and the show date. How time flies.) Here are some fascinating recollections of that historic night in Washington: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/clicktrack/2010/12/paul_mccartney_al_gore_tommy_roe_and_more_recall_beatles.html
Tickets for the film are $11; for more information, go to http://www.americancinemathequecalendar.com/egyptian_theatre_events.
I think you’ll enjoy the affectionate late ’70s parody, the Rutles. Here’s their “Hold My Hand,” which humorously captures the feel of “All My Loving,” “I Want To Hold Your Hand” and other songs from this era:
A French ‘Maid of Athens’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.10 at 01:29
Current mood: artistic
Perhaps some of you are salivating over the subject line, believing you are shortly going to see an image of Carole Lombard in a French maid outfit. (If you are indeed salivating, please don’t do it over your keyboard.) Sorry to disappoint you, but that’s not what today’s entry is all about, as a check of the punctuation above would tell you. (As far as I know, Carole never visited Athens, Ohio; Athens, Ga.; Athens, W.Va. or any other Athens in the U.S. And she certainly never journeyed to Athens, Greece.)
But there is a Grecian tie-in to the entry. It’s no secret that through her many photographic portraits, particularly those she made at Paramount. Lombard often presented an ethereal, larger-than-life beauty (witness above) that evoked a mythical Greek goddess. (Of course, with her blonde hair, fair skin and features, Carole hardly looked Greek, so perhaps it should better be said she evoked the image of how Americans and northern Europeans envisioned a Greek goddess.) In early 1932, with the Olympics soon to take place in Los Angeles, Lombard posed for a series of photos evoking the Greek/Olympian ideal:
As it so happened, a novel came out that summer called “Maid Of Athens” (also the title of a noted Lord Byron poem from 1810), and the publisher used the image of a Paramount actress on the dust jacket. Guess which one they chose?
“Maid Of Athens,” by French Strother. Get the subject line now?
I thought I had that photo in my collection, but it wasn’t listed under a Paramount p1202 number. However, my hunch proved correct, as I found it elsewhere:
The photo, taken from a magazine, was credited to Otto Dyar, but that’s all I know about it. If it indeed has a p1202 number — meaning it was issued as an official Paramount publicity portrait — it’s probably in the high 260s or 270s.
So, what about the book?
It was recently put up for auction at eBay, but nobody bid on it, although bidding began at $9.99. However, it has re-listed at http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260735283647, with bidding ending at 10:37 p.m. (Eastern) next Wednesday. Here’s how the seller describes the book:
Interesting to see the term “Duse” used here, referring to the famed stage actress Eleanora Duse; several years later, when Lombard gained renown for her comedic work, she would be described as “the Duse of daffy comedy.” Beyond the description, I know nothing about the book aside from that the New York Times reviewed it that August and it apparently was never adapted into a film (perhaps Paramount, then in severe shape financially, secured movie rights in return for allowing Doubleday, the publisher, to use Lombard’s picture). Did Carole get any extra money for her image being used? Probably not, but let’s hope she at least received a copy of the book.
As it turns out, the author — who probably had nothing to do with the dust jacket — is of interest, because he was a well-known writer and journalist of the time; this was his only novel.
French Strother (shown above in 1929) was born in Missouri in 1883. In the early 1900s, he began writing for the monthly Doubleday magazine World’s Work, covering a variety of topics. (You can read his report on the 1915 Panama-Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco — which includes a good account on how technology had changed society over the past decade — at http://www.shaughey.com/images/PPIE/Worldworks_july1915.pdf.) His best known work is probably “Fighting Germany’s Spies,” a series of World’s Work articles during 1918 that were later compiled into a book. (It was reissued several years ago, to the delight of World War I scholars.)
In 1924, he spent a week with President Coolidge in a story for the magazine. Five years later, he accepted a job with Coolidge’s successor, Herbert Hoover, writing speeches and handling other White House tasks. He resigned in 1931, wrote “Maid Of Athens,” then returned to Hoover’s staff in 1932 to assist the re-election campaign (which, as any student of American history knows, didn’t do very well). Strother attended Franklin D. Roosevelt’s inauguration on March 4, 1933, caught pneumonia, and died nine days later.
It is sort of unusual to see Carole Lombard on the cover of a book she had no other connection to, but these things happen…and continued for several decades. In fact, I thought this had happened to one of Lombard’s most passionate (and famous) fans during the 1950s…
…but, as it turned out, at least Julie Newmar was said to have provided “analytical notes,” in addition to her cover pose, for the album “How To Make Love To A Blonde.” (However, if you’re a record collector and acquire the album, Newmar wants you to know this: “No, I didn’t write those insipid words that were said on the back jacket. At least the cover was decent.”)
In Fort Wayne, they’ll apparently have no…
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.09 at 00:49
Current mood: amused
From what I know about Carole Lombard’s sense of humor, somewhere she’s laughing heartily over the following story I’m about to tell. It deals with her hometown of Fort Wayne, Ind., and a government center the city is building.
The public has been asked to name the building through an online poll, and so far the clear leader is a man who served as mayor for about 16 years, winning four terms before his death in 1954. While I don’t claim to be an expert on Fort Wayne politics, he apparently had no tinge of scandal about him.
So, what’s the controversy about? Well, his name happens to be Harry W. Baals. Now, say that without the middle initial.
Therein lies the problem, and why the building probably won’t have his name on it.
“We realize that while Harry Baals was a respected mayor, not everyone outside of Fort Wayne will know that,” deputy mayor Beth Malloy said Tuesday in a statement to the Associated Press. “We wanted to pick something that would reflect our pride in our community beyond the boundaries of Fort Wayne.”
So what does this have to do with Lombard, you may ask? More than you think.
On New Year’s Day 1938, a plaque was put up at the home on 704 Rockhill Street where Lombard was born Jane Alice Peters on Oct. 6, 1908. While Carole never saw the plaque at the house, she did view it (the plaque was publicity garnered by the wily Russell Birdwell to promote “Nothing Sacred”) before it headed east:
With Lombard is director Mervyn LeRoy, who was beginning work on Carole’s next film, “Fools For Scandal.” Guess who was Fort Wayne’s mayor at the time, and presided over the ceremony that Jan. 1? That’s right, Harry W. Baals. In fact, his name is on the plaque, third line from the bottom:
Alas, history has not recorded Lombard’s reaction upon seeing the name.
I’ve seen the plaque, and heretofore thought the mayor’s name was pronounced “bahls,” similar to Baal, a god worshiped in Old Testament times. Perhaps Lombard thought that, too. But no, he pronounced it “balls”; later generations altered it to “bales.”
His great-nephew, Jim Baals, is understandably upset over the likely slight. “Harry served four terms and was a wonderful mayor. I don’t know what the problem is,” he told the AP. “I understand people are going to poke fun at it. That’s OK. I’ve lived with that name for 51 years now, and I’ve gotten through it. I think everybody else can, too.”
I have no idea whether the mayor ever met Lombard. Her lone trip to Fort Wayne after childhood came in June 1930, and Baals didn’t become mayor until 1934. He was mayor in January 1942, so he may have traveled to Indianapolis to meet a hometown heroine at the war bond rally. And it’s possible he met Carole if he ever visited southern California, where many Hoosier natives relocated.
No matter what happens, Baals has already been honored by Fort Wayne, as a street was named after him. However, Harry Baals Drive was later renamed H. Baals Drive due to the double entendre. (This begs the question — why couldn’t the building be named the H.W. Baals Center, honoring the man without pandering to the Bart Simpson/Beavis & Butthead crowd?)
But, thanks to the Lombard plaque, at least one place in Fort Wayne will always have…
They’ve got an awful lot of film fans in Brazil
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.08 at 01:32
Current mood: thirsty
If coffee isn’t actually in Carole Lombard’s cup for this photo shoot, she’s probably pretending that it is, which sort of leads us into today’s entry.
Had Lombard lived throughout World War II, there’s a good chance one of her duties aside from selling bonds might have been to help the U.S. government’s “good neighbor” program with Latin America. While relatively little actual fighting was taking place in that part of the globe, the nations in Central and South America were keys to the Allied cause, and American officials were doing all they could to keep those countries aligned.
Movies were an important part of that cause. Just as was true elsewhere in the world, American films — and their stars — were extremely popular with Latin American audiences, as we’ve shown over the years with samples of Lombard on covers of their magazines. Well, now there’s a way to learn more about how Carole and other Hollywood notables were treated in one major South American country…Brazil.
Brazil had two major film magazines during the classic Hollywood era: Cinearte (1926-1942) and A Scena Muda (1921-1955). Thanks to a contribution from oil giant Petrobras, the contents of these magazines has been digitized and placed online. The magazines have been called “documents of unquestionable historical value, essential to the recovery of the memory of national cinema, and exhibition of film criticism in Brazil.”
You can electronically flip through these magazines, consult them through the internet or search your content matters relating to the beginnings of cinema in Brazil. (And while Brazilian cinema has a long and healthy tradition of its own, much of the content deals with the U.S. part of the industry.)
Keep in mind that these are Portuguese-language publications, so it may be difficult for many of us who aren’t from Brazil to understand them. According to William M. Drew, who alerted me to this treasure trove, “Many of these articles were translated from articles in American publications, although there are also a fair amount of articles and interviews with the stars conducted by representatives of the Brazilian magazine.” (In other words, there was a significant foreign element to the Hollywood press corps long before the Golden Globes were established.) To check it out, go to http://www.bjksdigital.museusegall.org.br/projeto.htm.
Here are some samples of Lombard-related coverage. First, from Cinearte of May 1934, about the time “Twentieth Century” was being released in the U.S., but Brazilians wouldn’t see that for another few months; their most recent Lombard product was “We’re Not Dressing.”
Fast forward to Cinearte of August 1936, when Carole and castmate Alison Skipworth greet the wife of the Brazilian president on the set of “The Princess Comes Across” (I’m pretty certain that’s what it says!) as part of a feature showing Brazilians visiting the film capital:
In the January 1938 issue of Cinearte, you can find two things relating to Lombard. First, this brief, which apparently has something to do with Carole, Clark Gable and his wife Ria…
…then, this picture on the set of “True Confession”:
That May, Cinearte ran letters from several Paramount stars, including Carole and Claudette Colbert:
And no, we haven’t forgotten A Scena Muda. Here’s a column mentioning Carole in its issue of March 28, 1939 (a rather important day in Lombard lore):
We mentioned coffee at the start of the entry, so why not close with “The Coffee Song” (from which today’s subject header is derived)? Here’s Frank Sinatra’s 1946 version for Columbia, one of the many hits he had in that era. (Frank would cut a new version in the early sixties, and later in the decade would make several albums with Brazilian music legend Antonio Carlos Jobim.)
Two from the ’20s
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.07 at 02:10
Current mood: curious
The 1920s, the decade in which she began in films, remain the great untapped area of Carole Lombard research. Of course, the biggest gap is that none of the movies she made before her 1926 automobile accident are known to have survived; if merely one of them resurfaced somewhere, it would be a major find.
Failing that, though, the online archiving of newspapers has become a boon for researchers, as we’re able to discover all sorts of heretofore unknown tidbits about Lombard’s life and early career. Two such articles follow.
First, let’s visit Dubuque, the picturesque northeastern Iowa town just across the Mississippi River from Wisconsin and Illinois…but we’re going back to Sept. 30, 1925 to do it. Turns out one of the local theaters is playing this new Fox film called “Marriage In Transit,” and there’s a brief about it in the city’s paper, the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald:
It looks to be something from the Fox publicity department, and it puts yet another dent in the long-held story that when a teenage Jane Alice Peters took a pseudonym for her movie career, she was known as “Carol” Lombard until about 1930, when a misspelled name on a poster led her to adopt the extra “e.” But she was referred to as “Carole” in a pair of Los Angeles Times stories earlier in 1925 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/197042.html). Indeed, misspelling honors here go to someone in the galleys, who left out the first “e” in September (not to mention a few commas) directly above the story. (You can also see a few radio listings to the left of the story; in those days, people in Dubuque who owned one of those amazing devices could hear stations from everywhere in the continental U.S., including both coasts. Of course, back then radio was in its infancy, with only a handful of AM stations.)
Lombard’s comments about “busy Palm Beach widows getting fiances so mislaid” might presage things Carole would say a decade or so later, assuming this is something she actually said and not concocted by a studio publicist. It’s hard to gauge what kind of personality Lombard was like in her pre-accident days; she would later refer to her earliest film work as “terrible.” Here, she also admits a hasty marriage wouldn’t be something she’d do in real life, probably because at the time this made the Telegraph-Herald, Lombard was less than a week away from reaching the ripe old age of…17.
Now let’s jump ahead a little more than 3 1/4 years — specifically to Jan. 20, 1929 — and some 2,000 miles westward, to Los Angeles. We pick up the Times that morning and see this story, without a byline, in the entertainment section:
This article is a mite confusing. It says Carol (this is from the relatively brief period when Lombard eschewed the “e” in her first name) is appearing in “Craig’s Wife” at the Hillstreet in downtown Los Angeles; actually, the film she was in at the time was “Ned McCobb’s Daughter,” which also starred Irene Rich.
Actually, several other things are of interest here, not the least of which concerns itself with “Dynamite,” the Cecil B. De Mille film for which she briefly had the female lead but wound up reduced to little more than an extra, wearing the number three in this publicity still (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/11206.html):
Years later, when Lombard made her first appearance on the “Lux Radio Theater” series De Mille hosted, they briefly mentioned that he had dismissed her from the original starring role. But, as it turns out, that wasn’t Lombard’s initial encounter with the director. Here’s the story, taken from the second half of the article:
As Lombard is noted to have signed with Fox at age 15, this article apparently accepts the shibboleth that she was born in 1909, not the actual 1908. This would thus mean that she had tried to get work with De Mille in late 1922 or early ’23, while still a student at Virgil Junior High School.
Some of her thoughts on “vamps” are worth noting. “Time was when a vamp was as apparent in her methods as a saxophone player,” she quipped, but added that talking pictures provided such characters with more subtlety and texture — a revamped vamp, as it were. “But now that we’ve learned to talk, we can all be different. We can say it with wisecracks or roses, and the Canadian Mounties have nothing on us when it comes to getting our man.”
My thanks to William M. Drew, whose work on the initial years of motion picture history on the West Coast has proven invaluable (http://william-m-drew.webs.com/), for providing me with this article.
Incidentally, you may have noted we’ve once again changed the header photo. The one running this week was taken by Warners esteemed staff photographer Madison Lacy in early 1938.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A pair of blonde legends (ay Chihuahua!)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.06 at 01:47
Current mood: amused
Every now and then, I find a Carole Lombard photo I forgot I had in my online collection. (I know that’s the case because the image hasn’t been resized, and the border is still there.) Once such uncovered treasure is found, I copy and upgrade it, then present it to you.
An example is above — a Paramount portrait from 1936, p1202-1344. I don’t know who took it, nor do I have a snipe available that could explain what this was promoting (it’s probably “The Princess Comes Across,” her lone film at the studio in ’36, though if it came out late in the year it might be to give advance notice for “Swing High, Swing Low”). Whatever, it’s quite stunning…and in the size I initially found it in, a scale roughly twice as big as an 8 1/2″ x 11″ glossy, it was pretty obvious that Lombard wasn’t wearing a bra at that session.
Some more treasure just came my way, compliments of Carole Sampeck and The Lombard Archive. It’s new to me, and likely you too, as it shows Carole next to a blonde icon whose centenary we’re celebrating this year.
Before you get your hopes up too high…no, it’s not the long-sought pic of Lombard and Jean Harlow. (If Carole Sampeck had such a photo, she might be able to retire from the proceeds of that image alone.) Neither is it a photo of Lombard and her RKO buddy Lucille Ball (who in her earlier years was a blonde, though I think her hair shade had darkened by the time she met Carole), which also would be quite valuable.
No, this image shows Lombard with someone she’s been seen with before; in fact, we ran that photo just the other day. We’re referring to Ginger Rogers (speaking of RKO), and while this second image of Carole and Ginger is not in the greatest of condition, it is fun to look at. Without further ado, Misses Lombard and Rogers…and friend:
Can’t quite make out the “friend”? Here’s a closer look:
Hope my computer work clarified the image, but just in case you’re still having trouble with it, said “friend” is a Chihuahua. And as Carole Sampeck remarked when she sent the picture, “Lest anyone think Paris Hilton started that whole Little-Dog-As-Accessory thing, here you go!” (If Ginger is reading this somewhere, kindly do not throw thunderbolts toward Ms. Sampeck for comparing you to Paris Hilton. She lives just east of Dallas, not far from Fort Worth where you grew up, and the Metroplex has suffered enough awful weather this week.)
Carole Sampeck later commented, “If you look closely, you will see that Ginger’s Chihuahua has its own fur coat! You can see its front paws protruding from the little furry sleeves. This is too funny. Wonder what the fittings were like?” We can only guess — and speaking of guessing, I have no idea what the little canine’s name was. I checked a few Ginger Rogers blogs, and none of them listed a name; in fact, none of them apparently had anything about pets she may have owned over the years. Perhaps such information was in Ginger’s autobiography, which I have yet to read (though I’m increasingly becoming a fan of hers). Some Internet searching did turn up that more than a few Chihuahuas are named for Ginger Rogers…perhaps because of the breed’s frequent gingery color?
I wish I could provide more information about this photo, such as when and where it may have been taken, but Ms. Sampeck didn’t know; she said Lombard “had it tucked away among her things for some reason. Jeannie [Jean Garceau, personal secretary for Lombard and Clark Gable] did not know anything about its backstory, though.” Lombard, ardent pet lover that she was, probably couldn’t resist the image of a dog with a fur coat (and not its fur!).
For all the many Ginger fans who are seeing this entry, a lovely picture of her sans dog:
And for all the dog lovers, a photo of Ms. Sampeck’s best friend, the remarkable Bailey (isn’t she adorable?):
To the glory of Va(-)Va(-)Voom!
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.05 at 01:11
Current mood: excited
The term “pin-up” is rarely applied to Carole Lombard, though the picture above makes it clear that, in terms of sex appeal, she had what it took for the task. Then again, pin-ups came to the fore during World War II, and Lombard left us only 40 days after Pearl Harbor.
Even if Carole had lived, it’s rather doubtful she would have been a candidate. She was approaching her mid-thirties, focusing on having a baby with Clark Gable while also continuing her career. The actresses most associated with the wartime pin-up phenomenon — Betty Grable, Rita Hayworth and Jane Russell — were at least eight years younger than Lombard. And while Carole had no objections to showing off her legs in dresses or casual wear, she had stopped posing in swimsuits about the time she turned 30.
(Incidentally, does anyone know the p1202 number for the photo above? It’s impossible to read in the lower right-hand corner.)
These four portraits are part of a fine book I picked up not long ago called “Va-Va-Voom! Classic Hollywood Pin-Ups,” by Chris Chang.
The book, which uses photos from the esteemed John Kobal collection, looks at Hollywood glamour photography dating back to silent days, with pictures ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous (e.g., “holiday” art for Halloween, Thanksgiving and Christmas). It also looks at the phenomenon from a feminist perspective, and features a foreword by Mamie Van Doren, whose first direct exposure to Hollywood glamour may have come as a 10-year-old girl, when she saw Lombard and Gable arrive at the Sioux Falls airport for a hunting trip in October 1941.
“Va-Va-Voom!” should not be confused with a book with an almost identical name (which has Mamie on its cover)…
This “Va Va Voom!” (no hyphens) — written by Steve Sullivan — is also a worthwhile book, though it generally limits itself to post-World War II bombshells, not all of whom were Hollywood actresses. Its turf includes the likes of Bettie Page, June Wilkinson, Tempest Storm and Betty Brosmer.
One of the actresses featured in the Sullivan book has been profiled here at “Carole & Co.” (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/188038.html). We are referring to that still stunningly statuesque Lombard fan, Julie Newmar:
Julie, at 77 a beautiful woman in so many ways (for proof, visit http://julienewmar.com/ and http://www.JulieNewmarWrites.com),
has often cited Lombard and Hayworth as her idols; in fact, she has said that were her life story to be filmed, she would want Carole to play her. (Hey, if you can alter the space-time continuum to allow that to happen, you can also magically make Lombard at least half a foot taller and somewhat more voluptuous in order to portray Newmar!) Oh, and a memo to Anne Hathaway: study Julie’s work as Catwoman on the “Batman” TV series — forget the campy elements and focus on how Newmar approached her signature role — to get an idea how the character should be played (taking nothing away from Michelle Pfeiffer, who did a fine job as well).
Newmar, no stranger to pin-ups herself, will be one of the guests tonight at the opening reception for an exhibition, “Poster Peepshow: The Art Of The Pin Up,” at the Nucleus Art Gallery in Alhambra, Calif. Art from both vintage and contemporary artists will be on display (the show will run through Feb. 28). The reception is from 7 to 11 p.m., and while admission is free, it is limited to age 18 and up (ID required). If you’re in southern California, by all means go to see some fascinating artwork and meet an engaging lady. (And if you do see Julie, tell her the folks at “Carole & Co.” wish her well.) For more on the event, visit http://www.gallerynucleus.com/gallery/exhibition/263.
Looking back: February 1932
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.04 at 02:14
Current mood: thoughtful
Our second installment of Carole Lombard items via Google News comes from a month when theaters around the U.S. were showing her latest film, Paramount’s “No One Man” (that’s Ricardo Cortez with Carole above). There are a few things of note here, and we’ll begin with something (almost certainly syndicated) from the Calgary Herald of Feb. 6, where Lombard insists the stories of those wild Hollywood parties don’t apply in the sound era:
Staying in Canada, we turn to the Ottawa Citizen of Feb. 16. It turns out Lombard is having a problem that’s apparently endemic to blondes (double-click to view it at full size):
We learn her favorite colors (at least in early 1932) were “chartreuse, bottle green, and pale, dusty blue.” (Also note that near the end of the story, she uses the Canadian spelling of “practice,” though I’m going to guess that was put in by a Canadian copy editor, not Carole.)
The next day, this ran in Florida, specifically the Sarasota Herald Tribune:
There’s no byline, but some of the prose — the frequent references to Paramount, adjectives such as “meteoric” and a description of “No One Man” as “perhaps the plum of her historic career” — indicate this is likely a Paramount news release. But one sentence is indeed true: “Being a sensible young lady, Miss Lombard has not allowed success to turn her head.”
Finally, Grace Kingsley interviews Carole in the Los Angeles Times of Feb. 14; Lombard and William Powell were among the guests at a home-christening party for actor Neil Hamilton and his wife. (Hamilton, a noted leading man of the ’20s and early ’30s who worked with D.W. Griffith and would appear in 1932’s “What Price Hollywood?” with Constance Bennett, resurfaced in the mid-sixties as Commissioner Gordon on the “Batman” TV series.) Carole talked of William Powell Jr., whom Lombard occasionally saw when her husband had visitation rights:
“Carole Lombard told us how clever William Powell’s little son is. She is probably well equipped to small boys as she was brought up with two older brothers, and told about ‘borrowing’ cigarettes for them from her mother’s drawing-room table and of making and smoking cornsilk cigarettes in order to keep in good favor with them, so they’d let her ‘tag.'”
Powell’s son would commit suicide in late 1968; he was only 43.
Ginger and Jean: Centenaries in ‘Silver’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.03 at 01:23
Current mood: nostalgic
2011 marks centennials for two of Carole Lombard’s acting contemporaries — Ginger Rogers, with whom she is pictured, and Jean Harlow, who was a close friend. Both provided immeasurable contributions to the classic Hollywood we know and love.
And if you live in or near the Washington, D.C. area, good news. Just as it did for Lombard in 2009 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/179517.html), the American Film Institute’s Silver Theatre and Cultural Center in Silver Spring, Md. is celebrating the legacies of both actresses.
To be honest, the AFI’s “Jean Harlow Centennial Celebration” isn’t much, only two films, running from Saturday, March 5 to Tuesday, March 8. (Turner Classic Movies will be showing plenty of Harlow during the month.) But the two AFI selections are good ones, well worth experiencing on the big screen — “Platinum Blonde” (1931) with Loretta Young and the ill-fated Robert Williams, and the always welcome “Libeled Lady” (1936), where Jean delivers the laughs with William Powell, Spencer Tracy and Myrna Loy.
“Furious fun and racy romance,” indeed.
For showtimes and more information on the Harlow films, go to http://www.afi.com/silver/new/nowplaying/2011/v8i1/harlow.aspx.
The Rogers package, “Backwards and in High Heels: Ginger Rogers Centennial Retrospective,” is far more elaborate, featuring 22 films, beginning Friday and continuing through April 7. Most of February is devoted to Ginger’s movies with Fred Astaire, kicking off with “Flying Down To Rio” (1933), where the two are in support to Gene Raymond and Dolores Del Rio; their first starring vehicle, “The Gay Divorcee” (1934), follows.
If you’d like a good old-fashioned double feature, you’ll have two chances to do it: on Feb. 27 and 28, as the Silver shows “Star Of Midnight” (1935, with Powell) and “Rafter Romance” (1933, with Preston Foster), and on March 6 and 7, with the 1933 Warners pre-Code musicals “42nd Street” and “Gold Diggers Of 1933” (the latter featuring Ginger’s mouth gradually magnified in a gargantuan close-up, while she sings “We’re In The Money” in pig Latin!).
By mid-March, Rogers’ later films appear on the schedule, including her Oscar-winning performance in “Kitty Foyle” (1940); two fun films from 1942, “Roxie Hart” (William Wellman’s take on the “Chicago” story) and “The Major And The Minor” (Billy Wilder’s directing debut), and Howard Hawks’ hilarious “Monkey Business” (1952). For specific showtimes and other info, visit http://www.afi.com/silver/new/nowplaying/2011/v8i1/rogers.aspx.
I’ve been to the Silver; it’s a charming venue, blending its original Art Deco charm (it opened in 1938) with state-of-the-art facilities and comfort. Plus, it’s a short walk from the Silver Spring station on Metrorail’s Red line. Jean and Ginger await your visit.
Street talk with Lombard and Loy
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.02 at 01:40
Current mood: curious
As a result of our more than 1,450 entries over more than 43 months (and, at last count, a record 246 members!), “Carole & Co.” has received a special privilege: Every now and then, we receive transcripts of conversations Carole Lombard has with some of her filmland buddies up in Hollywood heaven. Here are a few Carole had in recent weeks with another fine actress and charming lady, Myrna Loy.
Morning, Jan. 17, 2011. Carole Lombard is sitting at a desk in front of a computer, turned away from it, when Myrna Loy walks in.
Loy: Got your message to come by and see you. What’s this all about?
Lombard: I merely wanted to congratulate you on your latest honor.
Loy: Huh?
Lombard: (Smiles.) Myrna, my friend, you’ve got a street named after you.
(Myrna makes a face at Carole.)
Loy: Not the folks in Helena again! I mean, having the performing arts center named for me was sufficient.
Lombard: No, that’s not where.
Loy: Not New York City? Okay, so I spent my final years there on the East Side, but there were a lot of celebrities who lived in that neighborhood. Why single me out?
Lombard: (Shakes her head.) Nope, not New York — and not Los Angeles or any of the studios, either.
Loy: Well, then, where is it?
Lombard: It’s in, of all places...Beaumont, Texas! (She presses a key on the board, and the screen saver disappears, replaced by the image below.)
Loy: Beaumont, Texas? I’m pretty sure I’ve never been there — or should I say, never was there — in my life!
Lombard: Well, this was in their hometown newspaper this morning, and the writer couldn’t figure it out, either. I was hoping you had the answer.
Loy: I suppose someone, somewhere, was a fan of mine.
Lombard: Could be, but shouldn’t the neighborhood also have streets named for other stars, like Bill Powell? “Powell and Loy” is a natural intersection.
Loy: (Smiles.) Guess so. Well, I’ve got to be going.
Lombard: Take care. (She watches Loy turns around and leave.)
Late afternoon, Jan. 17, 2011. Loy is walking when Lombard, holding a laptop, comes out of nowhere and stands in front of her.
Lombard: Good news! The great Myrna Loy Drive mystery is solved!
Loy: Okay, so who named it after me?
Lombard: Well, as it turns out, it wasn’t named after you. Well, not directly.
Loy: (Puzzled.) Just what are you talking about?
Lombard: This! (She opens up the laptop, flips on a switch and the image below comes onto the screen.)
Lombard: Meet Myrna Loy Chambers, Beaumont High School class of 1954.
Loy: So why is the street named after her? Not that I’m jealous, just curious.
Lombard: Turns out her dad was the developer of the subdivision. His name was Loyd D. Chambers. That’s L-O-Y-D, with one “L.”
Loy: But “Loy” a middle name? A bit unusual.
Lombard: Hey, remember, in that part of the country, girls are often named “something Sue” or “something Lee.” In that context, Loy fits. (Pauses.) Don’t know too much about her, but she evidently was a good student — a check of the ‘Net showed that two years later, she was listed in the University of Texas yearbook.
Loy: If she graduated in ’54, chances are she was born in 1936 or ’37.
Lombard: About the time you were queen of Hollywood! (Carole performs a mock curtsy.)
Loy: You’re not taking that seriously, are you?
Lombard: (Laughs.) Only if I had won!
Loy: Well, if that girl had been born five years earlier, the only way she would have been named after me would have been if she was of Chinese descent. Some folks actually thought I was Asian!
Lombard: See you around. Perhaps you can join Clark and I to watch some tennis.
Loy: Not a bad idea — I’ll get back to you on that one.
Conjecture casting Clark and Carole
Posted by vp19 on 2011.02.01 at 00:59
Current mood: thoughtful
Today marks the 110th anniversary of Clark Gable’s birth, and the photo above is a publicity pic from his one film with eventual wife Carole Lombard, “No Man Of Her Own” from Paramount in late 1932. At the time, there was nothing going on between them (though that would change slightly more than three years later).
“No Man Of His Own” isn’t an entirely satisfying movie, particularly after the breeziness of its first half devolves into the moralistic melodrama of the second. But it has its moments, so in honor of Mr. Gable’s 110th, a clip from the film. Oh, and even you non-Gable fans will want to watch this, because the first minute or so of it features Lombard in lingerie (hooray!), a still of which is shown below as she hurriedly puts on pajamas:
Clark and Carole did have some nice on-screen chemistry, and it’s unfortunate that the only other motion picture footage we see them in are either home movies or newsreels. They apparently had no inherent aversion to working together again, but for whatever reason, MGM was cool on signing Lombard for a film (the only one she made there was “The Gay Bride” in 1934, a relatively unremarkable mob comedy).
The story goes that Carole did find a property she thought would be good for her and Clark, only to discover the rights already belonged to Katharine Hepburn…a little film she and Spencer Tracy would make called “Woman Of The Year.”
Here, though, we can imagine, create alternate cinematic universes. So let’s do that with Gable and Lombard — cast them in a movie that would be suitable for their respective talents. It might involve replacing Clark’s leading lady with Lombard, or Carole’s leading man with Gable…or a film that neither made (such as from the aforementioned Tracy-Hepburn matchups). Heck, since we’re fantasizing, if you want to magically transfer Clark and Carole to a film made after their deaths, even one in comparatively modern times, be my guest.
I’ll start with a movie they might have improved, and that’s to take nothing away from the stars who actually made it. I’m referring to 1941’s “The Bride Came C.O.D.,” starring James Cagney and Bette Davis (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/75449.html).
While Lombard — who was 32 when this film came out — might have been seen as a bit old to have played another heiress, her experience with comedy and younger, less weighty public persona than Davis would have made her ideal in this role. And Gable, like Cagney, had good comic chops and was no stranger to portraying a pilot. Could Clark and Carole have overcome Warners’ traditional ineptness with screwball? Maybe not, but it would’ve been nice to see them try.
What other Clark and Carole pairings could you imagine? Toss some our way. Meanwhile, happy anniversary to Mr. Gable.
Miss Lombard and Mr. Winchell, part 2
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.31 at 02:34
Current mood: cynical
I only know of one photograph of Carole Lombard with Walter Winchell, but as the man himself might have said, it’s a beaut.
It gives a glimpse of a bizarro universe where Lombard and Winchell are entwined in romance, while Clark Gable — no stranger to roles as a newspaperman — readies to take notes. (This was taken at a costume party thrown by William Randolph Hearst; we know because there’s another photo showing Carole in her cowgirl outfit, at a table with Hearst himself. And Winchell was a Hearst employee, working for his New York Daily Mirror.)
We previously noted that Lombard served as a guest columnist for Winchell on two occasions. We ran the first one yesterday; here’s the second. Unlike the initial outing, written in the form of a letter to the columnist, this time Lombard actually deigned to write a column — about its usual author. Logrolling of a sort? Sure, but it makes for fun reading just the same.
_________________________________________
(Editor’s Note: Walter Winchell is on vacation during the month of August. He will have a guest columnist replace him each day. The Winchell column will be back as usual Sept. 1.)
Things I Never Knew ’Til Now About Walter Winchell
By CAROLE LOMBARD
A Hollywood star often wearies of facing the camera and imagines it might be fun to turn the camera on the cameraman. So, after years of reading what newspapermen have to say, I’ve nursed the ambition to write about them. Walter Winchell is on vacation, so here’s my long-awaited opportunity to turn the pencil on the writer.
* * *
But before I tell you any Things I Never Knew ’Til Now About Walter, I’d like first to say something I knew all along –- that in a country where we tend to worship prizefight champions, golf champions, tennis, swimming, racing and baseball champions, the most worthwhile title of them all belongs to W.W., the champion of Americanism. I think that when future historians come to estimate his importance in the scheme of American life, they will point not to his title as the Father of the Gossip Column, not to his contributions to the American “slanguage,” but to his persistent activities as Public Patriot No. 1. For that, Mr. W., orchids to you from me. And now that I’ve dispensed with the posies, I’ll get down to the prose.
* * *
As a member of the glamor racket, I think the definition of glamor Walter published tops them all. “Glamor,” he wrote, “is when the wrapping on the package is more attractive than its contents.” I wonder whether Walter realized when he wrote those words that he himself has glamor.
* * *
At 35, Walter announced that he would retire when he reached 40, instead of retiring he made his first motion picture, titled -– significantly or not –- “Wake Up and Live.” He was 43 on April 7 and still going strong, very much awake and very much alive … He is lithe, blithe and slender.
His hair has been whitening for years and now adds distinction to his appearance. His eyes, which to me are his most memorable features, are electric blue. He is a good listener, as evidenced by the reams of news he gleans. He is a good talker as will be vouched for by any who ever heard him -– including myself. When he feels that his own conversation is more interesting than that of his companions he unleashes a rapid-fire patter of ideas and anecdotes. His greeting, invariably, is “What’s new?” And you’ll notice that the first and last letters of the query makes W.W.!
I don’t know who first said “It’s smart to be thrifty,” but I do know Walter is both. Not only did he coin the expression “Annuities Keep Headliners From Being Breadliners,” but he practices what he preaches, too…During the first World War he served in the Navy, where his job was, of all things, carrying confidential messages! (More than one wag remarked: “From gob to gab in one generation.”) … Hurt pride was responsible for his starting the gossip column –- acknowledged to be the most drastic innovation in modern journalism. He gave the city editor of the Graphic the first-hand tip-off on the Frank Tinney-Imogene Wilson reconciliation. Lack of proof induced the editor to reject it. One week later the news made the front page -– of another newspaper. That was the last straw -– the one that almost broke Walter’s back. Then and there he decided to capitalize on the gossip he heard around town, and thus he started his famous pillar of prattle –- which was eventually to be the outlet for my reportorial ambitions. (How am I doing? Without a director, too!)
* * *
Unlike the majority of movie stars, who adopt fictitious names, Walter actually is a Winchell -– although it used to be spelled with one “l” until it was accidentally set up with the second “l” on a theater marquee … His reputation for scoring scoops covers everything from fifth columns to films. He wrote that “Made For Each Other” would be a box-office success before I had even seen the picture!
* * *
Walter can afford the best, but prefers wearing old shoes because he finds them more comfortable … And speaking of shoes, I think the cutest description of my legs was Walter’s, who gave a typewriter picture of them by describing them this way, !! (If I had legs like this (), I wouldn’t earn much pin-money.) … While one of my pet pleasures is to prepare an elegant dinner, from hors d’oeuvres to dessert, I don’t think I’d serve it to Walter. He eats sparingly and rapidly, and he’s food finicky. Not a chef in New York but gets special instructions from the boss when Walter orders. Yet with such opportunities to become a gourmet, his tastes are simple to the point of naivete. When he was in Hollywood last, he had the town’s swankiest restaurant in despair with his order for “basted eggs.” “But there is no such dish,” the maitre d’hotel protested. “Don’t tell me,” said Walter, “my mother basted them for years!” He meant shirred eggs!
* * *
Like Charlie Chaplin, William Powell and Babe Ruth, Walter is left-handed … He generally awakens at 5 p.m. (he retires at 10 a.m.) and a little later has “breakfast” while Mrs. Winchell and their two children, Walda and Walter Jr., have dinner … On his desk he uses a pair of baby shoes as paperweights. They are the first shoes ever worn by his unmarried son, age 5 … I shall never forget the first time I met Walter. I was seated at a premiere on the coast with Clark Gable, just before the lights went down, and I almost swallowed my gum when Clark said, “Meet Walter Winchell.” Just to be cute, with all the feminine sweetness I could command I turned to Walter and said, “You don’t like many people -– do you like me?” … “I’m crazy about you,” he replied, “but don’t be too sure of me!”
_________________________________________
Some observations:
* Lombard notes Winchell’s “Americanism.” Walter had been a longtime supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt, someone Carole also admired, and was among the first U.S. journalists to warn of the Nazis and the threat they represented. (Following World War II, he drifted to the right, engaging in feuds with black star Josephine Baker, liberal New York broadcaster Barry Gray and the New York Post, a liberal tabloid in its pre-Rupert Murdoch days.)
* Winchell appeared in several films, including two with bandleader Ben Bernie, with whom he had a noted feud, albeit an apolitical one along the lines of Jack Benny and Fred Allen. (Winchell had a more intense feud with New York Daily News columnist Ed Sullivan — yes, the man who later had a long-running variety show on CBS. They eventually made up.)
* I had no idea what Lombard was referring to when she mentioned “the Frank Tinney-Imogene Wilson reconciliation.” An Internet check revealed it was a scandal in 1924 where Tinney, a leading stage comedian of the time who often performed in blackface, was shown to be physically abusive to Wilson, a renowned Ziegfeld Follies dancer who was not his wife. Their reconciliation was short-lived; Wilson was fired from the Follies, moved to Germany and became a film actress, then returned to the U.S., where she had a brief movie career under the name Mary Nolan. Later, she became addicted to heroin and at age 42 died in Hollywood in late 1948.
* I have yet to come across Winchell’s “!!” reference to Lombard’s legs (might it have come as his response to the loving cup engraved with “To Carole Lombard, who gave publicity legs upon which to stand -– Russell Birdwell”?).
* Carole notes that night owl Winchell “has ‘breakfast’ while Mrs. Winchell and their two children, Walda and Walter Jr., have dinner.” As it turned out, you could have put quotation marks around “Mrs. Winchell,” too. Lombard likely didn’t know it, but Winchell never officially married his second wife, something he never made public because he didn’t want the public to know his daughter Walda was illegitimate. Winchell had numerous affairs over the years, including several with film actresses.
Winchell generally gave Carole good ink, but what may have been the last thing his column said about her during her lifetime might have given her reason to pause. It was on Oct. 12, 1941, and under the alter ego “Memos of a Girl Friday,” Winchell wrote:
“When coasters last week reported that Gable was going hunting without Carole Lombard because she was ill — his studio phoned me to tell you it was untrue. That’s why I told you they were together hunting in Watertown, S.D., happier than ever, etc. … Well, today, from what I call an excellent source, comes word that Carole will soon file. Carole is supposed to have so written pals.”
“Soon file” was Winchell argot for “soon seeking a divorce.” If any Lombard “pals” had written word of it from her, they certainly didn’t let on, either at the time or after her death.
Like others in the press, Winchell continued lionizing Lombard posthumously; in fact, in his column of Nov. 8, 1942, he wrote: “Warning to that Broadway night club: No free ads here until it removes from the lobby display — that likeness of Carole Lombard — posing in a dated ‘cheesecake.'” He believed it wasn’t tasteful to be shown less than 10 months after her death, while World War II was going on.
Winchell continued his power after the war, but his influence began to wane in the 1950s, especially since he never quite managed to conquer television. He was somewhat satirized in the 1957 Burt Lancaster drama “Sweet Smell Of Success,” but by then he was largely in the past tense — probably the reason he was hired to narrate episodes of “The Untouchables,” the TV series starring former Lombard cohort Robert Stack as Eliot Ness.
Winchell’s home base, the New York Daily Mirror, folded in October 1963; Hearst moved him to its Journal-American, which expired some 2 1/2 years later. With fewer and fewer papers carrying his column, Winchell shut it down in February 1969, dying three years later. I’m not sure if Manhattan has a memorial to him, but he does have a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
Incidentally, hope you enjoy my new header photo; it’s from Lombard’s 1933 potboiler, “White Woman.” We will attempt to change the photo each week.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Miss Lombard and Mr. Winchell, part 1
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.30 at 17:27
Current mood: amused
Few in filmdom better cultivated the press than Carole Lombard; she knew how to publicize her exploits in such a way that it was simultaneously significant and entertaining. That helped Carole immensely in her dealings with Louella Parsons, Hedda Hopper, Jimmie Fidler and others in the Hollywood press corps — but she also had plenty of success with writers who weren’t based in the movie capital.
One of them was no stranger to Hollywood, but was predominantly identified with New York; in fact, his column usually featured “On Broadway” in its title. Moreover, his influence extended far beyond the entertainment world, frequently venturing into politics, and he became one of the first multimedia stars, gaining high ratings on radio. It’s difficult to overstate just how big a force he was in the 1930s and ’40s.
We are referring to Walter Winchell.
Winchell had been a vaudeville performer in the 1910s, moving into journalism in the early 1920s — first with a trade paper, the Vaudeville News, then with eccentric publisher Bernarr MacFadden’s foray into tabloid journalism, the New York Graphic. In June 1929, he left the struggling Graphic for Hearst’s tabloid New York Daily Mirror, adding a radio show the following year. At his peak, his column was carried in more than 2,000 newspapers. Here’s a sample of Winchell’s breezy journalism, circa 1940 (double-click to see it at full size):
How often did Winchell write about Lombard? It’s difficult to gauge from a 2011 perspective. Most of the larger papers that carried his column were in the Hearst chain, are now defunct and are difficult to track down on microfilm. But I have found a few samples, two of them coming in one column — from the Hearst-owned Rochester (N.Y.) Evening Journal of June 29, 1936, while Winchell was out on the Coast:
First, Winchell discusses feminine film beauty, listing his tops in 10 different categories (oh, and apologies for typos that probably prompted a few snickers around Rochester that day — he’s referring to Gail Patrick and Kay Francis):
(A loud cheer for the Lombard legs!)
Next, an anecdote about being out with Lombard and Clark Gable — and a reminder that even 75 years ago, people often acted boorishly around celebrities:
Incidentally, Hearst would close the Journal in 1937 when he began having financial difficulties.
Flash forward to August 1938, not long after Carole had spent a week handling publicity for Selznick International Pictures. Just as Johnny Carson used to do on the Tonight show, Winchell would employ other celebrities as guest columnists while he was vacationing. Lombard got the honors on Aug. 2 (probably through Selznick International publicist Russell Birdwell), and wrote her column in the form of a “letter” to Walter. I couldn’t track down an original copy of it, but thankfully Carla Valderrama’s site, carolelombard.org, ran it a few years back — so here it is:
_________________________________________
Dear Walter,
I tried to get you on the telephone the other day, but they told me you were on a 30-day vacation. Pretty soft! You see, I went into the press agenting business for a week, and I had a lot to tell you.
Before you make any cracks -– it wasn’t a gag. I took a desk, four telephones and two secretaries in Selznick International’s news bureau. The doors were open wide for six days. Any and all movie writers, radio gossipers, reporters and columnists -– you too –- were welcome to enter and hear the news.
You would have loved to have been here, Walter, when I called in Gene Fowler to be my rewrite man, and he interviewed John Hay (Jock) Whitney and David O. Selznick. Here’s how it went, according to Gene’s report:
Gene: Mr. Whitney, meet Mr. Selznick. He is president in charge of production.
Whitney: This is news to me. I thought he was part of the Roosevelt spending program.
Gene: How long will the partnership last?
Whitney: Forever. You see we are producing “Gone With The Wind.”
Gene: I hear that you have changed your racing colors since entering the movie business.
Whitney: Yes? To what?
Gene: Black and blue!
When I called you, Walter, I wanted to toss a couple of stories in your direction.
One was about plans to have the first transatlantic air clipper drop a wreath over the spot where the S.S. Titanic sank in 1912. The flowers would bear the legend, “To Those Who Showed The Way To Safety On The High Seas.” It is a dignified and newsworthy idea. Furthermore, Selznick is going to make a picture called “Titanic.”
Called the Duke of Windsor, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, H.G. Wells, Maude Adams, George Bernard Shaw and a few others on another idea — a round-the-world telephone poll on what noted people think on the casting of Norma Shearer and Clark Gable in “Gone With The Wind.” I couldn’t get a single answer. I defy even you to get past the Duke’s third secretary. As for the others, they weren’t in.
Governor Frank M. Merriam of California, I found out, is giving earnest consideration to “career insurance” for Hollywood stars. Nine extras, former stars themselves, who recently worked together on “The Young At Heart,” petitioned the governor for a law forcing present stars to save 10 per cent of their salaries for the future. The idea aroused widespread favorable comment.
By the time my week was over, Walter, I had handled 70 news stories, including one or two, I must admit, on my next picture, “Made For Each Other.” On the final day, they threw a party for me, and sent me out of the office with a three-foot gold loving cup, inscribed, “To Carole Lombard, who gave publicity legs upon which to stand -– Russell Birdwell.” The man Birdwell is Selznick’s nominal publicity and advertising head.
For stars who feel ego creeping up on them, I recommend a week’s trick in a studio news bureau. They’ll find that city editors don’t swoon at the sight or sound of so-called Hollywood names.
Time to sign off now. Here’s one you can have with no credits attached:
Did you hear about the producer who ordered a certain makeup man fired? The man, he said, made a star’s wig look too phony.
Well, the fellow told to execute the order slipped the bad news to the makeup man.
“But why?” said the man. “That was no wig. It was the star’s natural hair.”
“In that case,” said the lieutenant bouncer, “you’re canned anyway. Do you think I can tell the chief he was mistaken?”
Carole Lombard.
_________________________________________
Oh, that wacky, wonderful Lombard.
However, that wasn’t the only time Carole pinch-hit for Winchell. See another example in tomorrow’s entry — along with a famed photo of them together.
Something else that’s got it ‘Made’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.29 at 00:54
Current mood: excited
Let’s again use Carole Lombard’s 1939 film “Made For Each Other” as the basis for today’s entry. Here are publicity stills promoting the movie — first, Lombard with James Stewart; second, Carole, with baby in tow, meeting Charles Coburn.
However, the focus of this entry is on another still, one that doesn’t show Carole in character as newlywed Jane Mason, but a “glamour” shot. Back in those days, such pictures could be used on a newspaper’s movie page or in the “women’s” section; these images enabled the studio to build up the star and current fashion at the same time.
This stunning photo unfortunately lacks a snipe, so we don’t know who designed the outfit or other cogent information. The snipe was likely removed when used for one reason or another, but we can still learn a few things from the back:
This was used by the Hearst-owned King Features Syndicate, arriving in its New York office library on Nov. 14, 1938.
The photo is an original 8″ x 10″ in very good condition; there are some minor creases in the edges and corners. The owner is selling it for $225, and it will be available through 5:16 a.m. (Eastern) on Feb. 15. (For what it’s worth, the seller mistakenly believes “Made For Each Other” is a Paramount picture, when it was actually from Selznick International.)
If you’re interested in buying this attractive portrait, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Orig-1930s-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Stunning-GLAMOR-Portrait-/270693440157?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item3f06961a9d.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘Made For Each Other,’ just a bit differently
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.28 at 01:32
Current mood: curious
This photo of Carole Lombard was taken in her dressing room while she worked on Selznick International’s “Made For Each Other,” It was an important transitional film for Lombard, as she temporarily bid adieu to her throne as “queen of the screwballs,” something the snipe on the back seemed to indicate:
“REFLECTION — Carole Lombard as a serious-minded bride in Selznick International’s ‘Made For Each Other,’ in which she is starred with James Stewart in a domestic drama of young married love, her first straight role since she reigned as the queen of ‘screwball’ comedy in the screen era just closed. Picture also presents Charles Coburn and Lucile Watson, directed by John Cromwell.”
Selznick publicity genius Russell Birdwell was giving the screwball genre a premature burial, however; several good films were still on the horizon, including one made by Carole roughly two years hence (“Mr. & Mrs. Smith”).
Here are two posters from “Made For Each Other,” using an identical picture, but with several notable differences. First…
…a film that bills Carole ahead of Stewart (and don’t you like that safety pin “attachment”?). Now, a poster that uses the same artwork, but changes things around a bit:
Here, Stewart is top-billed, Lombard second and Coburn is added. So what gives?
Look at the smaller print and you may have a hint. The first photo correctly lists the screenplay as being by Jo Swerling, the second by “Joe” Swerling. A check of my “Made For Each Other” online inventory shows the same misspelling for this lobby card:
Underneath “Joe” is the line “Released thru Film Classics.” We know that in 1943, this firm acquired reissuing rights to several Selznick International films, including “Nothing Sacred” and “Made For Each Other.” By this time, Lombard was dead, Stewart an Air Force pilot and Coburn was not only working, but would win a best supporting actor Academy Award for “The More The Merrier.” So it would make sense that Film Classics would want to play up Coburn’s involvement. (As with its spelling, its rendering of the Lombard-Stewart photo is also demonstrably inferior to the earlier version.)
No matter which of these posters you may prefer, you can obtain 11″ x 17″ reproductions on eBay. Nine copies of each poster are available as of this writing; you can buy one straight up for $6.99 or make a bid. This will last through 12:09 a.m. (Eastern) on Feb. 8, so you have some time.
For the first, the original from Selznick International, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Made-Each-Other-POSTER-Movie-11×17-Carole-Lombard-/180610429725?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a0d38731d. As for the second poster, the one that lists Coburn, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Made-Each-Other-POSTER-Movie-11×14-Carole-Lombard-/170588520146?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item27b7de3ed2.
The snipe completes the story
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.27 at 00:28
Current mood: productive
Perhaps a picture
does say a thousand words, as that old saying goes…but when it comes to photos from classic Hollywood, a snipe clarifies the pictorial language. Two Carole Lombard images give proof.
Take this one, for example — a shot of Carole playing tennis from 1935. It’s p1202-1178 (we think; that last digit might be a “3”). What is Paramount trying to promote? With just the photo, we can hazard a few guesses, but thankfully this has a snipe attached to the back:
And here’s what it says:
“NOT A BALLET DANCER — but one of Hollywood’s best women tennis players is beautiful Carole Lombard, soon to appear in Paramount’s ‘Hands Across The Table.’ This spirited action picture shows the blonde star during a heated moment of the game.”
The image appears more posed than “heated” to me — if Lombard were 26 years old today, I sense her tennis style would be a bit more aggressive — but no matter. We learn this was used by the studio to promote “Hands Across The Table,” something we might have surmised from the 1935 date, but this confirms things. (But the snipe is accurate; she’s not a ballet dancer.)
Another example is a fairly familiar still from one of Carole’s more notable films, “Nothing Sacred”:
Most longtime Lombard collectors have probably seen that image, of Carole’s Hazel Flagg alongside the fine character actor Charles Winninger. What more is there to learn about it? Here’s what the snipe says:
“RHUMBA TIME — Carole Lombard and Charles Winninger break into a rhumba at the conclusion of a gay whirl around New York, in which Fredric March led the way. The picture, ‘Nothing Sacred,’ co-starring Miss Lombard and March, and directed by William A. Wellman, has New York for its background and is made in technicolor.”
Of course, “Rumba,” without the “h,” was the other Lombard film of 1935. (And were Lombard and Winninger to take “a gay whirl around New York” today, chances are the itinerary would be far different!) But this snipe, composed by Selznick International publicity whiz Russell Birdwell, does its job by promoting the film, its stars and director.
Both of these images are original photographs, and both can be yours through eBay, although the deadline on their sale is just after noon (Eastern) on Friday. The tennis photo is available for $35, at http://cgi.ebay.com/Orig-1935-Pub-Photo-CAROLE-LOMBARD-playing-tennis-/200559527790?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb247876e, while the “Nothing Sacred” image sells for $30 and is at http://cgi.ebay.com/Orig-Carole-LOMBARD-Charles-WINNINGER-NOTHING-SACRED-/200559525932?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb247802c.
A Depressing situation
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.26 at 01:47
Current mood: depressed
When looking back at classic Hollywood, it’s so easy to get caught up in the glamour that we often forget show business is as much “business” as “show,” if not more so. Mesmerized by Carole Lombard’s beauty and wardrobe, we overlook the work that went into her craft.
At roughly the same time Carole posed for the top portrait, she was working on her latest film, “Sinners In The Sun.” It’s the spring of 1932, not the best of times for the industry, and it’s likely that Lombard and everyone else on the production knew it.
The crash of October 1929 initially affected only those holding stocks; much of the country went on as it always had, and the movies, buoyed by the novelty of sound, did record business in 1930. However, converting theaters to talking pictures was expensive, and when the bottom fell out of the economy in 1931, unemployment soared and movie attendance declined. Despite a number of artistic triumphs in 1932 — a pretty good year where film quality was concerned — things didn’t get better.
In early May, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences convened some 400 of its members to discuss conditions, and what the industry should do about it. The fine blog “Hollywood Heyday,” which has been examining 1932 for some time now through newspaper and magazine articles, described what the meeting was like (http://hollywoodheyday.blogspot.com/2011/01/may-4-1932.html).
Said Sidney R. Kent, new president of Fox Film Corporation:
“The industry is in a very serious condition. The next few months in my opinion will be the most critical months the industry has ever faced. Grosses are going down and we haven’t yet been able to cut expenses enough. We have got to strike a balance, on the work of executives as well as of stars and directors. The industry must get down to brass tacks.”
Some outsiders probably expressed skepticism — after all, one of the reasons the Academy was initially founded was to give management unity in case its hired hands, whether technicians, actors, directors or writers, tried to form those dreaded unions — but even the doubters could see where Kent was coming from. He continued:
“In my opinion, a three- to five-year struggle lies ahead of the industry. I too would like to see a complete recovery by August 1, but I am not sure that would be best, for it is important that the industry come back right rather than it come back in three months with a half-cure.”
Kent blamed over-expansion in prosperous years for the business’ present difficulties, as well as problems arising from the introduction of sound into films such as limitation of the market.
M.A. Lightman of Memphis, head of the Motion Picture Theater Owners of America, said the industry had too many theaters, too many seats, and that some houses needed to close.
Warners mogul Jack Warner, shown with Al Jolson during headier times a few years before, “told of his own company’s being overburdened with theaters, and declares the acceptance of salary cuts essential to the survival of the industry,” according to an Associated Press account of the meeting.
But were studios listening? Maybe, maybe not. At about the same time the convocation took place, Paramount announced its forthcoming schedule of releases for 1932-33.
Some 45 features were on the docket, including several originally promoted with Carole in the cast: “Pick-Up”…
…and “The Glass Key”…
Other announced features she would be associated with or rumored to be doing, but never made, included “The Girl Without A Room,” “Hot Saturday” and “The Big Broadcast.” And that doesn’t include a partially-shot segment, which was never completed, of the multi-director movie “If I Had A Million.” (One film listed she did was “No Bed Of Her Own,” later retitled “No Man Of Her Own” — and she got the part only because Miriam Hopkins dropped out over not being top-billed.)
Universal, which unlike Paramount owned no theaters, announced its schedule at about the same time, and had only 26 films planned. To some extent, Paramount’s size and large roster of players worked against it, but so did its status as a director-oriented studio where top-down management was relatively weak. It’s no wonder the studio was soon forced to reorganize.
Yes, times were bad, in Hollywood and elsewhere. In fact, one actress who had quit Paramount — and the industry — not long before went to New York to seek secretarial work, but found no takers although she had office experience. So she decided to return west, a fortuitous move on her part. The actress? Jean Arthur.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Serving up a Lubitsch five-course Friday
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.25 at 01:40
Current mood: amused
Carole Lombard had known Ernst Lubitsch for about a decade before she finally had the opportunity to act in a film he directed. In 1931, Lombard lobbied hard to get the role given to the more experienced Miriam Hopkins in “The Smiling Lieutenant.” In 1935, Lubitsch briefly served as Paramount’s head of production — the only occasion in classic Hollywood history where a major studio gave a director that kind of authority — and while he didn’t direct any of Carole’s films, he had a lot to do with them during his brief tenure in that position (notably “Hands Across The Table”). For the rest of her tenure at Paramount, she was treated like the top-tier star she was, and Lubitsch’s guidance played a key role.
Lombard finally made a film for Lubitsch, what would be her last, “To Be Or Not To Be” (Lubitsch is shown on the set with co-star Jack Benny). It would be the victim of bad timing; the U.S. had entered World War II as production was nearing an end, and Lombard died shortly before the film’s release. Consequently, many people — not even some staunch Lubitsch fans — were in the mood to see this film when it came out.
As time went on, history vindicated Lubitsch, and “To Be Or Not To Be” has justly been recognized as a brilliant dark comedy. Friday marks the anniversary of his birth, and Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. is commemorating it with five fine examples of “the Lubitsch touch.” Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
* 10:30 a.m. — “The Shop Around The Corner” (1940). For many years, this workplace comedy of manners set in a Budapest store went relatively unappreciated, but now it’s being recognized as the masterpiece it is; there’s not one false note throughout the picture. An excellent cast, headed by Frank Morgan (perhaps his finest performance), James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan. (There’s a non-Lubitsch Stewart-Sullavan pairing at 9 a.m., 1938’s “The Shopworn Angel.”)
* 12:30 p.m. — “To Be Or Not To Be” (1942).
* 2:30 p.m. — “Ninotchka” (1939). Greta Garbo shows off her comedic chops (and how about that hat!) as a Soviet official sent to Paris, only to fall under its decadent spell. Had William Powell not fallen ill, he would have played the male lead, but instead that went to Melvyn Douglas.
* 4:30 p.m. — “The Merry Widow” (1934). Lubitsch made several memorable musical comedies at Paramount with Maurice Chevalier and/or Jeanette MacDonald. Here all three reunite at MGM for some frothy fun, aided by Una Merkel and Edward Everett Horton.
* 6:30 p.m. — “Trouble In Paradise” (1932). An elegant heist story, as jewel thieves (Herbert Marshall and Miriam Hopkins) plan to rob Kay Francis, only to have love get in the way. Many view this as Lubitsch’s finest achievement.
To get you in the mood for Friday, and to show “the Lubitsch touch” at work, watch this exchange between Lombard and Robert Stack — who’d known Carole since he was a boy — from “To Be Or Not To Be.” If double entendres can be deemed elegant, they certainly are here:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole gets animated
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.24 at 11:53
Current mood: nostalgic
No, not in that sense, though the event we’re referring to occurred while “Nothing Sacred” (and “True Confession”) were in theaters, briefly making Carole Lombard the hottest actress in the film industry. It’s Dec. 21, 1937, and Lombard and Clark Gable are among movie VIP’s attending the world premiere of a landmark film — and what appeared to be a monumental gamble. The movie?
Walt Disney’s “Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs.”
These days, with a new animated feature in theaters seemingly every week, it’s difficult to comprehend the risk Disney was taking with this endeavor. While the public had made Mickey Mouse, introduced less than a decade before, a global icon and Disney’s “Silly Symphonies” were also major hits, the jury was out on whether people would go for an animated film of feature length. The mere cost of such a project seemed daunting.
But Disney persevered, getting significant financial backing from the Bank of America among other investors. (One of them was General Foods, which made a million-dollar deal in 1934 to market Mickey Mouse and other Disney characters on boxes of Post Toasties; the feature cost $1.5 million to make.) A few days before Christmas 1937, Walt unveiled “Snow White” to the world at the Carthay Circle theater in Los Angeles.
Here’s how the RKO-Pathe newsreel covered it; while Gable and Lombard aren’t shown arriving, you will see Marlene Dietrich with Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Shirley Temple, Preston Foster and Louella Parsons:
(Incidentally, this event marked the first time Disney characters had appeared in costume.)
Other notables on hand included Charlie Chaplin with Paulette Goddard, George Burns and Gracie Allen, Cary Grant, Gail Patrick, Jack Benny, John Barrymore, Norma Shearer and Judy Garland. Despite a chilly evening, more than 30,000 showed up to watch the stars arrive.
Among those who didn’t have tickets? Adrianna Caselotti and Harry Stockwell, who voiced Snow White and the Prince. But just as their cartoon alter egos would have appreciated, this story had a happy ending, as Caselotti later explained:
“When we got to the door, the girl said, ‘May I have your tickets, please?’ I said, ‘Tickets? We don’t have any tickets —- I’m Snow White and this is Prince Charming!’ She said, ‘I don’t care who you are, you don’t get in unless you’ve got tickets!’ So, we sneaked in when she wasn’t looking and we went upstairs to one side of the balcony and I stood there watching myself on the screen and all those movie stars clapping for me. Boy! Did I get a thrill out of that!”
Caselotti may have been thrilled, but others involved with the project were nervous. While “Snow White” had drawn a good reaction two weeks earlier at a sneak preview in Pomona, how would Hollywood bigwigs react? Animator Ward Kimball took in the action — and guess who was seated in front of him?
“We didn’t know how it would go over. Walt was on pins and needles. We sat down. Movie stars were sitting in seats. Betty and I sat behind Clark Gable and Carole Lombard.”
And their reaction to the film?
“Clark Gable and Carole Lombard were sitting close, and when Snow White was poisoned, stretched out on that slab, they started blowing their noses. I could hear it — crying — that was the big surprise. We worried about the serious stuff, and whether they would feel for this girl, and when they did, I knew it was in the bag. …
“It’s hard to believe but the people in the audience were really blowing their noses. I heard all this noise and I said, ‘Betty, let’s run out and watch them come out in the lobby.’ They came out and they were rummaging around putting on dark glasses so no one would know they had been crying and their eyes were all red. They were wiping their eyes. It was a very moving experience. We knew it was a winner then.”
Layout artist Ken O’Connor said the audience not only loved the story, but appreciated the artistry that went into telling it:
“The audience was wildly enthusiastic. They even applauded the background and layouts when no animation was on the screen. I was sitting near John Barrymore when the shot of the Queen’s castle above the mist came on with the Queen poling across the marsh in a little boat. He was bouncing up and down in his seat he was so excited. Barrymore was an artist as well as an actor, and he knew the kind of work that went into something like that.”
When the lights came back on, Walt addressed the audience from the stage in understandable triumph: “I always dreamed that one day I would attend a gala premiere in Hollywood of one of my cartoons. Tonight you’ve made it come true. You make me feel like one of you.”
Even before the film had begun, the public had been buying advance sale tickets for performances at the Carthay Circle. Now the demand was huge. “Snow White” played at the theater for four months, with a Spanish-language version, “Blanca Nieves y los Siete Enanos,” shown there on Sundays beginning in February. By the time the first release ended, it had grossed $8.5 million, a record that would be topped two years later by Gable’s “Gone With The Wind,” which made its Hollywood premiere at the Carthay Circle.
The theater, shown during the premiere of another 1937 film, “The Life Of Emile Zola,” played a major part in Disney lore. Not only did “Snow White” premiere there, but it was also the first theater to carry a Disney “Silly Symphony,” in 1929, when most distributors were skeptical whether Walt could produce product beyond Mickey Mouse. So while the actual L.A. Carthay Circle closed in 1968 and was subsequently razed, it lives again 3,000 miles to the east, in Orlando, Fla., as part of the Disney Hollywood studio complex, and inside you can see photos of that historic night in December of ’37:
Incidentally, if you’re a “Snow White” buff, you’ll want to visit “Filmic Light: A Snow White Archive” (http://filmic-light.blogspot.com/), a site featuring virtually everything related to this epochal movie.
P.S. Hope you like the new look of “Carole & Co.”, as I changed the color scheme and put up a new header photo.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘Clang-clang-clang went the trolley…’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.23 at 01:54
Current mood: enthralled
Since “Carole & Co.” was created more than 43 months ago, we’ve uncovered all sorts of Carole Lombard memorabilia. Today’s entry examines one of the more unusual items, and it has to do with this:
These are riders boarding a streetcar in St. Louis during the 1940s (specifically, Oct. 15, 1944), and chances are many of them possessed something called the “Shopper-Theater Weekly Pass” issued by the St. Louis Public Service Co., the city’s transit agency. For 75 cents, one could ride all bus and streetcar routes that week from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. weekdays and throughout the day on Sunday. (In 1948, the pass price was increased to $1.)
I’m guessing downtown merchants and theater owners created the program with transit operators, as it boosted business for everyone involved. From the types of general shopping ads on the passes (no particular store was mentioned), it was a promotion geared to women — and one guesses a few of those shown above used them.
From the movie buff’s perspective, these passes are valuable memorabilia because each advertised a film coming to a downtown house (again, no particular theater was mentioned, just the movie and an accompanying photo). As it turns out, 35 of these vintage passes are being auctioned as a package at eBay, and the oldest of them is for…
…”To Be Or Not To Be,” Carole’s last picture (with a still from it shown at the top of this entry). This pass was for the week of March 22 to 28, 1942, slightly more than two months after Lombard’s death. It also reminds riders to “select your Easter apparel now.”
The collection advertises 34 different films (for some reason, there are two different cards for William Powell’s “The Senator Was Indiscreet”), and here they are:
Films advertised include “The Miracle Of Morgan’s Creek,” “Red River,” “Mrs. Miniver” and “Reap The Wild Wind”; and just in case you didn’t notice, “Meet Me In St. Louis” is not in the collection. (One presumes that if those were ever issued, they were quickly hoarded.) I have no idea whether similar promotions were done in other cities, nor do I know when this campaign began and ended. (The latest pass shown here is from January 1949, for “The Snake Pit.”)
Each pass measures 2.5″ x 4″, about the scale of the pass with Lombard’s image shown earlier, and all are in normal used condition. As of this writing, one bid, for $49.99 (more than the original cost of all the passes combined), has been made, with bidding closing at 3:39 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. To place a bid, or learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/35-MOVIE-BUS-PASSES-1940S-JOHN-GARFIELD-CAROLE-LOMBARD-/380309185103?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588c31a24f.
As was the case in other cities, the streetcars in St. Louis were gradually converted to bus lines. Here’s one shown still running in July 1958, eight years before the entire system became buses. However, streetcars are making a comeback. Last July, federal funding was approved for a seven-mile line, with construction scheduled to start later this year and the line operating before the end of 2012. It will be called the Loop Trolley, and you just know that when it starts running, somebody on board is going to sing this Judy Garland classic:
A famed recipe to keep you chili
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.22 at 09:55
Current mood: 
hungry
Earlier this week, we discussed the ties between Carole Lombard and Alfred Hitchcock, who’s shown with her and Robert Montgomery on the set of “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.” And it’s appropriate this is from a scene at a restaurant, because that’s the angle of today’s entry.
According to Robby Cress in his fine blog “Dear Old Hollywood” (http://dearoldhollywood.blogspot.com/), when Hitchcock arrived in Hollywood in 1939, Lombard and Clark Gable took him to dinner at Chasen’s on Beverly Boulevard, a restaurant less than three years old at the time but already a favorite of the film community. Hitch and his wife became regulars at the restaurant, usually on Thursdays. While I’m hardly surprised to discover that Lombard had dined at Chasen’s, this was the first definite link I’d seen.
Chasen’s, founded by ex-vaudevillian Dave Chasen — a good friend of director Frank Capra — had a star-studded (and loyal) clientele, ranging from George Burns and Gracie Allen to Ronald Reagan (the future president proposed to Nancy Davis at a Chasen’s booth) and James Stewart. However, as time went on, it became increasingly less trendy, and it closed in April 1995. Here’s the interior of the place as it looked in June 1987:
Chasen’s menu had many favorites, but it was perhaps most renowned for its chili; its adherents were legion. In fact, while in Rome filming “Cleopatra” in 1962, Elizabeth Taylor spent $100 to have it shipped to her (encased in dry ice). I have no idea whether Lombard ever had Chasen’s chili, but while the restaurant may be long gone, the recipe lives on, and you can replicate this famous dish in your own home.
1/2 pound dried pinto beans
water
1 28-ounce can diced tomatoes in juice
1 large green bell pepper, chopped
2 tablespoons vegetable oil
3 cups onions, coarsely chopped
2 cloves garlic, crushed
1/2 cup parsley, chopped
1/2 cup butter
2 pounds beef chuck, coarsely chopped
1 pound pork shoulder, coarsely chopped
1/3 cup Gebhardt’s chili powder
1 tablespoon salt
1 1/2 teaspoons pepper
1 1/2 teaspoons Farmer Brothers ground cumin
1. Rinse the beans, picking out debris. Place beans in a Dutch oven with water to cover. Boil for two minutes. Remove from heat. Cover and let stand one hour. Drain off liquid.
2. Rinse beans again. Add enough fresh water to cover beans. Bring mixture to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer, covered, for one hour or until tender.
3. Stir in tomatoes and their juice. Simmer five minutes. In a large skillet saute bell pepper in oil for five minutes. Add onion and cook until tender, stirring frequently. Stir in the garlic and parsley. Add mixture to bean mixture. Using the same skillet, melt the butter and saute beef and pork chuck until browned. Drain. Add to bean mixture along with the chili powder, salt, pepper and cumin.
4. Bring mixture to a boil. Reduce heat. Simmer, covered, for one hour. Uncover and cook 30 minutes more or to desired consistency. Chili shouldn’t be too thick — it should be somewhat liquid but not runny like soup. Skim off excess fat and serve.
Makes 10 cups, or six main dish servings.
It’s delectable just looking at it, a dish that could really warm you up. One wonders if Carole brought some by for Clark on that cool June evening in ’38 when he was filming “Too Hot To Handle.” (If so, I hope there was some left over for Myrna Loy and the others on hand.)
Springtime at the ‘Rocky’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.21 at 01:11
Current mood: cold
It’s an uncharacteristically chilly June night in southern California in 1938, and Carole Lombard pays a visit to Clark Gable on the set of his MGM picture, the ironically named “Too Hot To Handle.” (The weird curl atop Lombard’s head predicts “There’s Something About Mary” some 60 years later; could this photo be why some compare Cameron Diaz to Carole?)
Nine months later, temperatures cold more than 1,000 miles to the east, in Denver, Colo. — though it’s expected to get above freezing on this March 30, 1939 — but the many fans of Clark and Carole have something to warm themselves up with: They’ve finally married!
The report comes from the Rocky Mountain News, a Scripps-Howard newspaper (the chain’s trademark lighthouse is in the upper left-hand corner) which had a long and legendary rivalry with the Denver Post. For decades, the News and Post went at it, and as late as the 1990s, both papers had good circulation and were selling plenty of advertising. But the Post gradually gained the upper hand, and the “Rocky,” as locals nicknamed it, published its final edition in late February 2009 — two months shy of its 150th anniversary.
Here’s a greyscale closeup of the Gable-Lombard story, though the copy is difficult to read:
This 16-page newspaper, in good condition, can be yours, whether you’re seeking a keepsake of Lombard or Gable, a famed newspaper now defunct, or both. It measures 16″ x 23″, and bids start at $9.99. No bids have been made as of this writing, and bids close soon — 7:23 p.m. (Eastern) tonight.
Think you’re interested? Then go to http://cgi.ebay.com/0212230S-HOLLYWOOD-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CLARK-GABLE-WED-1939-/290523197010?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43a4882e52.
Oh, and to those people in Denver: Just wait a few hours. Given that city’s notoriously variable weather, you may have a heat wave before April Fool’s Day. (But you knew that.)
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.20 at 01:05
Current mood: impressed
Incredible picture, isn’t it? It’s part of a group scene from a party in February 1936, and it shows Carole Lombard with good friend Marion Davies and Douglas Fairbanks…senior at top, junior below him. Now that’s a dynasty — and speaking of such, today marks a major anniversary for another American dynasty; it was 50 years ago today that John F. Kennedy took the oath of office as president of the United States.
So what do the two events have in common? Marion Davies, that’s what. She’s somewhere on the stand, fairly close to the new president, though to be honest I can’t specifically pinpoint her. (She is reportedly behind the Kennedy family.) She was there as a guest of JFK’s father, Joseph P. Kennedy, a longtime friend from his days as a filmland mogul. Marion had also contributed money, and time, to John’s campaign, letting him and his entourage stay at her Beverly Hills home while the Democratic convention was being held in Los Angeles in July 1960.
(Imagine if something similar happened in today’s environment of highly-charged talk radio and cable TV — a presidential candidate getting help from, and then paying tribute to, a woman who had been a longtime mistress. We would never hear the end of it, regardless of which party or ideology was involved.)
Davies was relatively apolitical compared to some other Hollywood notables who aided the Kennedy campaign. (Myrna Loy, a longtime Democratic activist, made appearances on behalf of JFK, and it is said her visit to Syracuse, N.Y., my hometown at the time, helped put that city in the Kennedy camp.) But, as said, Marion felt obliged to help a family friend.
Davies also used her considerable wealth in other ways; in October 1960, a children’s medical wing at UCLA was opened and named for her after she donated $1.5 million. With extensive real estate holdings and a good business sense, Davies was worth about $20 million in 1960.
Marion could still be charming, but she was now in her sixties and it had been close to a decade after William Randolph Hearst, the man she dearly loved but could never marry, had died at age 88. Alcoholism had taken its toll on her. This is one of the last photos ever taken of Davies, in 1959 with her husband, Horace Brown:
The Kennedy inauguration was essentially a public last hurrah for Davies. She was suffering from cancer of the jaw that would result in some disfigurement, and not long after returning from the east, she broke her leg. She was hospitalized much of the summer of 1961, took a turn for the worse and died in Los Angeles on Sept. 22.
To commemorate this historic anniversary, here is Kennedy’s complete inaugural address, just as Davies witnessed it close to the new president. It remains stirring oratory, and if all you’ve ever heard from it is the phrase “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,” I think you will more fully comprehend this speech, and how Kennedy inspired millions. Embedding of the address — from the JFK library — has been disabled by request, but you can see and hear it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEC1C4p0k3E.
On this day 69 years ago Carole Lombard Gable and her mother Elizabeth K. Peters were laid to rest in the Great Mausoleum of Forest Lawn, in Glendale, California much as she had requested. The entombment was preceded by a brief invitation only funeral service in Forest Lawn’s Church of the Recessional.
One of the invitations to the funeral service.
The Church of the Recessional in Forest Lawn, Glendale.
Recently I read the archive of the Los Angeles Times for a description of this event. There were 46 invited guests who attended the funeral service that was held shortly after both Carole’s and her mother’s remains were returned from Las Vegas by train with Clark Gable accompanying them.
The invitees included amongst others: Clark Gable’s father; Carole’s two brothers, Frederich and Stewart; Madalynne Fields Lang, Carole longtime friend and former secretary, (her husband, Walter Lange served as a pall bearer); Dixie Pantages Karlson, Carole’s lifetime friend and her husband, director Phil Karlson; William Powell, Lombard’s first husband and his wife, “Mousie”; Spencer Tracy and his wife Louise Treadwell Tracy; Jean Garceau, Carole’s last and then Gable’s secretary and actress Myna Loy. Lewis B. Mayer, Eddie Mannix and Howard Strickling represented MGM.
Clark Gable entered the chapel quitely through a private family entrance. He sat with his father and an MGM official, unseen by the other attendees in a family alcove, “inconsolable and unapproachable”.
The private family entrance to the Church of the Recessional.
Among Carole’s pall bearers were Walter Lang, the film director and husband of Madalynne Fields, and Zeppo Marx, the comedian/actor, agent and longtime friend of Carole. Both Walter Lang and Zeppo Marx along with Stewart Peters, Carole’s brother, had served as pall bearers seven and a half years earlier at the funeral of Russ Columbo. Carole’s casket was also covered with a pall of white gardenias, with orchids added.
Zeppo Marx, Walter Lang and Stewart Peters serving as pall bearers for Russ Columbo. Russ’ coffin is covered by a pall of gardenias, a gift from Carole. The pall bearers also wear them.
After the brief service in the Church of the Recessional which consisted of two readings of psalms and a work of poetry, Carole and her mother’s remains were tranported the short distance to the Sanctuary of Trust in the Great Mausoleum where they were entombed side by side. (A carefully folded white dress had been placed inside Carole’s coffin before it was sealed.)
The main entrance to the Great Mausoleum.
Almost nineteen years later, Clark Gable was buried alongside of Carole and her mother. And twenty three years after that Kathleen (Kay) Gable, Clark’s fifth wife and widow, was buried discretely in the same alcove, one row beneath and three positions to the left of her late husband.
Elizabeth Peters and her daughter, Carole, in Chicago, one week earlier on January 14, 1942.
Rarities not ‘To Be’ forgotten
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.19 at 01:28
Current mood: melancholy
Above is a fairly common still from “To Be Or Not To Be,” Carole Lombard’s final film. Two considerably rarer images from the movie, both originals, have just been put up for sale at eBay. Both measure 8″ x 10″ and are sepia-toned.
First, we see Lombard’s character, Maria Tura, looking at Professor Siletsky:
Next, a far more upset Maria being taken captive by the Nazis:
These photos are being sold together for $100; I do not know whether they were issued before Lombard’s death. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/NOT-42-CAROLE-LOMBARD-2-ORIGINAL-STILLS-/160518873339?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255faba0fb.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Two, new, to view
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.18 at 00:31
Current mood: curious
The merry-go-round of Carole Lombard items at eBay has been a largely unexciting carousel of late, at least from my perspective. Sure, there are plenty of items — nearly 1,700 as of last count — but many of them are things I’ve viewed before, didn’t sell on previous go-rounds and have been brought back by the sellers for another try.
However, I did see a pair of Lombard images that I didn’t recognize, and so I thought I’d share them with you. Because of watermarks in the lower right-hand corner, the p1202 numbers are obscured, preventing me from supplying them to you. But from Carole’s appearance, I’m guessing these were made between 1934 and 1937, her final few years at Paramount.
Both of these images are 8″ x10″, and each are being sold for $9.95. First up:
It appears Lombard is holding a cigarette between the fingers of her left hand, and the angle of her pose sets off her eyes. You can learn more about this pic — or buy it — by going to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8X10-PHOTO-4622-/270531576039?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3efcf040e7.
The next shot is also cross-legged, but somewhat more sober, featuring a contemplative Carole:
Just what is on her mind? I couldn’t venture to guess an answer, but if you want to buy it and figure it out, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8X10-PHOTO-4612-/270531576089?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3efcf04119.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
CMBA Hitchcock Blogathon: ‘Mr. & Mrs. Smith’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.17 at 00:26
Current mood: accomplished
For many years, “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” was a cinematic orphan of sorts. It was snubbed by the Alfred Hitchcock community (“It wasn’t true Hitch; after all, it was a comedy!”) and only grudgingly accepted by Carole Lombard fans, often for the opposite reason (“It’s an OK movie –- disregard who directed it”).
Hitchcock himself didn’t help much with his responses the few times he was asked about the film, saying little other than that he had done it as a favor to Lombard, who’s shown above directing him in his customary cameo. (And that may be true; Hitch’s first American home was the St. Cloud Road residence that Carole rented to him following her marriage to Clark Gable.) And in 2005, memories of the movie were further muddled when Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie did an unrelated film of the same name -– though it was an adaptation of a novel by that title.
In recent years, the 1941 “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” has undergone a re-evaluation. To be sure, it’s still an anomaly in the Hitchcock canon, and will likely always be seen as such, but it’s moved up a bit in the Lombard hierarchy -– maybe not alongside her “big four” of “Twentieth Century,” “My Man Godfrey,” “Nothing Sacred” and “To Be Or Not To Be,” but as part of a highly-regarded second tier with “Hands Across The Table,” “Virtue” and “Vigil In The Night” (the last of these a heavy drama more respected than loved). And while romantic comedy may not have been Hitch’s forte, he did have a sense of humor about his work, and that adds to the “Smith” allure, which is probably why Lombard wanted him to direct.
Two other factors have worked against “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.” The first is its theme — the marital squabbles of a Manhattan couple, leading to their separation and their comical attempts at one-upsmanship. Sounds a lot like “The Awful Truth,” doesn’t it? (“Truth” was frequently adapted for radio, including a 1940 version starring Lombard and Robert Young.) While “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” doesn’t quite hit the heights of the film “The Awful Truth,” and it actually takes the concept in a slightly different direction, Norman Krasna’s script is nonetheless appealing, if dated in many ways. (More on that later.)
Many believe the male lead is a second drawback to “Smith,” in that he’s not Cary Grant (whom Lombard, as de facto producer, sought but couldn’t get), who had starred in “Truth” with Irene Dunne. Fate would thus deny film buffs a chance to see the king and queen of the screwball comedy co-starring in that genre. We instead get Robert Montgomery, who might not have had Cary’s charisma but was an accomplished actor and fine farceur in his own right. (However, his personality is at times overpowered by Lombard’s, something that probably wouldn’t have happened with Grant in that role.)
It’s important to remember that when this film was made in late 1940 (then released in early 1941), Hitchcock wasn’t yet Hitchcock in the eyes of U.S. moviegoers. Yes, he had achieved American success with “Rebecca” and “Foreign Correspondent,” and his British films had gained him some earlier stateside renown, but he hadn’t yet become a “brand name.” No, the big angle for “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” was Carole’s return to comedy after several dramatic roles that, while generally well-received by critics, did tepidly at the box office.
And Hitchcock photographs Lombard lovingly. Her initial scene, where she peeks out from under a blanket, is sublime, and that elegant sex appeal lasts throughout the movie. Whether it was Hitchcock’s direction or simply returning to the genre she was most comfortable in, she seems liberated from her previous serious self.
Hitchcock also provides a bit of a chilling undercurrent, as if he were saying to the audience, “Were there no Production Code, just imagine where I’d take these characters.” For example, take the Ferris wheel scene, where Carole’s character Ann and her (ex-)husband David’s best friend -– among those trying to woo her now that her marriage to David technically never took place -– ride, only to be stopped at the top when the power goes out…and it starts raining. The way it’s handled, you can almost sense Hitch’s macabre glee.
Hitchcock also adds a tone of despair, rare for the romantic comedy, when Ann and David, hoping to rekindle the flame, return to the Italian restaurant where their courtship began. The place has fallen on hard times; no one dines there any more aside from a few cats, and a multi-ethnic crew of urchins stares at the couple as if to wonder, “What are you two doing here?”
Perhaps the most jarring scene in “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” at least from a 2011 perspective, comes when Ann -– who now lives on her own after throwing David out of the apartment they had called home -– gets a job in a department store, only to have David come in and tell store officials she is his wife. Ann is then fired, as the manager explains that it is store policy “not to employ married women.” That, of course, would be illegal today (and likely lead to boycotts of that store), but with the economy not entirely up to full speed in 1940 and unemployment still a problem for many families, two-paycheck households were frowned upon. (Some 70 years later, many two-paycheck households can barely make ends meet!)
Carole Lombard’s premature death has led to many “what-ifs,” and one of them deals with Hitch. Might she have joined the ranks of the “Hitchcock blondes,” assuming she technically wasn’t one already? (Many place a Ford Frick-style asterisk beside her name because she was in a comedy.) It’s easy to look at Hitch’s later films, note the female lead and then substitute Carole (though it only goes so far, since by the 1950s she would have been too old to have played roles that went to Grace Kelly, Kim Novak or Eva Marie Saint), but it’s also simplistic.
Had Hitchcock wanted Lombard for a project, he likely would have found a property that best suited her -– and that might have been something he never actually filmed. (Some claim Carole wasn’t “icy” enough to have been a prototypical Hitchcock blonde. But as was the case with Lombard and Columbia mogul Harry Cohn, her give-and-take — the ability to challenge a man on his own terms –- won Hitch’s admiration.)
It’s entirely possible Hitchcock and Lombard might have collaborated in a different manner. Several stars began producing films after World War II, and with her keen interest in the business side of the industry, there’s a very good chance Carole would have gone in that direction –- and not only for films she would have appeared in. Perhaps she would have sought Hitch to make a film or two for her production company.
Interesting things to ponder while watching -– and belatedly appreciating -– “Mr. & Mrs. Smith.”
Note: The other Hitchcock blogathon reviews are in; find them at http://clamba.blogspot.com/. Films reviewed are:
“The Birds” -– Classic Film & TV Café
“Dial M for Murder” -– True Classics: The ABCs of Film
“The Lady Vanishes” -– MacGuffin Movies
“Lifeboat” -– Classicfilmboy’s Movie Paradise
“The Man Who Knew Too Much” (1956) -– Reel Revival
“Marnie” -– My Love of Old Hollywood
“North By Northwest” -– Bette’s Classic Movie Blog
“Notorious” -– Twenty Four Frames
“The Pleasure Garden” -– Thrilling Days of Yesteryear
“Rear Window” -– Java’s Journey
“Rebecca” -– ClassicBecky’s Film and Literary Review
“Rope” –- Kevin’s Movie Corner
“Shadow of a Doubt” -– Great Entertainers Media Archive
“The 39 Steps” -– Garbo Laughs
Three classic Hitchcock killers -– The Lady Eve’s Reel Life
“Torn Curtain” — Via Margutta 51
“The Trouble with Harry” -– Bit Part Actors
“Vertigo” -– Noir and Chick Flicks
“The Wrong Man” -– The Movie Projector
Bittersweet photos
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.16 at 00:50
Current mood: sad
Above are photos of Carole Lombard. first, shown alongside her mother, Elizabeth Peters, second, with her second husband, Clark Gable. Attractive images, though the reprint quality admittedly isn’t the best — but had it not been for tragedy, these might never have come to light.
For these pictures ran in newspapers on Jan. 17, 1942, the day after the airplane carrying Lombard, her mother, and Army pilots crashed into a mountain in Nevada:
Of course, hundreds of newspapers ran the sad news; the loss of servicemen only 40 days after Pearl Harbor would have been a big story, whether or not there had been a celebrity on board. But Carole’s presence — especially returning from the first World War II bond rally — added poignancy. The U.S. was now in wartime, and this news hit home hard.
At “Carole & Co.”, I’ve rarely dwelt on the crash, what led to it and such, for the simple reason — one I’ve frequently stated — that this community exists not to focus on how Lombard died, but examine, and celebrate, how she lived. That was why she was both a successful actress and a beloved personality both inside and outside the entertainment industry. I previously haven’t run newspaper accounts of her death, and the only reason I’ve included these are because these photos shows how two communities whom Carole had graced remembered her.
The first, from the Chicago Sun, founded the year before by Marshall Field III of department store fame, is of Lombard and her mother in Chicago only a few days before the crash, as Carole received her instructions for the Indianapolis bond event from Treasury Department officials. (Her mother went to her hometown of Fort Wayne, saw friends, then met up with her daughter in Indianapolis.) The Sun would merge with another Chicago paper later in the decade to form the Chicago Sun-Times, now a tabloid best known as Roger Ebert’s home base.
The second photo is from the end of 1940, when Lombard and Gable went to Johns Hopkins Hospital; the public was told it was so Clark could have work done on a sore shoulder, and that may have been done, but the actual reason the Gables were there wasn’t disclosed for many years — it was to determine why the couple was unable to conceive. This was from the files of the Baltimore News-Post, a Hearst afternoon daily that lasted until it merged with Hearst’s morning Baltimore American in 1964. The successor, the News-American, expired in May 1986.
It was 69 years ago today. We remember, and mourn, all those lost.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Set sail with a ‘Princess’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.15 at 00:10
Current mood: chipper
This spring marks the 75th anniversary of one of Carole Lombard’s more charming, if not entirely satisfying, films at Paramount, “The Princess Comes Across.” It was her second movie co-starring Fred MacMurray, and while Carole delights as a faux Swedish princess making a transatlantic boat trip to America with hopes of movie fame (her character in reality is a showgirl from Brooklyn), “Princess” then veers into a murder mystery that doesn’t quite mesh with the tone of the rest of the film.
Nevertheless, it’s generally fun, and a rare photo from the film (not the image above) is now on sale at eBay. Here it is:
I believe that’s George Barbier, cast as the ship’s captain, alongside Lombard (and isn’t that smile seductive, especially with the hat hiding part of her right eye?).
The photo is a sepia original measuring 8″ x 10″ (which includes a white border I have eliminated to highlight the image). It’s in fair condition, with slight tears, creases and other defects. Still, that smile of Carole’s more than compensates.
It’s being sold for $25, and will be available through about 4 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. If you are interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1936-Carole-Lombard-Princess-Comes-Across-340c-/400131066308?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d29ab89c4.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
In downtown LA tonight, feast on organ-ic ‘Oat’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.14 at 00:54
Current mood: nostalgic
Imagine how much easier life would be for biographers and researchers if we could go back in time for a moment and place an invisible GPS or tracking device on our subject, one whose signal could only be picked up many years in the future. It would erase mere conjecture on when and where they were during their lifetime.
Above is Jane Alice Peters, the eventual Carole Lombard, as a girl of about 10 helping the Allied effort on the home front during World War I. What were the places this actress-to-be visited during her youth, venues that likely shaped her future? We don’t have the exact answers, but chances are that Jane, her two older brothers and mother went to see live theater and film productions after their move to Los Angeles in 1914 (just as they had in Fort Wayne, Ind.). And chances are that much of that time was in the downtown theater district; outlying areas such as Hollywood were only beginning to develop as business and entertainment destinations.
In all honesty, the downtown theater district, centered on Broadway, wasn’t all that old itself, as several major venues were built in the 1910s and others were built during the ’20s (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/71388.html). One of them opened in February 1926, about the time Jane Alice Peters had adopted the pseudonym Carole Lombard and had just been sidelined from the movie business following an automobile accident.
This theater, the Orpheum, wasn’t initially a movie house, but was a venue for vaudeville, then still a major attraction. But the rise of radio and talking pictures doomed that genre and by 1930, the Orpheum was showing movies (which it did through 2000), though it continued with stage shows (one of them, in 1933, featured a young Judy Garland). And two years after its opening, management installed a large Wurlitzer pipe organ.
And tonight, that organ lives again as the Orpheum — which was restored in 2003 to its vintage splendor — hosts a silent movie. It’s not just any silent, either, but one feared lost until a copy of it was found in the Czech Republic several years ago, then restored by the Academy Film Archive. It was shown in San Francisco in July 2008 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/118984.html), and now Los Angeles gets to see it again. It’s Colleen Moore’s romantic comedy, “Her Wild Oat”:
Moore — whose appeal as a comic actress in the mid-1920s was topped only by Clara Bow — portrays a lunch wagon owner who tries to crash resort society, with hilarious results. One of the bit players is a 14-year-old named Loretta Young (she’s second from left, with Moore at right):
Noted organist Bob Salisbury will provide accompaniment for the film, which will start at 8 p.m. The Orpheum is at 842 South Broadway; tickets are $18 in advance, $20 at the door. This screening is a part of the Los Angeles Organ Theatre Society’s Wurlitzer Weekend (in conjunction with the Broadway Initiative of the Los Angeles Conservancy), with other events slated over the weekend. To learn more, go to http://www.latos.org/ww2011_event.html. If you’re in southern California, or will be there tonight, I can’t think of a more (Moore?) wonderful way to spend a Friday evening.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.13 at 01:00
Current mood: grateful
A question for you: How many people have you had contact with in one form or another (met in person, wrote, talked on the phone with, etc.) who knew Carole Lombard? (Yes, this is sort of the Kevin Bacon “degrees of separation” parlor game.)
I can think of probably five, which sounds like a lot after all these years and may well be a good total for someone outside the movie industry. (Someone like Peter Bogdanovich, who’s not only a director but a writer and film historian, must have met dozens, if not hundreds.)
In 1969, I and my family met Jack Benny while we were at a hotel in Niagara Falls, N.Y.; he was performing in the area. In 1990, I wrote a fan letter to Myrna Loy, who autographed and returned the photo I sent her. I once talked on the phone with Alice Faye while doing some movie research (not about Lombard), and while I’ve never seen a photo of her and Carole, I can’t imagine their paths didn’t cross at one time or another.
I met Garson Kanin, who of course directed Lombard in “They Knew What They Wanted” and described her so vividly in his book “Hollywood”; he signed a paperback copy of it for me at the short-lived Biograph revival house on West 57th Street in New York, at which time I told him I was jealous of anyone who knew Carole. (I still am.)
And there was one other person who knew Lombard whom I met, shook hands with and received his autograph:
He’s Douglas Fairbanks Jr., whom I met in 1995 at Film Forum in New York, when it was showing a retrospective of his father’s films and he personally introduced them one night (if I recall correctly, they were a few of his dad’s comedies of the teens, before his career veered towards swashbuckling adventure). After the films, I met him — he looked every bit as distinguished as you recall him from those wool commercials he made in the ’80s and ’90s — shook his hand, and he autographed my Film Forum schedule program (which I still have today).
Being the son of an icon — much less sharing his name — couldn’t have been easy, but Doug Jr. had a fine career in his own right, carving out his own identity as an actor, a writer and raconteur. In his first autobiography, he mentioned knowing Lombard in the 1920s (the second book was about his exploits during World War II). That I was aware of, but according to a noted Hollywood columnist, his ties to Carole could have run far deeper.
The other day, I mentioned that a thread at a Turner Classic Movies message board is examining Hollywood’s halcyon year of 1939, day by day, through the Minneapolis Tribune. That newspaper, although not part of the Hearst chain, did carry its popular film columnist, Louella Parsons, and on Jan. 12, here’s what she had to say:
Louella opens her column by saying:
“Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., will have to tear himself away from his favorite charmer, Zorina, and return from New York to Hollywood. Young Doug, you see, has big business in two of our important movies. Not only has he been chosen to play opposite Carole Lombard in ‘Memory Of Love’ at RKO, but he has a later date with Paramount studios for the role of Lancelot in ‘Knights Of The Round Table.’ I reckon the older Doug will get a kick out of his son donning doublet and hose in the King Arthur epic, for it’s the very type of swashbuckling role that Fairbanks senior likes best…”
(Parsons’ column also noted that Luise Rainer had signed to do a New York stage play, fulfilling a longtime goal. Jan. 12, 1939 was her 29th birthday, and yesterday she celebrated her 101st. Hope you caught her interview with Robert Osborne last night, which was done at the inaugural TCM Classic Film Festival last April.)
So Doug Jr. was set to be a Lombard leading man…but what was this “Memory Of Love” Louella was writing about? Well, this trade ad from later in 1939 provides an answer:
It’s mentioned in the fine print as the novel adapted for this film, “The Kind Men Marry”...what?
Actually, the co-stars shown with Lombard give it away. Carole, Cary Grant and Kay Francis were the leads in Lombard’s first film for RKO, “In Name Only.” As recently as two years earlier, Grant and Fairbanks Jr. may have been viewed at the same commercial level, but hits such as “Topper,” “The Awful Truth” and “Holiday” had since elevated Grant to higher ground.
Initially, this drama was seen as yet another Grant teaming with Katharine Hepburn, but poor box office for their previous film (“Bringing Up Baby”!) led RKO to make Lombard the leading lady. (She, in turn, successfully lobbied to make her friend Francis, then struggling at Warners, the third part of this romantic triangle. Today is the anniversary of Francis’ birth, and TCM in the U.S. is showing 10 of her films during the day, although “In Name Only” isn’t among them.)
As for “Knights Of The Round Table,” Paramount apparently shelved it; a film by that title wasn’t made until 1953 at MGM, starring Robert Taylor as Lancelot, Ava Gardner as Guinevere and Mel Ferrer as King Arthur. That was probably a disappointment to Anglophile Doug Jr., but far sadder news occurred later in 1939, when Doug Sr. passed on.
I should add that this list almost had a sixth member; unfortunately, I never got the chance to talk with Robert Stack when he appeared on a New York radio call-in show in 1986.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.13 at 22:55
Current mood: creative
Here’s news about something that will take place here Monday: That day’s entry will focus on Alfred Hitchcock, part of a Hitchcock blogathon scheduled for that day by the Classic Movie Blog Association. At last check, 19 different blogs are participating (up from 18), and each will file an entry centered around a specific film from Hitch. (As this is a Carole Lombard-centered site, you can probably guess which movie I chose.) Once all of them are in, I intend to update the entry, providing links to and information about the other ones posted.
It’s all part of what should be a splendid tribute by CMBA’s members to a filmmaker who developed his own idiosyncratic style during more than half a century of work, a man whose uncanny self-marketing parlayed himself into more of a “brand name” than any other director in history. (But few complained — more often than not, his movies’ figurative steak justified the sizzle.)
For more about the blogathon, go to http://clamba.blogspot.com.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Colorful memories of the city she loved
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.12 at 09:10
Current mood: nostalgic
It was 69 years ago this morning that Carole Lombard unknowingly left the city she loved for the last time, boarding an eastbound train from Los Angeles Union Station for Chicago. There, she would get instructions from the Treasury Department before going to Indianapolis, capital of her home state of Indiana, for a war bond rally. (As fate would have it, the name of the train she took was Union Pacific’s “City of Los Angeles.”)
To commemorate this anniversary, we thought we’d provide some images of Los Angeles as it existed during Carole’s lifetime...in color, just as she would have viewed them with her own eyes. (Many of these photographs were taken using Kodachrome color film, a process that recently breathed its last when the final rolls were developed at the remaining lab handling the format.) Unlike many of her star brethren, she had grown up in the city (arriving with her mother and brothers in the fall of 1914, not long after turning six), and so for Lombard Los Angeles was more than merely a movie factory town, though she certainly loved the business.
First, some shots we’ve run before, of Hollywood Boulevard from April 1931, screen grabs from a tourist’s film in two-strip Technicolor:
Note the sign at the far left of the second photo with the reference to “KFWB”; that radio station, founded by Warners as the call letters would indicate, naturally had offices at the building that housed one of its theaters.
The remaining images really don’t have anything to do with the movie side of Los Angeles, but provide a feel for the city before World War II. First, from 1938, LA’s new Chinatown at night; the old district nearby had been razed in order to build the new Union Station, which would open the following May:
We next travel to June 1940, and two photographs of Elysian Park, then as now a place where Angelenos savor nature. The tree is a jacaranda, the automobile a Lincoln Zephyr. (These are part of a large online collection of vintage color photos at Indiana University.)
Next, also from the IU archives and taken in June 1940, a photo of a riot of colorful pink geraniums on Sunset Boulevard in Santa Monica:
Now it’s a year later, in 1941, and we see the bustle of West Los Angeles (top) and Westwood Village, areas Carole had some familiarity with:
Finally, photos that were taken some years later, but certainly evoke the past. First, a rare color image of the interior of the entrance to the old Los Angeles subway line, taken in June 1955, days before the trains stopped serving the Subway Terminal Building for good, replaced by buses. (And they called it progress.) See it and weep:
The tunnel to downtown, constructed with such fanfare in 1925, would carry passengers for not even three decades; by the time of its demise, several lines, including the one that ran along Hollywood Boulevard (from which those 1931 images were likely taken), had been converted to buses, and the last train line serving the station went to Glendale and Burbank. (Some other lines had their downtown terminus at the Pacific Electric building a few blocks away, with their service finally ending in April 1961.) One of those last trains from the Subway Terminal Building is shown below:
We’ll close by noting the passing of singer Margaret Whiting at age 86. Whiting, whose father Richard was a noted composer (among his works were songs for Lombard’s first film at Paramount, 1930’s “Safety In Numbers”), was among the first stars for the Capitol label (Johnny Mercer, one of its founders, had collaborated with her father). Here’s Margaret’s best-known recording, “Moonlight In Vermont,” done with Billy Butterfield’s orchestra in 1944:
Teen bride in ‘Transit’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.11 at 00:41
Current mood: impressed
In late 1928 or early 1929, Carol Lombard — then about 20 — posed in bridal wear for Pathe. Perhaps the studio had an eye on wedding sections in newspapers, and believed this picture could win some attention for their starlet.
But dressing up in such an outfit was nothing new for Lombard; she had done it several years earlier, when she was all of 16.
What?
No, not in real life — we’re talking about the movies…specifically, her second film before the cameras, and her first as Carol Lombard (as we’ve stated beforehand, the “e” in her first name didn’t arrive for good until 1930). It was a movie for Fox called “Marriage In Transit,” and while it’s lost (as are seemingly all of Carole’s films prior to her 1926 automobile accident), an artifact from it is now being auctioned.
We’re referring to this lobby card, which measures 11″ x 14″ (double-click on it, and you can see it at roughly its actual size):
As we noted, when this film was made in early 1925, Lombard was 16 years old and had yet to reach the halfway point of her brief life. So what is someone of her tender age doing playing a bride? Well, her character was likely a few years older, and since it was found younger women photographed well for the cameras, they were often cast as more mature types.
The look on Lombard’s face conveys considerable seriousness, in her mind likely befitting someone preparing to walk down the aisle. (Also note the statue behind her, which appears to be anatomically correct.) It’s possible one or both of the little bridesmaids in the picture are still with us, though they would be in their early 90s. As to where this was taken, it was probably the Fox lot.
This is from Heritage Auction Galleries, which lists the item under “comedy” (hey, that’s what Lombard was known for, right?). Actually, accounts of the plot list it as a melodrama, a vehicle for Edmund Lowe; he plays dual characters, and Carol marries the good guy, a secret agent out to expose the bad guy she thought she was marrying. (The lobby card shown below, with Lombard’s character marrying Lowe’s, is not being auctioned.)
In the April 11, 1925 Motion Picture News, reviewer Lawrence Reid said Lombard “displays good poise and considerable charm.” Truth be told, she was a bit in over her head, and Fox quickly relegated her to western programmers, where she could develop her skills in a less demanding environment.
The card being auctioned has some minor stains and wear from age (it’s nearly 86 years old!), but is nonetheless attractive, in fine-plus condition. It’s a rarity from the dawn of Lombard’s career.
As of this writing, there are three bids on this lobby card, topping at $24. Bidding continues through 11 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. If you’re interested in this item, visit http://movieposters.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=511013&Lot_No=53278.
Finding Carole’s memorabilia in Norma’s Jeans
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.10 at 01:39
Current mood: envious
How would you like to own something Carole Lombard not only possessed, but probably used? You’ve got four chances to do so, thanks to an auction of a noted memorabilia collection on eBay.
The items — all of them engraved in one form or another — are from the estate of Richard Lee Wilson, a man from the Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C., who for many years ran a mail-order memorabilia store called Norma’s Jeans (for his favorite film star, Marilyn Monroe) up to his death in March 2009. According to Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive, “Richard Wilson was always very particular on sources, provenance and authenticity. I suspect that any buyer would be safe with these wonderful goodies.”
More than 80 items from his collection are now being auctioned, with the most expensive being a cigarette card Elvis Presley gave Natalie Wood (bidding starts at $1,249) and an engraved, 14-karat gold watch with jewels that belonged to Jean Harlow (opening bid: $999). Barring bidding that goes into the stratosphere, the Lombard-related items won’t set you back anywhere near that much…but they won’t come cheaply, either.
Take, for example, this item — an engraved watch pin, measuring roughly 2 1/2″. Can’t make out the engraving? Here’s an enlarged image of the watch (which isn’t running, BTW); look vertically down the center of the funnel and you can see “CAROLE”:
Bidding opens at $225; you can find out more at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Engraved-Watch-Pin-/180608464313?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a0d1a75b9.
The next item is a bit more affordable, with bids starting at a mere $140. This ties into Saturday’s entry, featuring a 1933 Max Factor ad; here are a pair of make-up jars that belonged to Lombard (you can see the “C” script monogram on both jars, particularly the one on the right):
Each is 1 1/4″ high and 2 1/4″ in diameter. They can be seen at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombards-Two-Make-up-Jars-w-Engraved-Metal-Tops-/310285305915?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item483e72083b.
Bids for both of the above close at 9 p.m. (Eastern) next Sunday.
The other two items are from the Lombard-Clark Gable marriage. Imagine having a set of four silver coasters that belonged to the Encino power couple (with the “G & L” initials in the middle of each exquisitely designed coaster):
If you want to do more than merely imagine, be prepared to shell out at least $349 (or about $88 per coaster), in which case you may want to reserve them for champagne and such. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-4-Engraved-Silver-Coasters-/180609777703?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a0d2e8027 to learn more. Bids close at 11:05 p.m. (Eastern) on Jan. 17.
The cheapest of the quartet of items, at least by minimum bid, is for those of you into hard liquor (or relatively inexpensive Hollywood celebrity collectibles). It’s an engraved bourbon label, with a silver finish and measuring less than an inch and a half long:
Bids for this start at $125, and bids finish at 9:05 p.m. (Eastern) Jan. 18. Details are at http://cgi.ebay.com/Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-Engraved-BOURBON-Label-/180610330556?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a0d36efbc.
To view the entire collection of Norma’s Jeans goodies — including an engraved watch William Randolph Hearst gave Marion Davies, cigarette cases belonging to everyone from Clara Bow and Lucille Ball to John Wayne and Marlon Brando, and flasks owned by Frank Sinatra and Walter Winchell — go to http://stores.ebay.com/Second-Story-Books-and-Collectibles/_i.html?rt=nc&_sid=6828083&_trksid=p4634.c0.m14.l1513&_pgn=1.
A classic Culver City capture
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.09 at 08:19
Current mood: accomplished
Many movie buffs probably recognize the rooster on Carole Lombard’s sweater, but just in case you don’t, it stands for Pathe Films, the studio Lombard worked for in the late 1920s (when her first name in movies was actually “Carol”). Pathe was located in Culver City, headquartered in the same building where Lombard would star in a pair of Selznick International films nearly a decade later:
That building remains on Washington Boulevard, and it still fronts an active film and TV studio.
Several other studios called Culver City home. The building that housed Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer for many years is probably the best known site (although both it and the Pathe studio site were originally built by silent film pioneer Thomas Ince), but a third also existed, and like the other two was on Washington Boulevard:
This was the home of Hal Roach Studios, whose employees included the beloved comedy team of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. (The studio operated through 1960, and was torn down three years later.) Laurel and Hardy’s work will be spotlighted from 8 p.m. (Eastern) Tuesday through 8 p.m. Wednesday on Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. as part of its January salute to the Roach studios…and through incredible work from one of their many devoted fans, we can get an idea of what Culver City was like in the late 1920s (when Roach used its streets to film scenes for many of Stan and Ollie’s silent shorts).
Piet Schreuders, a Dutch pop culture historian, painstakingly researched Culver City maps of the time to recreate the streets of its downtown during that era. The video below, from a 1999 Dutch documentary (most of the segment is in English), shows how he did it and part of the finished result:
Brief clips are shown from a 1929 Laurel and Hardy silent, “Angora Love” (a quarter-century before Ed Wood, though this has nothing to do with sweaters!), where we see a goat follow Stan and Ollie down a street as well as Schreuders’ computer-generated model of the location. Really remarkable.
You can learn more about Culver City in this era, how Roach and his technicians made a one-block area seem much larger, and the work to capture these images, at http://www.donbrockway.com/The%20Shortest%20Main%20Street%20in%20the%20World.pdf. Until a time machine that can actually take us there is developed, this is the best way to experience Culver City in the 1920s.
Carole scores a rouge…
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.08 at 00:36
Current mood: enthralled
…and she’s not playing Canadian football.
No, this is the rouge of the cosmetic variety, and Carole Lombard was among three Paramount stars featured in a Max Factor ad in the November 1933 issue of Photoplay. At the time, Factor’s ad slogan — one that continued for several years — was “SOCIETY MAKE-UP…Face Powder, Rouge, Lipstick in COLOR HARMONY.”
In this ad, Claudette Colbert represented powder, Adrienne Ames lipstick and Lombard rouge. Here’s the copy for the Lombard segment:
“ROUGE…A rouge in color to harmonize with your powder and complexion colorings. Creamy-smooth, as fine as finest skin texture, it blends and clings just as you would want it to. The color harmony shade for Carole Lombard…blonde hair, light skin and blue eyes is Max Factor’s Blondeen Rouge. And, Max Factor’s Rachelle Powder and Max Factor’s Super-Indelible Vermilion Lipstick complete her color harmony make-up.”
For comparison’s sake, the ad stated the Factor products Colbert used were Olive Powder, Raspberry Rouge and Super-Indelible Lipstick in Crimson; while Ames employed Brunette Powder, Carmine Rouge and Super-Indelible Lipstick in Carmine. (Does Max Factor still manufacture these particular shades?)
The lipstick and powder sold for a dollar at most stores nationwide, while the list price for the rouge was 50 cents. A color harmony make-up chart was also available by mail; the sender listed the appropriate complexion, eyes and other information.
The ad also noted the actresses’ latest films — Lombard was in “White Woman,” Colbert “Torch Singer” (a pretty good pre-Code work) and Ames “A Bedtime Story.”
You can buy this ad for $3 through eBay; it will be on sale through 7:30 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-MAX-FACTOR-AD-CAROLE-LOMBARD-ADRIENNE-AMES-LOOK-/160526021706?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item256018b44a.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Another ‘what might have been’
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.07 at 15:30
Current mood: contemplative
When I ran items relating to Carole Lombard in January 1932 that I found at Google News earlier this week, I inadvertently left one out, perhaps because it’s a brief with no accompanying illustration. It concerns something that ultimately never happened, but is fascinating to ponder, and is from the Spokane Daily Chronicle of Jan. 30, 1932:
That MGM was interested in Lombard at this stage of her career itself carries intrigue — this presumably happened after the “Taxi!” fiasco, where Carole declined a loanout to Warners, only to have Loretta Young take the female lead opposite James Cagney — but look at the property Metro was considering for Lombard: “Red-Headed Woman,” which, as we all know, turned out to be the breakthrough for another flashy blonde whose hair took a crimson hue for the film…
…Carole’s eventual friend, Jean Harlow. (At this juncture, they may have been acquaintances, but likely little more.)
What might “Red-Headed Woman” have done for Lombard? Would this have tapped her inherent comedic skills some two years before “Twentieth Century”? It’s doubtful it would have led to her moving to MGM, inasmuch as she was under a long-term contract with Paramount, but it might have set her apart from the large pack of Paramount starlets and put her on more equal footing with the likes of Claudette Colbert and Miriam Hopkins.
Could Carole have pulled off playing the gold-digging Lil the way Harlow did? Hard to say. While Lombard had already gained internal notice in the film colony for her ability to recognize good scripts, it hadn’t yet translated into good performances. Then again, the programmers Paramount gave her weren’t written by the likes of Anita Loos, so perhaps that would have elicited something heretofore unseen.
Now the question: Why didn’t Lombard get the part? Hard to tell from this piece of industry gossip, probably from some syndicate or wire service (if the Chronicle somehow had its own Hollywood writer, his or her byline would have been attached). Jan. 30 was about the time Harlow — up till now cast for her looks rather than acting ability — proved her talent with a nice supporting turn in the gangster film “The Beast Of The City.” That was made at MGM, as executive (and eventual Harlow husband) Paul Bern persuaded the studio to sign her to a contract. Once that was done, it likely sealed the deal.
There was another name in that Paramount-to-MGM item: Phillips Holmes, who the report said was going to appear in “The Wet Parade”:
Holmes, born to an acting family in 1907, spent several years attending elite U.S. and European institutions, including a year at Princeton (where he was a member of the university’s Triangle Club theater group). He was coming off a solid year in 1931, including roles in “The Criminal Code,” “An American Tragedy” (an adaptation of Theodore Drieser’s novel, playing a role reprised by Montgomery Clift in “A Place In The Sun” two decades later) and Ernst Lubitsch’s World War I drama, “The Man I Killed” (aka “Broken Lullaby”).
Holmes never worked with Lombard, though he had been slated to be her leading man in “The Beachcombers,” the film that was briefly shelved because of Carole’s illness and then finally made as “Sinners In The Sun.” By that time, Holmes had signed with MGM, not making much of an impact there, and his career began to diminish. By the late 1930s, he was focusing on stage work, including “The Petrified Forest” and “The Philadelphia Story.”
There is another, more tragic link between Lombard and Holmes. He would join the Royal Canadian Air Force in late 1941 (his mother was of Canadian descent). Holmes attended the Air Ground School in Winnipeg and graduated; on Aug. 12, 1942 — nearly seven months after Lombard’s death — he and several of his classmates were being transferred to Ottawa when their plane collided with another over Ontario, killing all aboard.
(The 1931 film version of “An American Tragedy,” directed by Josef von Sternberg, led to a crucial court case on adaptation rights. For this story, written by Richard Schickel, go to http://www.dgaquarterly.org/BACKISSUES/Summer2010/FeaturesJosefvonSternberg.aspx.)
A freaking great site
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.06 at 01:23
Current mood: accomplished
When it comes to Carole Lombard on the World Wide Web, I like to think I’m a pretty good authority. But on Wednesday, I discovered a remarkable site for any Lombard fan…and it’s been up for four months without my knowing of it.
It’s from rapidly growing Tumblr, and I love its URL: http://carolefreakinglombard.tumblr.com/. That’s right, carolefreakinglombard — a salute to both her awesomeness (OK, so that’s not an adjective I frequently use to describe her, but it’s nonetheless true!) and a nod to her often inventive invective. (Truth be told, the “profane angel” angle does Carole a disservice, giving the impression her vocabulary was limited to that of a stevedore. Not the case at all — she was a bright woman who could intelligently converse on a variety of topics. At the same time, if people she was with were comfortably exchanging blue banter, she could hold her own with any of them.)
Getting back to this site; it presently comprises some 70 “pages,” which on Tumblr equates to about 700 images. A handful are duplicated throughout the site, uploaded by several different contributors, but among the many others are things I’ve never seen before. For example, take the photo at the top, Paramount p1202-216, which I’m guessing comes from late 1931 or early ’32. Carole had beautiful eyes, and this portrait shows them off about as well as any I’ve seen.
Or how about this shot, taken from “Made For Each Other,” showing Lombard with Louise Beavers:
There aren’t very many stills showing Carole with black actors, and here she’s with one of the best (although, alas, the stereotypical roles Beavers received often prevented her from showing her full ability on screen).
One of the nice ideas here is something called “The Many Faces Of” — eight images of Lombard from a particular film. Eight of Carole’s movies have received such an honor, and here they are (double-click to view them at their full, glorious size):
Very impressive.
As stated, this site gets the “Carole & Co.” seal of approval (remember to feed it fish daily!), and I think any Lombard fan worth his or her salt should make it a regular cyberspace destination. With all the images, you can feel as close to Carole as director Garson Kanin did here:
Kudos to the contributors at carolefreakinglombard.tumblr.com — though I won’t say it’s for “a job well done,” because it’s not anywhere close to being “done.” I fully expect we’ll see hundreds more lovely Lombard images put up for our viewing pleasure in the future.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Looking back: January 1932
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.05 at 01:10
Current mood: 
surprised
Today, we’re inaugurating a new feature at “Carole & Co.”, one we intend to run each month that I think will delight Carole Lombard fans. It’s through a resource that’s fairly new to me — the “news” section at google.com. Through it, you can access newspapers from past and present regarding all sorts of subjects.
Some of the papers charge a fee, such as the Tribune Co. properties (the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Baltimore Sun and Hartford Courant) or the New York Times. But thankfully, many other papers involved in the project are free.
We’re going to use this to examine Carole Lombard, and while much of what you’ll see may not be very significant, it is fun to find. We will look at newspaper items dealing with Lombard each month, beginning in January 1932. (That should give us 10 years’ worth of material, assuming this blog can last through December 2020!)
The image above isn’t from Google News; it’s from the Jan. 30, 1932 Motion Picture Herald –– an ad from Paramount promoting Carole’s upcoming release, “No One Man”…just to get you in the mood.
The first item ran 79 years ago today (Jan. 5) in the upstate New York paper, the Schenectady Gazette:
Under the headline “Striking Creation,” this syndicated item shows Lombard “in a frock that glitters,” red and silver on a black background. It’s simple yet elegant, and as this photo indicates, Carole looked splendid in it.
“Elegant” and “splendid” probably aren’t the proper adjectives for the outfit Milwaukee Journal readers found Lombard in on Jan. 9, 1932:
No, she’s not in training to be a bubble dancer, nor is she wearing a bunch of tiny balloons. Here’s what it’s all about, according to the caption:
All Balled Up In New Style
Pajamas are yesterday’s mode; the bathing jacket is today’s — and Carole Lombard, screen star, introduces this startling new fashion in a forthcoming production. The jacket for beach wear comprises many yards of white jersey trimmed with innumerable balls of white yarn.
Well, “startling” is accurate, and so is “balled up”…if it’s a euphemism for a somewhat, uh, stronger term. Just how did Carole keep a straight face while modeling this? (And it’s probably safe to say this unorthodox style was not a favorite on beaches throughout the summer of 1932.)
Check back next month for a variety of Lombard items, circa February 1932. Hey, you may find another early thirties version of “what not to wear.”
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.04 at 01:28
Current mood: contemplative
If you liked last week’s Lombard-palooza — an array of rare images of Carole Lombard being sold on eBay (hope you bought some) — you will
love what’s going on this time. Especially if you’re a fan of both Carole and William Powell.
Her first husband joins her on all these images; the picture quality isn’t the best on some of these (though, thanks to Tally, they’re in passable shape), but they are all of interest. The photos are available for $14.99 each (and in much better condition than you see here), and the sale ends a few minutes before noon (Eastern) on Friday. Up to five copies of each are available.
Without further ado, the first batch, starting off with a pair of photos taken at the racetrack, although from separate occasions, as their outfits indicate:
The first photo can be found at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-RACETRACK-PHOTO-/200552713359?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8c8f. The second, reportedly taken by a fan at the Agua Caliente track in Mexico, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-FAN-PHOTO-/200552713211?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8bfb.
Here are Bill and Carole at a premiere (and the Warners sign behind them may indicate it was taken after Powell signed with that studio in 1932):
For more on this photo, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-ARRIVE-PREMIERE-PHOTO-/190477810795?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbc6b.
This is a literally sparkling image of the couple having champagne (since Prohibition wasn’t repealed until after their divorce, was this taken in Mexico?):
It’s at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CHAMPAGNE-CANDID-PHOTO-/200552713387?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8cab.
Finally, a photo taken at the Club New Yorker in 1932, a club that actually was in the basement of the Christie Hotel on Hollywood Boulevard (the building that’s now Scientology headquarters):
According to the seller, one of the other persons here is a female impersonator named Jean Malin, though as the club emcee, he may not have been dressed in drag at the time. Malin, who got his start with Texas Guinan in New York, was one of the stars of the “pansy craze” of the speakeasy era. Less than a year after this photo was taken, Malin, 25, would drown in an auto accident after completing a performance at a club in Venice, Calif.; two passengers, including actress Patsy Kelly, survived.
This photo is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-JEAN-MALIN-CANDID-PHOTO-/200552713459?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8cf3.
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.04 at 09:29
Current mood: amused
Here are five more pictures of Carole Lombard with her first husband, William Powell — images now being sold at eBay for $14.99 each through just before noon (Eastern) Friday. As with the first batch, the quality here isn’t all that good (the actual items being sold are professionally done), and I thank Tally for her work making them at least passable.
First, a charming image of Carole giving Bill a kiss:
To buy this picture or learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-KISSING-PHOTO-/190477810929?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbcf1.
Next, a pair of stills from “Man Of The World,” the initial film Powell and Lombard made together:
The first photo, with them facing each other, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-MAN-WORLD-PHOTO-/200552713529?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8d39; the second is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-GLAMOUR-PHOTO-/190477810896?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbcd0.
Finally, two more from that 1890s costume party:
The first image, where they are standing, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-GAY-90S-COSTUME-PHOTO-2-/190477810879?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbcbf. The second, where they are sitting, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-GAY-90S-COSTUME-PHOTO-1-/190477810850?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbca2. (The two others in these photos were not identified, but if you know who they are, please respond.)
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.04 at 10:53
Current mood: loved
Now, time for the final five photos in our display of Carole Lombard/William Powell pictures now on sale at eBay ($14.99 each) through just before noon (Eastern) on Friday. As with the other images, Tally has brought them up to snuff, but the actual photos are 8″ x 10″, recently made in a lab, and are of top quality.
First, two photos from 1938, when Powell, recovering from a long illness, teamed with his ex-wife in a “Lux Radio Theater” adaptation of their hit “My Man Godfrey”:
Find the first photo at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-LOOKS-LOVINGLY-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CBS-PIC-/200552714594?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df9162. The second, with Lombard laughing, is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-LAUGH-CBS-RADIO-PHOTO-/200552713498?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8d1a.
Next, back to 1931, as Bill and Carole meet the press while returning from their honeymoon in Hawaii:
To learn more on this one, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-SHIP-HAWAII-PHOTO-/190477811001?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbd39.
Finally, a pair of romantic pics:
The photo of them embracing is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-ROMANTIC-CANDID-PHOTO-/190477811010?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c595cbd42; the one of them gazing is at http://cgi.ebay.com/WILLIAM-POWELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-LOOKING-EACH-OTHER-PIC-/200552713513?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1df8d29.
What’s dogging Carole and Clark?
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.03 at 09:39
Current mood: nostalgic
To outsiders, ranch life in Encino may have seemed idyllic for Carole Lombard and Clark Gable, but they knew better. There were all sorts of mundane tasks that had to be done — washing the dog, for instance:
This is from the Sunday color supplement of the Los Angeles Examiner (a Hearst paper) on Dec. 3, 1939. It’s a cute image of Clark and Carole cleaning a canine, but from comparing its colors to that of the photo at the top, it’s likely an enhanced black-and-white photo.
The six-page section, entitled “March Of Events, Screen And Drama,” measures 16″ x 22″. It can be yours, but you don’t have much time; bidding closes at 5:12 p.m. (Eastern) today. Bids open at $9.99, and no bids have been made as of this writing. To learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/201214C-HOLLYWOOD-CLARK-GABLE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-1939-/290516463417?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43a4216f39.
Oh, and speaking of 1939…that fabulous year will be reviewed day by day at one of the message boards at Turner Classic Movies, with columns, movie listings and other items taken from the Minneapolis Tribune. For example, here’s Sheilah Graham’s column, where we learn that on New Year’s Day, Clark and Carole were seen at the Rose Bowl game where Southern Cal beat Duke:
Louella Parsons predicts Robert Taylor and Barbara Stanwyck are the likeliest film colony couple to get hitched in 1939. The good news for Louella: They did. The bad news: They did nearly seven weeks after Clark and Carole performed the feat.
And finally, a partial check of some of the films playing around Minneapolis as 1939 began:
Find the thread at http://forums.tcm.com/jive/tcm/thread.jspa?threadID=157427&tstart=0. It’s something you’ll want to check back on throughout the year.
TCM’s Roach clips will get you high this month
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.02 at 09:04
Current mood: giddy
That’s a teenaged Carol(e) Lombard sprinting with cosmetics in the 1928 Mack Sennett two-reeler “Run, Girl, Run.” This month, Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. will be showing films from the other impresario of early comedy, Hal Roach, whose studio released a prodigious array of product for more than four and a half decades.
Lombard never worked for Roach, who often is lumped together with Sennett, which isn’t fair to either man. Sennett’s peak came during the 1910s and early ’20s; by the time Lombard joined his troupe of bathing beauties in 1927, his studio had seen better days. In contrast, Roach was coming into his own, and when talkies arrived at the end of the decade, he embraced the new technology far more than Sennett did. Moreover, while Sennett’s work was almost entirely in comedy shorts, Roach produced a number of features and non-comedies, and even did some television work in the 1950s.
TCM is running plenty of Roach material — four 24-hour blocks, from 8 p.m. (Eastern) Tuesdays through 8 p.m. Wednesdays. If this excites you (and it should!), thank Thelma Todd, the “ice cream blonde” shown above with Zasu Pitts. The “Summer Under The Stars” salute to Todd on Aug. 30, which included numerous short subjects where she was teamed with Pitts or Patsy Kelly, was an overwhelming success for the channel. (To our Canadian friends, you are again out of luck, as TCM will air substitute programming. Apparently no one knows who controls the rights to most of Roach’s catalog in Canada.)
Jan. 4 and 5 is dedicated to the “Our Gang” shorts. (Roach sold the franchise to MGM in 1938, but retained rights to the earlier films; when the television age arrived, he repackaged them under the name “The Little Rascals.”) TCM is running more than 50 of these movies (all of them premieres for the channel), and while the schedule is just too voluminous to run here, note that from 8 p.m. to 4:45 a.m., films from the 1930s will be shown, while the rest of the schedule focuses on 1920s product, most of them silent and with an earlier cast of kids.
Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, arguably the most beloved of comedy teams, are probably the performers most identified with Roach. TCM salutes the boys on Jan. 11 and 12 with 40 shorts, nearly half of them premiering on the channel, and three of their lesser-known features (“Pardon Us,” “Pack Up Your Troubles” and “The Bohemian Girl”), airing at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday. Among the shorts, check out “Brats” at 11 a.m. Wednesday, where Stan and Ollie play both themselves and their offspring (through oversized sets).
In 1955-56, Roach’s studio produced a TV version of the old radio anthology “Screen Directors Playhouse” for NBC. Ten of the 35 episodes are to be broadcast Jan. 18 and 19, including John Wayne’s first television appearance (it was also the TV directing debut for John Ford); Wayne plays a sportswriter in the baseball drama “Rookie Of The Year” (8:30 p.m.) and the cast includes his son Patrick as a hot-shot pitcher. Another highlight: “The Silent Partner” (9:30 p.m.), featuring Buster Keaton as a washed-up comic watching the Academy Awards on TV at a nearby restaurant and seeing his former director given a lifetime achievement award.
After these episodes, TCM shows 19 hours worth of assorted comedy shorts, including work from Todd and Charley Chase.
The last block, Jan. 25 and 26, focuses on the features from Roach’s studios, and Chase is a supporting player in the first offering, Laurel and Hardy’s classic “Sons Of The Desert” (8 p.m. Wednesday). Most of the films are comedies, but the schedule also includes the 1939 adventure “Captain Fury” (11:30 a.m. Wednesday), which Roach himself directed.
Constance Bennett fans will have three chances to catch Connie: first, the original “Topper” (10:30 p.m. Tuesday); the sequel, “Topper Takes A Trip,” where she’s shown above with Roland Young (10 a.m. Wednesday); and the ersatz “My Man Godfrey” comedy, “Merrily We Live” (5:45 a.m. Wednesday).
All in all, a wondrous batch of films, made or produced by a man who reached age 100 and was active in Hollywood until the end. Thank you, Hal Roach. (Here he is, at right, with Sennett and another legendary filmmaker, Frank Capra.)
For your New Year’s resolution
Posted by vp19 on 2011.01.01 at 11:11
Current mood: curious
We’ve made it to 2011 — the first year of the century that doesn’t feature multiple zeroes — and I wish you the best as we embark on another calendar year of “Carole & Co.”
Of course, with a new year invariably comes resolutions (most of which we fail to keep, human nature being what it is). Among the most common of those resolutions is to lose weight…and for those of you aiming to do just that, we may have some inspiration.
Did you know Carole Lombard was once a fat little girl? No kidding — that’s what the May 10, 1936 Des Moines Register said:
Well, we know she had a few extra pounds (and curves) during her days at Mack Sennett, pounds she took off through a training and diet regimen with noted Hollywood masseuse Sylvia (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/110803.html). But fat? Did someone mistake Lombard for her Sennett stablemate, Madalynne Fields? (And photos from Carole’s childhood as Jane Alice Peters certainly show no signs of obesity.)
Yet that’s what the Register headline read; there is also a subhead, “Now an Air Line Chooses Her Streamlined Figure as a Model by Which to Select Its Pretty Air Stewardesses.”
Unfortunately, the body copy from the photo is too small to read, so I can’t tell you more about it, such as what airline used her figure as a model. (And for those who thought the first flight attendants were hired for their medical and safety skills, this may indicate things were changing, eventually culminating in the “coffee, tea or me” mindset of the 1960s.)
But the page is nice, particularly that large photo of Carole in a swimsuit, right? Uh, no. While you would think that mentioning Lombard in the headline would indicate that she’d have the dominant picture, but from (barely) making out the caption, its subject is one Grace Bradley, a fellow Paramount player nearly five years younger than Carole. Here she is in a teddy, decorating a Christmas tree:
Bradley gave up her career in a few years to marry former Lombard co-star William Boyd, “Hopalong Cassidy” of western fame. She had been his widow for 38 years when she died this past Sept. 21, her 97th birthday.
This page is being auctioned at eBay, with bids starting at $9.99 (no bids have been entered as of this writing). Bidding ends at 6:50 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. To learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/221211C-HOLLYWOOD-ACTRESS-CAROLE-LOMBARD-DIET-1936-/390276093494?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5ade449636. (And if you get it, please let us know what the copy reads!)
Should auld acquaintance be forgot…
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.31 at 00:59
Current mood: jubilant
It’s hard to believe that within a matter of hours, 2010 will be in the past tense and we will have advanced to the year 2011. To honor the occasion, the photo above, showing Carole Lombard and James Stewart’s characters preparing to ring in their new year (1939) in “Made For Each Other.”
For me, this has been a year where much has happened — a job-related move, surgery to improve my eyesight, and other challenges. I’ve come through it okay, and this blog is among the reasons why.
“Carole & Co.”, now more than 3 1/2 years old, has been a labor of love from the outset: love for Carole Lombard as an actress and as a person, love for the classic Hollywood she inhabited, love for a special era in entertainment. Yes, we too often view the past through rose-colored glasses, glossing over the trials and tribulations people faced then; that’s what nostalgia is all about. At the same time, we can appreciate what Lombard and others created, artistry that transcends time, work “beyond category,” as Duke Ellington so elegantly put it.
At last count, “Carole & Co.” has 186 members, and this is its 1,422nd entry (most, but not all, from me). Researching Lombard’s life and times — and, to repeat a slogan of mine just one more time, blending a historian’s perspective with a fan’s enthusiasm — has been a joy; I have learned so much about Carole and the people she knew and worked with. And I’m so glad to have made friends with so many people in the blogosphere and classic Hollywood community.
My vow for 2011 is to “keep on keepin’ on,” continuing to bring you more about Carole and her contemporaries. Perhaps we collectively will uncover a “holy grail” or two, such as a film she made as a teen at Fox before her automobile accident. (It would also be fitting if a photo of Lombard and Jean Harlow together is discovered during the platinum blonde’s centenary year!)
I wish you joy and prosperity during the upcoming year; your interaction is always appreciated, and if you can spread the word about “Carole & Co.” to your classic film friends, I will be forever in your debt. (It would be a thrill to reach the 200-member level!)
If you’re not going out tonight (and if you are, please drive safely and soberly — we want you around for 2011!), a reminder that you can hear some great big band music, both from vintage-era recordings and the fine stylings of Barbara Rosene and her New Yorkers (live from the Omni Shoreham in Washington, D.C.), from 8 p.m. to 1 a.m. (Eastern) over WAMU-FM, 88.5 in the metro area and at http://wamu.org/listen/ online. It will almost be like those New Year’s Eve broadcasts of yore.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.30 at 02:43
Current mood: grateful
Now, the final group of photos of Carole Lombard being sold at eBay until shortly after noon (Eastern) today. All of them feature Carole with others, with three featuring her first husband and two other images relating to one of her movies. (And all can be bought for $14.99 each.)
But first, a portrait of Lombard with the woman she was closest to in her life…her mother:
This charming photo of Carole and Elizabeth Peters is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-POSES-HER-MOTHER-PHOTO-/190474598186?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb72a.
Here’s Lombard in a group shot of the Selznick film “Made For Each Other,” with co-star James Stewart to her left and director John Cromwell to her right:
Find it at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-JAMES-STEWART-JOHN-CROMWELL-CAST-PHOTO-/190474597957?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb645.
There was one cast member not in the group shot for both child labor laws and because it likely was bedtime. We’re referring to Bonnie Belle Barber, who plays the newborn. “Mother” Carole does some character bonding in this delightful shot:
Oh baby, is that cute — and you can learn more about it at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LOOKS-BABY-CANDID-PHOTO-/200549554844?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5a9c
Now for a trio with William Powell. First up, Bill and Carole dancing at the Cocoanut Grove in 1933; this may have been one of their post-divorce outings that led some to incorrectly assume they would remarry:
Next, Powell and Lombard at the Ambassador Hotel (site of the Cocoanut Grove) with Mary Carlisle (who will turn 99 Feb. 3) and James Gleason:
The last Lombard-Powell pic finds them at a costume party (with Carole wearing that 1890s outfit we saw her in early last month). We’re not sure who the other woman is, but the man without the mustache is Clive Brook, British leading man whose films included “Shanghai Express” and “Cavalcade.”
The Cocoanut Grove photo is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-WILLIAM-POWELL-DANCE-COCONUT-GROVE-PHOTO-/200549555276?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5c4c, the Ambassador Hotel pic at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-WILLIAM-POWELL-AMBASSADOR-HOTEL-PHOTO-/190474598482?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb852 and the costume party shot is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-WILLIAM-POWELL-COSTUME-PARTY-PHOTO-/190474598496?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb860.
Two more photos remain. First, Carole and Una Merkel take a break during work on “True Confession,” on location at Lake Arrowhead:
Find Carole and Una at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-UNA-MERKEL-CANDID-LOCATION-PHOTO-/190474598359?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb7d7.
The Lombard-palooza ends at the El Mirador in Palm Springs, where Carole is seen with Paul Lukas, whom she worked with in “No One Man,” and a fine comedic character actor she never collaborated with, Eric Blore:
And this image is available at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-PAUL-LUKAS-ERIC-BLORE-PALM-SPRINGS-PHOTO-/200549554920?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5ae8.
Once more, my kudos to Tally for her wonderful work on these photos.
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.30 at 00:56
Current mood: amused
Enjoyed that last batch of Carole Lombard pics now up for sale at eBay for $14.99 each? Well, here are some more — but just remember, they’ll only be around until a few minutes after noon (Eastern), so hurry.
First up, a lovably laughing Lombard, likely taken during that week in the summer of 1938 when she handled publicity for Selznick International:
If you’d like that as part of your Carole collection, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LAUGHING-CANDID-WORKING-DESK-PHOTO-/190474598013?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb67d.
From the ridiculous to the sublime…Lombard in a fetching white hat:
Check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-BIG-HAT-GLAMOUR-FASHION-PHOTO-/200549554745?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5a39.
For these next two, Carole is clad in gowns. First, she’s next to a pillar:
You’ll find it at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-GLAMOUR-SATIN-DRESS-PILLAR-PHOTO-/190474597902?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb60e.
Here, Lombard graces the head of a huge marble bust (lucky bust!):
This one is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-HIGH-GLAMOUR-HUGE-MARBLE-BUST-PHOTO-/200549554734?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5a2e.
Carole shows off an attractive beaded gown:
To learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-POSING-BEADED-GOWN-CANDID-PHOTO-/200549555015?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5b47.
Several showgirl portraits of Carole are extant from “Swing High, Swing Low,” but this one arguably shows off those Lombard legs to their best advantage:
This image is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-SEXY-SHOWGIRL-PINUP-COSTUME-PHOTO-/200549555133?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5bbd.
We’ll close this batch with Carole and Clark Gable out for a ride when this candid pic was taken. They look a bit bemused, but then again the concept of paparazzi was still more than two decades in the future…
If you’d like to go along for the ride, head over to http://cgi.ebay.com/CLARK-GABLE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-DRIVING-CAR-PHOTO-/200549566514?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af8832.
Again, thanks to Tally for her yeoman work.
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.29 at 23:38
Current mood: accomplished
A lot of rare Carole Lombard photos are being sold in a batch at eBay — so many, in fact, that it will take more than one entry to show them all (and that’s on top of the entries earlier this week). The sale will end shortly after the noon hour (Eastern) tomorrow, so if you want ’em, make your claim.
Each of these are 8″ x 10″, sell for $14.99 each, and the seller has multiple copies available. Ready? Here goes:
Several images of Carole shooting an arrow have emerged over the years, but I’m not sure I’ve seen these two before:
For the first, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ART-DECO-POSE-W-BOW-ARROW-PHOTO-1-/200549554009?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5759. The second can be found at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ART-DECO-POSE-W-BOW-ARROW-PHOTO-2-/200549554029?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af576d.
Over the years, I’ve seen a number of photos of Lombard at a microphone, but this CBS image looks to be a new one:
This image of network radio and Hollywood star power joining forces is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CBS-MICROPHONE-CANDID-RADIO-PHOTO-/190474597423?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb42f.
We’ve noted that in January 1935, Carole journeyed to Cuba, stopping in Miami on the way. Here’s the first photo I’ve seen from that trip — Lombard at the Biltmore Country Club in Miami:
This is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-BILTMORE-COUNTRY-CLUB-PHOTO-/190474597495?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb477.
Here’s an image taken by a fan at Sardi’s (I presume this is the restaurant in Hollywood, not the one in New York):
Want it? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-TAKEN-FAN-SARDIS-PHOTO-/190474597558?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb4b6.
Next up, another candid from a fan, but this one was shot at a race track — and it looks as if her horse finished out of the running:
This is available at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-TAKEN-FAN-RACETRACK-PHOTO-/200549554218?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af582a.
Here’s one more horse-related image, with Lombard looking as if she’s ready to ride (this may have been taken for the film “I Take This Woman,” which has some equestrian scenes):
If you wish to add it to your collection, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-EARLY-PUBLICITY-RIDING-OUTFIT-PHOTO-/200549554544?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5970.
This batch concludes with Lombard and Clark Gable, at a silver jubilee party for Paramount mogul Adolph Zukor in 1937; it must have been early in the year, since Clark’s got his “Parnell” sideburns on (and Carole is no doubt thinking of yet another way to rib him about this ill-suited role!):
This pic is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CLARK-GABLE-CANDID-PHOTO-/190474597578?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb4ca.
Many thanks to Tally for her work on these images.
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.29 at 01:35
Current mood: nostalgic
Imagine if Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie paid a visit to Washington, D.C., not only seeing the many sights of the nation’s capital but having an audience with the president of the United States.
People magazine,
Us Weekly and other celebrity magazines would have a field day; the public would be swamped with photos, and the White House would pull out all the stops to publicize the meeting.
But 70 years ago today, much the same thing happened, and it received comparatively little attention.
That’s right — on Dec. 29, 1940, Clark Gable and Carole Lombard arrived in Washington. They saw most of the things everyday tourists did — the Capitol, the Washington Monument, Mount Vernon — and some off-limits to said tourists, such as being in an audience of 20 in the White House when President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave one of his “fireside chats” that night, specifically his famed “arsenal of democracy” speech where the U.S. pledged its support of Britain (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/73489.html). The two actors reportedly had a half-hour conversation with FDR after the speech.
However, try as I might, I have yet to come across a photo of the Gables with Roosevelt; in fact, I’ve never found any photos of Clark and Carole’s D.C. sojourn online. (One of the Washington papers — I’m not sure whether it was the Post or the Star –– did photograph Gable and Lombard while they were being interviewed in their hotel room. However, it’s never ventured outside of the microfilm copy of that day’s paper.) The photo above was taken in Los Angeles; you can make out the “SAN VINCENTE BLVD.” in the background.
So while we don’t have any photos of the couple in D.C., we can tell you that while in town, they stayed at one of its most famous hotels, the Shoreham.
Now known as the Omni Shoreham, the hotel — close to Rock Creek Park and the National Zoo — opened for business on Oct. 30, 1930. The ambitious plan that night was to have red-hot radio and recording star Rudy Vallee arrive by airplane.
Unfortunately, inclement weather delayed Vallee’s arrival for several hours, and while he and his Connecticut Yankees did perform, it was for all of 15 minutes. (Also on the bill was Lina Basquette, a noted Ziegfeld Follies performer who had acted with Lombard in the 1928 Pathe film “Show Folks.”)
Many inaugural balls were held at the Shoreham, beginning with one for Roosevelt in 1933. The hotel’s Blue Room has hosted many top-flight entertainers, including Benny Goodman, Peggy Lee, Tony Bennett, Aretha Franklin and Judy Garland. (In 1965, Liza Minnelli made her first public appearance at the Blue Room.) But unquestionably, the performer most identified with the Blue Room is none of these.
Mark Russell, whose satiric political specials were PBS favorites for many years, called the Shoreham his home for two decades, using his gentle — but pointed — wit to poke fun at the American scene.
More than a few members of Congress have resided at the Shoreham. It was also where the Beatles lodged in February 1964, when they gave their initial U.S. concert at the Washington Coliseum.
I’ve spent some time discussing this hotel because on Friday, one of our favorite acts will be performing there. Jazz vocalist Barbara Rosene, who does wonders with the Great American Songbook in general, and ’20s and ’30s compositions in particular, will ring in the new year with her talented musicians, the New Yorkers. The event — “A Hot Jazz New Year’s Eve Live With Rob Bamberger” — is a sellout, but you’ll still able to enjoy much of it because part of the show will be carried over WAMU-FM (http://wamu.org/listen/) from 8 p.m. to 1 a.m. (Eastern). Rosene, previously profiled here (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/262741.html), is a Lombard fan (her favorite film is “Hands Across The Table”), and she was delighted to learn that Carole and Clark stayed at the Shoreham 70 years ago.
Here’s Rosene performing “It Had To Be You” at New York’s Iridium Jazz Club; you can find more about her, and purchase her CDs, at http://www.barbararosene.com/.
Oh, and as it turns out, we do have one Washington-related photograph of Clark and Carole, though it was taken just across the Potomac River in Virginia. It’s on Jan. 6, 1941, as the couple prepares to head home to California. They had spent another day sightseeing in D.C. after several days at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore (ostensibly to check on Gable’s nagging shoulder injury, but actually to discover why the couple couldn’t conceive). Lombard, who said she planned to return to the capital, never got the chance.
March, to more pics of Louella
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.28 at 00:39
Current mood: chipper
Today, four more relatively rare Carole Lombard images — two featuring a notable co-star, and two with a powerful Hollywood columnist.
All measure 8″ x 10″, sell for $14.99 (all have multiple copies available) and the sale on all ends shortly after noon (Eastern) on Thursday.
First, Lombard with Fredric March outside the Brown Derby:
We know these were taken as they were leaving the restaurant, but beyond that I have no information. The first one is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-FREDRIC-MARCH-BROWN-DERBY-PHOTO-1-/200549554639?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af59cf, the second at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-FREDRIC-MARCH-BROWN-DERBY-PHOTO-2-/200549554659?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af59e3.
Yesterday, we saw a photo of Lombard with co-star Fred MacMurray and Hearst columnist Louella Parsons. Here they are again, joined by actress Cecil Cunningham and director Mitchell Leisen:
I’m guessing this was taken at Louella’s CBS radio show — and it looks as if all four of her guests are singing! If you want this 8″ x 10″ photo, or simply want to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-FRED-MACMURRAY-MITCH-LEISEN-CANDID-PHOTO-/190474597803?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb5ab.
In this one, Lombard and Louella are joined by George Raft, Dick Powell and an unidentified man:
This is also from a radio broadcast, and it’s the first time I’ve seen Carole in a photo with Dick Powell; she would not live to see him alter his image from song-and-dance man to cool film noir star. Want to own it? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-GEORGE-RAFT-LOUELLA-PARSONS-RADIO-PHOTO-/200549554697?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5a09.
Again, thanks to Tally for her work on these photos.
Riskin these pictures? You be the Judge
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.27 at 07:14
Current mood: cheerful
Two rare photos of Carole Lombard with her second husband, and two others picturing her with the man who might have had that honor, are among images being offered through eBay. All the following measure 8″ x 10″ and are being sold for $14.99, with selling ending shortly after noon (Eastern) on Thursday. (As of this writing, at least four copies of each are available.)
That’s Carole with Clark Gable, and according to the seller, “this is not a professional studio photograph but taken by a fan at an event.” Judging from what Clark and Carole are wearing, I had guessed this event was the Atlanta premiere of “Gone With The Wind” in December 1939, but others say it was the Greek War Relief event of January 1941. And if a fan actually took this — some are skeptical a non-professional could have come so close to Clark and Carole — he or she did a nice job with this pic.
Here’s another casual image of the Gables:
This was supposedly taken at a sporting event, but I’m not sure which one.
For the first photo, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-CLARK-GABLE-CANDID-TAKEN-FAN-PHOTO-/190474597613?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb4ed. For the second, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CLARK-GABLE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-CANDID-HOLLYWOOD-PHOTO-/190474609634?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592be3e2.
But as stated earlier, Lombard might well have had a different second husband — and one who also won an Academy Award for work on “It Happened One Night.” We’re referring to noted screenwriter Robert Riskin:
Not sure where the first pic was taken, but the second was shot outside the Trocadero (and dig the high heels Carole is wearing!). As stated earlier, the couple might have married if Riskin had been more enthusiastic about having children (which he eventually did with later wife Fay Wray).
Find the first photo at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-AND-ROBERT-RISKIN-CANDID-PHOTO-/200549553964?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af572c, the second at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ROBERT-RISKIN-CANDID-TROCADERO-PHOTO-/200549555048?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5b68.
We have two more Lombard images to show you. First, Carole with frequent co-star Fred MacMurray as they curry favor with Hearst Hollywood columnist Louella Parsons:
It’s hard to figure out what Fred is holding (incidentally, kudos to Tally for her work on these photos), but it appears to be sheet music — which would make sense, since MacMurray was a musician before turning to acting. Might this be to promote “Swing High, Swing Low”?
To learn more about the photo, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-FRED-MACMURRAY-CANDID-PHOTO-/190474597780?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c592bb594.
Finally, Lombard back at the Trocadero, but this time she’s inside the fabled West Hollywood nightclub, posing with another 1930s actress:
That’s Arline Judge, who had supporting roles in a variety of films, but was better known for her love life. She would marry eight times, as often as the more celebrated Lana Turner; in fact, they shared a husband, Henry J. “Bob” Topping. (Judge was also married to his equally wealthy and better-known brother, Dan Topping.) Arline’s first marriage was to Lombard director Wesley Ruggles, and it lasted nearly six years before their divorce in 1937.
This photo is available at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ARLENE-JUDGE-TROCADERO-CANDID-PHOTO-/200549553990?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eb1af5746.
(It’s been noted Carole also wore this dress in a photo where she’s seen with Gable, Cary Grant and Ricardo Cortez, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it was taken at the Troc.)
And they’re off! (Horsing around at Santa Anita)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.26 at 01:19
Current mood: nostalgic
Nearing their first wedding anniversary, Carole Lombard and Clark Gable enjoy a day at the track on March 2, 1940. Here’s how the Associated Press caption that day explained it:
“LOS ANGELES, March 2 — CHEERING HOME THE WINNER — Clark Gable and his wife, Carole Lombard, were among hundreds of film folk who watched Seabiscuit establish himself as the all-time high money winner in turf history by capturing the $100,000 added Santa Anita Handicap, world’s richest horse race, today.”
Tens of thousands of everyday southern Californians joined the Hollywood high rollers in watching West Coast favorite Seabiscuit continue his dominance of the sport.
Carole and Clark were no stranger to racetracks, regularly playing the horses even during their previous marriages. In fact, here’s a photo from Santa Anita in 1940 (don’t know whether it was taken on the same date as the Gable-Lombard picture) showing Lombard’s ex, William Powell, and his new wife, Diana Lewis:
Another Santa Anita habitue was Janet Gaynor:
Why are we focusing on Santa Anita? Because today, the famed thoroughbred track in Arcadia, Calif., opens its gates, 76 years and a day after it began hosting races. (It went dark for two seasons during World War II.) It’s a southern California landmark, both for the great races — and horses — that it’s hosted, and for its marvelous aesthetics that makes it among the jewels of the sport:
It should come as no surprise that a number of films and television series have been shot at Santa Anita, including the Marx Brothers’ “A Day At The Races,” Bob Hope’s “The Lemon Drop Kid” and “A Star Is Born” (not the Gaynor version, but Judy Garland’s). More recently, Santa Anita has been regularly used in the HBO series “Luck,” starring Dustin Hoffman.
To honor its film and TV heritage, Santa Anita is giving away a commemorative 2011 wall calendar with images from these productions with paid admission today (it’s $5 — and with luck, you might make it up at the parimutuel window). Even if you don’t wager, it’s a fun place to visit, with the San Gabriel Mountains serving as a dramatic backdrop.
The gates open at 10 a.m. (Pacific), with the initial race at noon; if you live in the Los Angeles area, it’s worth a trip. For more about today’s promotion, including a home video of a visit someone made last February (the track has a wall of pictures showing its ties to classic Hollywood), go to http://dearoldhollywood.blogspot.com/2010/12/santa-anita-racetrack-in-movies.html. The official track site is at http://www.santaanita.com/.
Good luck — and cash ’em, don’t trash ’em.
Oh, and to get you in the mood for a day at the races, here’s the famed “Fugue For Tinhorns” from the 1955 film “Guys And Dolls.” I got the horse right here…
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A Christmas Carole (and company)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.25 at 00:43
Current mood: happy
“And so this is Christmas,” to borrow a line from John Lennon, and I hope for this holiday — whether or not you observe it — that you are safe and secure, with loved ones close by. To spread some Christmas cheer, we have a few holiday pictures involving Carole Lombard and several of her Hollywood contemporaries.
First, a Lombard Christmas photo that isn’t reprinted all that often, perhaps because it isn’t humorous…but it is lovely:
Next, a woodburned plaque Carole made to accompany a gift of bedroom furniture she and Clark Gable gave personal secretary Jean Garceau and her husband Russ:
Also note, in closeup, the “Clarkie” Lombard put on the plaque:
Now to one of Carole’s former loves and two of her film friends. First, here’s a photo of ex-husband William Powell and his flame at the time, Lombard’s pal Jean Harlow:
The photo comes from either 1935 or 1936; I’m guessing it to be the former. And can anyone identify the people with Powell and Harlow? I’m sensing most, if not all, are fellow MGM employees. (I briefly believed the woman at far right might be Joan Crawford, but I doubt it since she was one of the few people at MGM who didn’t like Harlow.)
And speaking of Jean, some more news about the upcoming “Harlow In Hollywood” book that we mentioned two weeks ago (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/361053.html).
The special pre-order offer we noted earlier — not only can you save 30 percent off the $50 list price, but authors Mark A. Vieira and Darrell Rooney will personalize your copies — will now be available through Dec. 31 from the publisher, Angel City Press. To find out more, go to http://www.angelcitypress.com/harlorder.shtml.
Finally, a photo that isn’t expressly about Christmas…but it does show a young Myrna Loy with a reindeer fresh from the Russian steppes. (And just what is that item Myrna is feeding him?)
This looks to be from the late 1920s, when Loy was a Warners starlet. Silly, but charming.
A merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night — but before we go, how about one more song of the season? This may be the holiday song most associated with Frank Sinatra, since he recorded it a number of times, “The Christmas Waltz.” He did it twice for Capitol; I believe this is the 1957 version, from his album “A Jolly Christmas.” And as the song says, may your New Year’s dreams come true.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
ombard & classic Hollywood
Swing high, swing higher, swing highest
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.24 at 01:03
Current mood: artistic
Here are some Carole Lombard items you won’t be able to give in time for Christmas (BTW, do you like the holiday-themed avatar?), but if the Lombard fan on your list is especially fond of “Swing High, Swing Low,” he or she won’t mind if they’re a bit tardy. For these are a trio of original 8″ x 10″ photographs from the film, Paramount’s biggest moneymaker for all of 1937; two of them even have the snipes on the back (explaining why this seller begins bids on each of them at $125, and possibly also why none have received a bid as of this writing).
Above is the photo that lacks a snipe, but it’s a lovely image just the same, with Carole pensively portraying singer Maggie King. It will be available until 1:33 a.m. (Eastern) Christmas morning, about the time some of you on the East Coast may be spying on Santa. Find it at http://cgi.ebay.com/Vint-8×10-Photo-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Swing-High-Swing-Low-/250746015147?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a61a08dab. (Please note this seller will only ship to U.S. addresses.)
Next, a familiar, leggy Lombard pose, with the snipe below:
It reads, “SPANGLES FOR CAROLE! La Lombard appears as a nightclub singer in Paramount’s ‘Swing High, Swing Low,’ thrilling ‘ups and downs’ love story in which she is seen with Fred MacMurray. Carole sings several numbers as a part of her glamorous role opposite MacMurray. They are seen together for the third time.”
Bids on this close three minutes later than the first photo. Learn more at http://cgi.ebay.com/Vint-8×10-Photo-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Swing-High-Swing-Low-/250746015685?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a61a08fc5.
And here’s the third pic, with MacMurray joining her:
The seller lists this as a George Hurrell portrait, which it well may be; by that time, he was freelancing and not under contract to any particular studio, and Paramount may have sought his services for what it saw as a top-of-the-line feature. Here’s the snipe:
“TENDERLY ROMANTIC — there are a lot of sad moments in the lives of Carole Lombard, cabaret singer, and Fred MacMurray, ex-soldier who is a genius on the trumpet, in Paramount’s ‘Swing High, Swing Low.’ But there are a lot of laughs, too, as they find the key to romance and then throw it away. They’re together for the third time in this production.”
Bids on this close at 1:40 a.m. (Eastern) Christmas morn. To bid, or get more information, check out http://cgi.ebay.com/Vint-8×10-Photo-CAROLE-LOMBARD-FRED-MacMURRAY-Hurrell-/320633765255?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aa742fd87.
To close this entry, a song of the season — the 2009 version of a tradition on David Letterman’s show, Darlene Love’s wonderful “Christmas (Baby Please Come Home).” And in case you haven’t heard the news, Love will be among the latest class of inductees into the Rock ‘n’ Roll Hall of Fame, an honor well deserved. Enjoy, and merry Christmas.
Rumors, rumors
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.23 at 01:11
Current mood: confused
It’s a few days before Christmas, 1940 — Dec. 20, to be exact. And that morning, at a certain home in Encino, Calif., one wishes we could have seen the reaction of its two occupants to this Jimmie Fidler item kicking off his syndicated column, which ran locally in the Los Angeles Times:
For those of you not wishing to double-click, this particular item reads:
“The sort of rumors I hate to hear are coming out Lombard-Gable way, with an important decision due to be made soon by Carole…”
What kind of decision, hundreds of thousands of movie fans probably wondered? Carole Lombard and Clark Gable were arguably the number-one couple in town (apologies to Barbara Stanwyck and Robert Taylor, Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier, and a few other duos), and the phrase “rumors I hate to hear” likely led to all sorts of conjecture.
Was their marriage, now nearing 21 months, on the rocks? (Perhaps Lombard’s decision, some thought, was to do what she had done with her marriage to William Powell more than seven years earlier — end it.) Or was Carole, who paradoxically had occasional health problems despite her athleticism, feeling under the weather once more? Whatever, Fidler made it appear Lombard’s mood more reflected the icy photo below than the cheerful one above:
Dec. 20 was a Friday, and it’s entirely possible that if either Carole or Clark ventured outside the Encino ranch that day, someone may have asked them about what Fidler wrote; they probably responded with a “no comment” or something to that effect. (One doubts that close friends of the couple would have asked such a question in the first place.)
As we now know, less than a week after this appeared, on Dec. 26, Lombard and Gable boarded an eastbound train in Pasadena…
…changed trains in Chicago…
…and wound up in Washington. There they saw the usual tourist attractions of the nation’s capital — the Washington Monument, the Capitol, Mount Vernon in nearby Virginia — but they also met President Franklin D. Roosevelt and watched him deliver one of his more notable “fireside chats” (specifically his “arsenal of democracy” speech). They would come back to D.C. in about a week after spending several days in Baltimore at Johns Hopkins Hospital:
Publicly, it was to examine Clark’s injured shoulder, but many years later it was discovered the real purpose of the trip was to discover why the couple had been unable to conceive.
Did Fidler know this? I can’t imagine the Gables would have disclosed such private information to anybody, much less a Hollywood columnist. On the other hand, this may have been a story Carole concocted to throw the public a curve before the trip east; by now, both she and Clark knew how the publicity game was played. If it was the latter case, the ruse worked.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Three from the early ’30s
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.22 at 08:19
Current mood: 
indescribable
Here are a triumvirate of Carole Lombard items from the early 1930s, her initial years at Paramount, being auctioned at eBay.
First, this image from 1930, p1202-76:
It’s an original photo, a lovely pose of Lombard in a gown. There is a significant tear on the left side, but other than that, it’s in very good condition.
This item is being auctioned with a starting bid of $24.99, but hurry; bidding closes at 7:43 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. To find out more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1930s-vint-CAROLE-LOMBARD-stunning-GLAMOR-photo-/270680975720?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f05d7e968.
In 1930, Lombard began her Paramount tenure with a supporting role in the Charles “Buddy” Rogers vehicle “Safety In Numbers.” A glass slide promoting the film is now available:
There’s a crack in the slide and assorted smudges (including one near Lombard’s eye), but otherwise it’s in decent shape for its 80-year-old age.
You can buy the slide straight up for $9.59 (marked down from $11.99), or make an offer. The sale closes at 1:49 p.m. (Eastern) Thursday, and for those who collect Lombard slides, this would be a rare addition. Learn more at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Buddy-Rogers-MAGIClanternGLASS-SLIDE1930-/130466491119?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item1e6068aaef.
Finally, Carole (by now with “e” in her first name) and car:
It’s Paramount p1202-322, probably taken on the studio lot. (The seller believes the photo to be from 1935, but the number on the photo — and her hairstyle — indicates it’s probably from about 1932.) I believe it’s a reproduction, not an original, but we know it’s an 8″ x 10″ glossy.
Bidding opens at $6.99 (no bids have been made as of this writing), with bids closing at 2:30 p.m. (Eastern) Thursday. Check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Leans-Her-Car-Candid-Photo-/380299975910?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588ba51ce6.
Carole, Marlene and…
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.21 at 08:43
Current mood: impressed
who?
![]()
Two of the three ladies in this photo are 1930s icons, Paramount stars and symbols of glamour. (Thanks to Tally for her work on this picture.) But just who is that in between Carole Lombard and Marlene Dietrich?
The answer: Someone you may have heard of, but don’t recognize. She was well-known on the Hollywood party circuit (this photo was taken at Dietrich’s Beverly Hills house in 1935), though she wasn’t in the movies herself. But her son certainly was…
That shot of Clifton Webb is from the trailer for the 1944 Twentieth Century-Fox film “Laura,” where he plays acerbic writer Waldo Lydecker (gaining the first of his two Academy Award nominations). Webb was renowned for his devotion to his mother, Maybelle Webb; while that devotion may have been genuine (she battled tirelessly with producers and directors to boost Clifton’s career), it’s possible that some of that devotion was designed as a deflection against his status as a gay man.
Maybelle Webb remained a Hollywood party fixture into the late 1950s, and died in 1960 at age 91. Friend Noel Coward said of her son, “It must be tough to be orphaned at seventy-one.” Webb somehow managed, dying in 1966.
This 11″ x 14″ photo is being auctioned at eBay, with bids beginning at $24.88 (none have been made as of this writing); bidding closes at 6:09 p.m. (Eastern) Wednesday. To find out more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Movie-Star-MARLENE-DIETRICH-Carole-Lombard-14-RP-/380299722544?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item588ba13f30.
Here’s another photo Tally worked on:
![]()
We don’t know who’s with Carole, but we do know where (and when) the picture was taken. It was taken in 1933, on the set of “White Woman.” I’m guessing the guests with Lombard are from India or someplace in south Asia, examining a film set in southeast Asia.
This photo is also being auctioned at eBay. One bid, for $19.99, has already been made as of this writing. You don’t have much time to get involved, since bidding closes at 1:58 p.m. (Eastern) today — but if you’re interested in this original 8″ x 10″ doubleweight photo, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-SEXY-DBLWT-Original-8×10-Photo-/400181021508?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2ca5cb44.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Lombard, Loy, etc. — fabulous!
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.20 at 00:30
Current mood: satisfied
“My story is much too sad to be told,
But practically ev’rything leaves me totally cold
The only exception I know is the case
When I’m out on a quiet spree
Fighting vainly the old ennui
And I suddenly turn and see
Your fabulous face…”
— “I Get A Kick Out Of You,” Cole Porter
That last line (notably in Frank Sinatra’s 1953 version of the standard) invariably conjures up thoughts of this book, among the first books I purchased after I developed an interest in Carole Lombard:
It’s called “More Fabulous Faces,” and it was written by Larry Carr in 1979 as a followup to his successful “Four Fabulous Faces,” which had been issued nine years earlier:
That first book examined Joan Crawford, Marlene Dietrich, Greta Garbo and Gloria Swanson; in the sequel, Lombard gets similar treatment, along with Bette Davis, Dolores Del Rio, Katharine Hepburn and Myrna Loy. (When the books were issued, Carole was the only one of the nine stars no longer living.)
Each profile features dozens of photos of the actress (the Lombard segment has 154 pics of her), along with detailed discussions of how her look evolved over the years. (Carr interviewed Loy, and her thoughts are particularly illuminating.)
As one reviewer to amazon.com wrote in 2005:
I’ve always felt Davis and Hepburn may have been included for their still being household names and good selling points for the book, though they certainly deserve to be in here, Carr is clearly not as enthusiastic about them as the other ladies and Davis particularly gets a bit of criticism that is sound but seems a little inappropriate given the way he praises Del Rio, Loy, and Lombard to the skies.
Since Lombard and Loy are my two all-time favorite actresses, I’m not complaining.
Now, you can get “More Fabulous Faces,” as it’s available at eBay. Bids start at $8.99 (none have been made as of this writing), and bidding closes at 8:16 p.m. (Eastern) Wednesday. The 265-page book is considered to be in very good condition. To bid, or learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/MORE-FABULOUS-FACES-BETTE-DAVIS-CAROLE-LOMBARD-1ST-BOOK-/330508951811?pt=US_Nonfiction_Book&hash=item4cf3de6103.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
The roles she never took
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.19 at 06:28
Current mood: curious
All of us have roads not taken, directions we decided not to follow. The same is certainly true for actors, and a site I’ve just discovered, “Crawley’s Casting Calls” (http://crawleyscastingcalls.com), leads us on the roles actors — for one reason or another — didn’t play.
Tony Crawley, who has written several film books, has compiled a list of film and TV roles not played by more than 4,000 actors…and yes, Carole Lombard is one of them. He lists 25 movies Lombard didn’t take part in for one reason or another, everything from “The Gold Rush” to the movie she had planned to do at the time of her death, “They All Kissed The Bride.”
And while 25 is a pretty good number considering her relatively brief life, it pales in comparison to some other actors. According to Crawley, Marlon Brando was part of 128 projects he ultimately never made, followed by 110 for Jack Nicholson and 102 for Cary Grant. Tops among actresses is Bette Davis, with 57; Elizabeth Taylor, 53; and Julie Christie, 52.
The Lombard list contains several projects you normally don’t associate with her, such as:
* “A Bill Of Divorcement” (1932). While Katharine Hepburn’s screen test for her film debut supposedly didn’t thrill either producer David O. Selznick or director George Cukor (ironic, since Hepburn would wind up making 10 films with him), Carole’s test was apparently even worse.
* “Peter Ibbetson” (1935). Had Sidney Franklin directed this film, Lombard would have played Gary Cooper’s lover…but Henry Hathaway went behind the camera instead and selected Ann Harding for the part.
* “Exclusive” (1937). Carole would have played a newspaper reporter, with Fred MacMurray a scribe for a rival daily. She turned it down (whether she was dissatisfied with the script or didn’t want to team up once more with MacMurray is uncertain), and Frances Farmer got the part.
* “You And Me” (1938). This film, written by Norman Krasna, was to have co-starred Carole and George Raft — and he was to have directed as well, which neither Raft nor Lombard wanted. The film was ultimately directed by Fritz Lang at the behest of Sylvia Sidney, who at the time was the mistress of Paramount mogul B.P. Schulberg.
* “Bringing Up Baby” (1938). Reportedly Howard Hawks wanted Carole, whom he’d worked with in “Twentieth Century,” to play flighty heiress Susan Vance, but things couldn’t be worked out so he settled for Hepburn instead. (Imagine an alternate movie universe where Lombard is in “Bringing Up Baby” and Kate has Carole’s part in “In Name Only,” made in 1939.)
Some of these stories may be hearsay, and there are a few errors that undermine the reader’s confidence (Crawley writes that Lombard’s fatal plane crash took off from Texas, and that she was 34 at the time of her death). One story in particular lends itself to controversy; it deals with the film “The Greeks Had A Word For Them” (1932).
That’s Madge Evans, Joan Blondell and Ina Claire as the three gold-diggers in this Samuel Goldwyn adaptation of the Broadway comedy “The Greeks Had A Word For It” (the title was altered because the original was on the Hays Office list of banned titles). According to Crawley, Carole was initially envisioned in the part Blondell wound up with:
“Producer Samuel Goldwyn gave the role to Ina Claire, but shopped around for a dizzier blonde. Warned off Jean Harlow, he borrowed Paramount’s Profane Angel — too sick to continue after two weeks. Enter: Blondell. ‘Nobody believed she was sick,’ says Claire, sick, herself, at being relegated to a smaller role. ‘I think she knew it was a lousy movie and just wanted out.’ Other rumours insisted Carole was away aborting a baby by William Powell, Harlow’s final lover.”
A “lousy movie”? While hardly a classic, “The Greeks Had A Word For Them” is generally considered a decent pre-Code comedy. (When the film was aired on TV, its title was further bowdlerized into “The Three Broadway Girls.”) But what’s especially intriguing from a Lombard perspective are the intimations that she had an abortion…something no biographer of her has alleged.
It’s known that several years later, Powell impregnated Harlow, who had an abortion; of course, they were not married. (It’s also been claimed that Harlow’s mother forced Jean to abort, and that Powell was unaware of the pregnancy.) And at about that time, Lombard declined marrying screenwriter Robert Riskin because she wanted children and he didn’t.
“The Greeks Had A Word For Them” was released in February 1932, less than eight months after Powell and Lombard had married. This leads to all sorts of conjecture, especially since it’s known that studios in that era often used the cover of “illness” to allow — or coerce — their actresses to have abortions.
That Lombard and Powell remained close following their 1933 divorce leads one to believe that either an abortion never happened or she may have become pregnant prior to their marriage. (It also might have explained her inability to become pregnant during her marriage to Clark Gable; a poorly-performed abortion left Jane Russell unable to have children, to her lifelong regret.)
The list of Lombard films she didn’t appear in can be found at http://crawleyscastingcalls.com/index.php?option=com_actors&Itemid=56&id=1840&lettre=L. (A similar list for Miriam Hopkins has 14 movies, four of which Carole ultimately starred in.) Take the comments with a grain of salt, but conjecture is always fascinating.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Honoring Jean’s birthday…just not on her birthday
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.18 at 07:19
Current mood: nostalgic
It’s been said timing is everything, and for proof, witness how Turner Classic Movies is honoring the centenaries of two of Hollywood’s blonde goddesses. On Oct. 6, 2008 — 100 years to the day Carole Lombard was born — TCM in the U.S. ran several of her movies. Come March 3, 2011 — the 100th anniversary of Jean Harlow’s birth — TCM isn’t showing anything starring Harlow.
It’s just Jean’s luck that March 3 closes out TCM’s annual “31 Days Of Oscar,” showing films that were either nominated for or won Academy Awards. The “31 days” theme made sense when the ceremonies were held in March, but now, more often than not they take place in February, and perhaps “28 Days Of Oscar” just doesn’t have the same ring to it. (Memo to Harlow: In your next life, choose a better birth date.)
But if this seems as if TCM were neglecting Jean, far from it. The original blonde bombshell, whose look even Lombard briefly tried to emulate (albeit not in the platinum sense), will be TCM’s Star of the Month in March, just as Harlow’s good friend Carole was in October 2008. And the schedule of Jean’s films has just been released; they will air Tuesdays, from March 8 to 29.
People who consider Harlow merely a Marilyn Monroe prototype (an inaccurate perception; Monroe was emotionally more of a blonde Clara Bow, as both had hard-scrabble backgrounds compared to the comfortably middle-class Jean) will get a better idea of what Harlow was about from these 19 films. Curiously, “Hell’s Angels” — the film that put her on the map — isn’t in the package, and neither are early rarities such as “Iron Man” and “Goldie.” But what TCM is showing more than compensates.
March 8
* 8 p.m. — Red-Headed Woman (1932). The film that convinced people Harlow could act; a pre-Code classic. With Chester Morris and Una Merkel.
* 9:30 p.m. — Three Wise Girls (1932). Perhaps the rarest of the Harlow films to be shown, this unites Jean with Mae Clarke and Marie Prevost as gold-diggers. (Sounds like a lower-tier version of “The Greeks Had A Word For Them,” a film for which Harlow and Lombard were once announced as cast members.)
* 10:45 p.m. — Riffraff (1936). Jean with Spencer Tracy as young marrieds in the fishing business.
* 12:30 a.m. — Suzy (1936). World War I intrigue with Cary Grant, who didn’t really become a top-rank star until after Harlow’s death in mid-1937, and Franchot Tone.
March 15
* 8 p.m. — The Public Enemy (1931). This is really a James Cagney film, with Harlow as window dressing (and little more), but it’s a gangster gem, and features the famed grapefruit scene with Clarke.
* 9:30 p.m. — Bombshell (1933). Jean gently sends up Clara Bow, with whom she’d worked in 1929’s “The Saturday Night Kid,” in this Hollywood satire, with Lee Tracy and Frank Morgan.
* 11:15 p.m. — Libeled Lady (1936). Pure MGM star power (Harlow! Myrna Loy! William Powell! Spencer Tracy!) is on display in this splendid newspaper comedy. Harlow does a fine comedic turn here, and enjoy Powell’s fishing scene.
* 1 a.m. — Reckless (1935). Harlow’s other film with Powell (Tone’s in it, too) is a backstage drama, including Rosalind Russell in one of her early roles.
* 2:45 a.m. — Personal Property (1937). Jean’s next to last film, a comedy co-starring Robert Taylor in which the bailiff charged with disposing of a financially strapped widow’s estate pretends to be her butler.
March 22
* 8 p.m. — Wife vs. Secretary (1936). This night’s schedule is devoted to Harlow’s films with Clark Gable (they had incredible on-screen sexual chemistry, but off-screen they were close pals, never lovers). This opener adds Myrna Loy as well, along with a young James Stewart as Harlow’s boyfriend.
* 9:45 p.m. — Red Dust (1932). Clark and Jean light up the screen with this steamy pre-Code offering set in Indochina, directed by Victor Fleming and co-starring Mary Astor.
* 11:15 p.m. — Hold Your Man (1933). Harlow’s a hard-boiled babe, Gable’s a con man; they wear down each other’s rough edges. This film also reflects racial attitudes of the time — to learn more, go to http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/174666.html.
* 1 a.m. — China Seas (1935). This film tries to emulate the steam of “Red Dust,” albeit in a defanged post-Code manner; Jean plays a character nicknamed “China Doll.” Russell and Wallace Beery round out the cast.
* 2:30 a.m. — The Secret Six (1931). When this gangster tale was made, Jean was still essentially eye candy and Clark a rough-hewn sort. Beery is the lead in this story of a secret society.
* 4 a.m. — Saratoga (1937). Harlow’s final film (she died midway through production, and Mary Dees doubled for her in much of the footage). Also featuring Lionel Barrymore.
March 29
* 8 p.m. — Dinner At Eight (1933). This was MGM’s 1933 equivalent of “Grand Hotel,” its all-star production of the previous year. It wasn’t as big an award-winner, but is nonetheless plenty of fun, with Beery, John Barrymore and Marie Dressler (watch for her closing repartee with Harlow). Directed by George Cukor.
* 10 p.m. — The Girl From Missouri (1934). Once the Production Code was enforced in mid-1934, MGM tried to preserve Harlow’s appeal; this was its first attempt. With Tone and Lionel Barrymore.
* 11:30 p.m. — Platinum Blonde (1931). Jean’s the title character in this early Frank Capra film — she’s all of 20 here, but older than Loretta Young, a mere 18. Robert Williams steals the movie as a reporter; had he not died shortly after this hit theaters, he might have rivaled Gable and Cagney among the top male stars of the early ’30s.
* 1:15 a.m. — The Beast Of The City (1932). An important transitional film for Harlow, who heretofore had shown sex appeal and little more. She holds her own in this gangster drama starring Walter Huston, and it helped secure her an MGM contract.
All in all, a nice way to remember one of filmdom’s most beloved ladies, a sweet sex symbol with a sense of humor.
‘…a bittersweet image’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.17 at 00:19
Current mood: contemplative
We know that in the mid-1930s, Carole Lombard took some flying lessons and posed for several publicity photos near a plane (
http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/64412.html) — images that cause a twinge of unease today, knowing her fate. One more such photo has since emerged:
It’s p1202-1171, issued in early 1936. We also have the snipe, shown on the reverse:
As the seller of this photo notes, it’s “a joyous and sexy, but bittersweet image since this radiant star would die in a plane crash.”
The photo is 8″ x 10″, with slight creasing. Two bids have already been made, the highest at $13.49, and bidding will end at 4:10 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. If you are interested in owning this rare image, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Vintage-pinup-photo-airplane-1936-/370458287581?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item564108dddd.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Yule cheer for this ‘new’ Christmas Carol(e)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.16 at 00:57
Current mood: jubilant
Greetings from central Virginia, where we are currently experiencing the season’s second snowfall — and we’re expecting a few inches when all is said and done. Come January and February, such precipitation will seem annoying…but for now, it’s sort of thrilling, because it helps one get in the Christmas mood. (Ironic, that, since it likely wasn’t snowing when and where the event Christmas celebrates occurred.)
Anyway, in honor of the season, a previously unseen holiday photo with Carole Lombard, from the Ace Photos site featured here earlier this month (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/359675.html):
I’m almost certain this was taken during the late 1920s, either for Pathe or for Mack Sennett. In other Christmas photos of the time Lombard wore the Santa suit, but here some other starlet has the honors. (If anyone can identify either of the two women with Carole, it would be greatly appreciated.) There’s a number in the upper left-hand corner, which I believe reads “1927”; if that indicates when it was taken, this is almost certainly a Sennett photo, as Lombard didn’t begin working with Pathe until 1928.
Whatever, it’s a charming image, one I’d never seen before. Here’s wishing you and yours a splendid holiday.
Hollywood examines its tragedies, 1936
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.15 at 02:49
Current mood: melancholy
As was noted in Sunday’s entry at “Carole & Co.” (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/361274.html), today marks the 80th anniversary of the death of Carole Lombard’s close friend Diane Ellis, who worked with her at Pathe in the late 1920s, then rejoined her at Paramount the following year. Ellis, who had married in October 1930 after completing “Laughter” with Nancy Carroll, took a world tour on her honeymoon, fell ill in India and died in Madras.
That, and other tragedies involving friends of hers, led Lombard to believe she was some sort of jinx, adding an undercurrent of melancholy to her otherwise joyous personality — a part of her psyche that only amplified after Russ Columbo died in a freak accident on Labor Day weekend 1934.
This week also marks the 75th anniversary of the mysterious, still-unsolved death of Thelma Todd, popular star of many Hal Roach short comedies. The Los Angeles Times’ fine blog “The Daily Mirror” has reprinted many Times articles about the incident over the past few days (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/thelma-todd-1/.), and one of them holds particular fascination from our perspective.
It comes from the Times Sunday magazine of Jan. 19, 1936, barely a month after Todd’s death and only weeks after 1920s star John Gilbert had died of a heart attack. It led many film fans to wonder whether tragedy and the industry were inherent partners. In “Does Tragedy Haunt Hollywood?”, writer Gerald R. Burtnett said no, that such sudden deaths only received such scrutiny because of the victims’ fame:
(To read the article at full size, go to http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/files/1936_0119_todd01.jpg and http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/files/1936_0119_todd02.jpg.)
Burtnett examines an array of mysterious or sudden film-related deaths that had occurred over the past 14 years, beginning with the still-unsolved murder of director William Desmond Taylor. (Faulty copy editing inadvertently omitted his full name on first reference.) Ellis, a comparatively minor player who had only made a handful of films, isn’t mentioned, but other notables are — Mabel Normand, Rudolph Valentino, Paul Bern, Lilyan Tashman, Will Rogers.
Some observations:
* Not only is Columbo’s death noted, so is the ruse used by family and friends to prevent his ailing mother from knowing he had passed on. It’s amazing this news was made public, and in today’s society of instant mass communication, such an endeavor would be impossible to try.
* Lew Cody, who died unexpectedly in the summer of 1934, had ties to two others who left too soon. He had been married to Normand, who died in February 1930, and his final film, “Shoot The Works,” was also the swan song for Dorothy Dell, who died the same month in an auto accident at age 19. (Lombard would replace Dell as the female lead in “Now And Forever.”)
* Burtnett repeats the canard about Gilbert’s high-pitched voice giving him trouble in talkies; actually, his downfall was tied more to the public’s changing styles and tastes than his voice, which was at the very least adequate and suited to his personality. Either Burtnett didn’t know, or didn’t want to relate, MGM mogul Louis B. Mayer’s vendetta against Gilbert.
Whatever, it’s fascinating to see how Hollywood viewed itself in early 1936. One can imagine it being read that Sunday by Lombard and good friend Jean Harlow…and both would be added to this tragic list within six years.
Incidentally, Ellis’ final film, “Laughter,” can be found online at YouTube. Here’s part one of eight:
See Yanks and Bucs, thanks to Bing
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.14 at 02:44
Current mood: thankful
Carole Lombard made only one film with Bing Crosby, “We’re Not Dressing,” but she was an avid fan of his music and liked him a great deal. Both also enjoyed sports, including horse racing and baseball.
So if Lombard the baseball fan were around today, she would likely be thrilled that thanks to Crosby, a broadcast of one of the greatest games ever played, once thought lost, has been preserved…and the public can now see it.
In the 1940s, Crosby became part-owner of the Pittsburgh Pirates. (He’s shown chatting with Bucs coach and Hall of Fame shortstop Honus Wagner before a game at Forbes Field.) But when the long-suffering Pirates — whose last pennant had come in 1927, not long after Bing had begun recording — finally reached the promised land of the World Series in 1960, Crosby, fearing himself a jinx, decided to vacation in Europe. However, when it reached a seventh game, he hired a company to record it by kinescope, on 16mm film.
Bing presumably watched it when he got back, as the Pirates won the title by beating the Yankees 10-9 on what we would now call a walk-off homer by Bill Mazeroski, a second baseman better known for his defensive wizardry.
Crosby stored the five film reels with other tapes and films of his work in his wine cellar…but no one was aware they existed until last December, when Robert Bader, vice president of Bing Crosby Entertainment, came across them and discovered they were in pristine condition.
The MLB Network will air the game in its entirety at 8 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. To accompany the telecast, host Bob Costas will interview some of the surviving players from both teams along with actor (and avid Pirate fan) Michael Keaton. (The game will later be available on DVD.) At 7:30, the channel will air “Bing And Baseball,” a look back on Crosby’s ownership of the Pirates and his interest in baseball.
The game, shown on NBC more than 50 years ago, is a fascinating artifact. It was played at Forbes Field, one of the landmark ballparks of yore, and broadcast by the Yankees’ Mel Allen and the Pirates’ Bob Prince, two of the greats in the booth. Managing was New York’s Casey Stengel and Pittsburgh’s Danny Murtaugh.
And the players? The Yanks featured Mickey Mantle, Roger Maris (in the first of his two MVP seasons, the year before he hit 61 homers), Bobby Richardson (who would be named the Series MVP, the only time it has gone to a player on a losing team), Yogi Berra and Elston Howard. The Pirates had Roberto Clemente (then a star, but not fully appreciated until another World Series 11 years later), Dick Groat and Hal Smith, whose three-run homer in the eighth had put Pittsburgh ahead until the Yanks rallied to tie in the ninth. (New York lost the Series despite outscoring the Pirates 55-27.)
It also marked the end of an era of sorts. Stengel was fired after the Series by the Yankees, whose management feared he was getting too old. Before October ended, baseball — whose major leagues had been at 16 teams since 1901 — decided to expand, if only to derail Branch Rickey’s proposed Continental League. After some initial uncertainty (interleague play was even brought up as a possibility!), it was decided the American League would expand to 10 teams in 1961, with the National League doing likewise in 1962. Stengel would resurface with the NL’s expansion Mets, who temporarily moved into the Polo Grounds, the upper Manhattan stadium the Giants had vacated to move to San Francisco.
This unique photo shows University of Pittsburgh students cheering on the Pirates from the university’s famed “cathedral of learning” near the Pitt campus. After Forbes Field was torn down, the university built a library on the site…preserving the left-field wall Mazeroski’s homer sailed over.
It should make for fun watching Wednesday night, especially for Pirates fans (their team hasn’t had a winning season since 1992, the longest such drought in MLB history). And we owe it all to the foresight of Bing Crosby.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole and Ginger had nothing to ‘Hyde’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.13 at 03:45
Current mood: 
scared
They were two of Hollywood’s beauties of the 1930s, and for a while both were stablemates at RKO. But if a note from a column in 1940 is true, both Carole Lombard and Ginger Rogers had an opportunity to star in a film genre far removed from comedies or musicals…opposite one of the great leading men in film history.
Here’s syndicated columnist Jimmie Fidler, as seen in the Los Angeles Times of Dec. 11, 1940:
The item in question is at the top of the fourth paragraph:
“Both Carole Lombard and Ginger Rogers have turned down the fem lead in ‘Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,’ in which M.G.M. will star Spencer Tracy…” (Also note Fidler’s comment about Lombard later in the column.)
Interesting, because Lombard was at Paramount in 1932, the previous time “Jekyll & Hyde” was filmed (with Fredric March as the title characters), but as far as I know she was not considered for Ivy, the female prostitute in that version. (It went to Miriam Hopkins, shown below with March.)
I’ll leave it to the several fine Ginger Rogers blogs to discuss why she didn’t take the part, but from Lombard’s perspective, she may have believed:
1) It was too minor, and “reactive,” a role;
2) She wanted no part of the horror genre after the 1933 fiasco that was “Supernatural”;
3) If she was going to work at husband Clark Gable’s studio, she wanted an “A”-level vehicle of her own. (Why this never happened remains a mystery; maybe Louis B. Mayer believed Carole didn’t fit MGM’s middle American image, or perhaps he was reluctant to give Gable added power at the studio by hiring his wife.); and
4) Lombard, now past 30, deemed herself too old for the part. (Ivy was transformed from a prostitute to a barmaid to placate Joseph Breen.)
The film might have worked with Lombard in the role, and it would have been great to see Carole sharing a screen with Tracy. But, as we all know, the part was ultimately played by the young Swedish import, Ingrid Bergman, shown below with Tracy and Lana Turner as the fiancée. (Some reports state that the original casting for the MGM film was Turner as Ivy and Bergman as the fiancée, but Bergman persuaded her co-star that swapping roles would allow them both to show their range.)
The film was released in September 1941 and became a substantial hit.
But while Lombard may have rejected the film, she couldn’t completely escape from it. In March 1941, Gable’s good friend Tracy appeared at Clark and Carole’s second anniversary party on the MGM lot…in Hyde make-up.
Doggin’ around for ‘High Voltage’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.12 at 08:08
Current mood: melancholy
We haven’t checked the eBay roster of Carole Lombard items for several days, so let’s see some of the new goodies that are available.
Carole’s fondness for animals was well known, and in this Paramount publicity still she proves it by giving a dachshund a treat. (Given that breed’s build, it must really be hungry to stand up like that!) I’m not sure whether this is Commissioner, Lombard’s beloved dachshund; it’s p1202-616, meaning this was likely taken about 1933 or ’34, and I have no idea whether Commissioner was around then.
Anyway, this is an 8″ x 10″ doubleweight photo, not an original but printed from the original negative, according to the seller. Bids begin at $14.95; as of this writing, no one has bid on it yet, and bidding closes at 9:21 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. Interested? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-Dog-RARE-1930s-DBW-CANDID-PHOTO-/330480575658?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf22d64aa.
Next are a pair of stills from Lombard’s first all-talking film, 1929’s “High Voltage.” They are from the estate of a New Jersey theater owner (the seller hails from Bergen County, just across the Hudson from New York City), and both are stunning:
What also makes these photos special is the presence of Lombard’s good friend, Diane Ellis (the top photo in particular is as good an image as I’ve ever seen of her). Both actresses were released from Pathe’s roster before the end of 1929, likely because both were blondes who too closely resembled new signee Constance Bennett. Both ended up at Paramount, with Ellis providing spark to the 1930 Nancy Carroll film “Laughter.”
That October, Ellis married wealthy New Yorker Stephen Caldwell Millett Jr. in Paris, and they traveled the world on their honeymoon. While in India in early December, Ellis contracted a disease and died on Dec. 15 — 80 years ago Wednesday, five days before she would have turned 21.
The photos, 8″ x 10″ originals, are being sold as a pair for $8.98 — and surprisingly, as of this writing, no bids have been made. Bidding will close at 9:13 p.m. (Eastern) Monday. If you want to get in on the action, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/YOUNG-Carole-Lombard-1929-Movie-Photos-High-Voltage-/250738910326?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a61342476.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Hooray…’Harlow In Hollywood’ is on the horizon
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.11 at 08:06
Current mood: happy
Each were icons of their era, one for her comedic style, the other as a sex symbol (although both could also excel in the other’s perceived domain). They shared friendships and romances with some of entertainment’s most renowned men. Both endured personal tragedies, and sadly, neither would live to one-third of a century.
And both were close friends, with generous, loving personalities that made them among the most beloved figures in Hollywood.
March 3 will mark the centenary of Carole Lombard’s pal Jean Harlow. We’ve previously noted that a book on Jean by Mark A. Vieira and Darrell Rooney will be issued on that date; now, we can tell you more about it. The book’s official title is “Harlow In Hollywood: The Blonde Bombshell in the Glamour Capital, 1928-1937,” and here’s the cover:
Really captures Jean’s spirit, doesn’t it? (Incidentally, according to Rooney, the title and Harlow’s silhouette will be embossed with a slight sheen.)
The book will measure 9″ x 12″, with 280 photographs (many of them previously unseen publicly) throughout its 240 pages. It’s to be published by Angel City Press, and beginning Tuesday, you can pre-order the book at a 30 percent discount from its $50 price, and get it autographed. Go to http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=112797408763424&v=wall, and according to Rooney, a link will be up in a few days (the discount will last through Dec. 23).
But wait, there’s more! To tie into the book’s release and Harlow’s centenary, the Max Factor Museum will hold a Harlow exhibit beginning March 3 and continuing through Labor Day weekend. (Factor helped Harlow refine her look — though it may not be indicative from the picture below — and in 1935, when he opened his headquarters which is now the museum, Jean christened the “Blonde Room.”)
The exhibit will include the Packard Jean owned and drove, along with the first-ever public viewing of the famed 1932 mural Paul Bern gave Jean as a wedding present (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/48066.html):
Incidentally, the book will have a color photo of the mural. (A book signing is also planned at the Club View Drive house Harlow called home.)
All in all, a great way to celebrate the centennial of the birth of one of filmdom’s most iconic ladies. Now if we could only find that holy grail — a photo of Harlow and Lombard together…
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole, Thelma and roads not taken
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.10 at 09:01
Current mood: contemplative
Carole Lombard and Thelma Todd were both beautiful blondes blessed with wonderful comedic ability, and accidents caused both of them to leave us much too soon. And while their career paths rarely crossed during their too-brief lifetimes, it’s certainly possible to envision circumstances where one might have followed in the other’s path. We’ve previously discussed how things might have been if Todd had went in Lombard’s direction; now, let’s flip things the other way.
That’s Lombard during her days at Mack Sennett, when she was part of their “bathing beauties” troupe appearing in many two-reelers. She learned a lot about comedic timing during her tenure there, but truth be told, Sennett had seen better days; his influence was waning even before sound had come on the scene.
In contrast, Sennett’s principal rival in the short comedy field, Hal Roach, was going strong thanks to the likes of Laurel & Hardy, Charley Chase and others. Todd appeared in both acts’ films, and soon was starring in a series of her own.
Had Sennett been as well off as Roach, might he have tried to do with Lombard what Roach did with Todd? It’s known that Mack respected Carole’s skills, beauty and commercial potential, and with sufficient resources (and vision), he might have designed a series for her. That wouldn’t have ensured Lombard would have accepted such a deal, though she was certainly fond of Sennett.
Or imagine Lombard, not Todd, portraying the “Margaret Dumont with sex appeal” role in “Monkey Business” or “Horse Feathers.” Heck, Paramount might have saved some money, since in 1931 and ’32, it already had Carole under contract. Of course, at that time, Lombard was not deemed a comedic actress by the studio (despite her earlier work with Sennett); heck, it could be argued Paramount didn’t deem her anything yet.
We bring this up because we are approaching the 75th anniversary of the still-unsolved death of Todd, and the “Daily Mirror” blog of the Los Angeles Times is looking back on the tragic incident and the newspaper’s ensuing coverage. It’s worth checking out for any Todd fan (she will be among the artists spotlighted in Turner Classic Movies’ January tribute to Roach). To see the Times Todd series, go to http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/thelma-todd-1/.
It’s a wonderful museum; help keep it going
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.09 at 07:24
Current mood: hopeful
Had Carole Lombard lived longer, it’s a good bet she would have made more than one film with James Stewart. They teamed up for a few radio productions — and ironically, while each appeared on a “Lux Radio Theater” adaptation of “Made For Each Other,” neither was with each other — and while “Made For Each Other,” the movie, certainly has its flaws, they aren’t because of Lombard, Stewart, or their mutual chemistry. Lombard genuinely liked Stewart…and vice versa.
Stewart is arguably the quintessential American actor; he could excel in virtually any genre, and while he usually played heroic characters, he invariably gave them complexity, making them all the more human. (It’s ironic that about the only top actress of his time he never made a film with was Barbara Stanwyck, his equal in versatility.) While several actors, including Lombard, had traded part or all of their salary for back-end profits on a film, Stewart (joining forces with MCA’s Lew Wasserman) popularized the practice for good with the 1950 western “Winchester 73.”
And Stewart was as genuine off the movie set as he was on it. During World War II, he enlisted in the Army Air Corps, flying a number of combat missions and achieving the rank of colonel. (He remained in the Air Force Reserve after the war, retiring as a brigadier general.) He married, raised a family and became one of the movie colony’s most respected citizens. Many of you may recall his visits to “The Tonight Show,” including reading poetry he wrote about his dog. When Stewart died in July 1997 at age 89, he was mourned by not only film fans, but America.
Now, Stewart needs our help — not the man himself, but the museum honoring him in his hometown of Indiana, Pa. (It’s across the street from the hardware store his father owned.) As is the case for many museums these days, the struggling economy is hitting the Jimmy Stewart Museum hard. Charter bookings have declined, attendance is off and state funding has been cut.
It’s been said the museum needs a miracle a la George Bailey in Stewart’s most famous film, “It’s A Wonderful Life,” and through cash, you can be Clarence. Go to http://www.jimmy.org to learn more; the address is The Jimmy Stewart Museum, 835 Philadelphia St., Indiana, PA 15701.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
I see dead…celebrities (again)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.08 at 08:12
Current mood: uncomfortable
Among the many regrets classic film fans have is that Carole Lombard and Cary Grant, shown above in the 1939 drama “In Name Only,” never starred in a comedy together. But that might soon change…well, sort of.
The British tabloid The Sun reported Monday that veteran movie director/producer George Lucas — in the words of British friend Mel Smith — “has been buying up the film rights to dead actors in the hope of using computer trickery to put them all together, so you’d have Orson Welles and Barbara Stanwyck alongside today’s stars.” (As might be expected, the Sun used neither Welles nor Stanwyck to illustrate the story, but Marilyn Monroe.)
It should be noted that Lucas has since denied he is acquiring the rights to deceased actors — although many of their images, such as those of Fred Astaire and John Wayne, have been used in commercials — and dead celebs are still marketable commodities. (Moreover, the Sun, a newspaper that runs topless photos of women each day, has never been noted as a paragon of journalistic integrity.)
However, as CGI technology continues to advance, reviving dead stars in new films appears inevitable. (Not that it’s such a new concept; Lombard was among the notables seen alongside Woody Allen as “chameleon” Leonard Zelig in the 1983 mockumentary “Zelig.”)
Part of me would be excited to see “new” Lombard product, but there would also be trepidation. I would have to be assured that the writers, directors and producers behind such a project would use the image of her and other actors no longer with us with intelligence and care. I’d feel a lot more confident if someone such as Peter Bogdanovich — who has knowledge of, and respect for, classic Hollywood — were involved than if it came “from the director of (insert latest frat-boy comedy here).” If only we could similarly resurrect directors such as Ernst Lubitsch and Howard Hawks, or writers such as Ben Hecht or Billy Wilder.
What would your ground rules be for the use of dead actors in films? Let’s have your input. Meanwhile, despite its potential pitfalls, the concept is tantalizing…imagine a movie in your mind co-starring Lombard and (husband) Clark Gable.
Pearl Harbor and Hollywood
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.07 at 09:10
Current mood: sad
It was 69 years ago today that “a day that will live in infamy” — as President Franklin D. Roosevelt so described it the following day — took place at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, a move that finally fully thrust the U.S. into World War II. Today, we’ll try to provide a snapshot of what life was like for Carole Lombard, and the Hollywood community, just before and after that tragic event.
Lombard was in the process of making “To Be Or Not To Be” as November 1941 turned into December. The press was invited to the set to watch Ernst Lubitsch and company at work, as the director labeled Jack Benny and Lombard’s characters “the Lunt and Fontanne of the Polish theatre.”
(It should be noted that while Carole’s previous film, “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” had more or less concluded its domestic run, it was making the rounds in what was left of the overseas market. At this time, it was playing in New Zealand theaters, listed as “Recommended by the Censor for Adults”; ad copy also reminded New Zealanders, “Careless talk costs lives — don’t talk!” Also, a Palm Beach, Fla., theater was showing a reissue of “Made For Each Other” with James Stewart.)
In mid-November, Lombard denied three rumors when interviewed by Hearst’s Louella Parsons: She and husband Clark Gable were not adopting twin boys; ill health would force her retirement from films; and she preferred hunting to acting.
One marketing advantage “To Be Or Not To Be” seemingly had was the presence of Benny, radio’s top-rated star, who himself may not have been a top-flight movie attraction but whose popular show could promote the film. In fact, the Schenectady (N.Y.) Gazette of Dec. 6 reported in its radio column that on Sunday night, “Jack Benny and gang will entertain from the stage of the movie set where he is making a new picture,” and it was thought Carole might drop in as a guest star. If she had planned to do so, the events of that Sunday possibly made her beg off and decide to reschedule. Had Lombard lived, she probably would have appeared on Benny’s show on Jan. 25 or in February; instead, Benny canceled his program on Jan. 18 out of respect for her, and the air time was used for patriotic songs.
Elsewhere in Hollywood just after Dec. 7, it was announced that several films late in production or in post-production — “Canal Zone,” “To The Shores Of Tripoli” and the musical “I’ll Take Manila” — would be altered to reflect changing conditions. (That wasn’t a completely uncommon practice; Warners updated “Confessions Of A Nazi Spy” in the months after its initial release in May 1939 to reflect changes in Europe.) Several Japanese houseboys in the homes of several stars were arrested by the FBI, as was Michio Ito, a technical adviser on several films.
That was the world Hollywood was thrust in just after Pearl Harbor.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Variations on a theme
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.06 at 07:49
Current mood: happy
There are many nice things about the Carole Lombard photo gallery (as of this writing, 728 images strong) at acephotos.org profiled in yesterday’s entry. One of them is that often some of the pictures taken at a particular session are shown together, perhaps the intent of the person who posted them. Seeing them together gives a slightly different perspective on Lombard.
For example, take these two pics of Carole with a sombrero:
Or these two from 1930, among her first portraits at Paramount:
Here’s a trio of Lombard with her Palomino pony, Pico:
Or these two, taken in Travis Banton’s studio at Paramount:
And finally, this threesome from Pathe days in the late 1920s (these are apparently original photos, as they show their age):
All are on the same or adjoining pages.
I’ve become a fan of this site, and I think other Lombard fans would appreciate it, too.
Playing an Ace
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.05 at 08:04
Current mood: enthralled
The adage goes that you learn something new every day. What I’ve learned today, courtesy of my friend Tally, is about a website with all sorts of photos — including more than 700 of Carole Lombard.
It’s http://www.acephotos.org, and the portrait you see above, Paramount p1202-1420 (or is that 1426?), is taken from the site. Here are a few others, just to whet your photographic appetite:
That last one looks to be a screengrab from “Virtue”; I doubt Columbia Pictures issued it as a publicity still, but I could be wrong. The Ace site also categorizes photos by individual film, though the above pic isn’t there. At the “Made For Each Other” gallery, I found this screengrab of Carole:
And this color image, almost certainly a screengrab, is at the “Nothing Sacred” gallery:
To go directly to Carole’s gallery, visit http://www.acephotos.org/t446/carole-lombard-photos.html. Relax and view the pictures, as Lombard likely would have done had laptops been around in 1934.
A different ‘Screwball’ pitch
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.03 at 07:40
Current mood: giggly
As we watch Carole Lombard typing away, let’s examine a book — one entitled “Screwball.”
No, not that one, which we’ve often discussed here. This is the “Screwball” I’m referring to, which also has Carole on the cover:
This particular “Screwball” deals with the film genre Lombard was most associated with; it was written by Ed Sikov in 1989, with a forward by noted film critic Molly Haskell. At 10″ x 10″ — roughly the size of an early long-playing record jacket — it’s sort of a coffee-table volume, and in fact there are plenty of pictures throughout its 240 pages.
Sikov examines the rise and fall of the genre, and tries to define what is (and isn’t) screwball. (His definition of screwball includes “Topper,” though he doesn’t feel the same way about its two sequels.) Lombard is frequently mentioned throughout the book; Sikov writes at length about “Twentieth Century,” “My Man Godfrey,” “Nothing Sacred” and “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” (a film he admired before many other critics did).
The book contains lists of writers, directors, cinematographers and a selected filmography, movies Sikov rates from one to three stars. The four Lombard films mentioned above all received three stars, as did “Hands Across The Table,” while “The Princess Comes Across” and “True Confession” each received two stars. (William Powell and Myrna Loy fans may argue with his giving “Libeled Lady” only two stars, the same as the lackluster “Double Wedding” and the superior “I Love You Again,” although Sikov does give three stars to the hilarious “Love Crazy.”)
Sikov’s “Screwball” is currently out of print, although copies can be found at amazon.com and eBay. It’s worth tracking down.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘No One’ or ‘No More’? The choice is yours
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.02 at 07:59
Current mood: impressed
In 1932, Carole Lombard made, or released, three films that began with the word “No.” The world is most familiar with the last of these, “No Man Of Her Own,” but a pair of lobby cards from the first two are now available on eBay. (It should be noted that all of these are reproductions, measuring 11″ x 14″; 10 copies of each are available, and all are being sold for $9.99 each.)
First, “No One Man,” from Paramount:
For the first, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/NO-ONE-MAN-1932-PRECODE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-1-SEXY-LINGERIE-/200505657344?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaf118800.
For the second, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/NO-ONE-MAN-1932-PRECODE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-2-SEXY-EMBRACE-/200505657794?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaf1189c2.
Then, “No More Orchids,” Carole’s second film at Columbia:
The first is at http://cgi.ebay.com/NO-MORE-ORCHIDS-32-PRECODE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-POTBOILER-1-/200505655308?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaf11800c. The second can be found at http://cgi.ebay.com/NO-MORE-ORCHIDS-32-PRECODE-CAROLE-LOMBARD-POTBOILER-2-/200505655529?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaf1180e9.
Nice reproductions — “no” doubt about it.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A ‘Pursuit’ that never materialized
Posted by vp19 on 2010.12.01 at 08:57
Current mood: happy
Add another to the list of films Carole Lombard might have appeared in, but didn’t.
In November 1933, Los Angeles Times writer Edwin Schallert (you’re probably familiar with his son, William, one of the great character actors who’s now in his late 80s and still works regularly) reported in his column:
“…Paramount will probably have an eye to Carole Lombard as a possible lead for ‘Pursuit Of Happiness,’ which is something new altogether in pictures. It is laid in the revolutionary days, and has to do with the ancient custom of ‘bundling,’ the meaning of which I will have to let you guess at, unless you happen to know. It was a premarital custom of the time.”
Methinks Mr. Schallert dropped a hint about “bundling” by the phrase “laid in the revolutionary days.”
Sounds like it might have been an intriguing comedic vehicle for Lombard, especially since she was rarely seen in period garb. (Whether her modern personality could have fit into such a film is another question entirely.)
Well, as we all know, Carole never made a film by that title, or of that subject; whether it was her decision or Paramount’s is unknown. But it was made into a movie, with Joan Bennett (shown below, playing a character named Prudence Kirkland!) and Francis Lederer (as a Hessian soldier gone AWOL) as the leads, with Charles Ruggles and Mary Boland in supporting roles.
“The Pursuit Of Happiness” was directed by Alexander Hall, who directed the Lombard film “Sinners In The Sun” (and also directed “They All Kissed The Bride,” the movie Carole would have appeared in had she not died in 1942).
That’s the good news (along with that a nitrate copy of the film exists in the UCLA film and television archive). The bad news? Paramount released the film on Sept. 28, 1934, which means it was issued after the Production Code was imposed in mid-year, and thus probably lost plenty of its sexual tension and bite. Under pre-Code guidelines, who knows what this might have been like?
Wish you were a witch?, and ‘Breakfast’ in Bulgaria
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.31 at 01:03
Current mood: relaxed
Aside from this and a few other photos of Carole Lombard holding a black cat, I don’t ever recall seeing a portrait of her in an expressly Halloween mode. (The avatar showing Carole “wearing” a witch’s hat was, like yesterday’s, created by Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive.) Early in her career (the late 1920s), Lombard dressed up in a Santa Claus suit, but aside from those foreign language “card” holiday portraits her first year at Paramount, she rarely indulged in that sort of stuff again. Whether that was intentional on her part or the studio’s decision to not put her in such poses is only conjecture.
However, several of her contemporaries did pose for Halloween-related art — in honor of the holiday, here they are for you.
First, the lady who was still the queen of the Paramount lot when Lombard arrived there in the spring of 1930, Clara Bow:
Next, the woman who briefly succeeded Bow atop the Paramount star throne, Nancy Carroll:
And now, my second favorite actress of the classic era, looking like anything but the perfect wife, Myrna Loy:
Here’s hoping you have a happy — and safe — Halloween. (And if you own a cat, please bring it in for the day; over the years, several of them, notably the notorious black ones, have been kidnapped on Halloween.)
Before we go, how about another rarity in Lombard memorabilia? We’ve occasionally noted posters or lobby cards for Carole’s films in foreign languages, but I don’t recall ever coming across one in the Cyrillic alphabet — until now:
It’s advertising “Love Before Breakfast” in Bulgarian, and it appears that the names of Carole Lombard and Cesar Romero are headlined (apologies to Preston Foster). I wish I could translate the rest of the ad to learn more about it (if anyone here knows Bulgarian — or knows someone who’s familiar with it — give translation a try), but the artwork is splendid. It also shows just how pervasive the American film industry had become in Europe by the mid-thirties.
The poster measures 27″ x 41″, looks to be in decent shape, and won’t come cheap; the asking price is $1,680, and the sale will close at 6:18 a.m. (Eastern) on Monday, so if you want it, hurry. If you want to learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/LOVE-BEFORE-BREAKFAST-CAROLE-LOMBARD-MOVIE-POSTER-/140460972218?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b42058ba.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Ribs redux, and advertising ‘Advertise’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.30 at 01:32
Current mood: satisfied
While you note a Halloweenish Carole Lombard in the avatar (a tip of the witch hat to Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive for creating such magic), we have a few intriguing items for you today.
In May 2009, we ran a recipe for spareribs that Lombard supplied for a Hollywood-themed 1939 cookbook called “What Actors Eat — When They Eat” (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/204782.html). At the time, all we had was the recipe, not a copy of the page it ran on.
That has since been rectified, thanks to the Los Angeles Times’ popular local history blog, “The Daily Mirror.” It noted the above book was being offered at eBay for triple digits, either as a minimum bid or its “buy it now” option. (In contrast, when a copy of the book was offered at auction about 18 months ago, bidding began at a mere $49.99.)
Someone who had a copy of the book commented, “I’ve owned this for ages, and it’s quite a wonderful cookbook (and also, I suspect, actually genuine when it comes to the provenance of the various recipes included). You haven’t lived ’til you’ve tried Carole Lombard’s spareribs.”
In a later entry, the page with the recipe was reprinted at the blog, and here it is (double-click to view it at full size):
What makes this extra fascinating is the biographical information that goes with it. Her birthdate is listed one year after she was actually born; her “real name” is listed as “Carole Jane Peters,” not Jane Alice Peters; and this is among the taller height descriptions of her, at 5-foot-5 1/2.
Also note that she was “educated at the Virgil school.” Sounds like one of those swanky finishing schools refined young ladies go to, right? But most Angelenos knew the truth — Virgil was the junior high school she graduated from before dropping out of Fairfax High School to go into movies. She’s listed as being married to Clark Gable, but on the roster of Selznick International, so one guesses the book was published in April or May of 1939, before or about the time she signed with RKO.
The recipe sounds delicious, and one of these days I’ll have to try my hand at it.
The blog ran another celebrity recipe that I’ll provide as a bonus — it’s from syndicated columnist Jimmie Fidler, whose work ran in the Times. It’s for Boston baked beans (which would complement the spareribs), although Fidler hailed from Memphis, not New England. (Also note the book published his first name as “Jimmy,” even though his “Jimmie” signature was on the same page.)
Now some more goodies, part of promoting one of Lombard’s more obscure movies.
“It Pays To Advertise” is hardly the 1931 equivalent of “Mad Men,” but it has its moments (a few supplied by Carole), and it’s interesting to see how Paramount “sold” the film. Since it dealt with advertising, someone came up with the idea of posing Lombard and co-star Norman Foster in scenes representing ad slogans of the day. (Were a studio to try something like that today, it might want to get permission from the firms it was parodying — or have attorneys on hand for the inevitable lawsuits.)
In the first, Foster is helping Lombard “keep that schoolgirl complexion”:
Next, the famed coffee slogan “good to the last drop” — but here, they pull a twist on the phrase “last drop,” though one senses Carole would rather have coffee:
Finally, an apparent cigarette slogan of the time, “Be nonchalant” (I have no idea what brand used it), and Norman indeed looks nonchalant — in fact, he and Lombard both appear a bit ridiculous — as he holds her in his arms:
(Thanks to Tally for eliminating the watermark from two of the three.)
The first two photos are from the same seller, and can be bought for $16.99. For the “keep that schoolgirl complexion,” visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-NORMAN-FOSTER-BEAUTY-TIPS-8X10-PHOTO-/150503404398?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item230ab3b36e; for the “good to the last drop,” go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-NORMAN-FOSTER-GOOD-COFFEE-8X10-PHOTO-/400161548177?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2b7ca791. If unsold, each will be available until next Friday afternoon (Eastern).
The third photo, “be nonchalant,” is also under the “buy it now” option, but for a mere $12.50, and if unsold, will be on the market for nearly another four weeks. It’s at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-RARE-SEXY-FUR-2-/280367306207?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item41473195df.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A language (and time?) barrier
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.29 at 01:54
Current mood: contemplative
In December 2007, I ran across this photo taken at Paramount in 1930 in which Carole Lombard, through a card she was holding, wished people a merry Christmas and happy new year — in German (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/58884.html). At the time, I wondered, “Did Carole do similar holiday duties with cards in other languages?”
The answer is yes.
Here’s Lombard, presumably at the same photo shoot, holding another card:
The question now is — what language is this? I initially guessed Polish, as it was a large European country (and U.S. cities such as Chicago had, and still have, sizable Polish enclaves). If not, I thought, it might be Czech or Hungarian — and according to Tally, who had removed the watermark from the original photo, it is indeed Hungarian. (This probably won Carole some fans in New Brunswick, N.J., which had, and may still have, a substantial Hungarian population.) Whatever, this was more difficult to detect than French, Spanish, Italian or German, the dominant languages on the Continent (remember, England is geographically separate). If someone can translate the message, it would be greatly appreciated.
This photo is Paramount PGP-18293 (the German photo is PGP-18294). It’s a linen-backed, double-weight 8″ x 10″, and you can purchase it via eBay for $69.99. (The seller showed the back of the photo, which is unfortunately blank.) If this item interests you, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-1930s-LINEN-BACK-Original-8X10-Photo-/150506024017?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item230adbac51.
Now, we wonder whether Lombard did likewise in any other languages. (Perhaps Paramount used ethnic-specific stars for some countries, such as Claudette Colbert for France, and Carole was merely assigned what was left.)
Another barrier of sorts has been the subject of much Internet speculation over the past day or two:
One rarely associates “Back To The Future” (the trilogy of which has just been issued on Blu-Ray) with Charlie Chaplin; heck, Sir Charles had been gone for nearly eight years when the first “Back To The Future” (produced by Steven Spielberg, but directed by Robert Zemeckis) hit the screens a quarter-century ago. But now, possible time travel is being linked to the premiere of a Chaplin film.
In case you haven’t heard about it, a man in Belfast, Northern Ireland is claiming that he saw — in footage of the 1928 premiere of “The Circus” at Grauman’s Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard that is among the extras of a Chaplin DVD box set — someone dressed as a woman (although from the build, it could be a man in drag) walking down the street, talking into something that may, or may not, be a cell phone.
(Mind you, no cellular towers were built for at least another four decades, so how would the device work? Then again, if someone found a way to journey from the future back to 1928, figuring out how to employ a mobile phone in that bygone time would likely be a piece of cake.)
Here’s the video in question, which is currently probably the most scrutinized piece of footage since the Zapruder film:
Whether or not we ever discover what this is all about, it leads to a fun hypothetical question: If time travel were possible, and you had the opportunity to go back in time and meet Carole Lombard, what period in her life would you choose? (For our purposes, the time just before she boarded her fatal flight isn’t on the table; we’re not trying to play God here and change the course of history, however much we might want to.)
Limiting the time frame to between 1925 (when she became an actress for good) and 1941, what year would you choose to go back to? You’ve got:
* The teenage Lombard at Fox prior to her automobile accident;
* The “Carol of the curves” working for Mack Sennett;
* The Pathe starlet, first in silents, then embryonic talkies;
* Her first year as part of Paramount’s stable of stars;
* Her two-year marriage to William Powell;
* Her post-divorce rise to stardom and ill-fated romance with Russ Columbo;
* Her Hollywood Boulevard party-giving period;
* The 1936-37 career apex and start of a romance with Clark Gable;
* Her shift to drama and marriage to Gable;
* Her 1939-41 period on the Encino ranch.
That’s effectively 10 different Lombards to choose from. Which of those periods would you find most interesting? Think about it, then supply an answer. Eventually, we’ll begin searching for a flux capacitor inside a DeLorean.
Moguls & a movie star
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.28 at 01:08
Current mood: nostalgic
If you live in the U.S. and get Turner Classic Movies on your cable or satellite system, I can’t overemphasize its upcoming seven-part series, “Moguls & Movie Stars,” which will run at 8 p.m. (ET) every Monday for seven consecutive weeks beginning this Monday, Nov. 1, and ending Dec. 12. (The one-hour episodes will repeat during the week, in case you miss them the first time around.) Films from either the particular period or reflecting on such history will accompany the episodes. (We first previewed this special in August at http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/328080.html.)
TCM has a pretty good track record on documentaries pertaining to classic Hollywood, but this looks to be its biggest accomplishment to date, spanning film history from its late 19th century infancy to 1969, when the classic era of studio filmmaking was in its death throes. And as the title suggests, the documentary will also examine the personalities who shaped the industry, both artistically and commercially.
At its Web site, TCM has a specific section dedicated to “Moguls & Movie Stars” (http://www.tcm.com/moguls/#/home). The site lists 21 “moguls,” a disparate group (though they are all white males, of course) ranging from Thomas Edison to Walt Disney. At http://www.tcm.com/moguls/#/moguls, you can click on a mogul’s photo and learn his story.
Carole Lombard didn’t know all 21 moguls (I doubt she ever met Edison, for example; he died in 1931 and probably didn’t visit Los Angeles often), while a few others she might have met, but never was employed by (Edison, D.W. Griffith, Hal Roach). But from the list, I’m guessing she actually worked for roughly half of them at one time or another — and she may have lost her virginity to one of the others. (Who? Longtime readers know the answer; check the list of 21 to venture your guess.)
Considering Carole worked for all eight major Hollywood studios during her career (completing the circuit with “To Be Or Not To Be” for United Artists), I’m surprised there aren’t more photos of her with moguls. Here are three I’ve uncovered.
First, Lombard with Adolph Zukor, in effect her boss for seven years while she was at Paramount (although by the early 1930s, Zukor didn’t wield quite as much clout as moguls at other studios, as Paramount struggled during the Depression). Zukor is visiting the set of “Swing High, Swing Low,” and the picture also includes co-star Fred MacMurray and director Mitchell Leisen. (“Swing High, Swing Low” would be Paramount’s most successful film for 1937.) Zukor would live to 103, dying in 1976 — a year after the success of Steven Spielberg’s “Jaws” sent the industry in an entirely new direction.
The next two moguls are from a studio that Carole spent more time visiting than actually working in, and the reason can be found in the following photo. We are, of course, referring to Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, where Lombard made all of one film, the lackluster 1934 comedy “The Gay Bride.” But Lombard’s romance with, then marriage to, Clark Gable led her to frequently visit the Culver City lot. A picnic for studio employees led to this photo of Lombard, Gable and MGM mogul Louis B. Mayer:
Finally, here’s Carole with another Metro mogul, Irving Thalberg. It’s part of a double date, as Lombard’s with screenwriter Robert Riskin and Thalberg’s with wife Norma Shearer:
Know of any other photos of Lombard with moguls? Send them my way.
We’ll close with what is likely the earliest celluloid moving picture ever taken — made nearly two decades before Jane Alice Peters (the future Carole Lombard) was born! As the person who put this up on YouTube wrote, “It was shot by Louis Aimé Augustin Le Prince using the Le Prince single-lens camera made in 1888. It was taken in the garden of the Whitley family house on Oakwood Grange Road, Roundhay, a suburb of Leeds, Yorkshire, Great Britain, possibly on Oct. 14, 1888. It shows Adolphe Le Prince (Le Prince’s son), Mrs. Sarah Whitley (Le Prince’s mother-in-law), Joseph Whitley and Miss Harriet Hartley. The ‘actors’ are shown walking around in circles, laughing to themselves and keeping within the area framed by the camera. It lasts for less than two seconds and includes four frames.”
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Some witchery from Mrs. Smith
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.27 at 00:01
Current mood: excited
No, it’s not the discovery of a long-lost alternate version of “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” where Carole Lombard’s character, Ann Smith, has been endowed with magical powers. (Although such a plot twist might have been fun to see a year before Rene Clair’s “I Married A Witch,” not to mention making director Alfred Hitchcock feel more at home.) The “witchery,” in this case, is in a fashion sense.
And for that, you can thank Irene, the celebrated designer.
In the January 1941 issue of Modern Screen, some of Carole’s costumes from “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” were shown in a two-page spread, with this introduction:
In RKO’s forthcoming film “Mr. and Mrs. Smith,” Carole Lombard’s costumes play up to her reputation for chic. Designer Irene emphasizes the witchery of black, the low hip-line, jewels and furs.
Here’s that sartorial magic of Lombard, several days before Halloween:
This two-sided page has been laminated for preservation and is in near-perfect condition (although it’s yellowed with age; I made it greyscale for additional clarity). It’s up for auction at eBay, with bids beginning at $4.95 (no bids have been made as of this writing); bids close at 4:17 p.m. (Eastern) on Monday. If you’re interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-FOUR-VERY-RARE-1941-MAGAZINE-PHOTOS-/380282614398?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588a9c327e.
The seller has about a dozen other Lombard photos, most of them laminated as well. You can see them at http://shop.ebay.com/theplateguy5o89/m.html?_trkparms=65%253A12%257C66%253A2%257C39%253A1%257C72%253A4026&rt=nc&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14.l1581&_pgn=2.
Oh, and speaking of magic, looking at this picture of Carole twitching Robert Montgomery’s nose begs the question: Did “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” have a subliminal effect on Robert’s daughter Elizabeth some 23 years later? (She was eight years old at the time it was filmed, and for all we know may have visited the set.)
Some mid-thirties goodies
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.26 at 01:07
Current mood: impressed
Many Carole Lombard fans deem the period between her 1933 divorce from William Powell and the beginning of her romance with Clark Gable in 1936 the most fascinating portion of her life. And they may have a point. It was during that time that Carole achieved significant stardom with her work in “Twentieth Century,” had romances with Russ Columbo and Robert Riskin, and earned renown as a party-giver. Her career was no longer meandering, as it had been earlier in the decade when she couldn’t establish a notable persona among Paramount’s star stable of actresses.
Today’s entry features three times from this era, and it begins with Paramount photo p1202-1170:
The snipe reads:
CAROLE TAKES LESSONS — In her favorite sport, tennis, from the renowned professional, Elinor Tennant. Miss Lombard, who will soon appear in Paramount’s “Hands Across The Table,” rates as one of Hollywood’s best women tennis players.
It was through Tennant that Lombard met, and befriended, Alice Marble on her way to championships at both Forest Hills and Wimbledon. I’m guessing this photo was released in the late summer or early fall of 1935, since “Hands Across The Table” began making the rounds of theaters in October.
This is an original doubleweight photo in very good to excellent condition; bidding starts at $19.99, but as yet no one has bid on it. Bids close at 10:15 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. If you’re a tennis fan, or player — or know someone who is — this might be worth investigating. Learn more at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LEGGY-1935-DBLWT-Original-8X10-Photo-/400165699561?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2bbbffe9.
Now p1202-1280, from either late 1935 or early ’36. It’s a fetchingly fashionable pose:
There’s no snipe with this photo, which the seller says is in very good condition. It also has yet to be bid on as of this writing, although for this one bids begin at $24.99. Bidding will close a few minutes after the previous item — 10:19 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. Want it for your collection? Then go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-BUSTY-1935-DBLWT-Original-8X10-Photo-/150509139984?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item230b0b3810.
(Incidentally, many thanks to Tally for eliminating the watermarks, enabling us to show you these photos in their original glory.)
While Lombard had an ill-fated affair with Columbo and the Riskin romance fizzled when he said he had no interest in having children, they weren’t her only involvements between Powell and Gable. In fact, Carole is alleged to have told friends that in a purely sexual sense, her best lover wasn’t any of the four named in this paragraph, but…
Yep, that’s George Raft, pictured with Lombard from their 1934 dance hit “Bolero” in a fan magazine of the time. The caption below reads:
‘TIS “Bolero,” the dance made famous after adapters had jazzed up the music of Maurice Ravel’s famous competition. And how Carole Lombard and George Raft can turn their toes to its exciting, sensuous rhythm, in the picture of the same name! George plays the role of Raoul, the gay night-club dancer who makes love to his floor partners.
(This, of course, was a time when a “gay night-club dancer’s” partners were those of the opposite gender.)
You can purchase this picture for a mere $3.65; if unsold, it will be available through 1:28 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. Visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-pic-GEORGE-RAFT-CAROLE-LOMBARD-BOLERO-/160496900714?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255e5c5a6a.
The little black dress, Lombard style
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.25 at 00:16
Current mood: pensive
Carole Lombard, as small-town librarian Connie Randall, takes a glance outside in the 1932 Paramount film “No Man Of Her Own” (yep, her one movie with Clark Gable). And with luck — and not a small amount of money — the dress she’s wearing in that photo could be yours.
It’s part of Heritage Auction Galleries’ Beverly Hills Signature Music & Entertainment Auction next month. A total of 1,277 items will be available, only one of which has ties to Lombard — but what ties! (And what a dress.)
That’s what the dress looks like from the front and the back. If the cuffs don’t look similar to their appearance in the film, it’s because Paramount re-used the dress in later films, most notably “The Blue Dahlia” in 1946 (likely worn by an uncredited Roberta Jonay, playing a hotel clerk). But this definitely was designed with Lombard in mind, as the tag proves:
According to Heritage, this black crepe dress was likely designed by Travis Banton — who created many an outfit for Carole — during his tenure as Paramount’s studio atelier. By Lombard-Banton standards, it’s more practical than ethereal, but it’s still gorgeous.
Here are some other photos from the film showing Lombard in that dress:
The opening bid for this item is $1,500, but understand that Heritage’s bidding process differs somewhat from eBay and other auctioneers. Absentee bidding ends at 11 p.m. (Eastern) Nov. 13, and a live auction will be held the following day. The buyer’s premium is 19.5 percent of the successful bid.
The dress is considered in very good condition, and its estimated value is at least $3,000. Should you wish to place a bid, or merely want to learn more, go to http://entertainment.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7022&Lot_No=46653.
Bing “sings” whilst Carole…poses?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.24 at 02:22
Current mood: mellow
We’re aware Carole Lombard wasn’t entirely certain she could sing (
http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/11870.html), but the question before the jury for today’s entry is…could she play an instrument? I don’t believe any biography of Lombard has brought that up, so I’m not sure of the answer. Perhaps the family of Jane Alice Peters owned a piano, as many affluent households of the period did.
But it should be no surprise that Carole could look as if she were playing an instrument, particularly when it gives the impression that she’s accompanying, of all people, Bing Crosby:
For this photoshoot, done to promote their 1934 Paramount musical “We’re Not Dressing,” Bing presumably didn’t “sing,” either — merely making it look as if he was. Lombard likely got a kick about appearing as if Crosby, then the top musical star in the business, was accompanying her. (This was also while Lombard was dating Bing’s buddy — and musical rival — Russ Columbo.) Lombard and Crosby hit it off well during production of “We’re Not Dressing,” and remained on good terms for years.
The above photo is being sold at eBay, and a glimpse of the back reveals at least one of its previous owners:
Interested in this original photo, which measures 9″ x 7.5″ and is in good condition? Then buy it for $25. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1934-Carole-Lombard-Bing-Crosby-VINTAGE-Movie-PHOTO-25f-/200504345223?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaefd8287
From Russia, with silents
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.23 at 01:52
Current mood: jubilant
Carole Lombard loved baseball, and one of her most avid fans, Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive, is probably still giddy over her Texas Rangers finally reaching the promised land of the World Series last night.
The photo, from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram website, is of Nelson Cruz’s two-run homer in the bottom of the fifth that capped a four-run inning and gave Texas a 5-1 lead; it added one more run to account for the final 6-1 score as the Rangers dethroned the defending World Series champion New York Yankees. Will they head to Philadelphia or San Francisco to begin the World Series next Wednesday? We’ll find out this weekend.
But no matter what baseball team you root for, there was reason to cheer on the film front this week, as the first installment of silent-era movies previously thought lost was presented to the Library of Congress. And for this latest treasure, we can thank a country where baseball is hardly played — Russia.
Unlike in America, where studios paid relatively little attention to films once their theatrical run was through (more than four-fifths of movies made before 1930 are believed lost in the U.S.), other countries took proper care to preserve cinematic product. And that includes Russia, whose state film archive, Gosfilmofond (dating back to USSR days in the late 1940s, when it was formed as a successor to a state film depository) has carefully kept old movies in good shape, part of a collection of more than 55,000 titles. Its new Moscow headquarters show Russia’s commitment to film preservation:
More than a few of those 55,000 are American in origin, as Hollywood movies were quite popular in Russia during the 1920s (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/84481.html). In fact, research by the Library of Congress has shown that about 200 films heretofore believed lost do exist in the Gosfilmofond library (most with Russian-language intertitles), and they will gradually be coming stateside in digital versions. (Who knows? They may possibly include one or two of the silents Lombard made at Fox before being sidelined in a 1926 automobile accident.) On top of the 75 previously lost films discovered in New Zealand vaults this year, 2010 has been a banner year for the rediscovery of movies…and more is on the way.
What’s in the initial batch from Russia? Quite a few notable stars and directors — Ramon Novarro, Wallace Reid (below) and Renee Adoree among the former, Victor Fleming, Rex Ingram and James Cruze among the latter.
Reid, a very popular star of the teens and early 1920s thanks to his rugged good looks, died before his time due to a morphine addiction he picked up when Paramount doctors prescribed it as a painkiller. The logging film on which he was injured doing stunt work, 1919’s “Valley Of The Giants,” has been found, as has a comedy he made that year, “You’re Fired.”
Also included in this rediscovered set are two Paramount dramas, “The Conquest Of Canaan” (1921), top (with Thomas Meighan and Doris Kenyon), and “Kick In” (1922), featuring Bert Lytell. For the complete list and more information, go to http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2010/10-239.html.
Since we have so much good news going around, from the Texas Rangers to rediscovered film, let’s celebrate with Sam Cooke, and a rare live version of his “(Ain’t That) Good News,” from “The Mike Douglas Show” of Feb. 18, 1964; I’m not sure whether this was when the show was still in Cleveland or had shifted to Philadelphia. (Incidentally, Douglas served on the Liberty ship named for Lombard during World War II.) The visual quality isn’t that good, but the sound is adequate, and it’s interesting to hear Sam minus the bigger arrangement of the recorded version. This was going up the charts at the time and had some success, although it ran head-on into the early stages of U.S. Beatlemania; Cooke would be shot dead less than 10 months later.
Limber up with Lombard
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.22 at 02:02
Current mood: energetic
Long before Jane Fonda became an exercise guru or leg warmers became a fashion statement, Carole Lombard stood tall when it came to physical culture. A natural (and talented) athlete since childhood, she kept herself in shape through an array of activities — most notably tennis, but also swimming, horseback riding and other endeavors.
It’s thus understandable why Lombard was asked to pose for a few workout photos, probably about 1930 or so. And she took to it as if she were back in phys ed class at Fairfax High School. Take a look:
Stretch! (Jack LaLanne, who got his start at Muscle Beach in the early 1930s, would no doubt approve.) Thanks to Tally for working on these.
Would you like to own these photos, and let Lombard give you some inspiration for your exercise regimen? The good news is, you can. Each of them can be purchased (as a professional photographic reprint) for #15.99 apiece. For the top photo, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LEGGY-EXERCISING-ART-DECO-8X10-PHOTO-B-/400148533206?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2ab60fd6; for the one on the bottom, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LEGGY-EXERCISING-ART-DECO-8X10-PHOTO-/400148533230?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2ab60fee.
The seller also has the bottom photo in its original linenbacked form, but that will cost you at least $49.99 for a minimum bid, with bidding closing at 9:55 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. It’s at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-LEGGY-LINEN-BACK-Original-8X10-Photo-/150509133117?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item230b0b1d3d.
To close, how about some workout music…specifically, the great “Baby Workout” by Jackie Wilson? The song was a top five hit in the spring of 1963, and here’s Wilson doing it on ABC’s “Shindig” in late 1964 (live, not lip-synched). It’s the close of the show, so you’ll see the closing credits about halfway through, and the list of performers on that episode ranged from the Righteous Brothers to “Willy” (sic) Nelson. (Two acts who would find more success later in the ’60s also appeared — the Chambers Brothers and Bobby Sherman.) Enjoy a few minutes of sixties soul.
Carole and Clara — neighbors to be?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.21 at 00:57
Current mood: confused
In 1930, Carole Lombard (shown in a publicity still from “Safety In Numbers”) and Clara Bow (shown from “Her Wedding Night”) were both employed at Paramount; recently we discussed possible ties between Lombard and Bow (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/344664.html). If a popular Hollywood columnist of the time is to be believed, there might well have been another had fate not intervened.
Here’s Jimmie Fidler’s syndicated column, from the Los Angeles Times of Oct. 20, 1941:
If you don’t want to double-click, here’s the cogent segment, part of a this-and-that section of Fidler’s column:
HOMES ON THE RANGE: Looks like the Clark Gables will be Nevada ranch neighbors of the Rex Bells (Clara Bow;) they’ve practically closed a deal…
(Where was the Times copy desk? The semi-colon should have been outside the parentheses.)
Were Clark and Carole considering leaving the Encino ranch they had called home for about 2 1/2 years? Some biographers say yes — security had increasingly become a problem, as the couple’s fame had amplified since their marriage. Privacy was also an issue, especially since they hoped a child was on the way. Rex and Clara were raising their two sons in Nevada, far from the Tinseltown madding crowd, and perhaps the Gables thought similar seclusion would be good for their potential family.
I have never heard of Gable and Lombard looking into Nevada as an alternative site, much less near Bell and Bow. I’m not certain if the couples knew each other that well. And I wonder whether Clark and Carole were even aware of this column (they spent part of that October hunting in South Dakota).
Possibly Fidler was repeating speculation on someone’s part. Maybe Gable — or more likely Lombard, who had lived in southern California since late 1914 — developed cold feet over being so far away from the film capital. Perhaps the deal was scuttled by the time of Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, if not before.
Of course, the sad irony is that less than three months after Fidler’s column, the area near the Bell and Bow ranch was where the Gable-Lombard romance had a tragic ending…and Bell aided the grief-stricken Gable when he came to Nevada after the fatal air crash.
On a happier note, Fidler’s column had another Lombard reference. The columnist had dropped by RKO to see production of the musical “Sing Your Worries Away,” and among his comments was this observation:
June Havoc (a younger edition of Carole Lombard) demonstrating, in a dance routine, that sister Gypsy Rose Lee has no family monopoly on energy.
Havoc was probably thrilled with the comparison. Here she is in a still from the film, along with the King Sisters and Alvino Rey:
And for you Bow fans, the picture from “Her Wedding Night” came from the Walterfilm online museum I noted yesterday. Its Bow section has more than 500 photos of Clara from several of her Paramount films, including many from movies now sadly believed lost. If you’d like to take a peek, simply go to http://museum.walterfilm.com/cpg14x/index.php?cat=20.
A great job, Walter
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.20 at 01:10
Current mood: happy
No, we’re not referring to Walter Pidgeon, the actor; Walter Johnson, the pitcher; or even Little Walter, the bluesman. The “Walter” in question here is a Los Angeles company called Walterfilm that sells vintage original movie memorabilia. As part of its Web site (
http://www.walterfilm.com/), there is an online museum in which you can view a fine collection of film memorabilia.
And from our point of view, the best thing about it is there’s lots and lots of Carole Lombard stuff. How much? More than 100 stills of Lombard, many of which I’ve never seen before (which means there’s a good chance you haven’t seen them either).
The bulk of the stills are from two of her Paramount movies — her first, “Safety In Numbers”…
(See how transparent Lombard’s dress is, or that look on Buddy Rogers’ face as he plugs his ears to the “girl talk”?)
…and arguably her best Paramount pre-Code, “No Man Of Her Own”:
(And yes, there are pix of her with Clark Gable, too.)
Other films of her represented with stills here include the rare “I Take This Woman”…
…”From Hell To Heaven” (that’s Carole with Jack Oakie!)…
…”The Eagle And The Hawk” (I agree with the Walterfilm observation that her gown more resembles 1933 than 1917, when the story was set)…
…”Supernatural,” her lone foray into horror…
…and two films she made with Fred MacMurray, “Hands Across The Table” (left) and “Swing High, Swing Low.”
(Note how closely they resemble more common publicity pics from those films, shown below; the differences make them fascinating.)
There are also a few Lombard photos not associated with any film. Remember seeing her image used in a Gap ad for khakis? It was taken from a 1937 Paramount publicity still, p1202-1533:
And here’s a real rarity — Lombard with Metropolitan Opera star Helen Jepson on the set of “Hands Across The Table.” (Jepson was about to sign with Paramount, hence the p2006-1 listing rather than the p1202 associated with Lombard. As it turned out, she never made a film.)
You can find these photos at http://museum.walterfilm.com/cpg14x/index.php?cat=23
Friends, yes; lovers…
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.19 at 01:32
Current mood: flirty
Marlene Dietrich and Carole Lombard helped define the allure of Paramount in the 1930s. Both were naturally beautiful women whose glamour rose to ethereal heights, largely through the work of both studio fashion maven Travis Banton and their own thorough knowledge of photography and lighting. Both had a fierce intelligence that enhanced their sex appeal and were friendly with each other.
But in 1934, the year before this photo was taken, one of them had a desire to make it much more, according to at least one Dietrich biographer.
Marlene was sexually voracious and, to use baseball parlance, swung from both sides of the plate. Her batting average from each side was pretty good; by early ’34, her list of bed partners included Gary Cooper, Maurice Chevalier, Cary Grant, John Gilbert and the director who put her on the map, Josef von Sternberg. On the other side, her conquests were multiple as well, notably Mercedes de Acosta, the socialite who had also been a partner of Greta Garbo’s. (To Dietrich’s credit, her affairs weren’t purely carnal, and most of her lovers remained on good terms with her after the bed-sharing ceased.)
Marlene had known Carole for several years; both had started at Paramount in 1930. (There apparently was a bit of early friction over Lombard copying Dietrich’s look, but it didn’t last long.) Now, according to Donald Spoto in his bio “Blue Angel,” Marlene wanted to know Carole a little better…
…by this time [early 1934, after filming completed on “The Scarlet Empress”] Dietrich was becoming more and more blunt in pursuing actresses she found attractive; among them were Paramount’s Carole Lombard and Frances Dee, whose unregenerate heterosexuality did not dissuade Dietrich from her usual stratagems of flower deliveries and romantic blandishments. Lombard, a beautiful, brash blonde, was unamused. “If you want something,” she told Dietrich after finding one too many sweet notes and posies in her dressing room at Paramount, “you come on down when I’m there. I’m not going to chase you.”
What made Marlene think Carole would take her up on the offer? Perhaps her hiring of William Haines to decorate her new Hollywood Boulevard home led Dietrich to believe Lombard had a gay streak of her own. But while it’s possible Carole had once experimented with lesbianism, whether she did or didn’t, she ultimately decided it wasn’t for her. (And regardless, she had both straight and gay friends.)
However, while Dietrich may have struck out with Lombard (and Dee, who was married to Joel McCrea), she may have made a hit with another female Paramount star:
That’s Claudette Colbert with Dietrich, taken at the June 1935 party Lombard threw at the Venice Pier. If Claudette was indeed a lesbian, as many believe, she was extremely discreet about it, much more so than Marlene. (“Blue Angel,” released soon after Dietrich’s death in 1992 but before Colbert’s passing in 1996, has no references to her in its index.)
Regardless of what these Paramount legends did — or did not do — in bed, each was on good terms with the other two; unlike the atmosphere at MGM or Warners, personal rivalries were minimal. Here’s another photo of Carole and Marlene at the Venice party, this time with Grant and Richard Barthelmess:
To leave, here’s some Hollywood (actually Culver City) history for you — a studio tour. And no, this is not the 1925 film about Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer that Turner Classic Movies frequently airs as filler between features. This one is considerably rarer, and was made several years earlier in 1920 and 1922, at a place a little further south on Washington Boulevard. It’s the Thomas Ince studio (actually his second; the first eventually wound up as MGM). You get to see Ince a few years before his mysterious death following an outing on William Randolph Hearst’s yacht. You’ll also see some stars of the era as well.
Lombard would work at this studio in the late 1920s, when it was the home of Pathe, and made two films there in the late 1930s when it was Selznick International’s lot. Just a note of warning — this runs about 22 minutes, so give yourself sufficient time if you plan to watch it.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Odds and ends, spiced with Ginger
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.18 at 01:54
Current mood: surprised
Finding photos of Carole Lombard with other noted actresses of her time isn’t the easiest of tasks. While she was good friends with Jean Harlow and Barbara Stanwyck, images of her with either one have yet to surface; I’ve also yet to see Carole pictured with Katharine Hepburn.
I feared the same might apply to another actress who spent time at RKO and who, like Lombard and Hepburn, was a pretty talented tennis player. I’m referring to Ginger Rogers…but lo and behold, a photo of them has been found, and I thank my friend Tally for referring me to it. From what I can gather, this ran in Photoplay sometime in 1939:
With them are two noted Hollywood fashion designers — Travis Banton, who did a splendid job with Lombard, Marlene Dietrich, Claudette Colbert and other stars at Paramount in the 1930s, and Howard Greer, who as far as I know never worked with Lombard, but had been at Paramount in the 1920s before deciding to freelance. He designed outfits for Hepburn in “Christopher Strong” and “Bringing Up Baby” and also worked with a number of other stars. In fact, for a brief time Banton and Greer joined forces, but their only notable fashion production was this evening jacket for Dietrich in 1936, of which I’ve added a closeup so you can appreciate the detail that went into this outfit:
It’s good we found a photo of Lombard and Rogers — now if we can only find one showing them playing tennis.
Let’s turn the clock back more than a decade from 1939, to a time when Lombard had just left her teens and hadn’t quite yet found her voice as an actress (both figuratively and literally). Her new home studio, Pathe, put her in a few films that were either part-talkies or had a synchronized musical score but no dialogue. One of them was called “Ned McCobb’s Daughter” and came out near the end of 1928. Here’s a lobby card from the film:
This movie, set in Maine and adapted from a Sidney Howard play (about a dozen years before Lombard would star in another Howard adaptation, “They Knew What They Wanted”) starred Irene Rich as the title character; Lombard has a supporting role (as does Robert Armstrong, who would make four films with her at Pathe, although in only two did they receive top billing) and drew some favorable reviews. I’ve had the image of the lobby card for some time, but never saw a publicity still from the film until coming across this the other day:
The unfortunate news is this film is believed lost, the most recent Lombard movie to hold that sad distinction. (The titles were written by Edwin Justus Mayer, a playwright and screenwriter whose credits include the screenplay for the original “To Be Or Not To Be.”) I wish I could identify the children from the photo; it’s theoretically possible one or both are still alive, though they’d be around 90 years old now.
Finally, I earlier mentioned “They Knew What They Wanted,” which premiered 70 years ago Tuesday. Syndicated columnist Jimmie Fidler apparently saw a preview and was impressed, but added a caveat. In a “confidential communique” on Oct. 15, 1940, he wrote: “Carole Lombard: Your very dramatic performance in ‘They Knew What They Wanted’ is really GREAT. But don’t let critics’ praise blind you to the fact that lots of faithful fans will be disappointed if you now disdain those zany roles you do so well.”
Of course, this was Carole’s fourth non-comedy in a row, and she was more than halfway into the filming of her upcoming movie, the comedic “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” so perhaps Fidler was simply setting up straw men. Or perhaps he was concerned that were Carole to bring home an Oscar — in his column the next day, he said Lombard and co-star Charles Laughton were “making strong bids for Academy recognition” — she might abandon comedy entirely. And in that Oct. 16 column, he also quoted the film’s director, Garson Kanin: “Irene Dunne and Bette Davis both act with their heads; Carole Lombard acts with her intuition.” Interesting. Lombard’s in between Laughton and Kanin below, with the Oct. 15 and 16 Fidler columns (from the Los Angeles Times) on each side of the photo:
Of course, Lombard didn’t win the Oscar for 1940 (she wasn’t even nominated); Rogers did — thus bringing this entry full circle.
Then, pick up some 8-tracks
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.17 at 02:22
Current mood: quixotic
What do this,
this,
and this
have in common (other than Carole Lombard is pictured in all of them, of course)?
This!
It’s a laserdisc, arguably a 1980s relic along the lines of leg warmers. The three Lombard images above are from films of hers that were put on laserdiscs — and all three are now available, for those who might be interested:
Yes, “No Man Of Her Own,” “Nothing Sacred” and “To Be Or Not To Be” were all issued on laserdisc (so apparently was “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” although I don’t have definite proof). And while no new laserdiscs have been issued domestically in a decade, and the last players made for the format were produced in early 2009, there’s still a market for these discs. Their aficionados say their picture quality was better than the VHS cassettes that became popular (so also do backers of Beta cassettes, which lost out to VHS by the late ’80s). In addition, the inability to record laserdiscs prevented it from gaining favor — although apparently the technology was available to do just that.
Of the three, “Nothing Sacred” may be the most fascinating for several reasons. Two versions are available, and both have extras; one features the original theatrical trailer, the other a pair of Lombard’s Mack Sennett two-reelers (both with two-strip Technicolor sequences) and some home movies of her and Clark Gable. (This is similar to the extras issued on one DVD release, and may indeed come from the same source.) Both versions claim to be remastered from the original 35mm nitrate, which doesn’t necessarily mean restored nitrate, but for all we know they may look better on laserdisc than in the grainy VHS format.
“To Be Or Not To Be” is a natural, since it’s her final film and one of Ernst Lubitsch’s most famous comedies (as well as Jack Benny’s best movie).
“No Man Of Her Own” presumably gained a laserdisc release largely on the Gable-Lombard pairing; chances are the term “pre-Code” hadn’t yet entered the popular lexicon when it was issued. In fact, here’s what the back of the jacket looks like:
The film is labeled a screwball comedy (it has its comedic moments, to be sure), but it certainly isn’t “screwball,” a term that didn’t take a cinematic turn for more than a year after this movie was released in late 1932. And the copy says “it gives the viewer a sense of the real-life fireworks that existed between Gable and Lombard,” to which both Clark and Carole would have said at the time, “What the hell are you talking about?” (On the plus side, the notes say there is a “collection of stills” as a bonus item, though I’m not certain whether that refers to the film, Gable, Lombard or all of the above.)
These discs are probably best suited for laserdisc connoisseurs, not Lombard completists, though I should also note that they may not necessarily be compatible with all laserdisc players. So if you’re going to bid on them, consult the seller for specific information about the disc.
“No Man Of Her Own” has two sellers; one of the copies is in “very good” condition and can be purchased for $4.99 (http://cgi.ebay.com/NO-MAN-HER-OWN-1932-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-LD-/320599023348?pt=US_Laserdisc&hash=item4aa530def4), while the other, also a “buy it now” item, is available for $7.99 (http://cgi.ebay.com/LD-laserdisc-CAROLE-LOMBARD-No-Man-Her-Own-CLARK-GABLE-/360242853185?pt=US_Laserdisc&hash=item53e025b541).
The “Nothing Sacred” version with the trailer as an extra sells for $30, or you can make an offer (http://cgi.ebay.com/NOTHING-SACRED-CAROLE-LOMBARD-REMASTER-LASERDISC-LD-/110596683636?pt=US_Laserdisc&hash=item19c0137774); the one with the Sennett silents and Gable-Lombard home footage has the same sale criteria, but the “buy it now” price is $45 (http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-NOTHING-SACRED-LASERDISC-RARE-/370402376927?pt=US_Laserdisc&hash=item563db3bcdf).
Finally, “To Be Or Not To Be” is being auctioned, with bids starting at $7.99 (none have been made as yet), and bids end at 10:26 p.m. (Eastern) on Thursday. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Not-Laserdisc-WoW-/380279220173?pt=US_Laserdisc&hash=item588a6867cd.
To the joys of archaic technology!
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
For this ‘Lady,’ no more orchids (or onions)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.16 at 01:11
Current mood: moody
The 1934 Carole Lombard film “Lady By Choice,” a sequel of sorts to the hit “Lady For A Day” from the year before (also by Columbia), would at first glance have been designed as such from the outset, judging from the title.
But you would be wrong — and a new piece of Lombard memorabilia proves it.
Displaying this item, a photo, is a bit difficult because for some reason, the seller decided to present it at both a right and a left angle, rather than simply showing the image straight on. (This is the first time I’ve ever seen a Lombard item displayed this way, and unfortunately, I could find no alternative copy of the image.) So here it is, shown from both the left and the right — and I had to do a lot of rotating just to present it this way:
But what’s really tantalizing is on the back. For one thing, it has a snipe:
C-28-44- “I love him so; I love him…” sobs Carole Lombard as she unburdens her heart before Judge Daly, friend. Carole has the role of a gold-digging fan dancer who has fallen in love with a rich young man after trying to work him for his money. The production, temporarily titled “Orchids And Onions,” is under the direction of David Burton.
“Orchids And Onions”? (And two years after Lombard had asked for “no more orchids” at that very studio?) Thankfully, someone at Columbia decided to sell the film as a semi-sequel to “Lady For A Day” instead; in fact, you can see someone wrote “Lady By Choice” near the snipe. (The seller, likely not versed in Lombard’s film output, couldn’t make out the writing and believed it to be “Lady By Chorn.”)
The seller also noted something else; it’s rather hard to make out, but double-click on this photo and look at it carefully:
The seller writes, “A green stamp on the back reads: Approved Advertising Advisory Council Aug. 28, 1934 Hollywood and is signed by Joseph — something, I cannot make it out.” But I can, and it’s “Joseph Breen” — the man who finessed the film industry into accepting a strictly enforced Production Code, which had come into effect on July 1 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/62897.html). Columbia evidently received approval from Breen’s office to use this photo in its publicity campaign.
This original 8″ x 10″ is in reasonably good condition. Bidding begins at $9.99, and as of this writing no bids have been made. However, you have plenty of time to place one, as bids close at 10:20 p.m. (Eastern) a week from Sunday.
If you know your onions about Lombard memorabilia, this might be a good pickup. To learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ORCHIDS-ONIONS-HOLLYWOOD-PHOTO-1934-/260678301384?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb1a336c8.
Carole converses with Cupid
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.15 at 01:23
Current mood: mischievous
We know Carole Lombard was a champion athlete in her youth; was archery among her skills? Maybe, but no matter how good she was at it, chances are she wasn’t quite as good a shot as the being she’ll be shown conversing with. In fact, chances are he successfully targeted her a number of times.
We’re referring to Cupid, whose skills with an arrow have figuratively touched all of us at one time or another. And the symbol of romance apparently had a conversation with Carole in the spring of 1934…one that happened to be transcribed to the makers of Lux soap. How do we know? We have proof!
(And we know it’s from the spring of ’34 — about the time she was settling into her new home on Hollywood Boulevard — because Lombard is listed as the “charming star of Paramount’s ‘We’re Not Dressing.’ “)
I’ve seen this ad before, but the two pages were always shown separated, not connected; I’ve been told by the seller the pages here are actually separate as well. (The ad was also made in a one-page version.) Here, you truly sense the impact it must have made in fan magazines of the time. Here’s their “conversation”:
Cupid: “Hello, angel face, you look as if you’d just washed in morning dew.”
Carole: “I’ve just washed in something much nicer — and it’s your own prescription, too.”
Cupid: “When did I prescribe for you? You’ve turned men’s hearts and heads so often that I can’t remember when you needed my advice.”
Carole: “Well, once upon a time you told me to always use Lux Toilet Soap — and I agree that ‘it’s a girl’s best friend’ — those were your words, Dan.”
Cupid: “You’re not the only girl I’ve seen surrounded with admirers after taking that advice of mine. It’s my favorite ally, that soap.”
Carole: “Men certainly do fall for a lovely complexion, don’t they, Dan? And I’m certainly much obliged for that tip you gave me years ago.”
Below the copy, Cupid is shown pointing to a bar of Lux, calling it “my greatest ally”…and the National Recovery Administration’s famed “blue eagle” logo is next to the angel of love. (Was Cupid endorsed by the New Deal?)
It’s interesting that Lux chose Lombard for this ad, as it had been less than a year since her divorce from William Powell was granted. Hey, even Cupid doesn’t bat 1.000.
This ad is being offered at eBay for $9.99 — and believe it or not, no one has bid on it as of this writing. Hard to believe, because as a bonus, the seller is offering this Lombard page from Photoplay:
I’m not certain what specific issue it’s from, but it looks to be from 1933 because there’s a reference to her film “The Eagle And The Hawk.” It’s a beauty trick, and the caption for the top photo reads:
“The extreme sophistication of Carole Lombard’s latest coiffure created for ‘The Eagle And The Hawk’ convinces us that one need not be bobbed to look very chic. That engaging bang contrasts charmingly with the braid at the neck. Significant, these long screen coiffures.”
And for the bottom:
“Perhaps an attic or forgotten drawer may yield a braid with which to disguise your short locks in this regal manner for evening. Perfect with a sheer dance frock. That bang, which lengthens the head, shortens the face, is suggested only if your eyes are large, features delicate.”
Both the Lux ad and the Photoplay page can be yours…but you better hurry. Bids close at 3:38 p.m. (Eastern) today. If you want to bid, or simply learn more about it, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-2-page-Lux-Ad-Carole-Lombard-HTF-Must-See-/160492730446?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255e1cb84e.
Lombard was featured with a bow and arrow in at least two other photos, probably done to promote the 1932 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. And it looks as if, to borrow a line from Elvis Costello for the second day in a row, her aim is true.
A counterfeit in ‘Coral’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.14 at 01:11
Current mood: amused
Not long ago, we did an entry about a fraudulent autograph of Carole Lombard that was being peddled (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/342123.html), and Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive added a comment on deceptive sellers. Well, yesterday she took time out from celebrating the first-ever postseason series win by her beloved Texas Rangers to alert me to another obvious fake making the rounds. (Incidentally, the signature above is the real deal, although I’m not sure whether Lombard used a white ink pen to actually sign it or whether it was reproduced. Whichever, it’s definitely hers.)
I had called my earlier entry “Caveat emptor!” (let the buyer beware); Sampeck labeled this one “caveat emptor redux.” And this fakery would almost seem funny were it not for the very real danger that somebody might get taken.
Here’s what the item in question looks like from a distance:
From that perspective, you might give it a cursory glance and approval. But a closer inspection shows something is wrong; not only is there no “e” in her first name on a photo that was taken long after she had adopted the “e” for good, but the “o” and the “a” are transposed, leading to a signature of…
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you…”Coral Lombard.”
Okay, we know Lombard wasn’t a particularly good speller, but one presumes she at least knew how to spell her name. Or, as Sampeck humorously surmises, “Gosh, she must’ve been loaded” when she signed it. My initial excuse, er, explanation was that she might have been thinking of the actress Coral Browne, but apparently she was still in Britain in the mid-1930s, and would’ve been a teenager to boot, having been born in 1919. (Browne today might be best known for her marriage to Vincent Price — someone Lombard may have known — but Browne and Price didn’t meet until 1973, marrying the following year.)
Oh, and from the look on Lombard’s face in this photo, she apparently senses something is amiss:
Maybe that look derives from the price the seller is asking for this photo: $199.
I’m not going to dignify this absurdity by providing a URL, but I will say it is from a company called, ironically, “Guaranteed Autographs.” Yeah, right.
When it comes to this phony stuff, I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused. And along those lines, here’s Elvis Costello with a song containing that phrase — “(The Angels Wanna Wear My) Red Shoes.” Costello still performs that song when he tours in rock mode (the man is a musical encyclopedia, doing everything from jazz to country to classical!), but here he is when the song was new, and so was he…back in 1977, when he made his first appearance on the famed UK music program “Top Of The Pops.” In fact, I believe this performance predates the Attractions, as his backing band then was a group named Clover. Don’t feel bad that they didn’t stay with Costello, however; they wound up as Huey Lewis’ backing band, the News.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Some more from the house she lived in
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.13 at 00:47
Current mood: pleased
We have at least one more “then and now” from the house on 7953 Hollywood Boulevard that Carole Lombard called home between 1934 and 1936, and I credit Bill Cwiklo for pointing it out. In Paramount publicity still p1202-717, issued sometime in ’34, Carole is shown posing in front of a fireplace. Cwiklo noticed the similarity between the fireplace in that photo and one shown in the current setup of the house (though it’s now shaded differently than in Lombard’s time); he believes it to be from one of the upper-level bedrooms, and judging from the leaves on the trees in the window and what looks to be a second-floor balcony, I believe he’s right. So here are the photos, side by side:
Here are two more pictures of Lombard inside her house. The first shows her celebrated bed, designed by William Haines (and oh, the stories this bed could tell!). Note a telephone in front; if someone called Carole while she was in the midst of some, uh, activity in bed, it would take her a few rings to reach it and answer. The other photo, Paramount p1202-713, shows a Lombard confident in her choice of decor.
Remarkable photos, remarkable house…remarkable lady.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A cottage for sale, er, rent
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.12 at 00:38
Current mood: envious
It’s probably Carole Lombard’s most famous residence, at least among those solely connected to her. And apparently now you can call it home, too…provided you’re willing to pay rent that, for a month, may be more than the rent many of us pay for a year.
This house, on 7953 Hollywood Boulevard, was recently put on Craigslist, for a monthly rent of $5,800 (if only I’d won MegaMillions or Powerball!). It’s not listed there anymore, so perhaps the seller found a willing renter. What will that person get?
* Four bedrooms.
* Three baths.
* Fireplaces.
* Wood floors.
* And basking in the aura of a legend during a remarkable era in her life.
(Thanks to the Classic Movies blog — http://classicmovieblog.blogspot.com/ — for the information.)
Lombard moved into this house (which she, too, apparently rented) in April 1934, some months after her divorce from William Powell and while she was seeing Russ Columbo. After his unexpected death that September, she had a romance with screenwriter Robert Riskin, but his reluctance to have children doomed any possible marriage. In early 1936, she began seeing Clark Gable, but the location of her house, at the western end of a heavily traveled thoroughfare, made it impossible for them to maintain a discreet relationship. So in the spring of 1936, Carole moved into a more secluded home in Bel-Air.
During her two years on Hollywood Boulevard, Lombard developed a reputation as the film industry’s most imaginative party giver, many of them given in that home. Professionally, she finally emerged as a top-tier star thanks to hits such as “Twentieth Century” and “Hands Across The Table.”
The house’s interior was designed by former MGM star turned decorator William Haines; apparently none of his furniture remains inside. Here are some photos of the interior — compare and contrast, then and now (and note the portraits of Carole atop the fireplace!):
Now, some more photos of the house as it looks today:
What a showplace. (Several other entertainment notables also called this home, including character actor Max Showalter and British pop-rock star Morrissey.) One can only guess what it must be like to live there, with Lombard’s spirit hovering over the place. (It reminds me of a short-lived ’80s sitcom called “Jennifer Slept Here,” where Ann Jillian played the ghost of a fun-loving movie star whose mansion is inhabited by a family, though she only made her presence known to their teenage son.)
To close, I thought I’d play the song whose title is noted in the subject line, “A Cottage For Sale.” Written by Willard Robison and Larry Conley in 1929, more than 100 versions have been recorded, including Frank Sinatra, Billy Eckstine, Nat “King” Cole, Ruth Etting and Julie London; heck, even Little Willie John, Ivory Joe Hunter and Chuck Berry have tried their hand at it. Here it is when it was new, in 1930, recorded by British star Jack Hylton’s orchestra (and taken off an HMV 78 rpm disc):
Of Carole and Clara
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.11 at 01:40
Current mood: cheerful
We tend to think of Hollywood history as being neatly divided into several eras, but just as in real life, it doesn’t work that way. Things overlap, so someone you identify with one period may have ties to a person invariably linked to another.
For example, take Carole Lombard…
…and another screen legend, Clara Bow:
They seem so inexorably tied to different eras — Bow the 1920s, Lombard the 1930s. But, of course, we know better; Carole made quite a few movies in the twenties, while Bow’s film career extended into 1933. In fact, for much of 1930 and part of 1931, both were employed by the same studio, Paramount. I’m not sure if they were more than acquaintances then — in “Screwball,” Lombard biographer Larry Swindell says nothing about it — but a Bow biographer states their ties, however tenuous, may have gone back several years.
In his book “Clara Bow: Runnin’ Wild,” David Stenn looks back to the fall of 1927, when “the Garden of Allah became the final stop of the Young Hollywood set.” The Garden of Allah, built by actress Alla Nazimova in 1921 (hence the name), was a famed hotel/bungalow complex on Sunset Boulevard:
As Stenn wrote, “Lina Basquette and Joan Crawford were regulars. Buddy Rogers brought Janie Peters, a next-door neighbor who would soon change her name to Carole Lombard.” (Obviously, Stenn is in error about her name; while she was legally Jane Peters and would be until 1937, she was known as Lombard in the film community and in the fall of ’27 was working under that name for Mack Sennett.) “When Earl Burnett’s famous Biltmore Hotel Orchestra played ‘Goodnight, Ladies’ one last time at two a.m., its musicians segued to the Garden of Allah and jammed on Clara’s favorite jazz tunes all night long.”
Stenn wrote Bow’s parties normally ended “with a sunrise swim in the hotel pool,” which Nazimova had built in the shape of the Black Sea:
So there’s a good chance Bow and Lombard, who was only three years younger than Clara, got to know each other even if they didn’t become friends. And even though Bow had become Hollywood’s biggest box-office attraction by the fall of 1927, it didn’t necessarily endear her to many in the industry.
It’s well known that Marilyn Monroe, in many ways the Bow of her era (she once even posed as her for Life magazine), had a rough childhood, but it was positively idyllic compared to Clara’s. Born into squalor in Brooklyn in 1905 to a mentally ill mother who once tried to kill her and a father who would rape her when she was a teenager, Bow escaped the tenements by winning a movie magazine contest in 1921. She was a natural actress (something that became apparent in her first film of note, 1922’s “Down To The Sea In Ships”), soon moving to Hollywood and gradually gaining experience. By 1926, Clara had reached full-fledged stardom; the following year, with the release of the film “It,” she became the era’s embodiment of sex appeal.
Unfortunately, that “It girl” tag, as well as the many myths that have grown about her over the years, doesn’t do Bow justice. Yes, she was sexually active and had a number of lovers, including Gary Cooper and director Victor Fleming, but she was not a nymphomaniac. (And while she became an ardent fan, and friend to, the University of Southern California football team, the infamous orgy involving Trojan players alleged in Kenneth Anger’s “Hollywood Babylon” never happened.) While adored by those on film sets for her professionalism and generosity, her lack of education and sophistication made her persona non grata to many in the filmland social whirl.
Moreover, Paramount underpaid Bow relative to her box-office worth, generally putting her into formula films that didn’t allow her to develop as an actress. And while Clara held her own in talkies — while she was fearful of the new technology, her voice was capable, at least congruent with her character — changing tastes, a Depression economy and a scandal involving a personal secretary blackmailing her would spell the end of her time at Paramount. She married cowboy star Rex Bell, moved away from Hollywood, returned to make two films for Fox (“Call Her Savage” and “Hoopla”) and then retired for good in 1933. She would have two sons by Bell, who later became Nevada’s lieutenant governor, dying three years after him in September 1965.
While we don’t necessarily think of Lombard as a direct successor to Bow, there must have been something in Carole’s personality that reminded some at Paramount of Clara. Note these publicity stills of Lombard, and note how similar they are to some of Bow taken several years before:
Lombard and Bow would sort of cross paths one final time. Clara and her family had a ranch in Searchlight, Nev., not far from where the plane Carole was in crashed in January 1942. Rex Bell would organize a search party after the crash occurred and would help console Clark Gable when he came to the site.
Stenn’s book is a good introduction to Bow, along the lines of “Bombshell,” his later book on Jean Harlow. In fact, Harlow (and a young Jean Arthur) had supporting roles in Bow’s 1929 film “The Saturday Night Kid,” and while Clara was at first intimidated by the teenaged platinum blonde, they soon became friends:
(It is said that Harlow’s 1933 film “Bombshell” is in many ways a gentle satire on Bow, although by the time it came out the public viewed it as Jean self-parodying herself.)
While I’ve never seen a photo of Bow and Lombard together, here’s one of Clara that’s definitely in the “two ships passing in the night” department. It’s from 1930, and shows Bow meeting Paramount’s latest discovery, Marlene Dietrich, on the set of her film “Morocco”:
To also learn more about Bow, check out the splendid site “The Clara Bow Page” (http://www.clarabow.net/), which includes a biography, filmography, hundreds of photos and some contemporary stories about her. (Sadly, more than a few of Bow’s films are lost, although one of her earliest, the 1923 costume drama “Maytime,” was among a group of 75 movies found in New Zealand earlier this year.)
While some may find it difficult to comprehend the “language” of silent film, those viewers who overcome that obstacle will find in Bow a vibrant actress whose personality and approach is every bit as timeless as Lombard’s.
Oh, and as for the Garden of Allah — home to a number of legends, including Dorothy Parker, Errol Flynn, Greta Garbo, Humphrey Bogart, the Marx Brothers, F. Scott Fitzgerald and the recently departed Gloria Stuart — it became history before Bow did, razed in June 1959 to make way for a bank.
eBay odds and ends
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.10 at 10:10
Current mood: content
Scanning the eBay listing of Carole Lombard-related memorabilia, I found a few items that may be of interest to collectors.
We’ve previously discussed the Ross-Verlag series of photo cards that were popular in Europe during the 1920s and ’30s (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/52279.html). The company produced thousands of cards, and a checklist compiled by collectors lists 14 Lombard cards. Two of them have surfaced on eBay:
In the years I’ve researched Lombard items, I’m somewhat certain I’ve never seen the first image, and I’m definitely certain I’ve never seen the second (although Carole posed for several Paramount publicity photos with her beloved Palomino, Pico).
The cards themselves aren’t very big (1 3/4″ x 2 3/4″), and both are in good condition. Bidding on the photo on the left ends at 4:40 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday, five minutes before bids close on the other. Bids open at $2.99, and knowing that there are a number of Ross-Verlag collectors, I’m surprised that as of this writing, neither has yet received a bid. If you’d like to change that, or simply find out more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1930s-Carole-Lombard-Ross-Verlag-photo-card-/330481627757?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf23d726d for the first photo, http://cgi.ebay.com/1930s-Carole-Lombard-Ross-Verlag-photo-card-/330481629595?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf23d799b for the second.
Another photo of Lombard with an animal is also being auctioned, and what makes this image rather rare isn’t what’s being pictured as how it’s presented:
This 1932 image of Carole holding a cocker spaniel, taken by Paramount’s Otto Dyar, was frequently colorized and put on magazine covers, and understandably so — it’s charming. But in its original black-and-white form, it’s equally riveting.
This is a 7.5″ x 9.5″ double-weight matte finish portrait, with a Dyar stamp in the lower right-hand corner; it’s in excellent condition. And, as you might expect, it will cost you considerably more than a Ross-Verlag card — $249.95 for starters. No bids have yet been placed, and bidding ends at 11:15 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. For more information, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-32-BEAUTY-Portrait-OTTO-DYAR-/380272893405?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item588a07dddd.
Wed where she worked
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.09 at 01:55
Current mood: creative
That’s Carole Lombard with William Powell on the date of their wedding, June 26, 1931. To the left of the couple are Carole’s two brothers, Frederick and Stuart Peters, with Rosemary Zeiner in between them.
Lombard and Powell were certainly glad to be away from work at Paramount (and after the wedding took place, they boarded a boat to Hawaii for the honeymoon). But whereas the complex on Melrose Avenue was strictly a studio in 1931, nearly eight decades later it’s more than a workplace.
It’s also where you can hold a wedding.
That’s right, the fabled site of so many movies and home to so many stars since the 1920s can be rented out to host your saying “I do,” and the reception afterward.
Take the vows in front of the legendary Bronson Gates or around the fountain? You decide. After that, you can hold the reception at the Paramount Theatre…
…or the smaller Sherry Lansing Theatre:
Have your guests take a private tour of the studio backlot (perhaps your guide can walk them over to the Carole Lombard Building). In fact, let them celebrate the nuptials in “New York,” on the city street lot where many film and television scenes have been filmed:
Heck, stage a romantic reception and party that night:
Naturally, this won’t come cheaply; rental fees range from $2,000 to $15,000, depending upon the size of the space rented, and catering meals will cost between $55 and $100 per person. (There are also a number of other fees.) But if you have a really wealthy father — you know, the type who used to be portrayed in the movies by Walter Connolly or Eugene Pallette — money is obviously no object.
To learn more, go to http://www.paramountstudios.com/special-events/wedding-special-occasions.html or call (323) 956-8398; other information can be found at http://www.herecomestheguide.com/location/detail/paramount-pictures-special-events-department/. But if you do decide to hold the big day at Paramount, at least be civil when you arrange it by not bringing up how the studio missed the boat by largely ignoring its considerable pre-1948 history when labeling its sound stages (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/259644.html).
If Lombard and Powell were marrying in 2010, one wonders whether they would have staged their wedding at Paramount. Of course, with the film industry being what it is today, neither would be under contract there.
Carole’s pulp fiction
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.08 at 01:53
Current mood: curious
It made perfect sense for Carole Lombard to be on the cover of “True Confessions” in February 1938, insomuch as her latest film (one of them, anyway) was titled “True Confession” (singular) — a logical tie-in. (While that was obvious, it should be noted that Carole graced that magazine’s cover on at least three other occasions.)
What we’re saying is that in Lombard’s heyday, she and other stars could be found on covers of magazines that didn’t deal with the film industry — either as a fan magazine or trade publication — or weren’t general-interest titles. True Confessions was one example; the following is another…one much rarer.
More than 3 1/2 years before “True Confession” (the movie), Carole and her co-star were on the cover of a magazine I’d heretofore never heard of:
That’s Lombard and Bing Crosby, whose “We’re Not Dressing” was then in theaters, on the June 1934 cover of a publication called Love Novels. (The National Recovery Administration eagle logo helps pinpoint the date.) I have no idea whether there are any stories or pictures about the movie inside, but we do know that someone named Mary King Hunter is providing career and romantic advice, and that you can win both a pal and a prize by joining Rosemary Lee’s Helping Hearts Club. Moreover, there are at least two romantic stories — “She Didn’t Belong” and “Bride For Rent.”
A bit of research showed that Love Novels was published by Doubleday, and was the rebooting of a publication called Three Love Novels, which had begun in the summer of 1932 and had since published sporadically:
The change of title, and the price reduction from 25 to 15 cents an issue, didn’t help –– Love Novels breathed its last in November of ’34, leaving the Helping Hearts Club in limbo. (A different publisher revived the title for a magazine that ran from 1943 to 1954 and was nicknamed “The BIG Love Magazine,” though I’m guessing that, unlike the HBO series, it had nothing to do with polygamy.)
This interesting curio is being auctioned, with bids beginning at $99.99; apparently “pulp fiction” interests people other than Quentin Tarantino. As of this writing, no bids have been placed, with bidding ending at 2:32 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. Should this interest you, check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/LOVE-NOVELS-PULP-JUNE-1934-BING-CROSBY-CAROLE-LOMBARD-/330481168654?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4cf236710e.
She’s been robbed!
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.07 at 01:27
Current mood: annoyed
For all the advantages of being a celebrity, there are several downsides. It’s hard to fade into the woodwork and go about your business without people making a fuss. Security can also be a problem, as Carole Lombard learned in the spring of 1938.
Lombard made the front page of the Los Angeles Examiner on April 23, 1938, but it wasn’t the result of clever publicity from Russell Birdwell or some other master of studio PR. No, this was crime news…her home had been robbed.
Two images of the home on 609 St. Cloud Road; the top from a contemporary postcard, the bottom the house in more recent times (pop star Belinda Carlisle and her husband resided here for several years). Carole moved there in 1936, believing it would give her more privacy than her fabled residence on Hollywood Boulevard (privacy she now sought given her budding romance with Clark Gable).
Lombard apparently wasn’t in the house at the time of the robbery; according to the Hearst newspaper, $25,000 worth of items were stolen — including a jewel-encrusted watch given her by Gable. With film stars’ houses on maps sold to tourists, chances are the perpetrators knew who they were targeting.
But if it was any solace to Carole, she wasn’t the only troubled actress on the front of the Examiner. In fact, the other film star’s problems with crime warranted a banner headline:
“SIMONE SIMON BARES $50,000 SWINDLE PLOT.” Simon was a French actress brought to America in the mid-1930s, signing with 20th Century-Fox. She appeared in a number of films, including a 1937 remake of “Seventh Heaven” with James Stewart, but never really clicked with American audiences, although she did have some success in the 1940s with movies such as “Cat People.” She also reportedly had an affair with George Gershwin prior to his death in 1937. Simon died in Paris at age 94 in February 2005.
As far as details of the swindle plot, I really couldn’t find anything online. This newspaper, in full, could explain that, the Lombard robbery and so much more. Get a feel for life in Los Angeles in April 1938. Also see if you can find Marion Davies’ name somewhere in the paper (legend has it that while William Randolph Hearst was alive, her name had to be placed somewhere in every Hearst paper, every day).
This copy of the Examiner has 30 pages and is said to be in good condition. One bid, for $4.99, has already been made, and bidding closes at 10 a.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. Interested in adding this to your vintage newspaper collection? Bid, or learn more, by going to http://cgi.ebay.com/0510101W-CAROLE-LOMBARD-HOME-LOOTED-APRIL-23-1938-/390248688558?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adca26bae.
Soon after this incident was reported, Lombard’s latest film, “Fools For Scandal,” was released. Since it drew lackluster response from critics and was a box-office disappointment for Warners, chances are more than a few fans of Carole felt as if they had been robbed.
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.06 at 00:00
Current mood: jubilant
Celebrate what, you say? Well, if you’re a Carole Lombard fan you probably know, but just in case you don’t, some hints…
From Alabama to Minnesota, Vermont to Pennsylvania (and in the 46 other states, and indeed around the world), classic movie buffs are celebrating the 102nd anniversary of Carole Lombard’s birth. If you are in the U.S. and have Turner Classic Movies, you can watch seven of her movies today, beginning at 9:30 a.m. (Eastern).
We remember her considerable talent as an actress, her generosity to others that made her among the most beloved people in the film industry, her timeless personality and approach to life that makes her every bit as modern today as she was during her all-too-brief lifetime.
We remember the three main loves of her life — William Powell,
Russ Columbo,
and Clark Gable:
We remember her devotion to her family:
We remember her love of sports, both as an athlete and as a fan:
Happy 102nd, Carole Lombard!
Lombard times seven: A reminder
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.05 at 02:26
Current mood: excited
As you probably know, tomorrow (Oct. 6) marks the 102nd anniversary of Carole Lombard’s birth, and if you live in the U.S. and have Turner Classic Movies available, you’ll be able to watch seven — yes,
seven! — of her films as a birthday present to fans, including a few TCM doesn’t show all that often. Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern), with a still and a promotional item from each movie:
* 9:30 a.m. — “No More Orchids” (1932)
* 10:45 a.m. — “Virtue” (1932)
* noon — “Lady By Choice” (1934)
* 1:30 p.m. — “Fools For Scandal” (1938)
* 3 p.m. — “In Name Only” (1939)
* 4:45 p.m. — “The Gay Bride” (1934)
* 6:15 p.m. — “Twentieth Century” (1934)
Enjoy.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Picture Carole in these
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.04 at 00:28
Current mood: cheerful
My friend Tally has worked on some Carole Lombard photos recently, removing watermarks and such to allow us to see some otherwise obscure images of her in their full brilliance, and I’m pleased to share her work on them with you.
First, how about this fetching portrait of Lombard looking sleek and sexy, a leopard-skin rug at her feet (in the days before Hollywood’s consciousness was raised about such things):
This one’s rather wistful, isn’t it?
A portrait of Carole from about 1934:
I like this one of her in a dark straw hat:
Here’s Lombard with bobbed blonde hair:
Now, two of Carole with her most frequent leading man, Fred MacMurray. The first looks to be on the Paramount lot at the time “Hands Across The Table” was filmed; the other may be a publicity still from “Swing High, Swing Low”:
Finally, a photo of MacMurray, Lombard and Una Merkel to promote “True Confession” (we’ve run several of these lately). Carole and Una are either in an argument or raving about something, and Fred probably wonders how he got in the middle of all this:
Wonderful work, Tally. Thank you.
Out for a ride
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.03 at 00:39
Current mood: jubilant
Many pictures capture the
joie de vivre which made Carole Lombard so beloved during her relatively brief lifetime, and a timeless icon of classic Hollywood even today. Here’s yet another image that explains her appeal:
Isn’t that stunning? Look at that smile.
According to the seller, “It is back-stamped ‘Oct. 17, 1938,’ and shows Miss Lombard laughing as she sits on what looks like a motor bike of some kind. The photo appears to have been taken on a studio back-lot.” The lot was most likely Selznick International in Culver City, since in the fall of ’38 that’s where she was working, making “Made For Each Other” with James Stewart.
Several other photos of Lombard on her motor bike have surfaced over the years, including one where she’s showing it off to Sabu when the film star from India was visiting Los Angeles for the first time:
Also on the back of the top picture, the seller says, are the phrases “Photo by PIX PUBLISHING” as well as “Used in TIME.” Interesting, since the Oct. 17, 1938 date cited above was the date of the issue on which Lombard was the cover subject of Time’s younger and larger-sized sister, Life magazine.
This candid classic of Carole — 8″ x 10″, in very good condition — is being auctioned at eBay, but bidding concludes at 8:14 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. Two bids have already been made as of this writing, the higher being for $10.99. If you’d like this photo for your collection, or are simply interested in learning more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-motorbike-ORIG-1938-backlot-candid-/260669389640?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cb11b3b48.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Caveat emptor!
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.02 at 01:23
Current mood: angry
For those of you unfamiliar with Latin, or should I say Latin phrases that have nonetheless entered the English lexicon, that’s “Let the buyer beware!” And today this saying concerns Carole Lombard, clad in a lovely outfit that suggests the heyday of Rome — well, it concerns Carole Lombard memorabilia.
Someone recently purchased an item on eBay that is said to be a radio script from 1941 autographed by Lombard, paying $27.51 for it. Here’s what it looks like:
The second I saw it, several bells rang in my head:
* Dec. 22, 1941? It was indeed a Monday — 15 days after Pearl Harbor, less than a month before Lombard’s fatal airplane accident — but there are no documented broadcasts from that day on which Carole appeared. “Lux Radio Theater” aired that evening, presenting “Remember The Night”; Fred MacMurray reprised his film role that night, and pinch-hitting for Barbara Stanwyck was not Lombard, but...Jean Arthur. Two star guests appeared on the show, but they were Bob Hope (Carole’s co-star in her last “Lux” appearance, on “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” in June of ’41) and Rita Hayworth.
* I simply see “RADIO SCRIPT,” something that looks too generic to be true. What show was this from?
* And the autograph conjured memories for me, and not pleasant ones. It looks suspiciously similar to an autographed train ticket Lombard allegedly signed in December 1936, an autograph we concluded was bogus in December 2007 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/55847.html):
Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive, who confirmed the signature on the rail ticket was not authentic, shared my suspicion of the radio show autograph, calling it “Good detective work … absolutely on-target deduction.” She added:
“Too ridiculous. Can’t these scoundrels find something better to do with their time? This bull—- makes me angry (as a collector) and frustrated (as a long-time autograph dealer).
“Sheesh.”
This makes me upset that I didn’t catch this item before the auction ended, but I never saw it. For some reason, intentional or otherwise, it was never listed with the other Lombard items at eBay before bidding on it closed at just after 2 p.m. (Eastern) on Thursday.
But as bad as this ripoff was, it could have been substantially worse. While it was sold for $27.51 after two bids were made, the seller also had a “buy it now” option of...$185. Sheesh, indeed.
But just to clarify things, here are several examples of what an actual Carole Lombard signature looks like:
As was said on “Hill Street Blues,” be careful out there.
Learning more about Carole, via Clark
Posted by vp19 on 2010.10.01 at 00:56
Current mood: ecstatic
What’s the cover of a Marilyn Monroe book doing heading an entry in a Carole Lombard-related blog? Well, today’s entry really isn’t about Monroe…but it is about the person who wrote and assembled that book, “Marilyn Monroe: Private And Undisclosed,” released three years ago and considered by many to be one of the more illuminating tomes on that oft-discussed ’50s icon.
The author’s name is Michelle Morgan, and she forwarded me some intriguing news today. I’ll let her describe it in her own words:
“I am absolutely thrilled and excited to let you know that I have recently been signed to co-produce a documentary and an accompanying book about the life and times of Clark Gable, which of course will include much information about Carole too. I am working with Hollywood production company Tegan Summer Productions, and the documentary (and accompanying book) will explore Gable’s life through the eyes of those who knew him best, and will take full advantage of over 5 HOURS of previously unseen footage of the Gable family, including much footage of Carole Lombard.
“A blog has been created to share information about the project and I’d be really grateful if you could let your readers know the address, so they can keep up to date with everything that we are doing during this worthwhile project.”
Gladly, Michelle — it’s http://clarkgableproject.blogspot.com/.
The project’s official title is “Gable: The Ties That Bind,” and based upon Morgan’s work on the Monroe book, I am confident this will be a fair and honest portrait, neither gushy nor a hatchet job. The target date for both book and documentary is late 2011 to early 2012.
Morgan added in a later e-mail, “The footage we have is extraordinary and Carole looks wonderful as always. It’s going to be hard work deciding what we will use and what we will leave out, as it is all amazing!”
At one time, Morgan was working on a Lombard biography; whether she has shelved that project or will incorporate that material into this endeavor, I do not know. And while Gable has been a frequent subject for biographers, I am certain Michelle will find information heretofore unknown, providing a new perspective about not only the man who brought Peter Warne, Rhett Butler and so many other characters to life, but about his third wife as well.
That’s Stan Taffel, who will host the documentary, according to Morgan. Taffel, who’s won three Emmy awards, served as moderator of last Saturday’s Republic Pictures 75th anniversary event, and you can get a feel for his interviewing style at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF16B0Hb-kQ.
We eagerly await more news from Michelle on the progress of this documentary…and if any of you have material that could help the project, by all means get in touch and tell her about it.
She even had nice things to say about “Carole & Co.”: “I still look at your blog — such a lot of hard work and it is totally fascinating and wonderful to read it.” Slightly more than a year from now, I’m confident we’ll be able to say the same thing about her Gable book.
(Almost) everyone’s a critic
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.30 at 03:27
Current mood: busy
This is a poster from 1963’s “Critic’s Choice,” the last of four film teamings of comedy legends Bob Hope and Lucille Ball. It’s a tie-in to something Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. is planning next month, though it has nothing to do with this movie — merely its title.
While some may argue that the rise of the Internet and the blogosphere have whittled away at their influence, film critics have been an indispensable part of the cinematic culture for close to a century. And during October, TCM is paying tribute to critics by asking 16 of them to select a double feature from the channel’s voluminous film library. The choices — four films, two critics each night — will air on Monday and Wednesday evenings. Moreover, each will appear with prime-time host Robert Osborne to not only talk about the movies they selected, but how they developed their interest in film criticism.
The lineup is an intriguing blend, as old as the silent era, as recent as 2000. Here is the schedule, with the twin bills from each critic (all times Eastern):
Monday, Oct. 4
Leonard Maltin
* 8 p.m. — “Penthouse” (1933). A pivotal film for Myrna Loy, as it was her first collaboration with W.S. Van Dyke and one of the first movies to lift her out of the vamp/Asian rut she inhabited for much of the early ’30s. Myrna plays a call girl who falls in love with wealthy lawyer Warner Baxter.
* 9:45 p.m. — “Skyscraper Souls” (1932). Another fairly obscure pre-Code gem, this stars Warren William as the towering building’s rather oily owner who exploits everyone he meets. You’ll also see a young Maureen O’Sullivan, Gregory Ratoff and Anita Page, among others. Based on a novel by Faith Baldwin, whose “Spinster Dinner” would be shaped into the Carole Lombard film “Love Before Breakfast.”
Kenneth Turan
* 11:30 p.m. — “Touch Of Evil” (1958). This is the remastered version, more true to the vision of director (and actor) Orson Welles than the original release, which wound up on the bottom of double features. Starring Charlton Heston, Janet Leigh and featuring a memorable cameo by Marlene Dietrich. Don’t miss the opening tracking shot, lasting more than three minutes and finally restored the way Welles wanted it.
* 1:30 a.m. — “I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang” (1932). Based on a true story, this tale of a war veteran whose life unjustly descends into barbarism features a classic performance by Paul Muni. The closing scene is rightly considered one of the most powerful endings in film history.
Wednesday, Oct. 6
Richard Corliss
* 8 p.m. — “Citizen Kane” (1941). After a septet of Carole Lombard films during the day to celebrate the 102nd anniversary of her birth (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/320567.html), watch a classic Lombard saw in a private screening a few months before her death. Like “Touch Of Evil,” this Welles gem wasn’t universally lauded at first, but it was rediscovered and re-evaluated after World War II. And it remains a revolutionary motion picture.
*10:15 p.m. — “The Seventh Seal” (1957). This allegory of death from Ingmar Bergman became an art-house favorite and brought stardom to Max von Sydow, who portrays a knight in medieval Sweden during the Black Plague, international renown. Not for all tastes, but nonetheless powerful.
David Ansen
* midnight — “The Third Man” (1949). Postwar intrigue in Vienna starring Joseph Cotten, who’d worked with Welles in “Citizen Kane”; this time, Orson has a memorable supporting role as the mysterious Harry Lime. The concluding chase through Vienna’s sewers is justifiably famous.
* 2 a.m. — “The Earrings Of Madame de…” (1953). From famed French director Max Ophuls, this romance of vanity reunites Charles Boyer — making his postwar debut in French cinema — with Danielle Darrieux, his co-star in “Mayerling” some 17 years earlier. Vittorio De Sica, an actor before gaining greater fame as a director, has a supporting part.
Monday, Oct. 11
David Denby
* 8 p.m. — “The Big Sleep” (1946). Nice pedigree for a film: Story by Raymond Chandler; script by, among others, William Faulkner and Philip Epstein of “Casablanca” fame (Chandler was under contract to Paramount, and this was a Warners property); directed by Howard Hawks; starring Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. It took nearly a year and a half to make the film due to rewrites and whatnot, but it was worth it.
* 10 p.m. — “His Girl Friday” (1940). More brilliance from Hawks, aided by rapid-fire dialogue from Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell, with all sorts of delightful in-jokes (plus Ralph Bellamy). This, “The Front Page” with a sex change, might have had Lombard in the Russell role if Columbia had been able to afford her…although it’s difficult to envision anyone topping Roz’s standout performance.
Robert Bianco
* midnight — “The Perils Of Pauline” (1947). This not-very-accurate biopic of early silent star Pearl White features brassy Betty Hutton, then at the peak of her career, along with John Lund and Billy de Wolfe — with songs from Frank Loesser. Some of White’s original co-stars have cameos in the silent film sequences.
* 2 a.m. — “Hail The Conquering Hero” (1944). Eddie Bracken made two classics for Preston Sturges, one with Hutton (“The Miracle Of Morgan’s Creek”) and this one, where he plays a small-town boy discharged from the Marines for hay fever, but a misunderstanding leads the citizens to believe he is returning as a war hero. Sharp, perceptive and very funny.
Wednesday, Oct. 13
David Edelstein
* 8 p.m. — “The General” (1927). Many consider this Buster Keaton’s masterpiece, loosely based on an actual incident that occurred during the Civil War. His painstaking attention to detail provided a realism unusual for a slapstick comedy; watch the scene where a locomotive falls into a river as a burning bridge collapses.
* 9:30 p.m. — “Smiles Of A Summer Night” (1955). A charming, lyrical Ingmar Bergman comedy that helped put him on the map with American audiences and would influence much of Woody Allen’s work.
Kim Morgan
* 11:30 p.m. — “Something Wild” (1961). If you only know Carroll Baker from “Baby Doll” or one of the 1965 “Harlow” films, check out this low-budget obscurity where she plays a rape victim who winds up on the Lower East Side and is preparing to jump off a bridge when… This American version of Italian neo-realism also features a jazzy score written by none other than Aaron Copland!
* 1:30 a.m. — “He Ran All The Way” (1951). This film noir thriller has a Red Scare undercurrent. It was co-written by an uncredited Dalton Trumbo, and it would be John Garfield’s last film; blacklisted, he died a year later. With Shelley Winters and Gladys George.
Monday, Oct. 18
Joe Morgenstern
* 8 p.m. — “Oliver!” (1968). A bit of a surprise as winner of the best picture Oscar, this adaptation of Charles Dickens’ “Oliver Twist” featured a relatively anonymous cast (Ron Moody portrayed Fagin rather than initial choices Peter O’Toole and Peter Sellers), but became a smash hit.
* 10:45 p.m. — “The Black Stallion” (1979). Francis Ford Coppola adapted this popular children’s tale about a boy and his horse into a well-received film. With Mickey Rooney as the retired jockey turned horse trainer.
Peter Travers
* 1 a.m. — “Almost Famous” (2000). This look back at the rock scene of the early 1970s, told through the eyes of a youthful rock journalist (which director-writer-producer Cameron Crowe had actually been), was a considerable hit and turned Kate Hudson, playing a groupie, from Goldie Hawn’s daughter to a star in her own right.
* 3:15 a.m. — “The Lady From Shanghai” (1948). Welles turned Rita Hayworth, then his wife (though not for much longer), into a blonde — much to Columbia mogul Harry Cohn’s dismay — for this unusual film noir, best known today for a famed funhouse scene.
Wednesday, Oct. 20
A.O. Scott
* 8 p.m. — “Ride Lonesome” (1959). Arguably Randolph Scott’s best collaboration with Budd Boetticher, this western about a man seeking revenge for the death of his wife features three future stars of the western genre — James Coburn (“The Magnificent Seven”), Pernell Roberts (“Bonanza”) and Lee Van Cleef (spaghetti westerns).
* 9:30 p.m. — “Park Row” (1952). Former newspaperman turned director Samuel Fuller made many satisfying films, although this one about the newspaper business of the late 19th century (for which he wrote the screenplay) unfortunately tends to be overlooked.
Lou Lumenick
* 11 p.m. — “The Last Flight” (1931). Written by aviator and one-time Fay Wray husband John Monk Saunders (he also wrote the story for the Lombard film “The Eagle And The Hawk”), this tale of aviators after World War I wasn’t a big hit at the time but has been rediscovered. Starring Richard Barthelmess, David Manners and Johnny Mack Brown.
* 12:30 a.m. — “All Through The Night” (1942). “To Be Or Not To Be” wasn’t the only film to lampoon Nazis; so did this one, which was also filmed prior to Pearl Harbor and is set in Brooklyn (the Nazis here are members of the German-American Bund). It stars Humphrey Bogart, Conrad Veidt, Peter Lorre and William Demarest; you can even spot Phil Silvers and Jackie Gleason in small parts.
Monday, Oct. 25
Susan Granger
* 8 p.m. — “The Fuller Brush Man” (1948). Red Skelton made a number of funny films during the 1940s, although this one was done at Columbia, not MGM. Frank Tashlin co-wrote the screenplay, in which Red’s character is implicated in a murder he didn’t commit, and Janet Blair is his leading lady.
* 9:45 p.m. — “The Magnificent Yankee” (1950). Louis Calhern reprised his Broadway role of Oliver Wendell Holmes in this adaptation, with Ann Harding as his wife. This was a good year for Calhern; not only did he win an Oscar nomination for this film, but he played Buffalo Bill in “Annie Get Your Gun” and had Marilyn Monroe for a mistress in “The Asphalt Jungle.”
Tom Shales
* 11:30 p.m. — “Mickey One” (1965). Two years before teaming up for “Bonnie And Clyde,” Warren Beatty and director Arthur Penn worked on this tale about a troubled nightclub comic on the lam, done in an American equivalent of French New Wave style. (This will also air at 6:15 p.m. ET Saturday, just before “Bonnie And Clyde,” as part of a tribute to Penn, who died this week.)
* 1:15 a.m. — “Hollywood Hotel” (1937). This comedy, directed by Busby Berkeley, features the debut of the Tinseltown anthem “Hooray For Hollywood,” written by Johnny Mercer and Richard Whiting, plus it features music by Benny Goodman’s orchestra, then nearing the peak of its popularity. With Dick Powell and two of the Lane sisters (Rosemary and Lola).
Wednesday, Oct. 27
Roger Ebert
* 8 p.m. — “The Lady Eve” (1941). What actress ever had a better year than Barbara Stanwyck in 1941? “Meet John Doe,” “Ball Of Fire” and this Preston Sturges smash that reunited her with Henry Fonda, her comedic co-star three years ago in “The Mad Miss Manton.” This is more substantial fare, as she toys with the wealthy dope.
* 10 p.m. — “Sweet Smell Of Success” (1957). Want a feel for New York in the mid-fifties? Check out this acerbic portrait of Manhattan, with Burt Lancaster as J.J. Hunsecker, an ersatz Walter Winchell, and Tony Curtis (who died Wednesday at 85) as his self-loathing assistant; the beauteous Barbara Nichols also shines in a small role. Lancaster’s production company owned the property, and initially Burt wanted Hunsecker to be played by…Orson Welles.
Mick LaSalle
* midnight — “Lady Of The Night” (1925). LaSalle is best known for sparking the career rehabilitation of Norma Shearer through his fine book, “Complicated Women,” so it’s no surprise he chose a Shearer film. This one, a silent where Norma plays dual roles (one wealthy, one streetwise, both infatuated with the same man), is relatively unknown but well done. Adela Rogers St. Johns wrote the story the screenplay is based upon. Shearer’s over-the-shoulder double (when both her characters were in the scene)? None other than Lucille Le Sueur, later known as future Shearer rival Joan Crawford.
* 1:15 a.m. — “Gold Diggers Of 1933” (1933). Ginger Rogers singing “We’re In The Money” in pig Latin, camera zooming in on her until her mouth fills the entire screen…a dance number to “Pettin’ In The Park” where the girls change clothes behind a flimsy screen after a shower…60 girls playing neon violins in the dark. Yes, this is pre-Code, Busby Berkeley style. But there’s also the moving “Remember My Forgotten Man” that concludes this musical comedy on a poignant note.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Getting the upper hand
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.29 at 00:55
Current mood: impressed
That’s a wonderful photo of Carole Lombard in a black sweater, and it’s courtesy of my friend Tally. She came across it the other day, but said the original had “disgusting scan lines.” Thanks to her enterprising photo editing, such lines have been removed. It’s a splendid gift she has, and she uses it well.
So when I came across a photo being auctioned at eBay that needed some touching up, guess who I called upon? (And to the seller of this or any other item where I have a watermark or lines removed, it’s not done as a ripoff. I have never, nor will I ever, reproduce and sell these images for commercial use, but merely show them as historical artifacts.)
And the following artifact ranks as arguably the most unusual of the more than 1,700 publicity stills Lombard made during her seven-plus years at Paramount. Why? Because you don’t see her face, just…
…her hands. (It’s Paramount P1202-495, proving it’s a Lombard still, and I’m guessing this was taken in late 1932 or early ’33.) Said Tally of the photo, “There were a LOT of scratches in the black velvet part of the picture, so turned the contrast up…Obviously it’s black velvet…I bet she wore a turban in this picture session, yes?”
She’s obviously referring to this photo:
I can’t give Tally a yes or no answer on this one because the copy of the photo I have lacks a P1202 mark; for all we know, this portrait may have been taken at some other studio. (A check of the Paramount portrait gallery at carolelombard.org failed to include this photo.)
Getting back to the photo at hand, pardon the pun, it proves Lombard had a lot more going for her than an ethereal face, a sleek figure and magnificent legs. (Incidentally, one of my aunts was a commercial hand model for several years, and no, she did not suffer the same fate as George Costanza in the “Seinfeld” episode — was that “The Puffy Shirt”? — where he briefly takes up that occupation.)
The back of the photo, which had been property of Culver Pictures in New York, may have a snipe at one time or another, but it isn’t there anymore.
The photo is 8″ x 10″, and bidding begins at $19.99; as of this writing, none have been placed. Bids end at 9:21 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday. If you’re interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Photo-Hands-Carole-Lombard-M-/220675087213?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3361429b6d.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
No Clark of her own — and no problem
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.28 at 00:48
Current mood: surprised
In light of what was to come some years later, the teaming of Carole Lombard and Clark Gable so looms over the 1932 Paramount film “No Man Of Her Own” that it’s sometimes treated as if they were the only two characters in the movie. They aren’t, of course, and in fact while Lombard has fine on-screen chemistry with Gable, it’s her work in some of the other scenes, particularly early in the film, that makes many believe it’s one of her two best starring roles before “Twentieth Century” moved her up in the Hollywood hierarchy. (The other candidate often cited is Columbia’s “Virtue.”)
Wesley Ruggles, who directed “No Man Of Her Own,” said as such to author Larry Swindell in the biography “Screwball,” labeling Lombard’s work in the film a “revelation”:
“Somebody complained that she didn’t seem to be acting, which was one hell of a complaint. Because it didn’t look like acting, it was so damn natural. Look at the picture today. It’s dated, but her work hasn’t. She’s very fresh. She’s playing straight, but using comedy technique, too. Those idiots who’d taken over the studio — they couldn’t even see that. Well, the critics didn’t see it either. She was wonderful, but it just passed by.”
Here are two photos of Lombard, as small-town librarian Connie Randall, at home with her family; I don’t recall whether this was before or after her character met Gable’s:
Both of these photos — each 8″ x 10″, in excellent shape, on heavy linen-backed paper — are now available at auction. (According to the seller, there are no snipes or other information on the back of either photo other than “just hand written pencil notation of the movie title.”) Bidding starts at $8.98, and somewhat surprisingly, no bids have been placed as of this writing; bidding closes at 12:13 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. If this strikes your interest, or you simply want to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Original-30s-young-Carole-Lombard-Movie-Still-photos-/250700711064?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a5eed4498.
Finally, we mark the passing of Gloria Stuart, nearly three months after she became a centenarian (which we noted at http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/318284.html) — and thankfully, her health remained strong until the end, enabling her to participate in a public centennial celebration of her life in late July.
According to one respondent at a Turner Classic Movies message board, “Sometimes, during her heyday in Hollywood, she would be mistaken for Carole Lombard by fans. In later years, Gloria often joked about this situation of her mistaken identity.” Interesting. Here’s a photo of Stuart (who I know was at a number of social gatherings Lombard attended, so they probably were acquaintances). Is there a resemblance? You be the judge:
I like to think that somewhere, Carole and Gloria are now sharing a laugh over that mistaken identity story.
For Carole, Fred and Una, another ‘True Confession’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.27 at 02:02
Current mood: embarrassed
Earlier this month, we noted how Carole Lombard helped draw out a side of Fred MacMurray that can best be described as goofy (
http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/337132.html). Well, this photo to promote “True Confession,” with Una Merkel in tow, certainly proves it:
Here, Lombard is definitely dressed in character as fibbing housewife Helen Bartlett, though the expression on her face is in more in line with an angry old man telling kids to stay off the lawn rather than anything Helen does during the movie. MacMurray appears more confused than bemused, and Merkel is simply glad she has Fred in between herself and Carole.
This is an original 8″ x 10″ photo, with a stamp of Dec. 28, 1937 on the back, not long after “True Confession” was released by Paramount. It’s considered in excellent condition.
The photo will be up for auction through 4:32 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday; one bid, for $24.99, has been made as of this writing. If you’d like to win the bidding, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Orig-1937-Carole-LOMBARD-Fred-MacMURRAY-Una-MERKEL-Pic-/190447491539?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c578e19d3.
And speaking of Merkel, here’s an attractive postcard of her:
I bring this up because I found it among the Lombard items listed at eBay, even though it’s 1) clearly not Carole, and 2) Merkel is identified on the postcard. Why this evaded the seller (not the same one selling the top photo, let me make that clear) is beyond me. One guesses they either never heard of Merkel, one of the great character actresses of classic Hollywood, or they thought it was a name of a character Lombard portrayed. Weird. (Perhaps on the top photo, Carole — feeling sympathy for Merkel — is giving those sellers a piece of her mind.)
If you’re a Merkel fan and would like the postcard, you can buy it for $9.99. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/B8434-Movie-Star-postcard-Carole-Lombard-Metro-goldwyn-/370405262960?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item563ddfc670.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Read all about it!
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.26 at 18:09
Current mood: curious
Carole Lombard’s “Nothing Sacred” aired early this morning on Turner Classic Movies in the U.S., so today’s entry deals with that 1937 comedy.
As you know, the film deals with a New York newspaper’s attempts to sensationalize what it believes is a young woman’s losing battle with radium poisoning (she is, of course, actually in fine health but can’t admit that publicly). The film includes items from the fictional newspaper, the New York Evening Star, and here are some screenshots of what it looked like:
Here’s how the copy reads:
“Warsaw, Vt. — Who will be next?
“That grim question held the entire town of Warsaw, home of the Paragon Watch Company, in a grip of terror today, as townfolk wondered, fearfully, which beloved member of their family or friends would fall victim to the creeping death, radium poisoning.
“With two already in their graves, and a third victim, pretty Hazel Flagg, doomed to follow, virtually every man and woman carried the shuddering thought that he or she might now be headed toward certain doom. Deadly radium paint…”
Actually, the first screenshot doesn’t look as it if actually came from a newspaper at all, because nothing is surrounding it. The second, with the photo, is clearly part of a newspaper.
There’s also a scene in the movie where a nightclub honors Hazel with a tableau citing great women of history. Playing Catherine the Great was a burlesque performer named Elinor Troy.
The towering Troy (published accounts of her height range from six feet tall to 6-foot-2), born in Washington, D.C., in September 1916, was a showgirl at famed impresario Nils T. Graslund’s Florentine Gardens in Hollywood. She had occasional bit parts in films when an attractive woman of imposing proportions was needed, although she went uncredited in all 12 of the movies she appeared in (including “The Fleet’s In,” “Lady Of Burlesque” and “Anchors Aweigh”).
Like Lombard, she passed away at age 33, dying of tuberculosis in November 1949. Troy is buried at Valhalla Memorial Park Cemetery in North Hollywood, where her eternal neighbors include Oliver Hardy, Cliff “Ukelele Ike” Edwards and another “Nothing Sacred” cast member — boxer turned actor Maxie Rosenbloom.
By one classic photographer, signed for another
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.25 at 01:38
Current mood: productive
Photos autographed by Carole Lombard are inherently valuable, but one now up for auction at eBay has qualities that make it extra special.
For one thing, it was taken by the legendary George Hurrell. For another, Lombard autographed the picture for…a different photographer.
The inscription reads:
To Fred
The mad man Parrish
Always,
Carole
So, just who was “the mad man Parrish”? Well. here’s what Fred Parrish looked like:
He may not have been a Hurrell in the pantheon of portrait photographers, but he nonetheless had a pretty substantial career. A Wisconsin native, he studied at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where one of his subjects was a classmate named Fredric March. Parrish later served as a machine gunner during World War I. He was a newsreel cameraman for much of the 1920s, as was his wife, Darlene, and they spent three years in Africa on a photographic expedition sponsored by Harvard University.
In 1931, the Parrishes returned stateside, and Fred was hired as a still photographer by RKO, taking early publicity shots of Lucille Ball and Katharine Hepburn. He followed David O. Selznick to his newly-formed studio, and there’s a good chance he took some of these stills of Lombard for “Nothing Sacred” (which will air on Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. at 6:30 a.m. Eastern Sunday):
Parrish did yeoman work for Selznick’s “Gone With The Wind,” taking more than 950 stills of that epic, many of them behind-the-scenes shots. He later worked at Republic Pictures, and died in July 1980.
The Lombard portrait is 11″ x 14″, with the signature in her customary green ink. The item is in good condition and comes unframed. Two bids have already been made as of this writing, topping at $304; bidding concludes at 12:38 a.m. (Eastern) Sunday, so if you want it, make your bid quickly. To learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/AUTHENTIC-SIGNED-CAROLE-LOMBARD-PORTRAIT-HURRELL-/140454284908?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b3ba4e6c. (And please pardon the seller for referring to Hurrell’s first name as “James.”)
We mentioned that Parrish worked for Republic in the 1940s. That famed studio, which found a niche with westerns and action pictures, celebrates its 75th anniversary this year (as does 20th Century-Fox), and the milestone will be celebrated today at the old Republic lot, now the CBS Studio Center in Studio City. (While Lombard never worked for Republic, she spent time on the lot in the late 1920s doing two-reelers for Mack Sennett, who had opened the facility in 1927.)
The celebration — organized by the Cultural Affairs Committee of the Studio City Neighborhood Council and the Museum of the San Fernando Valley, is from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Scheduled guests include (in alphabetical order) Theodore Bikel, Adrian Booth, Michael Chapin, Ben Cooper, Robert Easton, Coleen Gray, Eilene Janssen, Anne Jeffreys, Dick Jones, Jane Kean, Joan Leslie, Marjorie Lord, Jimmy Lydon, Hugh O’Brian, Peggy Stewart and Jane Withers.
Events include screenings of Republic films, serials and trailers, live performances of swing and western music, entertainment by gun spinners, rope twirlers, trick horses, cowboy poets and a diverse collection of memorabilia. In addition, a speakers forum with prominent industry experts and Republic celebrities will discuss a range of topics from creating sci-fi special effects to tales of working at Republic Pictures. (Wonder if there will be any Vera Hruba Ralston anecdotes?)
To learn more about this event — something any movie buff who’s in southern California today should attend — visit http://www.republicpictures75th.com/home.html.
When movie stars get pregnant
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.24 at 00:29
Current mood: confused
“I recently found out I am pregnant. While my guy and I are happy, Hollywood is not. I have been told by no less than 6 people (producers, directors, agents…all people I considered friends) to get rid of the baby. My career is on a fast track…movies are finally happening…why mess it up for a baby?
“I was nice enough not to kick their asses. This is Hollywood after all, and if you are smart you never burn bridges. I just smiled and said I am keeping the baby.”
That’s the opening entry in a remarkable blog from mid-2005 called “Pregnant Actress” (http://pregnantactress.blogspot.com/). Said actress soon discontinued the blog five weeks later, after her guy persuaded her to stop for fear her identity would be revealed. We never discovered who she was, and for this entry -– see title above — it’s rather irrelevant.
These days, pregnant celebs are no longer shocking, as they were in 1991 when Demi Moore flaunted her pregnant body on the cover of Vanity Fair; there’s even a blog dedicated to them (http://celebritypregnancy.sheknows.com/). But had our pregnant actress been in that condition 75 years ago, she not only would have been encouraged “to get rid of the baby,” but might have had to if she wanted to stay under contract.
Actresses of today are a big deal; actresses of Carole Lombard’s day were substantially bigger (and that’s no pregnancy pun). There was no television to speak of in those days, and radio had some impact, but relatively little compared to the movies. And in those days, women had far more influence on the film industry –- both as viewers and as performers -– than they do today.
The battle to become, and remain, “box office” was considerable, and actresses were understandably fearful about the physical effects pregnancy, and childbirth, could have on bodies that were enlarged several times life-size on screen.
Also, keep in mind that the public morals of three-quarters of a century ago were vastly different than today (although, believe it or not, sex outside of wedlock was probably just as frequent then as it is now). If a married actress found it difficult to publicly have a child, a pregnant unmarried actress was really behind the 8-ball. Not only couldn’t she work because of the obvious physical aspects of her condition, but she would have been labeled a pariah and her career would be over. (It was especially true during that era of Hollywood, when studios had actors under long-term contracts and few, if any, freelanced.)
It’s understandable, then, that several decades before Roe v. Wade, abortion was a fairly common, if unspoken, practice in the film industry. Kay Francis had several abortions; Myrna Loy admitted to having one in her autobiography, “Being And Becoming.” It is believed that Jean Harlow underwent two abortions, including one during her relationship with William Powell that she aborted with much reluctance. (And, to be fair, this wasn’t restricted to actresses; in her frank autobiography “High Times, Hard Times,” jazz singer Anita O’Day admitted to having numerous abortions.)
If a movie star found herself with child and refused to abort -– for religious reasons or otherwise –- she could find a way to have the baby, but it wouldn’t be easy. The most famous example is Judy Lewis, daughter of Loretta Young and fathered by Clark Gable while he and Young were on location in the Pacific Northwest filming “Call Of The Wild.”
Young, a devout Catholic, managed to hide her pregnancy while filming “The Crusades,” had the child in private (Lewis turns 75 Nov. 6), then staged an adoption to cover up what she had done. Young denied being Lewis’ birth mother, leading to an estrangement for some years, until admitting it not long before her death in August 2000.
As it turns out, there may be another example of a movie star who discreetly had a daughter sired by a famous father, one that was kept under wraps for many years.
It was no secret that Marion Davies was the mistress of William Randolph Hearst for several decades. What wasn’t known was that Davies may have bore him a daughter -– Patricia van Cleve Lake, reportedly born June 18, 1923 in Paris. The child was said to have then been given to Davies’ sister Rosemary, whose own child had died in infancy, which would mean Marion’s child grew up as her niece.
As was the case for most of the Davies family, Patricia spent much time around San Simeon, and may have met Lombard during her numerous visits to the Hearst castle. Patricia, who acted on both radio and television, married actor Arthur Lake in the summer of 1942. The wedding took place at San Simeon, and before she died in 1993 she said that at the time of her marriage, Hearst secretly told her he was her father.
Lombard, of course, never had a child, and it’s uncertain whether she was ever pregnant. Some believe she may have learned she was just prior to her death, while others contend she may have earlier miscarried during her marriage to Gable. She supposedly wanted children, and it may have been screenwriter Robert Riskin’s refusal to have them that prevented them from marriage in the mid-thirties. (He changed his mind on the subject some years later, marrying and having children by actress Fay Wray.)
To close, a few more thoughts from the blog of our anonymous pregnant actress:
“Women in Hollywood are supposed to wait until a certain ‘point’ in their career to have kids. And when you do you are supposed to gain 12 lbs., all in your tummy, work out with a personal trainer everyday and be back to your size 0 no more than 2 weeks after the baby is born.
“To heck with that. Actresses are real women. Yeah, some still work out during their pregnancy…Gabby Reece looked fantastic at the end, and some look great not working out. But some say to hell with it and they just enjoy eating ‘real’ foods and they put on weight. I will always love Kate Hudson after she gave an interview and said she gained 60 lbs., was the happiest fat lady out there, and that it bothered the people around her much more than her. I’m sure it did, I’m sure her agent and next director were calling daily to see how quickly she was losing the weight.”
and
“So as tough-skinned as you have to be in Hollywood, you have to be even tougher to be pregnant in Hollywood.”
Agreed.
Lombard, Loy and love (tennis and otherwise)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.23 at 00:58
Current mood: amused
At previous times, I’ve lamented that my two favorite actresses of the classic era, Carole Lombard and Myrna Loy, never made a film together. Both were wonderful at comedy, though their approaches to it and personas for it were wholly different, and in the right vehicle they might have complemented each other beautifully.
Imagine, for example, a film where Carole and Myrna are rivals for the same man. We’ll set this hypothetical film at MGM, Loy’s home studio, and Metro officials would understandably want that man to be one of their stars. William Powell? An obvious candidate, but let’s go in a different direction and choose another Metro luminary with links to both Lombard and Loy — Clark Gable:
From the way this scene is positioned, it appears Myrna has the inside track on winning Clark’s heart (or, should I say, the heart of Clark’s character). No surprise there — did you actually think Louis B. Mayer would let an outsider, especially one from Paramount, beat out “the queen of Hollywood” for the love of “the king”?
Actually, this isn’t from a movie, but is an actual photo of Gable, Loy and Lombard at the Los Angeles Tennis Club in late September 1937, and it ran in the Chicago Tribune:
Many thanks to Tally for working on the photo to eliminate the Tribune watermark and the crop marks. The result is the best picture I’ve ever seen of Carole and Myrna. Perhaps an MGM publicist had Lombard and Loy switch seats to put the two Metro stars together; by this time, most film fans knew Clark and Carole were an “item.” (And I had no idea Myrna was a tennis fan.)
Here’s the caption as the photo originally ran:
Film Stars Drop In at Tennis Matches
“Film Actresses Myrna Loy (center) and Carole Lombard showing they’re no different from feminine film fans. While Clark Gable looks at a match at the Los Angeles Tennis Club, Myrna and Carole look at him, with no wire netting to obstruct their view.”
Yes, and once the photo was taken, Lombard returned to concentrating on the match.
Tally also worked on two other photos of Carole from the Tribune archive, and here’s the finished product on both, along with what is on the back of each:
The top photo was received at the Tribune in March of 1939, and I believe it was used to promote “Made For Each Other.” About a third of a century later, in May 1972, the Tribune used the photo in its TV section to illustrate an upcoming telecast of “My Man Godfrey.” The bottom photo has a somewhat similar history — it’s also from Selznick International Pictures for “Made For Each Other” (we learn it premiered in Chicago at the United Artists Theater on March 18), and the portrait was re-used in July 1974 to illustrate an installment from Warren G. Harris’ new book “Gable & Lombard.”
The three photos are among a group of seven Lombard pictures from the Tribune archive that are up for auction at eBay this week — and none of the seven has been bid on as of this writing (the minimum bid for each is $24.99). I’m especially surprised the Gable-Loy-Lombard photo has received no bids, since all three stars have an array of fans.
For Myrna, Clark and Carole, where bidding ends at 8:19 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Trib-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-Myrna-Loy-/250699556316?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a5edba5dc.
For the portrait of Lombard in a dark dress, for which bids end at 11:07 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/260666941515?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3cb0f5e04b.
For Carole in the light dress, check out http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/260666938489?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3cb0f5d479; bidding concludes at 10:57 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday.
(To see all seven, go to http://stores.ebay.com/TribunePhotos/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&LH_SellerWithStore=1&LH_TitleDesc=1&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_sasi=1&_sop=1.)
Oh, and can anyone here conjure up ideas for a hypothetical movie starring Gable, Lombard and Loy?
The magnificent Marsha Hunt
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.22 at 11:13
Current mood: happy
There aren’t too many people left who knew Carole Lombard, but one of them is appearing at an entertainment memorabilia show in Baltimore Thursday through Saturday. Her name is Marsha Hunt, a fine actress of the ’30s and ’40s who had her share of screen success, and might have had more had it not been for post-World War II anti-Communist hysteria.
Hunt never made a film with Lombard, but Marsha’s film career began at Paramount in 1935, so they were studio stablemates for about two years. Carla Valderrama, who’s working on a Lombard biography, has reportedly interviewed Marsha about Carole.
There’s also another Hunt-Lombard tie-in: Both portrayed Jane Mason in “Lux Radio Theater” adaptations of Carole’s film “Made For Each Other.” Lombard did it in 1940, with Fred MacMurray taking the role James Stewart had done on screen the previous year; when Stewart got around to doing a version in late 1945 — nearly four years after Carole’s death — Hunt was his leading lady. (One wonders if the scripts were sufficiently similar to enable “creating” a Lombard-Stewart version…or, for that matter, one starring Hunt and MacMurray.)
Born in Chicago on Oct. 17, 1917, Hunt long aspired to be an actress, and in her teen years was a John Powers model and sang on radio. She went to California in 1934, played coy about her acting ambitions, and the gambit worked as Paramount gave her a screen test and signed her. Hunt made about a dozen films at Paramount, usually in second leads, probably getting her most exposure in the George Burns and Gracie Allen movie “College Holiday.” But, like Lombard in the early thirties, Paramount really didn’t know what to do with her; Marsha’s last film there was opposite John Wayne, still relegated to western programmers, in the oater “Born To The West” (1937).
Hunt freelanced for a while, then got a contract at MGM, where she may have occasionally seen Lombard when she dropped by to visit Clark Gable. The films at Metro were a little better (including “Cheers For Miss Bishop,” a remake of “The Trial Of Mary Dugan” and “Blossoms In The Dust”), the parts a bit bigger. As the forties went on, Hunt gained more visibility with films like “The Human Comedy,” Cry Havoc” and “Music For Millions,” though at star-studded MGM she remained on a slightly lower tier.
After World War II, she continued her success with good roles in “Smash-Up: The Story Of A Woman” and “Raw Deal.” Ironically, the latter film’s title signaled what would be next for her.
Since the mid-1930s, Hunt had been associated with liberal causes (and in fact, she joined Jean Harlow as Hollywood representatives to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s birthday celebration in January 1937); she had signed a number of petitions and was a member of the Committee for the First Amendment. In the postwar witch-hunt Red scare, Hunt and her husband, screenwriter Robert Presnell Jr., were never officially blacklisted, but Marsha — who began working in television in 1949 — rarely got work during the early to mid-1950s.
Hunt guested a variety of series, from “Gunsmoke” and “My Three Sons” to “The Twilight Zone” and “The Outer Limits.” (In the late 1980s, she appeared on an episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation.”) She wrote a book on vintage Hollywood fashion, “The Way We Wore,” in 1993. (Appropriately, her star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame is front of the fabled Larry Edmunds Bookshop.)
She worked in the civil rights movement, and was active for UNICEF and the Red Cross. (She serves on the advisory board of directors of the nonprofit for the San Fernando Valley Community Mental Health Center.) She even still occasionally acts in small roles.
Hunt will appear at the Mid-Atlantic Nostalgia Convention in suburban Baltimore, along with Dawn Wells of “Gilligan’s Island” fame and other notables. To learn more, go to http://www.midatlanticnostalgiaconvention.com/.
A little of this and that
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.21 at 12:48
Current mood: cheerful
CAROLE LOMBARD
“She is one of the smartest young women in Hollywood in more ways than one. She wears a great many or very few clothes equally well.”
Here’s proof of the latter:
“Carole is young and healthy and oh, so beautiful. She goes in mainly for athletics, dancing, tennis, swimming and horseback riding being her favorite diversions. She’s married to Bill Powell, under contract to Paramount, and you’ll be seeing her in ‘Supernatural.'”
The above is a page from a fan magazine –– Photoplay? — in the spring of 1933, when she was indeed married to William Powell and her Paramount film “Supernatural” was about to hit the screens. (The “young and healthy” comment is a nod to the song of that title, one of the hits from the Warners musical “42nd Street” then currently playing.)
That page of the ship–shapely Carole is being auctioned at eBay — and, on the flip side, you get this photo of then-Fox starlet Heather Angel (which was her real name):
The item will be available through 7 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday; bidding begins at $2.49, although as of this writing no bids have been made. If you’re interested in the leggy Lombard or the alluring Angel, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-Movie-Magazine-pic-Heather-Angel-/160481465852?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item255d70d5fc.
Here’s another photo of the early thirties Carole and another brunette actress, although this time both are on the same side of the page:
That’s Paramount stablemate Frances Dee, one of the great beauties of her time. She was in a number of fine pre-Code films, including “An American Tragedy” and “Blood Money,” and was even seriously considered for Melanie in “Gone With The Wind”; however, David O. Selznick believed her looks were too similar to Vivien Leigh’s, and thus cast Olivia de Havilland instead. Dee — who also starred in Val Lewton’s 1943 thriller “I Walked With A Zombie” — was married to Joel McCrea for 57 years, and they had three sons. She died in 2004, a year after being interviewed for the pre-Code documentary “Complicated Women.”
In between Lombard and Dee is a man named M.C. Levee, who was one of the 36 founders of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and served as AMPAS president from 1931 to 1932. (This photo is dated April 5, 1932.) Levee had his own studio, United, from 1920 to 1926, when he sold it to Paramount; he was the latter studio’s executive manager from 1929 to ’32, when he was let go for economic reasons. He subsequently founded the Artists Management Guild, for which this is a publicity photo. (This is not to be confused with the Screen Actors Guild, which wouldn’t be founded until 1933, although the seller lists it as such.) Levee later became an agent whose clients included Joan Crawford, Leslie Howard, Jeanette MacDonald, Paul Muni and Greer Garson.
This is part of the United Press photo collection; one bid, for $9.99, has been placed as of this writing. The auction ends at 10:12 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. To find out more, or to place a bid, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1932-Screen-Guild-Forms-Hollywood-Carole-Lombard-Photo-/170539908651?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item27b4f87e2b.
Out hunting and up a tree
Posted by vp19on 2010.09.20 at 10:34
Carole Lombard so easily epitomized glamour that her informal, sporty side is often overlooked. But several photos that have recently emerged show it — beautifully.
It’s known that Lombard and husband Clark Gable went pheasant hunting in South Dakota in October 1941, and a few pictures from that trip have made the rounds of biographies and other places over the years. But four more photos of the hunting Gables have now been made public:
These were taken on a farm near Roslyn, S.D. (in the northeastern corner of the state, about 35 miles northwest of Watertown) by the daughter of Albert Sorenson, presumably one of the Gables’ hosts. Clark and Carole appear comfortable in their pursuit of waterfowl, just like any other couple (only with a lot more money than other couples, thanks to their ability to play other people for fun and profit).
All four are snapshot size for the time, roughly 3 1/2″ x 4 1/2″. Three bids have already been made on the photos, with the high bid at $16.48 as of this writing; bidding closes at 5:35 p.m. (Eastern) Tuesday. If you’re interested in this artifact of the casual Clark and Carole, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Real-South-Dakota-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/320590663738?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4aa4b1503a.
Some three Octobers earlier, Lombard had just turned 30, and perhaps she was trying to recapture her tomboyish youth. What other reason would she have to pose for a picture like this?
It’s a wonderfully informal image, and here’s the caption:
“UP A TREE — Carole Lombard, who, with James Stewart, is starred in David O. Selznick’s production ‘Made For Each Other.’ Screenplay is by Jo Swerling from a novel by Rose Frankon, and is romantic drama of woman who wanted both career and husband.”
It certainly has nothing to do with the movie — Carole’s character isn’t shown climbing a tree — but that may be the point. When newspaper readers saw this photo, they likely wondered why she was doing it (“it’s that goofy Lombard again”) and it was good publicity for the film. More of the publicity genius of Russell Birdwell.
This is an original 8″ x 10″ photo from Selznick International Pictures and deemed in very good condition. (I’m also told it’s from the collection of “a man who adored Lombard,” with “many wonderful photos, vintage magazines and clippings” to become available.) It will be auctioned through 7:03 p.m. (Eastern) Tuesday; bidding begins at $34.99, although as of this writing no bids have been made. If you’d like to change that, or are simply curious, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Original-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Photo-MADE-EACH-OTHER-/200519775707?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eafe8f5db.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
It’s Carole, by George
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.19 at 11:54
Current mood: artistic
George Hurrell, the most renowned portrait photographer of classic Hollywood whose subjects included Norma Shearer, Jean Harlow and other legends, took his share of pictures of Carole Lombard as well, such as the one above that was Clark Gable’s favorite (and signed on the back “Pa, I love you. Ma”).
Now you have an opportunity to purchase two Hurrell images of Carole, double weight silver gelatin prints and printed with thirties-era technology in Hurrell’s initial studio building by Mark A. Vieira, Hurrell’s biographer (and author of the forthcoming Jean Harlow centennial book we noted recently at http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/336423.html). As Ben Mankiewicz would say of the Turner Classic Movies app for your cell phone, how cool is that?
The first portrait is fairly common; it comes from a 1934 session, and Hurrell used the image at an exhibition three years later:
The second portrait, considerably rarer, was shot at the same session. This time, Carole’s arms are crossed and she looks directly at the camera — very charming:
Each photo also contains a certificate of authenticity and copies of letters from Douglas Fairbanks Jr. and Helmut Newton discussing Hurrell.
Three prints of each portrait are available; you can purchase each for $59.99 under eBay’s “buy it now” policy or make an offer. Both will be available at eBay until Oct. 1. For the “leaning” portrait, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/GEORGE-HURRELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-PHOTO-leaning-/350380678077?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item519450dbbd; for the “arms crossed” print, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/GEORGE-HURRELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-PHOTO-arms-crossed-/350380680310?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item519450e476.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
The further adventures of P1202…
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.18 at 01:30
Current mood: mellow
…Paramount’s code number (as most of you know) for Carole Lombard.
Here are two more splendid examples of the sublime photographic artistry Lombard showed time and time again while at Paramount. Both of these portraits are from around 1936, and both are exquisite. And both can become part of your collection, if you’re willing to spring a little dough. (Well, actually not so little, but we’ll get to that later.)
We’ll start out with p1202-1309:
The seller lists this item as “SEXY GLAMOUR CAROLE LOMBARD 1936 VINTAGE PHOTO,” and at first glance it would appear to be from Universal’s “Love Before Breakfast.” But this is a Paramount portrait, as the label in the lower-right hand corner makes clear. And Lombard serenely surveys things about her, cinematic royalty draped by Travis Banton.
Next, a photo that I had long believed to be p1202-1325 (couldn’t quite discern the final digit due to the light-on-light background), but according to this seller (not the same as the first), it’s p1202-1323. And since this particular seller routinely gives the p1202 numbers in their listings, I’ll grant them the benefit of the doubt:
Sleek from head to toe, befitting a goddess (Carole appears to be resting on something that evokes classic Greek). And just what is Lombard pondering? She seems as mysterious as the Mona Lisa.
Both photos are available under eBay’s “buy it now” option…and each will cost you triple digits. P1202-1309 will wait for a seller until about 6 p.m. (Eastern) Monday — and a buyer would pay $150. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/SEXY-GLAMOUR-CAROLE-LOMBARD-1936-VINTAGE-PHOTO-337M-/380245125339?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item58886028db if you want to learn more.
As for P1202-1323, it will cost even more — $194.95. If unsold, this will be available until 3:29 p.m. (Eastern) on Monday. Interested? Then visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Carole-Lombard-30s-SEXY-GORGEOUS-Portrait-/380267840917?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5889bac595.
We eagerly await discovering more heretofore hidden photographic pleasures from P1202.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A gathering of — er, for — ‘Idiot’s’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.17 at 11:00
Current mood: optimistic
It’s Jan. 25, 1939. Two people with nothing better to do that night decide to take in a movie:
Okay, one of them (Clark Gable) happened to be in the film they were seeing — “Idiot’s Delight,” which was holding a press preview at the Westwood Theater in Los Angeles. For Gable and Carole Lombard, it was also their first time out in public since Clark’s wife, Rhea Langham, announced she would go to Nevada, establish legal residency there, and get a divorce from her husband (similar to what Lombard did in mid-1933 when she divorced William Powell). Both Carole and Clark are playing it cool, not appearing to gloat over the situation. They had waited nearly three years for something like this.
Here’s a better version of the photo, as well as the snipe on the back, although both have Chicago Tribune watermarks:
YOUR AUTOGRAPH, PLEASE?
LOS ANGELES, CALIF. — Making their first appearance in public since Mrs. Rhea Gable announced her intention of obtaining a Nevada divorce from her actor husband, Clark Gable and actress Carole Lombard were besieged by autograph seekers Monday night when they attended a press preview of Gable’s new picture, “Idiot’s Delight” at the Westwood Theater.
PHOTO SHOWS Carole Lombard and Clark Gable carefully averting their eyes from the outstretched hands of autograph seekers as they entered the theater.
This photo, from the Acme syndicate, was stamped Jan. 28, 1939, and is one of eight Lombard photos from Tribune archives being auctioned this week. It’s also clearly the most popular — seven bids have been made as of this writing, whereas none of the others has received any — and the price, which began at $24.99, is now up to $34.99. How much higher will it go remains to be seen, but if you’d like to get in on the action, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/250696245040?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a5ea91f30. Bidding closes at 11:14 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday.
To check out all of the Tribune Lombard photos, visit http://stores.ebay.com/TribunePhotos/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&LH_SellerWithStore=1&LH_TitleDesc=1&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_sasi=1&_sop=1
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
The war bond rally photographer’s story
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.16 at 14:54
Current mood: contemplative
This is the famed photograph of Carole Lombard singing “The Star-Spangled Banner” at what would be her final public appearance, the Indianapolis war bond rally of Jan. 15, 1942. Now we learn more about Lombard’s visit to the Midwest — from an interview with the photographer who took that, and other, pictures of her.
His name? Myron H. Davis, then a stringer for Life magazine:
And here is the interview, from the blog “Photographers Speak” (http://photographyinterviews.blogspot.com/), which originally ran in B&W magazine:
_________________________________________
Can you talk about the context in which these images were made?
Well, you have to remember that there was a huge amount of patriotism at that time. People were shocked about Pearl Harbor and believed that we were an innocent country that had been viciously attacked. Lombard was very patriotic herself, and was, I believe, the first big Hollywood star to sell raise money for the war effort. Later, of course, Bob Hope and Bing Crosby were noted for traveling to overseas bases and putting on big stage shows for the soldiers. But this was the first war bond rally in the country, and I think Lombard’s death inspired other Hollywood stars to follow her example.
Take me through some of her activities on this tour.
Lombard didn’t like flying, and had taken a train from Los Angeles that was bound for Chicago. The train made a brief stop in Salt Lake City on January 13, where she spoke to people waiting on the platform and sold some war bonds.
A photo of Lombard with two servicemen in Salt Lake City on Jan. 13.
Then she got back on the train and proceeded to Chicago, where she sold more bonds and did some interviews. From Chicago she flew to Indianapolis on Wednesday evening, and met her mother at the train station the next morning.
Her first official appearance that day was at the Indiana statehouse. Also attending were the governor [Henry F. Schricker], the publisher of the Indianapolis Star [Eugene C. Pulliam] and Will Hays, who was responsible for the notorious Hays Code of film censorship. The governor made a speech while Lombard stood on a stepstool and personally performed the flag-raising ceremony. She was wearing a fur coat, on account of the cold weather, but she was very down to earth. She didn’t have any “actress” airs about her. After the flag-raising, she signed the first shell fired by the United States in World War I, gave a short speech and then signed autographs for the crowd. I remember that she and the governor and Hays stood in a row at one point and gave the “V for victory” sign for a newsreel camera crew.
Lombard raises the flag as Indiana Gov. Henry F. Schricker addresses the crowd.
Then everybody went inside the statehouse building, where Lombard sold war bonds for about an hour or so. She was very good with the crowds, and very spontaneous. She handed out special receipts to everyone who bought a bond. These receipts had her picture and signature printed on them, plus a special message. I still have one, in fact. It read: “Thank you for joining me in this vital crusade to make America strong. My sincere good wishes go with this receipt which shows you have purchased from me a United States Defense Bond.”
The Lombard war bond rally receipt.
She was then driven to the Claypool Hotel, where she was staying, for another flag-raising event. I think it might have been to commemorate the opening of an armed forces recruitment center. After that she went to the governor’s mansion for a big formal reception — busy day! And then that evening, she appeared at another war bond rally at the Cadle Tabernacle, where she gave a patriotic speech to get the crowd fired up. The last thing she did was to lead the crowd in singing “The Star Spangled Banner.”
Did you have much personal interaction with her during the tour?
I was with Lombard for three days, traveling all around. She put in a lot of long hours, and I tried to go wherever she went. We passed a few words here and there, but she knew enough about photography to just let me do my job, and I just let her do her thing and documented it.
Your most famous shot of Lombard is the one in which she’s singing the national anthem onstage.
I knew that the Cadle Tabernacle was the last place that she was to perform publicly before heading back to the West Coast. It was this huge auditorium that was standing room only and filled with patriotic signs put up everywhere. When I got up on the stage I saw way back on the far wall this big sign that read, “Sacrifice, Save and Serve.” That pretty much summed up the mood of the country right then, and I said to myself, “Wow. I’ve somehow got to get that sign as part of the image.”
What equipment did you use for this image?
I used my Speed Graphic and Eastman Kodak Double XX film. I had a battery-powered Heiland flashgun on my camera fitted with a reflector and a #3 Wabash Superflash bulb, which was the most powerful one on the market back then. I framed the shot to illuminate both Lombard and part of the audience to her left. I also had a couple of stagehands point flashtubes with #3 flashbulbs at the front and middle rows to help light what was a really large crowd. Fortunately I got a pretty good negative, but when I had to make an 11 x 14 print for Life magazine, I had to dodge and hold back some of the sign in the background to make it legible.
I understand you had a close encounter with Lombard at the airport before she got onto her plane.
I was pretty doggone tired after taking that last picture of her, not realizing what a historical moment it was going to represent. I had to catch a plane at the Indianapolis airport at around three or four in the morning. I took a cab there and arrived early. I was practically the only passenger there. So I’m sitting on this wooden desk, half-asleep, when I sensed somebody come in and sit next to me. I felt a fur coat pressing against the side of my leg. Well, of course I knew it must be a woman, but I was so surprised when I opened my eyes and here was Carole Lombard sitting right next to me! We were so close together it was almost like we were boyfriend and girlfriend. I was so startled that it made her laugh, and then I laughed, too. I guess both of us were the kind of people who tried to see the sunny side of life.
Davis captures Lombard’s ability to connect with people from all walks of life.
I had sensed from the start of working with her that she was a wonderful, down-to-earth lady. Being in Hollywood and being a star and being married to Clark Gable hadn’t gone to her head. So we just sat there and talked about a few of the day’s events. I thanked her for being so cooperative and letting me follow here around and do my thing. And she said, “Well, I was happy to do it, Myron.” I don’t think I called her by her first name. I probably called her Miss Lombard. Being the kind of lady she was, she said early on, “Just call me Carole.” It was a very sincere personal exchange between the two of us thanking each other for working on a job that we both thought was necessary for the country at that time.
Her mother and a Hollywood press agent [Otto Winkler] were also there, standing in front of me. Neither of them spoke much. Carole and I were doing all the talking and laughing until they called her plane. We weren’t there together very long. I would say I talked to her for about five to ten minutes. Her plane was called shortly before mine, and then I got on my plane and fell asleep right away.
Did she talk about her fear of flying?
Yes. She told me she was really afraid of flying, but that she didn’t want to spend three days — and she used this expression — on a choo-choo train to go back to California. So this is another tragic part of it. It was almost like she had a premonition of some kind.
Ever the professional, Lombard held this V for Victory pose until Davis could make the shot.
You didn’t take any photographs of her at the airport?
No, my equipment was checked in, except for my Leica, but I wasn’t going to bother her anymore. I’d been following her around with my camera for three days and nights, and it was obvious that she and her mother were tired, like I was. I always tried not to impose on people.
So your Cadle Tabernacle pictures are the last ones that anyone took of her.
Yes, I’m convinced that’s true. I don’t remember seeing any other photographers at the auditorium. And I don’t think anybody else was at the hotel waiting to take her picture after the event wrapped up. I’m certain that the “Sacrifice, Save and Serve” picture Life ran was the last one taken of Carole Lombard while she was alive.
It must have been quite a shock to hear the news about her death.
I was married at the time and living on the south side of Chicago. We hadn’t been married all that long. I was still in bed trying to get some sleep from all this round-the-clock stuff, when my wife comes in, shakes me, wakes me up and says, “New York is on the phone. They want to talk with you.” It turned out to be Life magazine calling. They said, “Myron! You’re sleeping? Where are your Lombard pictures?” I said, “Well, they’re here with me. What about them?” “Oh, you don’t know? There was a plane crash and she was killed. We want those pictures here. Go downtown, develop the negatives and make four 8 x 10 prints. We’ve arranged for you to go to the Associated Press offices, and they will transmit the pictures to us. We’ll look at them and tell you which one we want. Then go back to the darkroom and make an 11 x 14 print, and then go down to the Donnelly printing plant — which was on 22nd Street just off the lake — and deliver this personally. And you’ve got to do that as fast as you can.” So that’s what I did.
Lombard puts on the charm at the governor’s mansion prior to her final public appearance.
Once the editors in New York knew that the plane had crashed and that Carole Lombard, her mother and her agent had all been killed, they stopped production of the issue they were working on. At that time the editions for the entire country were printed here in Chicago at the R.R. Donnelly printing plant, and then shipped to the New York and the East Coast and the West Coast. They stopped production on that entire issue until I did what they wanted me to do. That may be the one and only time that Life stopped production on an issue.
As it happens, Life ran just the one image of Lombard. Did you try to do anything else with the pictures you took of her?
Some time after it had happened and after I had gotten over the shock of it, I went to the Life darkroom on the fifth floor of the Carbon and Carbide building on Michigan Boulevard. I spent hours making 11 x 14 prints that I had taken during her tour, maybe 25 or 30, boxed them up and sent them to Columbia Studios with a letter addressed to the top executives. The letter read: “This may not be the time to deliver these to Clark Gable. There may, in your opinion, never be a time to deliver these pictures to Clark Gable. But I’m leaving this up to your decision. If you think he might want to have these sometime, please deliver them to Mr. Clark Gable.” I never found out whatever happened to them. I never got a response, not from the studio, and certainly not from Gable. But I don’t believe these shots would have been tossed out.
_________________________________________
Some observations:
* It’s fascinating to hear Davis say Lombard was concerned about flying by air. particularly since we know she had regularly flown with Gable and, in the mid-thirties, even taken flying lessons. She may have been concerned about flying without Clark by her side, or perhaps it was because she was with her mother, who had never flown before.
* I’m not sure why Davis would have mailed the prints to Columbia, where Gable hadn’t worked since making “It Happened One Night” in early 1934. Might Lombard have been discussing her upcoming film, “They All Kissed The Bride,” a Columbia production?
* In Larry Swindell’s biography “Screwball,” he maintains this was the last photo ever taken of Lombard (with her mother):
I do not know whether Davis took this photo; it may have been taken at the Claypool Hotel after the rally and before they left, which would mean it wasn’t taken by him.
Signed vintage and modern prints of Davis’ Lombard images can be ordered at http://www.davidphillipscollection.com.
Dean Brierly interviewed Davis in 2009. Like Lombard, Davis would be victim to an accident, dying on April 17, 2010 from injuries incurred during a fire at his apartment in Hyde Park, Chicago. He was 90.
A farmer’s life for she
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.15 at 21:59
Current mood: accomplished
I know at least several of you enjoy playing the virtual agriculture game FarmVille (and you’re not alone — according to statistics, it has tens of millions of users). Well, even if computers had been around in the late thirties, Carole Lombard wouldn’t have needed one to play farmer. She was occupied with the real thing.
That’s a pajama-clad Carole in 1937, holding a rooster on farmland she owned. After she married Clark Gable in 1939, they could indulge their ag pursuits without leaving home, as the Encino property they purchased from director Raoul Walsh included a working ranch.
Understandably, the press was curious to learn more about the farming Lombard, a persona that seemed at odds with the Hollywood party girl of a few years earlier. Carole was more than happy to reveal this new side of her, and on Sept. 10, 1939. she was the subject of a pictorial in a publication read by tens of thousands of farmers — the Des Moines Sunday Register:
The Register today remains Iowa’s largest daily — but in those days, it was the state’s bible, with home delivery in all 99 Iowa counties. (The newspaper was then owned by the Cowles family, which had created Look magazine in 1937.) Much of the state was prime farmland, and in those days farming was more a family than a corporate activity. So reading about a movie star farmer certainly hit home with a lot of readers, though one doubts they ran into anyone quite as glamorous as Carole (or Clark) at the feed store or Grange hall.
With the headline “FARMER CAROLE: Star Regains Health With Barnyard Fun,” folks from Keokuk to Sioux City could learn about the Hollywood farm girl.
Here’s the copy:
_________________________________________
All screen stars, publicity has it, will eventually give up their careers and retire to a farm.
Carole Lombard, currently starring in RKO’s “In Name Only,” is emphatic about it. “I want to live a natural life before I’m an old lady,” she says. “I want to get off the pogo stick.”
Already Carole has the requisite farm and is a taste of natural life with “Pappy.” (See pictures at right and below.)
Life with “Pappy” (Carole’s name for Husband Clark Gable) consists of the nights and weekends she can spare from her career to motor out to the Gablombard ranch in the foothills north of Hollywood.
It is 12 acres of choice, secluded real estate overlooking the San Fernando Valley.
There Carole is learning from the cows and chickens how to recuperate from her recent appendectomy — by relaxing.
Woodsman Gable
Pappy Gable, too, is teaching her the woodland lore he picked up on countless hunting expeditions into the wilds.
And together they’re learning about life in a country home.
Carole exults: “It’s the first time in our lives that either of us ever owned furniture or a home. And, maybe, we are being foolish about it.
“But just the same, everything about it is an event of major importance. Where shall we place this rug or that chair, where shall we hang the pictures, what shall we plant in the garden — it all means so much.”
In fact, Pappy is just like a boy, to hear Carole telling it.
“Why, even when I’m all worn out from trotting around and fixing things, he’ll come bursting into the room and shout, ‘Carole, come on! Look at the wonderful knobs we’re going to put on the doors!'”
Carole has been busy in the garden since spring. “Believe me, it has onions in it, too,” she boasts, “and all the old-fashioned vegetables.”
Carole’s “Ark”
Animals and fowls? The place looks like an ark. Current inventory includes: One mulch cow (shown in the circle with Carole at the top of this column), 600 ducks, 1 lamb, 1 herd of rabbits, 1 bunch of horses, 1 bulldog, 1 pointer, 1 donkey, 1 Manx cat, 1 canary and 10,000,000,000 (estimated) chickens.
Carole doesn’t know how to milk “Bessie” and Pappy says he used to know how, but he’s forgotten. So he’s planning to hire an instructor for them both.
Since their “runaway marriage” in Arizona, the Gables have had no time for a honeymoon trip, but they’re “going places” on their ranch.
Both of them are running away from the fans and the Hollywood parties.
And Carole is taking a few, brief steps away from the “pogo stick” which spells “career” in the Lombard lingo.
“And we love it,” she says.
_________________________________________
Some thoughts on this article:
* One senses it might have been sent from RKO’s publicity department. The reference to “RKO’s ‘In Name Only'” in the second paragraph — while not mentioning the little film that Gable had been working on for much of 1939 — would seem to be indicative.
* “Gablombard”? An attempt for the “Brangelina” on the day, perhaps…and it’s just as well it didn’t catch on.
* Was the cow named “Bessie” in honor of Carole’s mother? And if so, who named it?
* The critter census reports one lamb, and indeed, one of the photos has a reference to a lamb in the caption:
“CAROLE’S LITTLE LAMB isn’t nearly as dominating as Mary’s fleecy beast, as you can see in the above picture. The star is carrying the little fellow out of the hay and back to his pen. Exercise like this helps Carole to retain her customarily slender silhouette.”
But haven’t we seen that picture somewhere before? Yes, we have — but as another species (the animal, not Carole):
Hearst’s Chicago Herald & Examiner ran the photo in late July of ’39, labeling the animal a goat. Oh, those misinformed city slickers.
* But my favorite photographic highlight is this:
I’m fairly certain this is an authentic color photograph, but even if it isn’t, it’s beautiful — Carole sitting near the “wishing well” at the ranch.
Oh, and if you like this page, you can make your wish come true and acquire it. This 8-page, 15″ x 20″ magazine is up for bidding starting at $9.99; no bids have been placed as of this writing, and bidding closes at 6:24 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday. If you’d like this as part of your memorabilia harvest, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/0309208S-HOLLYWOOD-CAROLE-LOMBARD-SEPT-10-1939-/290474968166?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43a1a84466.
A popular photography subject
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.14 at 00:09
Current mood: artistic
Photography was certainly an integral part of Carole Lombard’s life, so it’s rather appropriate she was part of the initial issue of the leading magazine dedicated to the genre.
We’re referring to Popular Photography, which began publication out of Chicago in May 1937, and whose first editor was photography enthusiast Bernard G. Davis. (Like Life, there was an earlier, unrelated publication with the same name.) The aim of the magazine was to provide tips to the amateur photographer; the rise of inexpensive home cameras (for both still and motion photographs) made it an increasingly popular hobby. (Above are the front and back covers of that first issue, below is an ad for cameras from the August 1937 issue.)
Lombard, whose Paramount portraits were regularly seen in newspapers and magazines, was the subject of a feature inside the debut issue that also included two photographs of her:
I wish this were in better condition so it could be read. Apparently the article was written by William Walling, one of Paramount’s staff photographers, and it would be fascinating to see his comments, both about the process of taking such stills and about Carole as a subject.
I have learned this from the seller: “One photo was considered by Paramount the top still of 1936. The other photo was not released publicly because it showed too much of Carole’s bust to adhere to Hays Office rules and restrictions.” Hmmm.
The good news is that soon, somebody will have the opportunity to see what Walling wrote. This first issue is being auctioned at eBay, with bids starting at $29 (no one has yet bid as of this writing), with bids closing at 9:26 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. If you’re interested in owning this bit of photographic history, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/POPULAR-PHOTOGRAPHY-No-1-May-1937-Carole-Lombard-/180558300902?pt=Magazines&hash=item2a0a1d06e6
Oh, and Popular Photography is still going strong today, even as the hobby has switched from film to digital images. Its home site is at http://www.popphoto.com, and it provides everything from camera reviews to photo tips.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A fascinating film find
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.13 at 09:41
Current mood: curious
It’s May 21, 1934. Carole Lombard, attending a polo match near Los Angeles, awards trophies, and two of the recipients are fellow actors Leslie Howard, left, and Will Rogers.
All three would die in aviation accidents within a decade.
Lombard never made a film with Howard, a reliable leading man who will always be best known for portraying Ashley Wilkes in “Gone With The Wind,” but it’s entirely possible she might be found as part of five hours of film footage discovered in the home of Howard’s 82-year-old daughter, Leslie Ruth “Doodie” Howard, and to be used as part of an upcoming documentary on the actor.
Part of the footage includes a polo match — whether it was this particular one is unknown, but supposedly those attending that day included Cary Grant, Gary Cooper and Mary Pickford — and footage shot at Hearst Castle, another regular Lombard haunt, with Joan Crawford and Douglas Fairbanks Jr., among others.
What else is there? It’s believed Howard and Myrna Loy, who worked together in “The Animal Kingdom,” had an affair. Film here taken on the set shows him flirting with Loy; other footage finds him doing likewise with Norma Shearer.
Plus, there’s also footage of Howard with his family, showing a warmth only hinted at his largely reserved acting work.
Howard, who had been active in British war work, was among 13 passengers killed by the Luftwaffe on a flight from Lisbon to Bristol, England, on June 1, 1943. A 7-year-old boy had given up his seat so Howard — a key figure in the UK war effort — could make it back to England. The boy, now in his seventies, has been interviewed for the 90-minute documentary on Howard, to be called “The Man Who Gave A Damn.” It’s being produced by Warners, making it likely that Turner Classic Movies will air it at one time or another. Learn more at http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/sep/12/leslie-howard-found-footage.
To close, here’s the entire photograph taken at that polo match, as well as another. Others in the photos include Spencer Tracy and Johnny Mack Brown.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole and Freddie Mac
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.12 at 20:25
Current mood: crazy
And no, we’re not referring to the federal agency that oversees mortgages. No, this “Freddie Mac” is none other than Carole Lombard’s most frequent co-star, Fred MacMurray.
As time goes on, MacMurray’s acting legacy is continually being re-evaluated, as people remember him more for his entire body of work and less for his Disney films and the “My Three Sons” TV series of later years. Not that he wasn’t good in those, mind you, but he deserves to be better known than as a baby-boomer paterfamilias. (Or, for that matter, as merely a heel in two Billy Wilder classics, “Double Indemnity” — below, with Edward G. Robinson — and “The Apartment.”)
In recent years, more and more people are becoming aware of a third MacMurray, the persona he was best known for until the 1950s: the genial, handsome leading man of light romantic comedies. It was a persona that suited him well, not only aesthetically but at the box office. Fred was quite popular with those who loved that genre (this was long before anyone dubbed them “rom-coms”), and he was a Paramount mainstay for more than a decade.
He worked with a variety of leading ladies. Claudette Colbert was his most frequent cohort; his best movies were probably made with Barbara Stanwyck (not just “Double Indemnity” but “Remember The Night”). But it can be argued that Lombard elicited a quality in him no one else did — a slightly wacky side.
That’s a scene from “Hands Across The Table,” the first of four films starring Carole and Fred, in which Lombard’s character pretends to be a long-distance operator. You can tell MacMurray’s delight at how Carole adds a comedic spin to this; indeed some of this was improvised.
Here are some more examples of the lighter side of Lombard and MacMurray. First, a publicity still from “Hands Across The Table”:
Next, this still from “The Princess Comes Across,” along with the snipe from the back:
The snipe reads:
“GREETING PRINCESS — Carole Lombard doesn’t seem to be particularly impressed with Fred MacMurray’s greeting as she descends from a car in front of the Paramount sound stage where she and Fred are appearing in ‘The Princess Comes Across.’ Maybe it’s all in fun.”
The look on Lombard’s face perfectly conveys the faux Garbo persona of her “princess” character, despite MacMurray’s genial glance.
Next up — “Swing High, Swing Low.” It wasn’t a comedy, but that didn’t prevent the two stars from having some fun…as they stood on a giant swing (get it?) for publicity:
Finally, their last collaboration, “True Confession,” Lombard’s final film at Paramount. Several rather goofy publicity photos were distributed by Paramount:
The two were even joined by supporting actress Una Merkel for a few silly shots:
Another photo with the trio featured a snipe on the back:
Variations on a theme
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.11 at 09:40
Current mood: curious
Longtime Carole Lombard fans have probably seen the above photo of her at one time or another. It’s Paramount p1202-1473; I’m not sure who took it, but I do know it was released sometime in 1937, at just about the peak of her popularity as an actress.
But did you know some other shots from that session have surfaced? I didn’t until perusing eBay recently. There, from the same seller, are three such portraits.
In addition to the one above, here are the two others:
Carole’s poses are different; so is the lighting. I’m not sure whether these were ever issued with p1202 numbers or are merely outtakes from the session.
If you have a favorite — or simply like all three — you can get them for a reasonable price, $5.95 each. For the top portrait (which, ironically, the seller lists as “very rare,” though it may be the most common of the trio), visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8×10-PICTURE-VERY-RARE-STAGE-PHOTO-/310169813563?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item48378fc23b. The “alternate” pose on the left is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-8×10-PICTURE-COMEDY-ACTRESS-PHOTO-/310169813548?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item48378fc22c, while the one on the right can be found at http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-PHOTO-comedy-actress-gorgeous-photograph-/310169813585?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item48378fc251. All will be available for purchase until late Wednesday (Eastern).
(Incidentally, the seller adds any of these or other photos it sells can be enlarged — for an additional cost, of course — up to 58″ x 90″. So if you’d like to have a colossal Carole dominate a wall of your residence, look into it.)
It should also be noted that at least one other portrait was taken at that session, though it’s not in the eBay package. It’s Paramount p1202-1478:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Book it for ’11: Hollywood through Harlow’s eyes
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.10 at 01:44
Current mood: pleased
Just as Carole Lombard and Jean Harlow were good friends (though a photo of them together remains a holy grail), it can safely be said there’s a large overlap between Lombard and Harlow fans. So it’s with joy that I give good news for those who love “the Baby”: She will be the subject of what should be a wonderful book scheduled to come out next March — the month that marks the centennial of her birth.
I use the word “wonderful” with confidence — alas, an adjective not always applicable to Harlow books — because the track record of the authors lends trust to the endeavor. Mark A. Vieira, below left, is an expert on classic Hollywood, specifically the artistry of portrait photographers such as George Hurrell, and Darrell Rooney, below right, is a Harlow historian.
They made pitches to publishers for a book called “Jean Harlow: The Platinum Icon,” and one publisher finally said yes — but the product will be a bit different than what they proposed. Nevertheless, I sense this is more of a redirection than a compromise. Here’s the info from Rooney, at the Facebook site “Fans of a Jean Harlow ‘Centenary’ Book for 2011”:
“I am happy to announce that Mark Vieira and I are in the process of writing a slightly different book than the original one we pitched. This pictorial bio is called ‘Jean Harlow’s Hollywood: The Platinum Blonde in the Glamour Capital.’ It will come out next March. It’s going to be full of tons of behind-the-scenes photos so stay tuned for future updates. Thanks again everyone.”
The concept sounds tantalizing — lots of photos of Harlow, probably both at work and at play. While there likely will be many portraits of Jean as well, I like the emphasis on the more informal side of her (just as many prefer seeing informal shots of Lombard or Marilyn Monroe, to name two other blonde icons). Since Harlow and her heritage should be front and center among classic Hollywood fans next March (if Turner Classic Movies doesn’t make her star of the month for March 2011, as it did for Carole’s centennial in October 2008, someone should be held accountable), this book should sell quite well and be a welcome addition to anyone’s coffee table. (Now I’m thinking about the “Seinfeld” episode where Kramer appeared on “Live With Regis & Kathie Lee” to promote his coffee table book about…coffee tables.)
In honor of Harlow, and the forthcoming book, how about getting you in the mood with some photos of Jean…from the “We Love Jean Harlow Fanclub” site on Facebook:
And finally, a pair of two-strip Technicolor frames from “Hell’s Angels,” as well as Harlow’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame:
On behalf of just about every Lombard fan, congratulations to Vieira, Rooney and Harlow fans everywhere.
Solving a cement puzzle
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.09 at 09:09
Current mood: confused
When the latest batch of Carole Lombard photos from the
Chicago Tribune archive were released for auction on eBay, at least one may have generated some confusion. I’m specifically referring to this one:
“What’s this all about?” someone might wonder. “I’ve been to Grauman’s Chinese numerous times, and I’ve never seen Lombard’s prints there.”
And that person would be right — Carole never got the chance to be immortalized in cement at the famed Hollywood Boulevard venue. But, as longtime readers of “Carole & Co.” may recall, she was awarded similar honors at a theater right in Chicago — a place on the South Side called the Rhodes. We did two entries on the topic in January 2009 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/173491.html and http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/175527.html); the latter showed Lombard doing the honors — not in Chicago itself, but in southern California; the slab was then shipped east:
The confusion over Carole in concrete isn’t aided much by the Tribune photo itself. Normally, there’s plenty of information on the back, possibly showing a copy of how the photo ran in the newspaper, a stamp showing when the image was received and so on. In this case, however, there’s virtually nothing:
Aside from the Tribune watermark, all that’s there are the words “footprints, 2 col.” (Actually, they’re shoeprints.) No indication when it was taken, or where. But since the Rhodes was in Chicago, it’s a pretty sure bet that this is where it came from.
The photo is at http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/260660725043?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3cb0970533, with a minimum bid price of $24.99. Bidding concludes at 9:45 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. (The entire array of Lombard-related Tribune photos up for auction can be found at http://stores.ebay.com/TribunePhotos/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&LH_SellerWithStore=1&LH_TitleDesc=1&_armrs=1&_from=&_ipg=&_sasi=1&_sop=1.)
So, at least, we now know what the Lombard shoeprints and handprints at the Rhodes looked like. What happened to the slab, and those of other stars who did likewise for the now-demolished Chicago venue, remains a mystery.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
More to be ‘negative’ about
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.08 at 02:02
Current mood: envious
Slightly more than two weeks ago, we ran an entry about a sale of six vintage, original negatives of Carole Lombard’s Paramount stills. At the time, we lauded their beauty, but were skeptical about the price — bidding began at $499.99. Not for all six, but for
each.
Since then, we’ve learned a few additional things. First, the seller is none other than Jerry Ohlinger’s, a famed movie memorabilia store in New York. The price may seem steep, but one would think the people at Ohlinger’s know there are a few collectors out there who would pay nearly $500 (at the least) for an original Lombard negative. (Unfortunately, I’m not one of them…and likely, neither are you.) We’ve also learned there are 17 additional negatives of Carole now being offered at eBay, all for a minimum bid of $499.99 apiece.
I’m not going to review all of them — though if you want to see Ohlinger’s collection of Lombard items, which includes a few things for a mere $9.99, go to http://stores.ebay.com/movie-material-store/_i.html?_nkw=Carole+Lombard&submit=Search&_sid=184728870 — but several of these are new to me (and possibly you, too). So here are some highlights.
First, Carole in a long, dark dress (likely a Travis Banton creation):
No p1202 number is given, but I’m guessing it to be from 1934 or ’35. It’ll be available through 3:32 p.m. (Eastern) on Thursday; to learn more, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581330482?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf293232
Next, Carole engaged in conversation with a very lucky gentleman, even if he is smoking:
Not sure where this was taken (probably the Paramount commissary), nor is there a p1202 number. But it’s beautiful, and is at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581330951?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf293407 until 3:33 p.m. (Eastern) tomorrow.
We’ve run a few stills showing Lombard at the bowling alley, but I don’t recall seeing this:
(Incidentally, I’m not sure Carole’s wearing regulation bowling shoes.) Again, no p1202 number, bidding closes at 3:35 p.m. Thursday, and it can be found at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581331543?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf293657.
Back to Carole in conversation; the gentleman she’d been talking to has just risen from his seat and wants to get in one more discussion with her:
To me, her facial expression looks very Ginger Rogers (hope the Ginger fans won’t mind the comparison). Like the others so far, there is no p1202 number. Bidding on this one ends at 3:54 tomorrow; go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581340325?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf2958a5.
To borrow a Bing Crosby lyric, a photo of Lombard in a swimsuit is easy to remember, but so hard to forget. And since I don’t recall seeing this one before, it’s likely most of you have never seen it, either:
We finally have a photo with a number — it’s p1202-1239. Here, the bids conclude at 3:58 p.m. Thursday, and you can learn more by visiting http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581342015?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf295f3f.
Here’s Carole at home, specifically her famed Hollywood Boulevard home of the mid-1930s designed by William Haines:
We can make out part of a p1202 number to the lower right-hand corner of this photo, but too much of it was cropped out to detect it. This will be off the market at 4:02 p.m. tomorrow, at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581343563?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf29654b.
Finally, here’s Lombard, fetching in fur:
Ohlinger’s states this is p1202-98, but I beg to differ. For one thing, that would have been from early in Carole’s career — 1930 or ’31. This looks to be from later in her Paramount tenure. Second, that version of the “CAROLE LOMBARD” inscription in the lower left-hand corner wasn’t used in the early ’30s. Finally, here is p1202-98, from Carla Valderrama’s Lombard photo archive:
I’m guessing there’s a third digit we can’t see, although Valderrama’s archive shows different poses for p1202-980 and 985. Anyway, the negative from Ohlinger’s will be available for bidding through 4:04 p.m. (Thursday) at http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/110581344665?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19bf296999.
If you win Powerball tonight (or have already won the grand prize in MegaMillions), bid on all 23 of these negatives. Heck, assuming there are no other bids, it’ll only set you back a scant $11,500 or so.
The ‘what of what’?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.07 at 00:57
Current mood: giggly
Based upon various “blooper” reels, we know that Carole Lombard’s language could at times be painted in shades of blue. One thus wishes to have been the proverbial fly on the wall when Carole first examined a copy of the May 1933 issue of
Shadoplay, the short-lived younger sibling of
Photoplay.
That’s because on that issue’s inside pages, it ran this story on Lombard:
In case you can’t make out the headline, or simply don’t want to double-click the image to enlarge it, it reads, “Carole Lombard, our new SHEBA OF SHIVERS!”
Say what?
Okay, the story is meant to promote Lombard’s latest film, “Supernatural,” a tale of the occult, spiritualism and dead people possessing bodies of the living. It’s actually not a bad little film, and Carole has some fine moments in it.
And as far as she was concerned, it was a genre she never wanted to touch again.
Lombard had a painful time making this movie. It was bad enough she felt out of her element making what she deemed to be a programmer, but an earthquake occurred during its filming in March, and it may well have led to one of the most famous anecdotes about Carole (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/6116.html). Now to be perceived as a scare star by a fan magazine — in fact, the subhead says, “Karloff and Atwill, it’s your turn now to quake,” telling Boris and Lionel that Lombard “is after your laurels” — must have brought some unwelcome shivers down her spine.
One senses Carole would have preferred to go back to being known as “the orchid lady” if that were the only alternative to “Sheba of Shivers.” And just imagine the things she probably wanted to do to the person who conjured up that headline.
Fortunately for her, she had already made her unease with horror known to Paramount, and while the studio still really didn’t know how to properly use here for another two years, she at least avoided that genre.
There are some other fascinating things about this issue of Shadoplay. The cover subject, for example:
It’s of a lady named Tala Birell, to which you’re probably giving the same response I did: Who? Well, Miss Birell, a 5-foot-6 blonde born in Romania but actually of German descent (her mother was an Austrian baroness, her father a Serbian businessman), had become a stage star in Europe in the late 1920s, so she was brought to America with hopes of becoming another Garbo or Dietrich. Like most other European emigres (e.g., Sigrid Gurie), she never reached those heights, but she appeared in a few films of note — “The Captain Hates The Sea,” John Gilbert’s final movie; and “Bringing Up Baby,” in which she has a small part. After the war, she went to Germany to both look after her ailing mother and to assist entertainment operations for the U.S. Army. She died in Germany in February 1958 at age 50.
Some better-known stars also join Lombard on inside pages:
On the right side of the first photo is a portrait of Sylvia Sidney, while the second photo, a feature on attractive faces, shows those of Jean Harlow, Frances Dee, Mary Carlisle and Una Merkel.
Seems like an interesting issue, and if you want it, you can buy it on eBay for $19.99. It will be up until 10:07 p.m. (Eastern) tonight if no one buys it first; the seller refers to it as “Acceptable: A book with obvious wear. May have some damage to the cover but integrity still intact. The binding may be slightly damaged but integrity is still intact. Possible writing in margins, possible underlining and highlighting of text, but no missing pages or anything that would compromise the legibility or understanding of the text.”
You can learn more about it at http://cgi.ebay.com/HOLLYWOOD-33-TALA-BIRELL-CAROLE-LOMBARD-HARLOW-HEPBURN-/360296084136?pt=Magazines&hash=item53e351f2a8.
Sorry, but I just can’t help but smile at the term “Sheba of Shivers.” And somewhere, Lombard is laughing about it, too...now.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A Fidler’s thoughts on Labor Day
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.06 at 14:21
Current mood: energetic
I trust all of you are having a fun/exciting/relaxing Labor Day (take your pick), so for the holiday, here’s something that isn’t really labor-related, but is some food for thought pertaining to classic Hollywood. It’s part of a Jimmie Fidler column that ran in the
Los Angeles Times (among other newspapers) on Sept. 3, 1940:
‘I wanta get something off my chest. In a current fan magazine is a story lauding the ‘courage’ of Hollywood producers because ‘they GAMBLE MILLIONS on their pictures without definite means of predetermining public approval.’ There have been many such eulogies.
“I’m getting fed up with them. They misrepresent salient facts. You could count on the fingers of one hand the Hollywood producers who invest their own money in pictures. The millions they gamble so ‘courageously’ belong to financiers, popularly known in the industry as ‘angels,’ and to small stockholders who have no active voice in studio production policies.
“Most producers who bask in the spotlight are glorified hired hands. True, they’ve succeeded in boosting their pay scale to an imagination-staggering high and under a lush system they continue to draw their fat pay checks irrespective of the success or failure of their pictures. There are producers in this business who have been making $100,000 and up for a decade or more, and never once have their films been profitable enough to pay stockholders a decent dividend.
“If we must dish out awards for courage, let’s dish them out where they properly belong, on bankers who hold the bag and on small investors who deserve better treatment and more consideration from the Olympian Joves who have mismanaged their affairs.”
For anyone who understood the machinations of the film industry, that was hardly a revelation — but it probably opened the eyes of some not all that conversant with the “business” end of “show business.” The so-called “angels,” of course, had long been a part of the Broadway and stage equation (think of Mel Brooks’ “The Producers” for a take on the concept), so it was no wonder that film production followed in much the same direction.
Some more on the man who wrote these comments:
Among Hollywood columnists, Jimmie Fidler didn’t have quite the same impact in print as Hearst’s Louella Parsons or the Times’ own Hedda Hopper, but in terms of radio, Fidler was likely second only to Walter Winchell, who covered film-related topics but was based in New York. Here’s Fidler with Russ Columbo in mid-1934, not long after Jimmie was hired to host a program on NBC:
Like Hopper, Fidler had acted in films, though the comparison ended there; his experience was limited to being an extra in about a dozen movies. He shifted into publicity, working for Gloria Swanson and other clients.
At his peak, Fidler was heard on more than 400 radio stations; television cut into his impact, but he continued on radio (I can recall hearing his reports in the early 1960s) and didn’t retire until 1983. He had a rapid-fire delivery and was known for using a bell system for rating films (one to four chimes).
Fidler parlayed his success into a 1938 short for MGM, “Personality Parade,” featuring clips of more than 60 performers whose careers began in silent films (including a tribute to the recently-deceased Jean Harlow). Turner Classic Movies occasionally runs it as filler between features.
Fidler had many friends in the industry (including, I believe, Carole Lombard and Clark Gable), but made some enemies, too; in 1938, Constance Bennett sued him over a report where he said she snubbed Patsy Kelly on a Hal Roach movie set and that studio workmen bought flowers for Kelly but none for Bennett. (Two years later, admitting his prior differences with Bennett, he lauded her for her work aiding war relief.)
In April 1988, nearly four months before his death, Fidler said of his career, “There were many better columnists, but not many who were better at finding opportunities. I had no great prowess, really. Anybody with the same willingness to go after the same opportunities could have done it.”
Fidler had four daughters, and here’s one of them, Judie, in front of her father’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (south side of the 6100 block of Hollywood Boulevard):
Clark and Carole’s ‘Tribune’-al
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.05 at 02:02
Current mood: curious
And those Carole Lombard photos from the Chicago Tribune archives just keep on coming. Here are four more, all with Clark Gable, although one of them might leave Lombard lovers feeling a bit cross. (More on that later.) All four are up for auction, and all four close later today, so if you’re interested, don’t tarry.
We’ll begin with a photo of Clark and Carole at a Hollywood premiere; they seem relaxed, and why shouldn’t they be? It’s not their picture:
The film is “Marie Antoinette,” the date July 9, 1938. Gable and Lombard are shown leaving the Carthay Circle Theater, and here’s what the caption on the back read:
HOLLYWOOD ON PARADE AT “MARIE ANTOINETTE” PREMIERE
“HOLLYWOOD, CALIF. — In one of the gayest, brightest, most lavish premiere movie showings ever staged in the film capital, a brilliant galaxy of the nation’s favorite screen stars last night paraded before a throng of more than 25,000 wide-eyed admirers to attend the opening presentation of the much-heralded Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer production, ‘Marie Antoinette,’ at the Carthay Circle Theater. After the opening, the stars attended a party at the Trocadero Cafe given by Louis B. Mayer in honor of Norma Shearer, leading star of ‘Marie Antoinette.’
“Photo shows Clark Gable and Carole Lombard arriving at the premiere.”
Because Clark and Carole are wearing dark clothing, the only clearly visible sign of the Tribune watermark (which isn’t on the actual photo) is the “r” over the back of Lombard’s left hand. Oh, and that party at the Troc after the premiere? That resulted in this famed picture of the cinema legends (which isn’t part of the Tribune package, merely shown for historical reasons):
The Tribune photo will be available for bidding through 7:20 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. Bids begin at $24.99; no one has bid on it as of this writing. If interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/250689684984?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a5e4505f8.
Next, a photo of Clark and Carole on their Encino ranch:
However, this happy photo didn’t run at the happiest of times for Gable. It ran in the Chicago Herald-American on Aug. 26, 1951, about two weeks after the Hearst newspaper had lost its patriarch. As for Clark, Carole had been gone for nearly a decade, and his new wife, Lady Sylvia Ashley, was completely altering his beloved home, as the caption notes:
‘INFORMAL life on their 20-acre ranch delighted Clark Gable and Carole Lombard, When the movie he-man installed his next wife, Lady Sylvia, on the sprawling estate, she rebelled against the carefree mode of living. Clark still clings to ranch.”
One bid, at the minimum $24.99, has already been made on this photo, and bids close at 7:44 p.m. (Eastern). Check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/250689691835?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3a5e4520bb.
The thought of Lady Sylvia Ashley trying to erase Lombard’s legacy might get some Carole fans cross…but how about this photo, where Carole is literally crossed out?
Does someone have a grudge against Lombard (and, for that matter, her old chum Sally Eilers)? Nah, it’s only a marking from a photo editor instructing the production folks whose photo he wants to use from that trio.
The solo shot of Gable ran in December 1938. The caption for the original photo, from the Associated Press, ran as follows:
“GABLE TAKES TWO FAIR COMPANIONS TO THE FIGHT
“LOS ANGELES, May 29 [1937] — Clark Gable of the films showed up at the Bob Pastor-Bob Nestell heavyweight battle last night with two attractive actresses as his companions. With him were Carole Lombard (left) with whom he is frequently seen and Sally Eilers (right). There were many members of the Hollywood colony among the 30,000 spectators who saw the fight [at Wrigley Field].”
No one has bid on this yet, not even at the minimum $24.99, for which we can blame some long-ago editor’s beauty marks. This will be up through 8:14 p.m. (Eastern), so if for some reason you’re interested, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/260657695369?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3cb068ca89.
Now, one more picture, from Dec. 26, 1940, showing Gable and Lombard in training (pardon the pun):
A glimpse of the upper left corner reveals part of the top has been torn off. We learn more about the photo from the snipe on the back. The caption:
“Film Actor Clark Gable and his wife, Carole Lombard, leaving Pasadena, Cal., yesterday by train for Baltimore.”
The brief blurb below:
“Hollywood, Cal., Dec. 26 (AP) — Clark Gable left at noon today to enter Johns Hopkins hospital for examination of an ailing shoulder. His wife, Carole Lombard, accompanied him.”
Had it not been for the caption, some might have been tempted to believe that Clark and Carole actually boarded the train in Hollywood — which would have been impossible, as the only trains you could board in Hollywood were streetcars. And while Clark may indeed have had his shoulder checked at Hopkins, the main reason he and his wife were visiting — a reason not made public until many years later — was to find out why they were unable to have children (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/86196.html). Also note that no mention was made that the couple would first be visiting Washington; one guesses they wanted to keep that part of the journey as low-key as possible.
Like the other photos here, bidding begins at $24.99 (no one has yet bid on this as of this writing), and bids close at 8:44 p.m. (Eastern). Want to learn more? Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-/260657703724?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item3cb068eb2c.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
The town she called home
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.04 at 01:33
Current mood: nostalgic
Imagine, if you will, an alternate universe…one where Carole Lombard never becomes a star at all; it certainly could have happened. (And this isn’t meant to denigrate Carole’s considerable talent — she herself would have been the first to acknowledge there were plenty of talented people around the film industry who, for one reason or another, never got the break they deserved.)
Perhaps Allan Dwan doesn’t see a 12-year-old Jane Alice Peters playing ball with the boys in her neighborhood, and thus she doesn’t get her first exposure to being in the movies rather than merely watching them. Maybe she does get into films, but the automobile accident that forced her to re-evaluate herself never happens; relying too much on beauty rather than skill or knowledge of the motion picture process, she falls by the wayside by the end of the 1920s.
One thing seems pretty certain, however: Even if she hadn’t become a filmland notable, instead drifting into obscurity, she would have remained a resident of Los Angeles. And you can’t say that about too many other stars of the classic era, many of whom might never have set foot in town had it not been for the movies.
Jane Alice Peters came to Los Angeles with her mother and two older brothers in late 1914, emigres from Indiana. (It is said that the family initially settled in San Francisco, but its often cool climate gave little Jane a cold, so they headed southward.) They didn’t come to crash the movies, though in ensuing years, many would do just that; L.A. was booming for many reasons, not just the film industry, and plenty of people wanted to be a part of it.
All three of the Peters children — brothers Stuart and Frederic are shown with Jane on the beach — fell under the spell of Los Angeles, and all of them remained to work there as adults. One Lombard biographer reported that no less than Florenz Ziegfeld wanted Carole to appear in what would be his final edition of the Follies in 1931, but she wasn’t interested in moving to New York. By then, of course, her film career was firmly set, but even if it hadn’t, it’s difficult to imagine her bidding adieu to a city she loved…and resided in, or around, for more than four-fifths of her life.
The photo above is an aerial view of downtown L.A. in 1929. The new City Hall stands out in the distance, but Union Station was a decade away from being built and Chavez Ravine housed an array of Mexican-Americans, as a baseball stadium wouldn’t be there for another third of a century. And a few years before Dodger Stadium opened in 1962, city authorities finally gave the green light to additional downtown skyscrapers.
At “Carole & Co.”, we’ve extensively written about Los Angeles — even when the entry was only tangentially about Lombard — because the city helped shape both herself and the industry she worked in. Understanding Los Angeles helps to understand Lombard.
The film industry would have a major role in the transformation of Los Angeles from a second-tier city in its own state to the economic colossus of the western U.S., a city whose influence extends south to Latin America and across the Pacific into Asia. However, how have the movies looked at Los Angeles, beyond being its workplace?
That’s the topic of a fascinating documentary, “Los Angeles Plays Itself” — and if you’re in southern California this weekend, you’ll have two chances to see it, at 7:30 p.m. tonight and Sunday at the Aero Theatre in Santa Monica. The film’s director, Thom Andersen, will speak about the film after Sunday’s showing. Learn more at http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/2010/09/coming-soon-los-angeles-plays-itself.html.
Like “Hollywood,” the famed Kevin Brownlow series on silent film, “Los Angeles Plays Itself” will likely never have a DVD release because the rights issues are too vast, too expensive. But this film is jam-packed with all sorts of thought-provoking examples of how Hollywood (the industry, not the neighborhood) has looked back on the city it calls home.
Here’s the trailer for the film when it was released theatrically a few years back:
The good news is that, like “Hollywood,” you can see “Los Angeles Plays Itself” via YouTube. It’s divided into 12 segments, each close to 15 minutes long, so don’t plan to watch the entire film in one sitting unless you have three hours to spare. But you’ll see sights from the steps Laurel and Hardy climbed in their famous short “The Music Box” to now-vanished Bunker Hill to the Pan-Pacific Auditorium (also a memory) and much, much more.
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SNc41zyLJ0
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8knsMz8V5E
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNEqMVDDt0k
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx1UJdUbd3I
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgjT9dfjbnE
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HOWRH9cSkw
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjiF2TkCmzI
Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv1uz23nbhg
Part 9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdSPH5Khh4g
Part 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcvvLzxLjIM
Part 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UMFdvgqz40
Part 12: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wszUJVlwTpg
Yes, this is the city…Los Angeles, California. Get to know it.
A bit under the weather
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.03 at 01:55
Current mood: sick
That’s Carole Lombard as Hazel Flagg, a healthy woman who’s trying to pass herself off as severely ill (radium poisoning) in 1937’s “Nothing Sacred.” Lombard knew all about being sick, for a little over five years earlier she had been genuinely under the weather.
Much of Lombard’s reputation rested on her energy (yes, I know that’s an oxymoron) and her talent as an athlete, from schoolgirl track champion to skilled tennis player. So to hear that Carole was often susceptible to illness, and occasionally was laid low, would seem at odds with her image.
But it was indeed true, the Achilles heel of this active cinematic goddess. Several times, a Lombard production was either delayed or scrapped because of her health. And one of these occasions apparently happened in her in the second half of April 1932, something we’ve learned from the thorough research of the Hollywood press at the site “Hollywood Heyday” (http://hollywoodheyday.blogspot.com/) as it continues its exploration of the film colony in ’32.
Here’s what United Press (the “International” wouldn’t come until 1958, when it merged with the Hearst-owned International News Service) wrote on April 27, 1932:
“Seriously ill for the past two weeks as the result of a nervous breakdown, Carole Lombard, screen actress and wife of William Powell, actor, was reported out of danger to-day. Announcement that she had passed the crisis in her illness was the first word given the public that she had been ill.”
What sort of illness was it? Lombard biographer Larry Swindell noted that she had frequent bouts with colds and flu, so one or the other may have knocked her out of action. (Had Lombard lived to see “Guys And Dolls,” she probably would have loved “Adelaide’s Lament.”) However, “nervous breakdown” may well have been a euphemism for menstrual cramps, which apparently were quite painful for Lombard. (She reportedly once quipped that God had switched the cycles on her personal physical calendar, so that there were only three days each month she didn’t bleed.)
Whatever it was, it certainly took its toll on her (and her home studio, Paramount), as this news item the same day from the Associated Press attests:
“Seriously ill for the last two weeks as the result of a nervous breakdown, Carole Lombard, screen actress and wife of William Powell, actor, was reported out of danger today.
“Announcement she had passed the crisis in her illness was the first news given the public that she had been ill.
“Miss Lombard denied she was having differences with Paramount studio over her next picture. She said the story provided for her, ‘Hot Saturday,’ was being altered to conform with her wishes.”
Lombard supposedly wasn’t entirely sold on “Hot Saturday,” and ultimately, Nancy Carroll — a major star at the start of the decade whose career was beginning to decline — was given the female lead instead, opposite a young Cary Grant, with Randolph Scott in a supporting role.
So if Lombard was genuinely ill — and we’re not doubting her — she should have recuperated, taking it easy for a while (below is a still from “Love Before Breakfast”)…
…and getting some medical care — maybe even from a doppelganger nurse (yep, that’s Carole from “Vigil In The Night”):
Time marches…again
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.02 at 01:32
Current mood: nostalgic
Once upon a time, when people wanted to watch the news, they didn’t press the remote and get CNN, MSNBC or Fox News Channel. They didn’t even go to ABC, CBS or NBC. Instead, to see news events, they had to leave the house and go to a movie theater. There, they’d see the news — several days old, to be sure, but news just the same.
Often, these newsreels would be part of an evening out at the theater, along with a short film, a cartoon, maybe a second feature (the type that became known in the industry as “B” pictures). So if you went to see Carole Lombard’s latest film, chances are you’d also get a newsreel as part of your program.
However, in many large cities, there were theaters that solely showed newsreels in a continuous loop (quite a few companies issued them, and competition was fierce — something satirized in the 1938 Clark Gable-Myrna Loy film “Too Hot To Handle”). Above is one of such theaters, the Trans-Lux on Chestnut Street in Philadelphia, shown in January 1935 at about the time of its opening.
Today’s entry deals with something that played in newsreel theaters and elsewhere, but was a slightly different take on the genre. It was called…
…oops, sorry, no. That’s from Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane” (we’ve been doing more than a few entries relating to that movie lately). Actually, the “News On The March” sequence seen in “Kane” is a pretty good imitation of what we’re going to discuss — a series called…
…”The March Of Time.” (That’s the genuine article.) As different from conventional newsreels as its progenitor, Time magazine, was from other publications of the day, “The March Of Time” ran from 1935 to 1951, when increasing production costs, not to mention the rise of television, rendered it somewhat obsolete.
As early as the mid-1920s, not long after Time began publication in 1923, the pioneering newsmagazine had used the infant medium of radio for cross-promotion. “The March Of Time” began as a radio series in 1931, rehashing the past week’s news with actors portraying personalities of the day. (Welles himself worked on the radio “March Of Time,” as did future Mercury Theatre stablemate Agnes Moorehead and a young Art Carney.) In 1934, Time did a test run of a film version, was satisfied with the outcome, and it began in earnest the following year.
“The March Of Time” closely reflected the magazine’s personality, going so far as to use Time’s distinctive inverted sentence style; that was also parodied in “News On The March.” (In 1936. the New Yorker’s Wolcott Gibbs satirized the style: “Backward ran sentences until reeled the mind […] Where it all will end, knows God!”)
But “The March Of Time” had substance to accompany its style. Unlike newsreels, it often focused on a single subject, bringing a deeper approach than usually seen on film. In 1938, it did a feature on life inside Nazi Germany that won plaudits, and it occasionally examined the American life and economy.
This year marks the 75th anniversary of “The March Of Time,” and New York’s Museum of Modern Art is honoring it with a 10-day exhibit that began Wednesday. A printed program on the exhibit can be found at http://www.hboarchives.com/marchoftime/86475March-moma%20booklet_H.pdf. A feature on the series is at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704147804575455494033046842.html?KEYWORDS=MoMA.
Can’t make it to MoMA, or don’t live near New York? No problem — you’ve got the next best thing. Turner Classic Movies (part of the Time Warner media empire) is honoring the anniversary on Sunday. From 8 p.m. to midnight (Eastern), TCM in the U.S. is airing eight “March Of Time” episodes. True, it’s a bit of a departure from usual TCM fare, but these ran in movie houses of the day along with the “one-reel wonders” and other filler TCM uses between features. Moreover, it’s Sunday on a holiday weekend, when viewership tends to be relatively low.
The schedule:
* 8 p.m. — “Dogs for Sale” (1937), “Dust Bowl” (1937) and “Poland and War” (1937)
* 8:30 p.m. — “Inside Nazi Germany” (1938)
* 9 p.m. —“Show Business at War” (1943)
* 9:30 p.m. — “Youth in Crisis” (1943)
* 10 p.m. — “Palestine Problem” (1945)
* 10:30 p.m. — “American Beauty” (1945)
* 11 p.m. — “Problem Drinkers” (1946)
* 11:30 p.m. — “Mid-Century: Halfway to Where?” (1950)
So, once again, to quote the slogan of stentorian narrator Westbrook van Voorhis, “Time –– marches on!”
Susan Alexander Kane: Much more than Marion
Posted by vp19 on 2010.09.01 at 09:00
Current mood: weird
When Carole Lombard saw “Citizen Kane” late in 1941 — she reportedly viewed it at a private screening, according to Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive — she recognized its revolutionary cinematic nature, having known and admired Orson Welles (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/53545.html). At the same time, she probably wasn’t happy over the character Susan Alexander Kane, who many were already saying was based on her good friend Marion Davies…and some have conjectured that Lombard herself may have been the source for the Davies-inspired word “Rosebud” that plays an integral role in the film (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/328313.html).
Are there elements of William Randolph Hearst and Davies in “Kane”? Certainly so. But as the film’s legend has grown over nearly 70 years, then and now there’s been a massive oversimplification of just who Kane was based on (and whom Susan was based on). In both cases, they were composites; just how well Lombard was aware of the latter would have largely depended upon her knowledge of…
…opera. (That’s Dorothy Comingore as opera-singing Susan in a still from the film.)
Marion Davies never sang opera, but several other mistresses or wives of powerful magnates did. Chances are Lombard was aware of, and possibly even knew, one of them — a lady named Hope Hampton.
Hampton had a bit of film success in the early 1920s, and can be seen in part of a pioneering color test shoot in 1922 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/332945.html). Hampton likely got the nod because she was then the mistress of Jules Brulatour, head of distribution for Eastman-Kodak; they would marry the following year, becoming his third wife. (She periodically modeled fashions in color on screen throughout the ’20s.) Hampton soon left films for a career in music, appearing in a short-lived (20 performances) Broadway show and singing opera in Philadelphia. That didn’t pan out, so she returned to being a New York socialite.
(Brulatour’s second wife, actress Dorothy Gibson, also dabbled in opera. Gibson, a Titanic survivor who starred in a now-lost film about the disaster a month after it happened, had also been a mistress of Brulatour’s. That became public knowledge after Gibson was in an automobile accident that killed a pedestrian, and it was revealed the car was his.)
But the Hampton story doesn’t end in the 1920s. In the 1930s, Universal Pictures, then struggling despite occasional hits like “My Man Godfrey,” struck gold with Deanna Durbin — but didn’t have the money to strike up enough prints of her films to meet demands of theaters (unlike several of its competitors, Universal didn’t own theaters). So Universal desperately needed film stock, and Brulatour — who had been a business associate of Carl Laemmle’s since the teens — agreed to furnish it…but for a price: the studio had to create a film vehicle for his wife.
Universal reluctantly agreed, so Hampton headed to Hollywood to make the movie, called “The Road To Reno” (later known as “The Ranger And The Lady”), a vanity production if there ever was one. Randolph Scott drew the short straw and ended up her leading man; Glenda Farrell was the second female lead. Hampton performed two songs written by Jimmy McHugh and Harold Adamson.
The movie — Hampton’s first in a decade — drew considerable derision (at least one wag referred to her as “Hopeless Hampton”) and soon sank from sight, but Universal got its film stock and the studio was saved. That was more or less it for Hampton’s cinematic comeback, although she can be seen, playing her socialite self, in the 1961 film “Hey, Let’s Twist” (whose cast also includes Sally Kirkland and Joe Pesci!). Hampton outlived Brulatour by more than 35 years, dying in January 1982.
Hampton may have been an inspiration for Susan, but she wasn’t the only one. Another candidate is barely remembered today by anyone other than opera fanatics.
What Comingore as Susan Alexander Kane did to fictional voice teachers, Ganna Walska did to the real article. (One instructor reportedly said her voice sounded like “five million pigs.”) At her best, she was apparently barely competent; in 1923, the new Time magazine called her voice “good enough for small parlour singing,” but little more. At one Paris performance, patrons reportedly laughed at her.
But she had a heckuva sugar daddy behind her — Harold Fowler McCormick (her fourth husband; she would marry twice more), of International Harvester fame. He helped fund her career and made her a millionaire. Walska regularly performed in Chicago, not far from where Welles grew up in Kenosha, Wisc., so he certainly was aware of her. (Another Chicago mogul, Samuel Insull, built an opera house in town to further his daughter’s budding singing career.)
After Walska’s final marriage ended in divorce in 1946, she left opera for good (and probably to opera’s relief as well) and turned to new pursuits, eventually creating the botanical equivalent of Hearst’s San Simeon. Also in California (Montecito), Lotusland (http://www.lotusland.org/) is a 37-acre treasure, open for tours, featuring a wide array of flora, which Walska personally oversaw until her death in 1984 at age 97.
So while Davies’ reputation has been tarnished for decades, history has let Hampton and Walska off virtually scot-free…the difference being, of course, that Davies was a genuinely talented actress, if often misused (largely due to Hearst, who liked her in romantic costume dramas that weren’t her strong suit), while the other two had average acting/operatic skills at most. Thankfully, the work of film historians, outlets such as Turner Classic Movies and repertory houses, and the release of DVDs have finally made Davies remembered for the right reasons.
As Mrs. Powell…and as soon to be the ex
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.31 at 00:14
Current mood: hopeful
Here are two photos concerning Carole Lombard’s relationship with William Powell…sort of a “before” and “after.”
First, here’s Carole and Bill together:
I’m not certain whether this was taken before or after they were married in June 1931. I lean towards the latter, because the background — particularly the window — looks as if it is in the house they called home, the one that was sold in the spring of 2009 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/210183.html). This photo can be brought for $11.99, or you can make a bid beginning at $9.99. Bidding closes at 10:05 p.m. (Eastern) Wednesday. If interested, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-William-Powell-Beautiful-BW-Photo-/300459927566?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item45f4cea80e.
The next photo comes from a period when Lombard was in the midst of becoming the ex-Mrs. Powell:
The photo is dated July 25, 1933, and was taken at Lake Tahoe, while Lombard (looking fairly fetching) was in the midst of establishing Nevada residency so she could divorce Powell.
This photo, measuring 9″ x 7″, is from the same seller who put up the picture in yesterday’s entry of Lombard, Clark Gable and Irvin S. Cobb. Two bids have been made as of this writing, topping at $10.99; bids close at 10:10 p.m. (Eastern) Wednesday. You can check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/1933-Carole-Lombard-Movie-Star-Actress-Acme-Wire-Photo-/170531931164?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item27b47ec41c.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole. Clark and Cobb
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.30 at 16:00
Current mood: contemplative
It’s always fascinating to find a previously unseen photo of Carole Lombard and Clark Gable in public, and here’s yet another:
The photo is dated Feb. 5, 1937, and the man with Clark and Carole is named Irvin S. Cobb. Few remember him today, but in the 1930s he was a well-known writer and humorist who also dabbled in movie writing and acting. He was a close friend of Will Rogers, and hosted the Academy Awards in 1935.
At what event was this taken? I have a feeling it was a benefit for the Red Cross at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles, as there’s a photo datemarked Feb. 4 showing Gable and Lombard in much the same outfit, although this pic has Clark showing his support for the Shriners:
The Gable/Lombard/Cobb photo is “an original Type I wire news press Acme photo . Photo measures 8×5. This is part of a collection from a former employee of the UPI in Tribune Towers [Chicago] before this collection was moved to New York.”
The photo currently has one bid on it, for $9.99; bidding ends at 10:25 p.m. (Eastern) Wednesday. If you’re interested in owning it, or simply want to learn more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1937-Clark-Gable-Carole-Lombard-Irving-Cobb-Wire-Photo-/170530949093?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item27b46fc7e5.
24 hours of ‘ice cream’ (and no brain freeze!)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.29 at 09:25
Current mood: jubilant
Someone at a Turner Classic Movies message board may have put it best: “A rare instance of waiting for the weekend to be over!” Yep, it’s not often one is thrilled with Monday approaching — but then again, it’s not often your Monday is chock full of
this:
See why people are excited? It’s Thelma Todd, the “ice cream blonde” (she probably got that nickname because she looks so yummy), and on Monday, TCM in the U.S. will honor her as part of its “Summer Under The Stars” festival. (Canadian TCM fans are out of luck; since Hal Roach films aren’t licensed to TCM in Canada through some complicated rights issues, it will show a day of Robert Mitchum instead. Nothing against Bob, but if I’m working customs at the U.S.-Canada border, I’d be prepared for a one-day influx of classic movie buffs into the States.)
Like Carole Lombard, Todd was a beauty, had a talent for making people laugh…and is too often remembered more for how she died than how she lived. This December marks the 75th anniversary of Thelma’s mysterious, still-unsolved death at age 30 near the restaurant she owned on the Pacific Coast Highway in Santa Monica. Had she crossed a mob member the wrong way? Did a former lover take revenge?
But Monday, it will be time to celebrate her work on screen, and she left plenty of it for us to savor. What’s also unusual about TCM scheduling Todd for SUTS is that much of the day will be devoted to short films, the 20-minute comedies Thelma was renowned for. You’ll find blocks of Thelma appearing in shorts (maybe sometimes wearing them, too!) with partners such as Charley Chase, Zasu Pitts and Patsy Kelly.
Here’s the schedule, and it’s a long one (all times Eastern):
* 6 a.m. — “Broadminded” (1931). Thelma plays a romantic interest in this Joe E. Brown comedy feature.
* 7:15 a.m. — “Son Of A Sailor” (1933). Todd supports Brown here, too, this time as a brunette(!); the always-reliable Frank McHugh is also in this cast.
* 8:30 a.m. — “The Real McCoy” (1930). Now the parade of shorts begins; this block has six pairing Thelma with Charley Chase. Here, Chase tries to pass himself off as a hillbilly to impress country girl Thelma.
* 9 a.m. — “Whispering Whoopee” (1930). Thelma’s among three party girls Charley hires to help close a business deal.
* 9:30 a.m. — “Dollar Dizzy” (1930). Two millionaires try to escape suitors who want to marry them for their money.
* 10 a.m. — “High C’s” (1930). Chase is an entertainer called into military service during World War I, but he’s more interested in music (and, presumably, Thelma).
* 10:30 a.m. — “The Pip From Pittsburgh” (1931). Expecting a disaster on his blind date, Chase goes all-out to make himself look bad…not realizing Todd is his date.
* 11 a.m. — “The Nickel Nurser” (1932). A millionaire’s daughter-in-law (Todd) is confronted by an efficiency expert.
* 11:30 a.m. — “Hips, Hips, Hooray” (1934). Now it’s back to features, two where Thelma provides support to the riotous Wheeler and Woolsey. Ruth Etting is also in the cast.
* 12:45 p.m. — “Cockeyed Cavaliers” (1934). This W&W farce is set in medieval England; wonder if Thelma plays a saucy wench? (Both of these features were directed by Mark Sandrich, who also directed several Astaire-Rogers musicals for RKO.)
* 2 p.m. — “Catch As Catch Can” (1931). Once again we’re in shorts, this time with Zasu Pitts as Thelma’s partner. In this, Pitts is a phone operator who wins a wrestler’s affection with help from Todd.
* 2:30 p.m. — “Red Noses” (1932). Hijinks occur when Zasu and Thelma are sent to a spa. Billy Gilbert is also in the cast.
* 3 p.m. — “Show Business” (1932). Pitts, Todd, a musical monkey and a train trip. Sounds funny even before you see the film.
* 3:30 p.m. — “Asleep In The Feet” (1933). The gals work in a dance club to raise money for a friend. Hope they get more than “ten cents a dance.”
* 4 p.m. — “Maids A La Mode” (1933). Trouble ensues for Todd and Pitts when their boss catches them attending a party.
* 4:30 p.m. — “Bargain Of The Century” (1933). Chase directed this short in which Zasu and Thelma’s antics cause a policeman to lose his job.
* 5 p.m. — “Soup And Fish” (1934). The next six shorts pair Patsy Kelly with Thelma, and this first one has the ladies crashing a high society party and not fitting in (the same theme used in Three Stooges shorts later that decade).
* 5:30 p.m. — “One-Horse Farmers” (1934). Thelma and Patsy go country, and find they’ve been scammed.
* 6 p.m. — “Opened By Mistake” (1934). Todd’s a night nurse who persuades Kelly to stay the night at the hospital after Patsy is kicked out of her apartment. Things don’t go as planned…
* 6:30 p.m. — “Sing Sister Sing” (1935). Here the gals share an apartment and discover they’re not the most ideal of roommates.
* 7 p.m. — “Hot Money” (1935). Thelma and Patsy are in the money when they come across some cash…not realizing it’s been stolen.
* 7:30 p.m. — “Top Flat” (1935). Thelma tells Patsy she’s struck it rich, but has she?
* 8 p.m. — “Monkey Business” (1931). It’s now prime time, and Robert Osborne gets to introduce Thelma the Marxist (as in Groucho, Harpo, Chico and, yes, Zeppo). In these films, Todd essentially portrays a Margaret Dumont with sex appeal, a foil for the brothers’ mayhem. Here, she shows she’s up to the task.
* 9:30 p.m. — “Horse Feathers” (1932). She’s up to it in this one, too, cast as a college widow in this campus comedy, in which the Marxes woo her with separate versions of “Everyone Says I Love You”; the canoe scene with Groucho is a classic.
* 10:45 p.m. — “Another Fine Mess” (1930). Now, some examples of Todd’s work with Laurel and Hardy. Here, Stan and Ollie try to pass themselves off as owners of a deserted mansion.
* 11:30 p.m. — “Chickens Come Home” (1931). This short (from which the above still is taken) has the boys dealing with blackmailers. Mae Busch is also in the cast.
* 12:15 a.m. — “The Devil’s Brother” (1933). This feature, directed by Hal Roach himself, is based on an opera(!) and features Stan, Ollie and Thelma in Tyrolean costumes.
* 2 a.m. — “The Bohemian Girl” (1936). This comedy feature about pickpockets was released after Todd’s death, probably explaining why it’s among the more obscure films in the L&H canon.
* 3:15 a.m. — “The Maltese Falcon” (1931). We conclude with two samples of Todd as dramatic actress. First, the initial filming of Dashiell Hammett’s story, with Ricardo Cortez as Sam Spade a decade before Humphrey Bogart made the character his own. With Bebe Daniels and Una Merkel.
* 4:45 a.m. — “Mary Stevens, M.D.” (1933). Thelma in a pre-Code Kay Francis vehicle about a woman doctor who decides to have a baby outside of marriage? Yep — and Glenda Farrell and Lyle Talbot are in the cast, too.
All in all, a fascinating lineup, nicely programmed by TCM.
If you want to learn more about Todd, there’s a wonderful site on Yahoo, the Thelma Todd Club (http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/thelmatoddclub/), that’s overflowing with photos and info on Thelma and other comedy greats. It’s well worth not just one visit, but several.
We’ll leave you with this rarely-seen gag photo of Todd from the set of the Laurel and Hardy movie “Brats,” where they portrayed their own children through the use of oversized surroundings. Thelma didn’t appear in the film, but some publicist had the idea of having her pose for some shots in the large-scale bathroom, effectively cutting her down to size. It’s charming, but one can argue the scale should have been inverted — because where comedy was concerned, Thelma Todd stood ten feet tall.
A couple of film bloggers sitting around, talking…
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.28 at 01:23
Current mood: thoughtful
“The Critic” was a mid-1990s prime-time animated series from some of the creative minds behind “The Simpsons,” with Jon Lovitz voicing the lead character, Manhattan film critic Jay Sherman (a poor man’s Siskel or Ebert). It lasted only about two seasons, though it was written well and had its moments.
Since Jay hasn’t been around for about a decade and a half, we have no idea how he’d react to the phenomenon of people writing blogs about films. (The Internet was around in those days, but relatively few used it — or knew how to.) However, many of Jay’s real-life, flesh-and-blood counterparts have made their opinions known on the subject, and to paraphrase a queen’s fictional comment, many of them are not amused.
Time magazine’s Richard Schickel:
“What I see of Internet reviewing is people of just surpassing ignorance about the medium expressing themselves on the medium.”
Cultural historian Thomas Doherty referred to online critics as “young punks who still [get] carded at the multiplex,” “man-boy[s] of the people, visceral and emotional,” and “semi-literate troglodytes who prowl the viral field grunting out expletives.”
And Rex Reed of the New York Observer once labeled online film critics as “these people.”
In other words, gang, writing about film is literary brain surgery; leave it to the professionals.
But, as Paul Brunick adroitly pointed out in a recent essay on film criticism (http://www.filmlinc.com/fcm/ja10/onlinecriticism.htm), some of the best, most perceptive writing on the topic, including key works by two of the greats — Pauline Kael and Andrew Sarris — were done for free, as labors of love. Both would reach the point where they were paid handsomely for their writing, but both had to walk before they ran.
And in today’s blogosphere, we have many worthy followers in the Kael-Sarris tradition — not necessarily in their philosophical approach to film, but in crisp, knowledgeable and passionate writing. Two of them who come to mind are Farran Smith Nehme, the Alabama native who now lives in Brooklyn and is known in the online world as the “Self-Styled Siren,” and Dennis Cozzalio, a Glendale, Calif., resident whose blog has the intriguing (and unforgettable) title, “Sergio Leone And The Infield Fly Rule.” Both have operated their blogs for more than half a decade, which in baseball terms makes them a veritable online Jamie Moyer. (He’s the Phillies pitcher who’s been in the majors since June 1986, has won more than 250 games, and is still pretty reliable.)
About half a century ago, Duke Ellington guested on a recording session with Louis Armstrong and his All-Stars, and the meeting of these two jazz legends was dubbed “The Great Summit.” On May 31, Nehme and Cozzalio got together for a “summit” of their own, and thankfully, it has been recorded for posterity through Skype, in two parts.
In part one (http://sergioleoneifr.blogspot.com/2010/08/movie-blogger-summit-part-1-siren-and_16.html) whose lead-in photo shows Rosalind Russell and Cary Grant in “His Girl Friday,” they discuss how they came to be fans of classic film (we learn that Nehme’s father had a crush of Cyd Charisse), what drove them to become bloggers, how their sites evolved, and how younger generations are reacting to classic Hollywood. Cozzalio notes his pre-teen daughter has become a regular partner of his for classic film forays at the New Beverly Cinema:
“Maybe she just likes the time with Dad (I hope so!), but she doesn’t even question me anymore if I say, ‘Oh, let’s go see Kansas City Confidential or The Lady Eve.’ ‘Oh, okay. Is it funny? Who’s in it?’ Over the last couple of years she’s really gotten to know the Preston Sturges stock company. She recognizes William Demarest and Franklin Pangborn, by face if not by name. And she doesn’t seem to be put off by black and white the way a lot of young kids are either. So if this is happening in my family, I have to believe it’s happening in other families where film and film history is important, and I think that translates into something to be cheerful about when it comes to thinking about the future of the audience for classic movies. And Turner has everything in the world to do with that.”
Nehme then says of TCM, “Oh, yeah. They’re doing the Lord’s work.” (And I concur.)
Part two (http://sergioleoneifr.blogspot.com/2010/08/movie-blogger-summit-pt-2-siren-and.html), which features a lead-in photo of Carole Lombard kicking John Barrymore in “Twentieth Century,” the Siren’s work with TCM on its “Shadows Of Russia” series is discussed, along with how their tastes in films diverge, the personal nature of film criticism and more. Nehme had this to say about traffic on her blog:
“I have this thing called Stat Counter, and if I star getting uppity all I have to do is just click on it. It’s certainly much higher than it was even two years ago, but it’s not a high-traffic blog. Realistically, it’s never going to be. What I do really enjoy and appreciate is the kindness and respect that I get from fellow film writers. I gather that the blog is fairly widely read by other people who write about film, and that gives me an enormous amount of pleasure. And also I have a fairly consistent group of very knowledgeable, articulate commenters that come back time after time, and also people who prefer not to comment who occasionally just e-mail me -— ‘Hey, I liked this,’ or ‘I really liked that,’ which is also extremely nice. I have a lot of people who have sent me DVDs of hard-to-find movies over the years. That’s also really great. And I also now have a group of personal friends that I’ve met through the blog. So all of that has been extremely rewarding.”
(I should also note she said her biggest reward was the film preservation blogathom she helped create in February. It raised nearly $14,000 to preserve films, and the funds are sponsoring the restoration of two of the 75 silent films previously thought lost, but found in New Zealand earlier this year.)
I can relate to her comments about traffic and readership. Not that I’m putting myself in the same pantheon as the Siren or Cozzalio — the aim of “Carole & Co.,” a potpourri of information about classic Hollywood, generally with a perspective on Lombard’s life and times, is certainly more specialized than their blogs — but I do share their passion for film, for knowledge, for the sheer joy of discovery. (Through this blog, I’ve exponentially increased my knowledge about, and appreciation of, films of the ’20s and ’30s.) Your comments have certainly contributed towards that end as well, and I thank you for them.
And I thank these two bloggers for getting together and providing a new perspective on blogs about movies and the people who write them. Heck, perhaps even Richard Schickel will change his mind. Check out their comments, and make their sites — http://selfstyledsiren.blogspot.com/ and http://sergioleoneifr.blogspot.com/ — part of your daily blogging diet.
Something to think about whether you’re at Cozzalio’s beloved New Beverly; the Siren’s fave, the Film Forum; or whether you’re in “flyover country” with TCM as your repertory house.
‘Give us those nice bright colors…’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.27 at 02:01
Current mood: indescribable
“Kodachrome
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world’s a sunny day, oh yeah
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So mama don’t take my Kodachrome away”
–“Kodachrome,” Paul Simon
It’s still rather hard to believe that after more 74 years of its existence, the Kodachrome brand name for color slide film is fading into history, unlike the brilliant colors the film provided photographers since 1936. But in a digital age, color slides have become the photographic equivalent of 8-track tape, LPs, analog TV, take your pick. So from a business perspective, few insiders were surprised when Kodak announced its decision earlier this year.
However, the company used the Kodachrome name long before it introduced its slide film in 1936. And this spring, Kodak released a fascinating rarity.
That’s Carole Lombard in “Matchmaking Mama” in early 1929, one of several Mack Sennett shorts she appeared in that had color sequences. We’ve also shown some two-strip Technicolor fashion footage from the late 1920s. But Kodak had a color find from a time when Lombard was still known as Jane Alice Peters and was attending Virgil Junior High School...1922.
It turns out Kodak did a test of its Kodachrome motion picture film that year, shot at the Paragon Studios in Fort Lee, N.J., just across the Hudson River from Manhattan (but about a decade before the George Washington Bridge linked north Jersey to New York City). The color is remarkable (“Becky Sharp,” the first three-strip Technicolor feature, wasn’t made until 1935), but one can tell it’s an experimental film; the background is uniformly dark, meaning Kodak was still testing to see what colors showed up well and what ones didn’t. That sort of precluded its use for cinematic storytelling.
Nevertheless, there is a story of sorts here — based upon who’s shown on screen.
Three years before Mae Murray’s best-known film “The Merry Widow” (which would also lead to her downfall), she was a beauty famed for starring in the Ziegfeld Follies as well as film work. It was no surprise, then, that she was called upon to model an outfit highlighted by brilliant red. Also seen in this test film are Hope Hampton, modeling clothes she wore in her then-current film “The Light In The Dark” (a near-complete print of which was found several years ago) and Mary Eaton, best remembered today for appearing in the Marx Brothers’ first film, “The Cocoanuts.”
All in all, another reminder that our history isn’t merely black and white, or even shades of gray. (Learn more about this film, and how it was restored, at http://1000words.kodak.com/post/?ID=2982503&page=2#comments.)
For the 90th of the 19th, Carole the feminist
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.26 at 08:47
Current mood: productive
Exactly 90 years ago today, these women were celebrating, and understandably so. Why? Because the 19th Amendment had just become law, allowing American women the right to vote in all 48 states. Prior to that, the matter was handled by individual states, and many of them — including all those west of the Rockies — had given women full suffrage. In contrast, Indiana, where Elizabeth Peters (Carole Lombard’s mother) had resided before moving to California in 1914, only gave women the vote in presidential elections. Here’s a map showing the state-by-state breakdown at the time the 19th Amendment was passed:
Few, if any, women are currently alive who were denied the right to vote specifically because of their gender; they’d have to be at least 111 years old. (Of course, many older black women in southern states were deprived of the ballot into the 1960s through poll taxes and other chicanery.) But in August 1920, when Jane Alice Peters was 11 and watching movies, not performing in them, the matter was a big deal — especially considering the feminist beliefs of Elizabeth Peters, beliefs she passed down to her daughter.
We’ve run items on Carole professing her thoughts on feminism (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/111181.html), and here’s something else along the same lines. It’s from Motion Picture magazine of August 1935, entitled “Be Modern Or Be A Wallflower.” Lombard embraced, and in many ways personified, the tenets of “modern” womanhood, and she makes it evident in this interview. This was tracked down by Carla Valderrama for her site, carolelombard.org, although she couldn’t find the conclusion of the piece. To anyone who has it –– please get in touch with us.
________________________________________
BE MODERN OR BE A WALLFLOWER
The girl of today, says the ultra-popular Carole, must have a variety of interests and keep up with the times. She must be modern enough to stay ahead of the parade instead of lagging behind — a forgotten wallflower.
By WILLIAM F. FRENCH
We WERE talking about what it takes to put a girl up where every girl wants to be, when Carole Lombard — fresh, healthy and confident, after two weeks rest in the mountains — aired her outlook on it all.
“No,” she replied, “I don’t think luck has much to do with a girl amounting to anything worthwhile. I think it’s more a matter of alertness, of being wide-awake and alive. These days a girl has to be modern or else be a wallflower. The year 1935 hasn’t time to stop and pay its respects to the old-fashioned girl who is sitting quietly in the corner. Instead of waiting to be asked, a girl has to get out in front of the parade, where she’ll be seen. The time is past when a girl can attract attention being a passive verb, so to speak. She must be active, and in time with the times. She must be modern.”
“Modern girls don’t have to get noisy and boisterous and cheap to get into things. They don’t have to be fast to live fast. A hundred sensible, constructive, progressive interests are open to them. They no longer have to clamp the lid on their energy until it explodes into unhealthy channels. The up-to-date girl has a variety of interests. She rides, she drives, she plays bridge, she reads, she follows the latest plays, she studies, she goes in for sports with a zest. She doesn’t putter. She doesn’t do things half-way. She does things with a will, never half-heartedly. Norma Shearer is an excellent example of being modern. There is nothing half-hearted about her, with her determination to progress and her score of interests. Joan Crawford is modern, knowing what she wants and going after it. Katherine Hepburn, with her independence of spirit, is ultra-modern.”
“Determination, independence, health, intelligence, zest, alertness and a variety of interests. Mix well and season with a happy sense of humor, and you have what it takes to be modern. But don’t forget that seasoning. It is the thing that makes all the others possible. And you must learn to stick with a thing until you whip it. These days a girl simply must go in for sports, both for health and for popularity. Men expect girls to swim with them, ride with them, play tennis with them and even, perhaps, go fishing or hunting with them.”
“I GO IN for athletics and sports as intensively as I do for work. When I took up tennis I had an instructor and, even now, though I’m rather good at it, I still coach. I’m taking up flying because I think it’s part of a present-day education, and because I think we will all be flying before long.”
“I can’t afford not to keep up with new things. And neither can any other girl, whether she is in society or in a bargain basement. She can find time and means to keep in step with the times. She simply must learn to dance well, to swim, to play golf and bridge. There are ways to accomplish this if she has the will. And if she hasn’t the will, and isn’t willing to pay the price and effort, she will never get the things her heart just aches for and longs for.”
“Don’t believe, girls, that you don’t have to do the things the movie stars do in order to get what you want. You do have to. Because life demands the same of you as it does of them. When you hear what a casting office asks of a girl, don’t marvel. That office asks: ‘Can you swim, can you dance, can you drive, can you play tennis, can you wear a gown attractively, do you know how to walk, can you make yourself interesting?’ Your employer and your friends may not be asking you those questions quite so bluntly. But they are finding the answers to them in their own way. And if you fall short you’ll get as little as little notice from them as the unprepared movie applicant gets at the casting office.”
“In the past fifteen years, women have gone a long way, and have claimed a lot of privileges, for which all women must pay. The progressive ones have crowded so far ahead that the ones who lag at all are left behind and forgotten. We, as women, asked to be included in men’s sports, interests, activities and even in their political problems. We got our wish. And to live up to it, we must be modern. Perhaps it is unfortunate that all girls must keep up with the pace set by the most successful ones. But I, personally, don’t think so. Instead, I think it is forcing them all into broader, happier, more useful lives.”
“TODAY, the girl in the Iowa village, or the Pennsylvania hamlet, must keep up-to-date on styles and on manners, because the movies are constantly showing her friends how she ought to act, how she ought to look and what she ought to be able to do. She can’t hide from progress, no matter where she goes. The small city judges the girls on its local beach by the same standards as the world judges the stars at Malibu. And it has a right to do so. Don’t say that you haven’t a chance. Two out of every three stars in Hollywood didn’t have a chance either — once. They worked in department stores, restaurants, and even factories. They were home girls, chorus girls and starving extra girls. But they were modern, and made their ‘break’.”
“Being modern doesn’t mean going in for fads, wearing ultra-modern or spectacular clothes, or doing strange things. The girl of today has too many interests, too much to do, to waste her time that way. She centers on efficiency. She must! But she keeps up with the latest in everything. She reads the newest and best books even if she doesn’t like…”
_________________________________________
Alas, that’s where it ends, for now. Somewhere, someone must have this article in its entirety, so we can find out all Carole has to say (assuming she actually said it; even if she didn’t say it verbatim, much of it was likely either transcribed or she signed off on it). Interesting to see her salute Shearer, Crawford and Hepburn, too.
To 90 years of women’s suffrage, while saluting a woman who denotes modernity even today:
Lombard, for Miss Davies. (No, not that one.)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.25 at 01:40
Current mood: amused
There are probably more than a few photos of Carole Lombard with Marion Davies, but this is the only image I’ve ever seen of them together. It’s a closeup from the celebrity-filled staircase shot taken at one of Marion’s parties, probably at her fabled oceanside mansion in Santa Monica. (We’ve run that image in full before.) Lombard and Davies were good friends; Carole admired both Marion’s comedic talent on screen and her generous nature off it. (The feelings were mutual.)
However, unless Marion was into collecting photos of her filmland friends — she certainly could have obtained extra copies from Hearst publications, right? — she probably didn’t obtain this one…though it was forwarded to a “Miss Davies”:
One presumes this “Miss Davies” was a librarian at the newspaper or magazine where this was used. There’s a stamped date of Feb. 5, 1936, but the publication is not identified, sort of unusual for newspapers of the time. The seller of this item hails from Brooklyn, N.Y., so assuming it came from somewhere in metropolitan New York (not a guarantee), we still wouldn’t know where it came from. At the time, there were about a dozen English-language dailies based in Manhattan, and other boroughs and suburbs had their own papers as well.
We can tell the photo was touched up a bit, giving Lombard a dark background to presumably help her image better contrast on gray, grainy newsprint. Here’s the unretouched original, Paramount p1202-752:
The doctored photo (though the effect is unobtrusive) can be bought for $79.99, or you can make an offer. If unsold, the bidding will expire at 12:31 p.mn. (Eastern) on Saturday. To view it for yourself, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ACTRESS-100-real-photo-1936-LH3906-/380261383029?pt=Art_Photo_Images.
As for photos of Lombard and the Davies we all know and love…well, perhaps there are a few we don’t know about, stashed somewhere in the magnificent vastness that is San Simeon.
A high price for being negative
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.24 at 02:10
Current mood: impressed
Imagine owning original 8″ x 10″ negatives from one of Carole Lombard’s famed portraits for Paramount Pictures. In fact, let’s own not one, but
six. Plus, as an added bonus, let’s own a print struck from each of these precious negatives.
Well, the good news is you don’t have to imagine — you can actually own those items. But to do it, you’ll likely have to forgo that vacation you have planned, or trade in that new car of yours for a used model.
Why? Because to own all six, you’d have to shell out more than $3,000 –– at least. Bidding on each of the six starts at $499.99. Unless you’re a truly serious collector, or think you can recoup the money you spend by making prints of these negatives, they’re probably out of your reach.
Nevertheless, there’s no law against online window shopping, so that’s just what we’ll do. I’ve seen some of these images before, but others are new to me, and anyone who enjoys the photographic artistry of portraits from the golden age of Hollywood (or merely admires the beauty of Lombard) will savor these.
Here’s what the finished images look like. First, p1202-479, 1215 and 1243 (the last one will bowl you over):
Now the other three — p1202-1404, 1483 and 1494:
Pretty exquisite…and pretty expensive for all but the professional collector.
None of the six have been bid on as of this writing, and bidding on all of them concludes between 4:19 and 4:25 p.m. (Eastern) on Friday.
For p1202-479, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611681990?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
For p1202-1215, http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611682718?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
For p1202-1243, http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611682990?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
For p1202-1404, http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611682437?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
For p1202-1483, http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611683552?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
And for p1202-1494, http://cgi.ebay.com/Carole-Lombard-Original-8×10-studio-Negative-photo-/120611683225?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
Oops…almost forgot to mention there is free shipping.
Getting Gilbert his due
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.23 at 10:04
Current mood: accomplished
We’re in the midst of Turner Classic Movies’ annual U.S. “Summer Under The Stars” promotion, and one of the things I always enjoy about the concept is the fascinating blend of personalities it brings to our attention day after day during August. The casual movie buffs and neophytes can enjoy longtime favorites such as Katharine Hepburn, Paul Newman and Elizabeth Taylor, who have been featured three of the last four days, but in their midst was Sunday’s tribute to John Mills, patriarch of the esteemed English acting family. And tomorrow comes 24 hours of a star who left us before Carole Lombard did — and when he’s remembered, it’s often for the wrong reasons.
We’re referring to John Gilbert, a major star of the 1920s (known as “The Great Lover”), but who fell out of favor in the 1930s and died in 1936 at a mere 38 years of age.
If you’re familiar with him at all, chances are it’s due to some of the myths about him…such as that he had a poor voice that sank his career in talking pictures. Not the case at all; Gilbert may not have had the pipes of a William Powell or Ronald Colman, but it registered well and was more than capable.
No, two things in particular caused Gilbert to fall out of favor. First, the florid dialogue given his characters in silents, which looked fine when read on screen by audiences, sounded ridiculous when actually spoken. (The corps of Broadway-trained screenwriters, whose dialogue better fit talkies, arrived in films too late for Gilbert.) Second was the change in public tastes; by 1930, the rampant romanticism that had made stars of Gilbert and, earlier, Rudolph Valentino was in the past tense. The new breed of male stars had either a self-effacing charm about themselves (think Maurice Chevalier) or were brutally realistic, such as James Cagney and Clark Gable. True, MGM mogul Louis B. Mayer may have resented Gilbert for a variety of reasons, but he didn’t need to subterfuge Gilbert’s career — time did it for him.
Thankfully, Gilbert’s daughter Leatrice Gilbert Fountain came to rescue her father’s professional reputation, as her 1985 biography, “Dark Star,” provided a fair, honest assessment of the man and his work. This 24-hour tribute to Gilbert should also win him a new generation of fans, especially as people become increasingly aware of the sophistication of late silent film. Here’s the schedule (all times Eastern):
* 6 a.m. — “The Busher” (1919). Silent with Colleen Moore.
* 7 a.m. — “He Who Gets Slapped” (1924). A Lon Chaney vehicle also co-starring Norma Shearer, this was the first film released by the new Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer company.
* 8:30 a.m. — “The Merry Widow” (1925). This film, starring Mae Murray and directed by Erich von Stroheim, made Gilbert a star.
* 11 a.m. — “The Show” (1927). A circus drama, directed by Tod Browning, reuniting Gilbert with “Big Parade” co-star Renee Adoree; Lionel Barrymore is the villain.
* 12:30 p.m. — “Desert Nights” (1929). Gilbert’s last silent, as he plays the operator of a diamond mine targeted by a beautiful woman and her crooked father.
* 1:45 p.m. — “Way For a Sailor” (1930). Wallace Beery co-stars in this talkie tale of merchant marines, which also features Polly Moran (and an uncredited Ray Milland).
* 3:15 p.m. — “Gentleman’s Fate” (1931). By this time, Mayer was handing Gilbert awful material, hoping he’d break his contract, but he persevered (just as Kay Francis would do later in the ’30s when Warners tried to do likewise). This drama also features Leila Hyams, Anita Page and Marie Prevost. Directed by Mervyn LeRoy.
* 5 p.m. — “The Phantom of Paris” (1931). This would have been Lon Chaney’s second talkie, but Gilbert took over when Chaney died; one presumes Mayer subsequently scaled production values down to a programmer. With Hyams again, plus Lewis Stone and Jean Hersholt.
* 6:30 p.m. — “Downstairs” (1932). Gilbert wrote the story, sold it to MGM for $1, and gives a wonderful performance as an amoral chauffeur, showing he could adapt to pre-Code style. With Paul Lukas, Hedda Hopper and Virginia Bruce (whom he then married).
* 8 p.m. — “The Big Parade” (1925). A classic epic of the World War, directed by King Vidor, that was one of the biggest hits of the 1920s.
* 10:15 p.m. — “Bardeleys the Magnificent” (1926). Also directed by Vidor, this swashbuckler was presumed lost for years, but was found and restored (though some of the third reel is missing).
* midnight — “Flesh and the Devil” (1926)- Gilbert and vamp supreme Greta Garbo steam up the silent screen.
* 2 a.m. — “Queen Christina” (1933). Garbo and Gilbert again, this time with sound. A pre-Code classic.
* 4 a.m. — “The Captain Hates the Sea” (1934). Gilbert’s last film (with Victor McLaglen), but it almost wasn’t. He was set to co-star with Marlene Dietrich in “Desire,” but had to withdraw from production due to three heart attacks, the third of which was fatal.
For more on Gilbert, including an interview with his daughter, go to http://classic-film-tv.blogspot.com/2010/08/about-john-gilbertan-interview-with.html. And catch some of his films Tuesday to acquaint yourself with this talented star.
It’s real, and it’s spectacular (the price, for now)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.22 at 01:08
Current mood: enthralled
You hear stories about people finding valuable documents or artworks in garages or flea markets. And we may have something along those lines, albeit on a far lesser scale, with Carole Lombard memorabilia.
The story from the seller, based in Hamburg, Germany:
“A while ago I bought a box with a couple of vintage autographs at a flea market. While I already sold many of them, the remaining I will sell during the next couple of weeks. Lot includes Brando, Flynn, Mansfield, Cooper and several others.”
One of those “several others” is this picture of Lombard:
More from the seller:
“I am not an autograph expert. I compared the signatures with autographs shown on the website of historyforsale and they appear to be genuine.
“As I am not an expert please note that I cannot guarantee the authenticity and for most items I don’t have COAs. All items are sold as they are. Therefore please check carefully and ask questions prior to bidding.”
First, kudos to the seller’s honesty. Second, I decided to have my questions answered by the person who probably knows more about Carole Lombard autographs than just about anyone — Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive. She’s been a collector for over 40 years, spent more than a decade as a dealer, and also served on the Universal Autograph Collectors Club (UACC) Ethics Board and their Executive Board for a number of years.
So, what does she have to say about this photograph, and autograph?
“Apparently this was one of her favorite photos to sign — and I can well understand that, as it is lovely! Have seen several of these over the years, all authentically signed, most in 5″ x 7″ format, and this image she apparently preferred to sign in BLUE. Those folks who say she always did something-or-other in a certain way (i.e. signing ‘everything’ in green ink) are mistaken. Green was her preference, obviously, but have seen many, many blue-ink sigs. This does NOT appear to be one of her photos with the reproduction signature printed into the image.”
Sampeck goes on to write,
“All of these white-lace pics I’ve seen over the years have the signature placement in a slightly different location. Plus on this one, the ‘e’ in Carole is a bit rushed — a reproduction would have been perfectly formed. Frankly, I’ve never seen this image with a printed-in signature. Certainly some might exist, but they’ve never surfaced within my particular orbit.
“I’d be comfortable owning this. That’s the best indicator of what I think of the signature.”
So it has the Sampeck seal of approval (and since she lives in an eastern suburb of Dallas, let’s hope said seal has a nice, large pool to make it through this torrid Texas summer). Some more comments:
“For a 5″ x 7″ of this image IN THIS CONDITION (the photo appears to have faded to sepia, probably from exposure to sunlight, a bit more than would be desirable, as it seems to be losing much contrast and detail is greatly flattened) I’d think somewhere in the $200-250 range would be a reasonable ‘eBay-retail’ price to pay.”
However, as of this writing, the high bid isn’t $200-250, not even close, It’s only $51, after a mere two bids. Perhaps the seller’s uncertainty over its authenticity — or, more likely, buyers’ uncertainty over whether it’s authentic or a reproduction (the signature is certainly Lombard’s) — is keeping the price down. Sampeck said were it to be sold for $51, it would be “a steal.”
Bidding on this item is slated to end at 11:20 p.m. (Eastern) tonight, and if you’d like to try your luck, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-Carole-Lombard-Fantastic-handsigned-vintage-5×7-p-/290464170792?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0 and place your bid. Perhaps someone will acquire an authentic Lombard autographed portrait for under $100. (Then again, maybe not — as of 9:30 a.m., a third bid had been made, for $80.)
Finally, some helpful advice from Sampeck on displaying signed photos:
“Never, EVER display these where they’ll be exposed to direct sunlight! It’s a killer, both on photographs and on the ink. Blue ink doesn’t fade as badly as some colors — red ink practically disappears in time — and there is no heartbreak like going to ooh and ahh over your precious autograph hanging on the wall, but discovering that irreversible damage has occurred.”
Spanning the globe with the lovely Lombard
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.21 at 11:58
Current mood: satisfied
For someone whose personality and style was expressly American, Carole Lombard had worldwide appeal. That’s been made evident in more than a few previous entries, and here are two more examples of her popularity on other continents.
First, off to South America, specifically Montevideo, Uruguay, for her appearance (with James Stewart and their characters’ “son” in “Made For Each Other”) on the cover of the July 6, 1939 issue of Mundo Uruguayo:
Note that Stewart’s last name was misspelled. By the end of 1939, a breakthrough year for him and one of the best years any actor has ever had, no one would be doing that anymore.
It’s a general interest magazine in Spanish, 112 pages, 8″ x 11 3/4″, in very good condition. You can buy it straight up for $19.99 or make an offer; bids will close about noon (Eastern) on Wednesday if the item isn’t sold. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-MUNDO-URUGUAYO-Cover-RARE-MAG-1939-/360212544546?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0 to learn more.
Now, let’s cross the Atlantic, through Europe and into Asia Minor, also moving up in time to early 1941. We’re in Turkey, and come across the Turkish magazine Yildiz, with Norma Shearer (looking almost Kay Francis-like) on the cover:
There’s also a two-page spread on athletic 20th Century-Fox starlet Brenda Joyce (who would later succeed Maureen O’Sullivan as Tarzan’s Jane):
But here’s what we’re looking for — some photos of Lombard and her latest film on Turkish screens, “They Knew What They Wanted.” This also features some photos of her with co-star Charles Laughton and director Garson Kanin that were taken for the fabled “behind the screen at the dailies” photo shoot in Life magazine, but apparently never saw the light of day stateside:
This magazine also has items about (and photos of) Laurel & Hardy and Betty Grable, among others. It’s listed in fine condition, with no pages missing.
Like the other item, this can be bought (for $18.75) or you can try your hand at making an offer; bids will conclude at 5:53 p.m. (Eastern) on Wednesday. If you’re interested, curious or would like to see more samples of what’s inside, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/NORMA-SHEARER-Cover-CAROLE-LOMBARD-LAUREL-HARDY-31986-/150472467230?pt=Magazines.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
It’s real. But is it valuable?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.20 at 11:00
Current mood: discontent
It’s understandable why so many people would prize having an item autographed by Carole Lombard, one of the most beloved personalities in Hollywood history. While she frequently signed photographs and other things, her stature as an actress and relatively brief life only enhances their desirability.
The item’s actual value, on the other hand, may be something else entirely.
Here’s an example of what I mean:
As is usually the case when it comes to Lombard autographs, we consult with Carole Sampeck of The Lombard Archive to examine their veracity. According to her, this signature,
is the real deal:
“Absolutely legit. A rather poor-condition example, with the smudging and less-than-optimal contrast, but it is her handwriting completely.” (It should be noted the image is from a sepia newspaper rotogravure, not an actual photograph.)
Sampeck proceeded to say of the item, “Might be a good ‘starter’ signature for a collector if it can be purchased cheaply”…and there’s the rub. She said it’s probably worth about $200 if it was 8″ x 10″, but it isn’t; according to the seller, it’s 6 1/8″ x 4 1/16”.
So the item may be worth about $175 or so, Sampeck said — but the seller opened bidding at $450. That may explain why, as of this writing, no bids have been placed on the item, with bidding closing at 9 a.m. (Eastern) Saturday.
If you’d like to see it for yourself, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-HOLLYWOOD-LEGEND-KILLED-AIR-CRASH-/350383898574?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0. If it goes unclaimed, perhaps the seller will put it up again, at a price that may be perceived as more appropriate. And a Carole Lombard autographed image can find a good home.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
To one ‘stupendously amazingly cool’ blogger
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.19 at 00:59
Current mood: impressed
It’s my birthday today, but I’ve decided to give
you the present. Beginning with today’s entry, I’m going to periodically spotlight one of my favorite bloggers (in no order of preference, mind you!), focusing on their entries about Carole Lombard (naturally).
We’ll begin with someone who coined one of my favorite descriptions of Carole…
…”stupendously amazingly cool.” And that photo, taken by Life’s esteemed Alfred Eisenstadt while Lombard was skeet shooting, is one of that blogger’s favorites.
Her name is Millie, and according to the profile in her blog “Classic Forever,” she’s 16. That’s less than one-third my age, and I deem it pretty remarkable not so much that she’s a classic movie fan (I was sort of one at age 16), but that she writes with such knowledge and enthusiasm for the topic.
And for Lombard.
That description of Carole — “stupendously amazingly cool” — certainly conveys her timelessness, a quality I’ve long admired about her. And I’m glad to see that Millie gets it, too. (She has also referred to her as “The Carole,” which I guess is okay but for me is too reminiscent of Donald Trump, a man who vainly wishes he were William Randolph Hearst.)
Lombard’s in her list of 10 favorite actresses, and she’s in some wonderful company: Ingrid Bergman, Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly, Jean Arthur, Sandra Dee, Barbara Stanwyck, Doris Day, Gene Tierney and Olivia De Havilland.
“Classic Forever” just became a member of the Large Association of Movie Blogs (as am I), and I welcome Millie to the LAMB family. According to her site, as of this writing she has 15 entries that mention, or feature, Carole (the only actresses with more are Kelly, Dee, Bergman and Audrey), and you can find them at http://classicforever.blogspot.com/search/label/Carole%20Lombard. (It’s a splendid site, period; at the time I write this she has nearly 500 entries to her credit.)
We’ll leave with another of Millie’s favorite portraits of Carole, because both of them are “stupendously amazingly cool”:
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Tennis, anyone?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.18 at 11:56
Current mood: contemplative
To remind us that the final tennis major of the year, the U.S. Open in Flushing Meadows, Queens, N.Y., is just around the corner, today’s entry features Carole Lombard, a fine player in her own right, looking lovely in tennis whites:
It’s the cover of a 1935 issue of Jueves de Excelsior, the Mexican magazine whose editors put Lombard on their cover on numerous occasions (was she the Jennifer Aniston of her time?).
I don’t see the precise date on the cover, but I’m guessing it to be from early May, since one of the stories inside is on the ill-fated Cunard ship Lusitania, presumably to mark the 20th anniversary of its torpedoing by German boats on May 7, 1915 (an event that spurred anti-German sentiment in North America). There’s also a Huey Long story inside; he would be assassinated in Baton Rouge, La., later that year. The seller adds there’s a boxing story with a picture of Joe Louis, then an up-and-coming heavyweight who wouldn’t win the title for another two years.
Aside from a missing page, the magazine is in good condition, If you look closely at the cover, you’ll see some writing over Carole’s skirt, but that’s merely markings, not an autograph. If it were, you can be sure that it would cost a lot more than the $10 price under eBay’s “buy it now” policy.
The item will be up until it is sold or just before 4 a.m. (Eastern) on Thursday. If you’d like to buy it, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/1935-CAROLE-LOMBARD-magazine-LUSITANIA-SAN-JUAN-ULUA-/190374601710?pt=Magazines.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Just who is Mr. Drew?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.17 at 11:28
Current mood: artistic
For someone whose life was relatively brief, Carole Lombard appeared in a lot of movies, and her career intersected with all sorts of other actors. Take this guy, for instance:
That’s Lombard in the 1929 Pathe programmer “The Racketeer,” working with an actor named Roland Drew. Coming across this photo, I thought I’d learn more about him. Here’s what I came up with:
Roland Drew was born in 1900 in the Elmhurst section of Queens, N.Y. He began acting in silents in 1926, initially under the name Walter Goss. By 1928, he had reverted to his actual name and had graduated to lead or second-lead roles, and had made two films opposite Dolores Del Rio — the 1928 “Ramona” and, in 1929, “Evangeline” (below) an adaptation of the Longfellow tale about Acadians in Louisiana. (Part of the latter film was shot on location; to learn more about this, along with photos of the cast and crew, visit http://www.acadianaprofile.com/cover_feature_20_3.htm)
Then, his career took an inexplicable turn, as there was a five-year gap between “Ex-Flame” in 1930 and his next movie, “Nine To Nine.” (“Ex-Flame” is presumed lost, which is to be pitied because it contained footage of Louis Armstrong performing.) Drew appeared in slightly more than a dozen films over the remainder of the 1930s, either in small roles in lower-tier films or uncredited parts in major movies (“The Goldwyn Follies,” “The Adventures Of Tom Sawyer”). Then came the production that Drew is best known for today.
It’s the 1940 serial “Flash Gordon Conquers The Universe” (Drew is at left, with Buster Crabbe, Carol Hughes and Frank Shannon). Drew plays Prince Barin, and yes, Flash’s antagonist is none other than Ming the Merciless, portrayed by Charles Middleton (who was in the cast of the Lombard film “White Woman”). After that, it was back to bit or uncredited parts, so by 1945 Drew decided to quit the business, and married Dorothy Dearing, who had danced in Busby Berkeley films, the following year. (They had a son before her death in 1965.)
Like fellow “Racketeer” cast member Hedda Hopper, Drew found later success in an unrelated career; he moved into, of all endeavors, dressmaking. He died in Santa Monica in March 1988.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole ‘speaks’ Spanish (fluently!)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.16 at 01:00
Current mood: curious
Yesterday’s entry showed Carole Lombard on the cover of a Mexican magazine, reminding us she visited Mexico on several occasions, at least once with each of her husbands, William Powell and Clark Gable (both of the pictures above were taken south of the border). We also know she vacationed in Cuba in early 1935 (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/152746.html). One presumes from such travels she knew a little bit of the Spanish language, enough to be a passable tourist.
But in May 1937, some Argentinians may have been led to believe that Carole could have conversed with them without dipping into “Spanglish.” That impression would have come from a glimpse of a page in the Argentine magazine Chabela. There, tucked underneath a column on contract bridge (that card game was hugely popular in the 1930s), was Lombard, extolling the virtues of Lux Toilet Soap (or, as the locals would have called it, “Jabon LUX de Tocador”):
Spanish is not my strong suit (I took six years of French in junior high and high school), but it appears as if Carole is saying (or at least the ad writers are having her say) that ladies (“chicas”) can get radiant and youthful skin (“cutis radiante y juvenil”) by using Lux soap. (If someone could provide a complete translation of her Spanish spiel, it would be appreciated.) Of course, at this time, Lux used Lombard and other stars to promote the product, both in the U.S. and elsewhere.
The ad measures 8.25″ x 10.75″ and is said to be in very good condition. You can get it for $10 under eBay’s “buy it now” plan; it will be on the board if unsold until about 5:30 p.m. (Eastern) on Tuesday. If you’d like to buy it, visit http://cgi.ebay.com/LUX-Soap-CAROLE-LOMBARD-Original-Argentinean-AD-1937-/310234950556?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘Before Breakfast’ in Mexico
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.15 at 02:07
Current mood: cheerful
Before we get to today’s entry, an update — and a bonus — from Friday, when we ran four photos of Carole Lombard fishing (photos we now believe were taken as part of a scene for her 1939 film “In Name Only”). There were some red editing pencil markings on them, and thanks to the work of my friend Tal, they’ve been removed. Here are the “new,” and improved, images:
Incidentally, the package that includes these photos, negatives and other related items is still up for bidding through 10:13 p.m. (Eastern) tonight. As of this writing, six bids have been made, topping at an even $30. To bid on it or follow, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-Vintage-RKO-photos-Negatives-c-1941-/270619618317?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
The subject of today’s regularly scheduled entry is also an item up for auction at eBay, this one a rare vintage magazine. Like many American film stars, Lombard was popular in Mexico, and in early 1936 she was featured in a publication I’d heretofore never heard of called Ilustrado. Take a look at this cover — it’s a wow:
I’m almost certain this image wasn’t originally photographed in color, but instead shot in black and white (the cover refers to Lombard’s latest film, “Love Before Breakfast,” so this is likely derived from a Universal publicity still), but the coloring is so expertly done it’s not that easy to tell the difference.
I do not know whether there’s a Lombard-related story, although “Love Before Breakfast” might be one of the movies reviewed in that issue. There are also features, cartoons and more, so this may be a general-interest publication. It measures 12″ x 9″, and is said to be in good condition for a magazine that’s 74 years old (although one page is missing).
Bids on this item start at $8.99, though no one has placed a bid as of this writing; bidding concludes at 4:44 p.m. (Eastern) Thursday. Think you’re interested? Check it out at http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190430512476&category=280&emailtemplateid=24662408&sellerid=FpRekKD1aqDSR79nXlR65w==&buyerid=FpRekKD1aqBMjcgYXvgwXw==&refid=store&ssPageName=ADME:B:SEMK:US:LISTG.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Getting to the great outdoors: Clark vs. Carole
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.14 at 01:35
Current mood: surprised
Whether or not yesterday’s images of Carole Lombard fishing were from an actual angling trip or merely a scene from a film (“In Name Only,” according to one comment), there can be no denying that she and Clark Gable (shown above with their pheasant catch while hunting in South Dakota in October 1941) enjoyed the great outdoors.
What to take getting there? That was something else entirely.
That may not have been that big a deal for the above excursion, since they took a plane to get to the upper Midwest. (A young girl who saw the stars arrive at the Dakota airport would, like Lombard, eventually change her name — to Mamie Van Doren — and make a film with Gable, “Teacher’s Pet” in 1958.) But when Clark and Carole went to hunt or fish within driving distance of their Encino home, they apparently had their differences.
At least that’s what Hollywood columnist Jimmie Fidler noted in the Los Angeles Times of Aug. 12, 1940:
Specifically, here’s what he wrote, with the subhead, “Retaliation!”
“Don’t get the idea there’s a rift in the Gable-Lombard bliss. Perfect — well, ALMOST perfect — accord still reigns. But there IS the problem of what to take on camping trips.
“Clark, in his lone-wolf days, went into the wilds with his toothbrush, a sleeping bag and supreme contempt for softies who took more.
“Since marriage, however, he’s found his station wagon so heavily laden for hunting jaunts that he’s thought seriously of hiring Don Wilson to sit on the radiator and hold the front wheels down.
“The other day, before the Gables’ latest fishing trip, Clark made his one formal protest: Carole awoke to find a 15-ton truck parked in the driveway.
“On its side, in huge letters, was printed: LOMBARD CAMPING VANS, INC.”
Gable may have been famous for his frugality, but he apparently didn’t mind spending a bit of money where a practical joke on his sweetie was concerned. Too bad no photo of this gag is known to exist.
Oh, and “Don Wilson” was a reference to the popular, rotund announcer of the Jack Benny show, the guy who read all the Jell-O commercials. (That was actually Fidler’s second Benny-related reference of the column; the first, in Fidler’s words — “Pickaninnies down South who used to be named ‘George Washington’ are now being christened ‘Rochester’ and in droves” — is a chilling reminder of race relations in America circa 1940. It refers, of course, to Eddie Anderson, the black actor who portrayed Benny’s wisecracking valet, Rochester.)
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Catch of the day
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.13 at 11:21
Current mood: hungry
I have an old friend of mine who has taken up fishing off Long Island Sound with her family — providing good recreation for the kids and, occasionally, dinner. I think she’ll find some joy from today’s entry (appropriately put up on Friday, the day of the week most associated with fish).
It’s frequently been noted that one result of Carole Lombard’s marriage to Clark Gable was accommodating her husband’s love of hunting and fishing. It wasn’t as considerable a change as some make it out to be — from her childhood, she had loved the outdoors life and was naturally athletic — but Carole now took up these activities with extra zeal.
We’ve seen images of this side of Lombard, but here are a few more that have been relatively unseen over the years. The seller says they came “from a file of studio documents belonging to RKO publicist Linn Unkefer”; we don’t know who took them, or why (the seller humorously states, “They were probably intended for a lame movie magazine piece titled ‘Hollywood’s Favorite Gal Pal Lands a Fish as Easily as She Did Clark Gable’ or some such other rot”).
Whatever, here they are, filled with Carole’s special charm:
These images are believed to be from 1941. Who took them, and where, isn’t certain, though we do know the Rogue River in Oregon was a longtime favorite Gable fishing destination and that he and Lombard went there. (We don’t see Clark in these photos, but they would have been the concern of MGM, not RKO.) Several of these images have red photo pencil markings, meaning they may have been used in RKO publicity, but they really don’t detract much.
Here’s what this package contains in full:
* 3-shot 35mm negative + proof strip
* 2 8″ x 10″ negatives: standing in creek with fishing pole, putting on shoe (the first two photos in this listing)
* 2 4″ x 5″ negatives of the same two images
* 2 4″ x 5″ matte finish photos or proofs of these two images with various markings, stamped “14638” and “14636” on the back, lightly ripped along edges
* 2 of the same in 8″ x 10″ versions, marked up, not stamped on back, lightly rippled along edges
* 5″ x 7″ glossy photo of the star standing, pole in hand, adjusting her shoe; marked in red “#2 5 x 7”; RKO stamp on back; light imprint from a paper clip on upper edge; short minor crease
* 5″ x 7″ glossy photo of Lombard in knee-deep water holding a line of fish; two people in background, marked in red “#3”; RKO stamp on the back; a few marks/imprints/dings in upper corner. There is no negative for this photo.
All in all, quite a lot to reel in.
Four bids have already been made for this, topping to date at $26.99; for something of this magnitude, this would be considered a bargain by most classic Hollywood collectors. Bidding will conclude at 10:13 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday. If you’d like to cast your lure for this, simply go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-Vintage-RKO-photos-Negatives-c-1941-/270619618317?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
On the set, naturally
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.12 at 09:48
Current mood: mellow
The beauty of Carole Lombard was such that it didn’t need fancy gowns or sleek dresses. Want proof? Take a look at this photo:
Isn’t that a wonderful picture? It was shot during filming of “They Knew What They Wanted,” probably on location in the Napa Valley, with Lombard in costume as her character, Ann. As she either waits in between takes or watches others in their scene, her intelligence is evident. And even in jeans, socks and shoes that are anything but glamorous, she exudes an aura that’s both ethereal and genuine. As Garson Kanin, the director of “They Knew What They Wanted,” wrote in his book “Hollywood,” it was easy for anyone to understand why Clark Gable was crazy about her (even if his libido led him astray every now and then).
The photo was taken by Fred Hendrickson, a staff photographer at RKO for many years, although not as well known as fellow studio lensman Ernest Bachrach. Here’s a photo of Hendrickson at work, photographing a young Joan Fontaine:
Hendrickson’s image of Lombard is 6.5″ x 7.5″, in mint condition, with a stamp on the back, and is being auctioned at eBay. Bidding will expire at 12:34 p.m. (Eastern) Friday; one bid has currently been placed, for $14.99. If you’re interested, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ORIG-PHOTO-BY-FRED-HENDRICKSON-1940-/350384292376?pt=Art_Photo_Images.
The same seller has another portrait of Carole available, a leggy swimsuit image we’ve seen before:
However, now we know two more things about it: the image is Paramount p1202-1227, meaning it was likely taken around 1935, and the photographer was Paramount staffer Bud Fraker (who worked into the 1950s and was best known for his images of Grace Kelly and Audrey Hepburn). It’s 8″ x 10″, in mint condition, and as of this writing, three bids have been placed, topping at $26.99. Bidding expires at 12:23 p.m. (Eastern) Friday.
Want to place a bid of your own? Then go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CAROLE-LOMBARD-ORIGINAL-LEGGY-PHOTO-BY-BUD-FRAKER-/350384290688?pt=Art_Photo_Images.
A walk half a century long
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.11 at 02:13
Current mood: pleased
Above is Hollywood, the actual geographic place, as Carole Lombard knew it (this photo of Hollywood Boulevard, looking west, was taken in 1937). But as we all know, Hollywood isn’t just a location, a section of Los Angeles. It’s mythic, legendary, a state of mind, both Olympus and Valhalla. (Some of its detractors might also compare to Sodom and Gomorrah, but we’ll ignore that.)
Those who lived, worked or had businesses in the actual Hollywood wondered how to connect the flesh-and-blood place to the larger-than-life Hollywood that’s been in the collective public imagination since the second decade of the 20th century.
The answer was right under their noses. No, let me correct that — it was right under their feet.
It’s the Hollywood Walk of Fame, which has become every bit as iconic as many of the personalities it honors. And this year marks the 50th anniversary that Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street have had the distinctive star sidewalks.
The driving force behind the Walk was a man named E.M. Stuart, who in 1953 was volunteer president of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce. The Walk of Fame was part of a refurbishment project for the neighborhood; as Stuart envisioned it, an improvement association would fund construction costs. To promote the project, actress Virginia Mayo installed a star at Hollywood Boulevard and Argyle Avenue in June 1956, as Stuart, left, and Harry M. Sugarman of the Hollywood Improvement Association looked on:
One-time Lombard co-star Preston Foster was among those receiving a demonstration star in 1958, but the first actual pink terrazzo star laid down was for director Stanley Kramer in early 1960. And the first person to have a star ceremony was actress Joanne Woodward on Feb. 9, 1960:
About 2,500 blank stars were set down on Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street, the neighborhood’s two most famous thoroughfares. More than 1,500 of them were inscribed over the next 18 months, although few, if any, received ceremonies. As one might expect, Lombard was part of the initial group of honorees, but I’m unaware whether Clark Gable ever saw her star (or his, for that matter) prior to his death in November 1960. (Charlie Chaplin, still a controversial figure in 1960, didn’t receive his star until 1972.)
The Walk of Fame was designed as a way to improve the Hollywood business district, but decay continued into the 1970s despite occasional new names added to the Walk. Enter a longtime Los Angeles radio personality named Johnny Grant.
In 1978, the city of Los Angeles named the Walk a historic cultural monument. Grant, a member of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, was asked to lead a project to restart the star-awarding process, which began anew in 1980. Dubbed “the honorary mayor of Hollywood,” Grant added sparkle and panache to the ceremonies, which through shows such as “Entertainment Tonight” became nationally recognized events. (That’s Grant with Susan Lucci at her star ceremony.) By the time of Grant’s death in January 2008, the Walk of Fame had become iconic, a major driving force behind Hollywood tourism.
Like its eastern sister in glamour, Times Square in New York, Hollywood has bounced back from decay, stronger than ever. Some may argue it’s become too corporate, losing some of its raffish soul, but the place is booming…and so is the Walk of Fame.
There are a number of Web sites dedicated to the Walk, and we’ll mention two. First, the official site from the Chamber of Commerce itself, http://www.hollywoodchamber.net/index.php?page=7, It contains all sorts of information about the Walk, including a directory (Lombard’s star is at 6930 Hollywood Boulevard, between the El Capitan Theater and the Hollywood Roosevelt).
(We should also note the Chamber has scheduled a gala on Nov. 3 to cap the golden anniversary celebration.)
The other site we like, also under Chamber auspices, is http://www.walkoffame50.com/ Go to the home page to find out why.
Something to quickly ‘Digest’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.10 at 01:19
Current mood: artistic
And for Carole Lombard fans, a tasty treat. We’re referring to the March 2006 issue of
Architectural Digest, the annual “Hollywood at home” issue and the one with Audrey Hepburn on the cover:
Audrey is indeed lovely, and you can see photos of the homes she and Mel Ferrer had in Beverly Hills and Malibu, but for Lombard fans, the selling point is an entry on her famed Hollywood Boulevard home, which was decorated by actor-turned-designer William Haines (his second assignment of note after having won plaudits for his work on Joan Crawford’s house).
First, we see Lombard in her living room:
At first glance, the next photo makes it appear as if Carole has mysteriously shrunk to about two feet tall, but never fear. That’s not a chair that’s engulfing her, that’s a bed. Well played, Mr. Haines:
Other stars featured in this issue include Ava Gardner, Bette Davis, Robert Mitchum, Doris Day, Jack Lemmon and Cary Grant.
Want it? Better hurry. You can buy it for $29.95, but it will only be up until 11:21 a.m. (Eastern) today. Go to http://cgi.ebay.com/ARCHITECTURAL-DIGEST-Audrey-Hepburn-Carole-Lombard-Deco-/360280126921?pt=Magazines.
As eBay items go, that’s eat-and-run, but for Lombard lovers, the flavor on this would be long-lasting.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Did she plant the ‘Rosebud’?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.09 at 16:12
Current mood: confused
Funny how one mere word can inspire volumes of discussion. And so is the case with “Rosebud,” the last word uttered by media plutocrat Charles Foster Kane before he dies, a word that starts people scrambling to discover just what it means in Orson Welles’ 1941 masterpiece “Citizen Kane.”
To fully appreciate “Kane” and its impact, you have to understand just how revolutionary it was, how Welles broke so many cinematic conventions (and, in the process, established many of his own). Watch the things “Kane” does, from camera angles to editing to story pacing: Few films that had come before it had attempted many of these innovations, and certainly no movie had ever attempted something of such totality. It’s why “Kane” is one of the few films that can withstand repeated screenings — there’s always something new in it to see.
But what about “Rosebud,” the catalyst for the action in “Kane”? Just in case you’re one of the few folks who has never seen the movie, we won’t tell you what it is, but we can tell you that at least one person believes Carole Lombard had something to do with it.
No, Lombard was not “Rosebud” herself; legend has it that the term was a pet name publisher William Randolph Hearst (one of the people on whom the character of Charles Foster Kane was based, although not the only one) had for a, well, intimate part of the anatomy of his mistress, film star (and close Lombard friend) Marion Davies:
Lombard also knew Welles from her time at RKO (http://community.livejournal.com/carole_and_co/53545.html). According to Josh R. at the site “Edward Copeland on Film,”
The actress’ most significant contribution to history of motion pictures came by virtue of a film in which she never even appeared, nor was in any way directly involved with; it was she who spilled the beans to Orson Welles about William Randolph Hearst’s pet name for a certain part of his lady love Marion Davies’ anatomy – “Rosebud.”
I’ve heard the Davies “Rosebud” reference before, but this is the first I’ve heard of any Lombard connection. It certainly could be the origin.
The truth behind “Rosebud” for the film is as much a mystery as “Rosebud” in the film. But it’s interesting to note that in January 1941, several months before “Kane” was released, Welles issued a press statement on what “Kane” (and “Rosebud”) was about, trying to dissuade the belief that the movie was a Hearst roman a clef. His statement — plus a magazine statement that came out with fabricated Welles quotes — can be found at http://www.wellesnet.com/?p=187. (As the press release does contain a spoiler of sorts, don’t read it if you’ve never seen “Kane.” Better yet, view “Kane,” then read it.)
TCM: A November you’ll want to remember
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.08 at 13:19
Current mood: excited
If you’re a classic film buff — especially if you live here in the U.S. — it’s hard not to shout hosannas for Turner Classic Movies. It’s not perfect (the other day, the first several minutes of “A Walk In The Spring Rain” were inexplicably omitted), but for the most part, TCM does a splendid job.
And come this November, that will be more evident than ever.
TCM’s schedule for the month has already been posted (http://www.tcm.com/schedule/month/?cid=&oid=11/1/2010), and it promises to be a must-see month (even if no Carole Lombard movies are scheduled). That’s because the month’s programming will be anchored by a special series that TCM fans have long awaited.
It’s called “Moguls And Movie Stars: A History Of Hollywood,” and it’s a seven-part series that will run throughout November into December. Narrated by Christopher Plummer, below, the series will examine the movie industry from its beginnings in the Edison era to the cinematic revolution of the 1960s.
According to a TCM press release, “this production will feature rarely seen photographs and film footage, clips from memorable American movies and interviews with distinguished historians and major Hollywood figures.” (A rough cut of the first episode was shown during the inaugural TCM Classic Film Festival in April, and reportedly was well received.)
An endeavor of such scope is bound to be compared with the groundbreaking series from some three decades ago,
which unfortunately remains unavailable on DVD due to rights issues. (Let us hope that will not be a problem with “Moguls And Movie Stars.”) Obviously, since “Hollywood” dealt strictly with the silent era, TCM’s approach will be somewhat different.
But how different? Hard to say just yet. As of this writing, TCM has yet to provide summaries of each episode beyond the titles. Each episode will air twice on Mondays (8 and 11 p.m., Eastern) and at 10 p.m. Wednesday and noon Saturday; beginning the second Monday, the previous week’s episode will air at 7 p.m.
Additionally, each new prime-time episode will have related programming that night, and those schedules provide an idea of what to expect (all times Eastern).
* Episode One – Peepshow Pioneers
Monday, Nov. 1:
9 p.m. — The films of Thomas Edison
midnight — D.W. Griffith at Biograph
2 a.m. — The films of Georges Melies
4 a.m. — Silent Shakespeare
5:30 a.m. — “Ramona” (1910). Only 17 minutes long, this pioneering Griffith effort was among the first films shot in southern California, an adaptation of Helen Hunt Jackson’s novel. With Mary Pickford and Henry B. Walthall.
Wednesday, Nov. 3:
Films about the early days of film:
8 p.m. — “The Magic Box” (1951)
11:15 p.m. — “Nickelodeon” (1976)
1:15 a.m. — “When Comedy Was King” (1959), a silent comedy compilation
2:45 a.m. — “Hearts Of The West” (1975)
4:30 a.m. — “Show People” (1928)
* Episode Two – The Birth of Hollywood
Monday, Nov. 8:
9 p.m. — “Traffic In Souls” (1913). This tale of prostitution was among the first notable features.
10:30 p.m. — “The Heart Of An Indian” (1912). If Thomas Ince is remembered at all today, it’s for his mysterious death in 1924, not for the many films he directed. Here’s a chance to see his work.
midnight — “The Birth Of A Nation” (1915). Griffith’s landmark spectacle advanced film cinematically, yet its racist elements (presenting the Ku Klux Klan as heroic, portraying blacks as buffoonish stereotypes or lecherous villains) can cause trepidation today. It’s understandable why TCM is following this with…
3:15 a.m. — “Within Our Gates” (1920). A call for better schools from pioneering black filmmaker Oscar Michaeux.
4:45 a.m. — “The Blot” (1921), from Lois Weber, one of the first female directors of note.
Wednesday, Nov. 10:
8 p.m. — “The Immigrant” (1915). An early Charlie Chaplin gem.
8:45 p.m. — “Yankee Doodle In Berlin” (1919). The listing says “A U.S. spy infiltrates the German Army disguised as a woman.” The release date indicates unfortunate timing.
11:15 p.m. — “The Poor Little Rich Girl” (1917). One of Pickford’s most famous movies, made at the peak of her fame.
12:30 a.m. — “The Coward” (1915). More from Ince.
2 a.m. — “The Squaw Man” (1914). An early Hollywood effort from Cecil B. De Mille.
3:30 a.m. — “The Mark Of Zorro” (1920). The movie that transformed Douglas Fairbanks from a sophisticated comedic actor into the master of swashbuckling action.
* Episode Three – The Dream Merchants
Monday, Nov. 15:
9 p.m. — “Sunrise” (1927). The first of four silent classics from the 1920s on the night’s schedule. Directed by F.W. Murnau and starring Janet Gaynor.
midnight — “The Iron Horse” (1924). An early western epic from John Ford about the building of the transcontinental railroad.
2:30 a.m. — “Flesh And The Devil” (1926). Greta Garbo and John Gilbert smolder in this gem (which TCM will air later in August as part of its Gilbert tribute on “Summer Under The Stars”).
4:30 a.m. — “The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse” (1921). The film that put Rudolph Valentino on the map, as he portrays an Argentine who fights for France in World War I.
Wednesday. Nov. 17:
8 p.m. — “The Kid” (1921). One of Chaplin’s most beloved films, followed by…
9 p.m. — “The Pilgrim” (1923). This time, Charlie is a convict who poses as pastor of a rural church.
11:15 p.m. — “One Week” (1920). Buster Keaton’s first solo starring-directing effort, as he portrays a newlywed trying to construct a house.
11:45 p.m. — “Steamboat Bill Jr.” (1928). Keaton plays a student taking over his father’s riverboat; this is the film with the famed “falling house” gag.
1 a.m. — “Safety Last” (1923). Harold Lloyd is a go-getter who climbs a downtown building to impress the girl he loves. A truly thrilling comedy, and Lloyd’s most famous film.
2:30 a.m. — “It” (1927). What was Clara Bow’s appeal? Find out in this comedy, which also stars a young Gary Cooper.
4 a.m. — “Show People” (1928). In case you missed it earlier in the month (or want to see it again).
6 a.m. — “Fool’s Luck” (1926). This Lupino Lane comedy short was directed by a post-scandal Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle.
* Episode Four – Brother Can You Spare a Dream
Monday, Nov. 22:
8 p.m. — “Footlight Parade” (1933). Warners pre-Code musical panache, with Joan Blondell, Ruby Keeler and James Cagney.
midnight. — “The Public Enemy” (1931). Cagney rose to stardom in this gangster tale, which forever associated him with grapefruit.
1:30 a.m. — “Little Caesar” (1930). Edward G. Robinson is riveting in this story of a gangster’s rise and fall.
3 a.m. — “I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang” (1932). A brilliant performance from Paul Muni as a World War veteran who falls on hard times and injustice, with one of film’s most memorable endings.
5 a.m. — “Red Dust” (1932). After four Warners films, here’s MGM’s take on pre-Code, with Clark Gable, Jean Harlow and Mary Astor steaming up the tropics.
Wednesday, Nov. 24:
8 p.m. — “It Happened One Night” (1934). Gable again, this time with Claudette Colbert in this pioneering screwball comedy that came out of nowhere to win a slew of Oscars.
11:15 p.m. — “Duck Soup” (1933). The Marx Brothers at their most satiric and anarchic, with their favorite foil, Margaret Dumont.
12:30 a.m. — “Top Hat” (1935). Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers at their most stylish. Isn’t it a lovely day to be caught in the rain?
2:15 a.m. — “Heidi” (1937). A fine example of the Shirley Temple phenomenon of the mid-1930s.
3:45 a.m. — “Little Women” (1933). Katharine Hepburn and Joan Bennett in this adaptation of the Louisa May Alcott classic, directed by George Cukor.
5:45 a.m. — “Of Human Bondage” (1934). Bette Davis vaulted to stardom in this film, co-starring Leslie Howard. Followed by a 1984 documentary on Davis at 7:15.
* Episode Five – Warriors & Peace Makers
Monday, Nov. 29:
9 p.m. — “Casablanca” (1942). The archetypal World War II movie, and the film that may run more than any other at TCM.
midnight — “The Great Dictator” (1940). Chaplin’s satire on Adolf Hitler, with Jack Oakie contributing as a clone of Benito Mussolini.
2:15 a.m. — “They Were Expendable” (1945). Solid wartime drama starring Robert Montgomery and John Wayne, directed by John Ford.
4:30 a.m. — “Hollywood Canteen” (1944). Hollywood’s contribution to the war effort, starring Joan Leslie.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
A Mack Sennett ‘mystery’
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.07 at 11:39
Current mood: chipper
A photo of Carole Lombard from her Mack Sennett days is always welcome, and as it turns out, one of those images is being sold at eBay:
But as we look at Carol, not yet out of her teens (and not yet with an “e” in her first name for good), getting makeup from diminutive Daphne Pollard, a question arises: Which Lombard two-reeler is this from?
The seller lists the photo as being from “The Swim Princess,” and since Lombard and the gang are in swimsuits, that would seem to make sense. Heck, the snipe on the back even indicates as such:
But wait — look at the lower right-hand corner; there’s a stamp reading “Campus Vamp.” And the photo, shown in Frederick W. Ott’s “The Films Of Carole Lombard,” lists it as being from “The Campus Vamp.” So personally, I’m inclined to go with the latter — especially since the unmistakable Madalynne Fields, at left, and Sally Eilers, at right, are in the cast of “Vamp” but not “Princess,” according to the Internet Movie Database.
Whatever, you can get the picture, shown below in its original sepia tone, for $50.
To find out more, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/20s-Carole-Lombard-Swim-Princess-VINTAGE-PHOTO-323c-/200489014790?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0
And to all you swim princesses and campus vamps, have a fun, safe time in the water this weekend.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Carole and kid
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.06 at 09:21
Current mood: cheerful
In recent weeks, we’ve been showing a number of Carole Lombard photographs from the files of the legendary
Chicago Tribune. As of this writing, seven such images are currently available; all of them will be up until at least 7 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday, and all but one have an opening bid price of $24.99 (the lone exception starts at $9.99). The group, and any future Lombard photos from the
Tribune archive, can be found at
http://stores.ebay.com/TribunePhotos__W0QQ_nkwZCaroleQ20LombardQQLHQ5fSellerWithStoreZ1QQLHQ5fTitleDescZ1QQ_armrsZ1QQ_fromZQQ_ipgZQQ_sasiZ1QQ_sopZ1.
However, we are going to single one out for inspection, though I’m pretty certain we’ve run it before. First, it’s a delightful image. Second, the caption is charming. Third, it ties in to the company which hosts this community.
Here’s Carole, in a photo taken in late July 1939:
Wonder how that played in the papers? Thanks to the archive, we can find out. On the back of the photo is a clipping of the way it ran in the Chicago Herald & Examiner, a Hearst publication later acquired by the Tribune Co.:
FARMERETTE Carole Lombard has her hands full of goat, and the goat doesn’t realize how lucky he is. The scene is Carole’s and Clark Gable’s ranch near Hollywood.
1. “Farmerette”?
2. Are we sure of the goat’s gender? (It is indeed lucky, however.)
3. For some unbeknownst reason, the image was “flipped.” (I’m guessing there was an adjoining photo in the upper right-hand corner, if that cutout is indicative.)
4. LiveJournal, where “Carole & Co.” has called home since its inception in June 2007, has a goat mascot named Frank…who is probably jealous after seeing this.
Of the seven Tribune photos currently available, this is the only one that has a bid as of this writing; bids on it will close at 8:20 p.m. (Eastern) Sunday. If you’d like to have it for your own, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/CT-Chicago-Tribune-Photo-Carole-Lombard-/260644545038?pt=Art_Photo_Images.
Now excuse me while I head to the store…making a mental note to pick up some goat’s milk…
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
‘Orchids’ and a lucky pool
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.05 at 10:06
Current mood: hot
It’s been a few days since I perused the eBay list of Carole Lombard memorabilia, and the most recent search unearthed a number of goodies, including two vintage photos complete with snipes (the information tag attached on the back).
First, an image new to me, and a lovely one it is:
It’s from Columbia Pictures, specifically her second film at that studio, 1932’s “No More Orchids.” Lombard biographer Larry Swindell states that the film got its title when studio boss Harry Cohn asked Carole what the movie’s title should be. At this time, her home studio of Paramount had been billing her as “the orchid lady,” and perhaps she was getting tired of the sobriquet. So she reportedly told Cohn to call it whatever he wanted, but “no more orchids for me.” One guesses the title didn’t get a particularly warm reception from Paramount.
One also guesses that given her reputation, somebody in Columbia’s wardrobe department hadn’t received the message, because here’s what the snipe for that photo read:
Deep Orchid brocaded satin trousers. … green velvet coat trimmed in blue fox … gold sandals and an emerald and diamond brooch. … worn by Carole Lombard in Columbia’s “No More Orchids” … in a gymnasium scene. (Yes, Lombard’s character was a wealthy young lady.)
The other photo isn’t new, at least not to me — it’s a Paramount still from 1935…
We knew it was p1202-1231. What we didn’t know was this, from the snipe on the back:
SOME LUCKY POOL — is about to be flattered by the white satin-clad Carole Lombard, Paramount star of “Hands Across The Table.” Over her chic swimming suit Carole wears a smart beach cape of white terry cloth and scorning the conventional type beach shoes she chooses open-vamp sandals of white edged with navy.
Oh, that Carole, always being unconventional. (And are “open-vamp sandals” a shoe relative of “f— me pumps”? Inquiring minds want to know.) This photo was received at the NEA agency on Sept. 24, 1935, not long before “Hands Across The Table” would arrive in theaters.
Both photos are up for auction until 10:03 p.m. (Eastern) on Sunday; bidding for both begins at $49.99, and as of this writing neither has received a bid. The “No More Orchids” photo is at http://cgi.ebay.com/1930s-Sexy-Carole-Lombard-No-More-Orchids-PHOTO-718a-/200503890441?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2eaef69209; the “Hands Across The Table” image is at http://cgi.ebay.com/1935-Sexy-Carole-Lombard-Hands-Across-Table-717a-/400141006856?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2a433808.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Oh, you dog! (And cat!)
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.04 at 01:47
Current mood: chipper
Yep, today is the 109th anniversary of Louis Armstrong’s birth, and I’m currently digging the start of WKCR-FM’s annual Armstrong birthday broadcast (which I provided a link for in yesterday’s entry). I also furnished one of Louis’ greatest recordings, the 1931 “Lazy River,” in which he twice says the memorable line, “Oh, you dog!” A perfect introduction to today’s entry, which deals with Carole Lombard…and a dog.
Lombard was an animal lover; over the years, her menagerie included all sorts of species. She was fond of her four-legged friends, and they returned the favor. (Well, except for a monkey that scratched her arm in the mid-thirties, but that’s another story for another time.)
One of those pet pals was a shaggy English sheepdog whom we’ve pictured before with Lombard, but that was taken from a magazine, and you couldn’t see it in its full glory. Well, now you can, because it was part of the collection of photos shown recently at the Turner Classic movies message board. I thought I’d hold it back a day to give it special attention…and because I’ve also learned more about this canine. First, the photo, from the set of “Fools For Scandal”:
As I’ve stated before about that photo, what other glamorous actress would have the temerity to pose like that? (I was nearly going to use another term, one referring to a part of the human anatomy Lombard never possessed.)
We’ve since learned the dog was named Snoopy (a full dozen years before that canine name was forever associated with beagles, thanks to Charles Schulz). We have two more photos of him with Carole, first as she gives him an affectionate hug (I believe that’s Marie Wilson looking on), and then him returning the favor by shaking Lombard, hand-to-paw. (The third photo is dogless but has its own charm, as director Mervyn LeRoy plays with his godson while Carole and co-star Fernand Gravet look on.)
Very nice, you cat fanciers are thinking, but don’t felines deserve equal time? They certainly do (my family’s cat has been part of our lives for 13 years), so here’s Carole with a cat:
Lombard looks lovely, but part of me wonders whether that cat is real or merely a plush toy animal; there’s something about that feline face that looks fake. (Nearly seven decades after this, an artificial cat was indeed found on the Paramount set — the animatronic Salem, voiced by Nick Bakay on “Sabrina, The Teenage Witch.”) Here’s another Carole-plus-cat photo, and I’m fairly certain this kitty is the real deal:
To borrow the title of a film from some years back, I hope that through Lombard, we’ve discovered the truth about cats and dogs.
Edit Tags Add to memories Share Track
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.03 at 01:45
Current mood: happy
I have several thousand photographs of Carole Lombard in my online collection (and that doesn’t even take into account the many duplicates I have!), so when I run across some images I’ve probably never seen before, I get excited…and I like to share them with you.
So today, at the Turner Classic Movies message boards, somebody posted a slew of Lombard photos, including quite a few I don’t recall having in my collection. So, as is my wont, I captured these images, and here they are for you.
First, though, we’re going to start with a photo we’ve run before, taken by Otto Dyar in the spring or summer of 1934, showing Carole in the back yard of her new Hollywood Boulevard home:
She obviously had a swimsuit on underneath that striped robe, but what kind of swimsuit? Well, we now know the answer:
Like that photo? Here are nine more:
Lovely images, all of them, and I thank the person at the TCM message board who brought them to our collective attention.
Just an advance reminder of something we always like to promote at “Carole & Co.” — the annual Louis Armstrong birthday broadcast(s) at WKCR-FM in New York. We list it in plural because Armstrong has two “birthdays”: the one he thought he had (July 4, 1900) and the one it turned out he actually had (Aug. 4, 1901, from baptismal records discovered some years after his death in 1971).
WKCR celebrates on both days with a day-long festival of Armstrong music — and since he made thousands of recordings, from 1923 until shortly before his death, no two broadcasts ever quite sound the same. I believe the upcoming event will begin around midnight Tuesday and last until the following midnight, but there could be a few extra hours added on either side. If you’re in the New York metropolitan area, you can hear it at 89.9 FM; otherwise, listen online at http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/wkcr/ and savor the joy of jazz’s most enduring figure.
One of the best blogs out there, Self-Styled Siren (which has received it’s own shout out recently with the entry about Mary Astor’s daughter, Marylyn), mentioned Carole and this blog in a favorable fashion. Lovely!
Self-Styled Siren
Find us (and friend us) through Facebook
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.02 at 10:06
Current mood: nostalgic
We’re pleased to announce there is now another way for you to access — and, we hope, enjoy — “Carole & Co.” It’s through Facebook, the by-now nearly ubiquitous social networking site.
There’s an application called “NetworkedBlogs,” and this community now is linked to it, enabling you to follow the site without having to leave Facebook. Simply go to http://apps.facebook.com/blognetworks/blog/carole_co./ and sign up as a follower. (Oh, and while you’re at it, confirm me as the site’s author. As of this writing, I have three down, and seven to go.) Also, if you have friends at Facebook who are fans of classic Hollywood, please spread the word about “Carole & Co.”
Since Julie Christie is today’s featured performer on “Summer Under The Stars” at Turner Classic Movies in the U.S., we’ll leave with a story of a song she helped inspire. At 5 p.m. (Eastern), TCM will show the 1967 England-based romance “Far From The Madding Crowd,” co-starring Terence Stamp.
In their honor, Ray Davies of the Kinks used the names “Terry and Julie” in a song he wrote around that time, “Waterloo Sunset.” It didn’t make much of a mark in America, despite the Kinks’ previous chart success there, but it was a huge hit in England, reaching No. 2 on the singles chart; on that side of the pond, it remains one of their best-loved recordings. (And deservedly so — it’s beautiful.) You can learn more about the song, and hear the original recording, at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/soldonsong/songlibrary/indepth/waterloosunset1.shtml.
Who’s been in, er, ‘under’ the stars?
Posted by vp19 on 2010.08.01 at 13:33
Current mood: busy
Like many classic movie fans, I’ve been thinking a lot lately about Turner Classic Movies’ annual “Summer Under The Stars” festival, which kicked off today with 24 hours of Basil Rathbone. However, I haven’t merely been thinking about the upcoming schedule, but looking back as well.
In my Friday entry on SUTS, I initially noted I couldn’t track down a list of those who had been featured since the channel began the promotion in 2003. Thankfully, someone at the TCM message boards supplied a list, which I then added to the entry. In Saturday’s entry on Gloria Swanson’s relationship with Carole Lombard, I noted that Swanson had never been chosen for SUTS, and that got me thinking about who has (and hasn’t) received the honor.
Using the American Film Institute’s “legends” rankings as a starting point, I’ve noted how often each of the top 25 in each gender have been (or will be) SUTS subjects. Here’s the list, with years chosen in parentheses:
Actors
1. Humphrey Bogart, 3 (03, 04, 05)
2. Cary Grant, 5 (03, 04, 05, 06, 09)
3. James Stewart, 5 (03, 04, 05, 06, 07)
4. Marlon Brando, 2 (05, 08)
5. Fred Astaire, 3 (03, 05, 08)
6. Henry Fonda, 4 (04, 08, 09, 10)
7. Clark Gable, 2 (03, 09)
8. James Cagney, 2 (03, 05)
9. Spencer Tracy, 4 (03, 05, 07, 08)
10. Charlie Chaplin, 2 (04, 08)
11. Gary Cooper, 3 (03, 04, 07)
12. Gregory Peck, 3 (03, 06, 08)
13. John Wayne, 5 (03, 04, 05, 06, 09)
14. Laurence Olivier, 1 (04)
15. Gene Kelly, 2 (03, 08)
16. Orson Welles, 0
17. Kirk Douglas, 4 (03, 04, 05, 07)
18. James Dean, 0
19. Burt Lancaster, 2 (04, 06)
20. The Marx Brothers, 1 (04 for Groucho)
21. Buster Keaton, 1 (07)
22. Sidney Poitier, 3 (04, 06, 09)
23. Robert Mitchum, 2 (03, 07)
24. Edward G. Robinson, 2 (04, 08)
25. William Holden, 2 (03, 07)
Actresses
1. Katharine Hepburn, 6 (03, 04, 05, 06, 08, 10)
2. Bette Davis, 3 (03, 04, 09)
3. Audrey Hepburn, 2 (06, 09)
4. Ingrid Bergman, 3 (06, 08, 10)
5. Greta Garbo, 2 (03, 08)
6. Marilyn Monroe, 0
7. Elizabeth Taylor, 4 (03, 04, 07, 10)
8. Judy Garland, 3 (03, 05, 09)
9. Marlene Dietrich, 1 (03)
10. Joan Crawford, 3 (03, 05, 07)
11. Barbara Stanwyck, 3 (04, 06, 08)
12. Claudette Colbert, 1 (04)
13. Grace Kelly, 0
14. Ginger Rogers, 1 (04)
15. Mae West, 0
16. Vivien Leigh, 0
17. Lillian Gish, 0
18. Shirley Temple, 0
19. Rita Hayworth, 2 (06, 08)
20. Lauren Bacall, 2 (05, 10)
21. Sophia Loren, 1 (05)
22. Jean Harlow, 1 (04)
23. Carole Lombard, 1 (06)
24. Mary Pickford, 0
25. Ava Gardner, 2 (04, 08)
Katharine Hepburn has more appearances than any actor of either gender, while there’s a three-way tie for the top among males with Cary Grant, James Stewart and John Wayne with five apiece. (Doris Day, who’s not on the AFI list, also has been on SUTS five times.) Four actors have been chosen four times — Henry Fonda (2010 marks the third straight year for him), Spencer Tracy, Kirk Douglas and Elizabeth Taylor.
The most glaring omission — and the only person in the top 10 of either gender yet to be honored — is Marilyn Monroe, no surprise since most of her films were made at 20th Century-Fox and thus largely unavailable to TCM; that probably also applies to Shirley Temple. (Tyrone Power, who’s not on the AFI top 25, is arguably the biggest male star associated with Fox, and he has never been featured on SUTS, either.) James Dean, who only made a handful of films, doesn’t have enough material to fit the 24-hour SUTS concept; the same holds true for Grace Kelly and possibly Mae West. (Orson Welles might fit, but the latter part of his cinematic career is filled with plenty of incomplete projects.)
And while we noted to our dismay that Lombard has only once been featured on SUTS, she certainly isn’t the only actress getting short shrift. Marlene Dietrich, Ginger Rogers, Claudette Colbert and Jean Harlow also have only one SUTS appearance each — and none have been honored since 2004! And, like Swanson, neither Lillian Gish nor Mary Pickford have been chosen. (Incidentally, were Lombard to see the AFI list, she’d probably say she was embarrassed to be ranked above Pickford, whom she admired as both an actress and a businesswoman.) Perhaps the selection of John Gilbert this year bodes well for silent-era ladies in future years.
To cut TCM programmers some slack, the supply of movies the network has to work with fluctuates regularly. Contracts with studios for film rights are limited. Also note that TCM has other promotions, such as Star of the Month, and I would guess that when comparing SUTS and SOTM rosters for the same year, there is very little correlation.
Just some things to ponder while enjoying this, the eighth edition of TCM “Summer Under The Stars.”
In 1932, Carole Lombard had yet to find herself as a film actress. And in some ways, the movie audience had yet to find her. That can be discerned from reading a biography of someone who was briefly Lombard’s stablemate at Paramount — “Hollywood Diva: A Biography Of Jeanette MacDonald,” by Edward Baron Turk.
One presumes Carole Lombard packed a few swimsuits when she went traveling in early 1935. Not that she used them in her first stop, New York, but she was planning to visit Cuba for a few days and probably would soak up some sun (and drink some rum) while in Havana.
While many of Carole Lombard’s most famous still portraits were taken under the auspices of Paramount during her seven-plus years there, quite a few were done elsewhere. Take the photo above, for instance, a work of the great George Hurrell.
“Vigil In The Night,” arguably Carole Lombard’s best dramatic film (in which she plays a nurse in late thirties’ England), wasn’t going to be an easy sell despite its pedigree (from a novel by A.J. Cronin, whose story of doctors, “The Citadel,” was a major hit both as a novel and as a movie), and RKO knew it. So it utilized some atypical strategies to spur business.
I trust you’re having a splendid, joyous Thanksgiving, and today I thought we’d give thanks to the city Carole Lombard called home for most of her life, Los Angeles. Even in solely a cinematic context, it is rich in history, but LA is so much more than that — a city that a century ago was growing, but not yet dominant on the West Coast. Two decades later, it had clearly usurped San Francisco for that honor (and while the blossoming film industry had plenty to do with it, other businesses such as oil and aviation played major roles, too).
That’s a sexy seaside photo of Carole Lombard and Gary Cooper, isn’t it? Well, about two years earlier, in the spring of 1931, they made a film (on land) together, the rarely seen (and nearly lost) “I Take This Woman” (
It’s fascinating to discover paths not taken by Carole Lombard during her career, and thanks to Hollywood columnist Jimmie Fidler, we may have learned another of them. Here’s his syndicated column of Nov. 22, 1940:
Tomorrow at 8 p.m. (Eastern), Turner Classic Movies in the U.S. unveils episode 4 of its seven-part documentary on Hollywood, “Moguls & Movie Stars,” with “Brother, Can You Spare A Dream?”, an examination of the film industry with the arrival of sound and the onset of the Depression. And Carole Lombard fans wonder whether she will be noted. Given her status as the leading female star of the screwball genre, one would think so, but…
It was 50 years ago Tuesday that Clark Gable, second husband of Carole Lombard, left us at age 59. His passing came late in the day — 11 p.m. (Pacific) — and here’s how it was covered the following afternoon in the old Los Angeles Mirror, the evening paper of the Los Angeles Times:
That charming picture of Carole Lombard with her beloved Palomino pony Pico was taken in California, but she had roots in the midwest, though not on a farm — she spent the first six years of her life as Jane Alice Peters in an upper-middle-class Victorian house in Fort Wayne, Ind.
Today, two more Carole Lombard items on eBay, as well as a reminder for those in the U.S. who watch Turner Classic Movies.
That’s a teenaged Carol (no “e” yet) Lombard, unbilled, in a scene from the 1927 Mary Pickford comedy “My Best Girl,” a film that few realized she was in until several years ago (
As today is Veterans Day — the 92nd anniversary of the armistice officially ending World War I — we thought we’d look back to when America watched what became World War II unfold on the European continent.
I’m not precisely certain when the above publicity still of Carole Lombard was taken (assuming it was a Paramount photo, although no p1202 number is evident), but I’m going to guess it’s from about 1933 or ’34, judging from the dress, her hair and the background (that may be designer Travis Banton’s studio on the Paramount lot).
Carole Lombard may have left us in January 1942 — slightly more than a year after this still from “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” — but people in the film industry still remembered her, and the type of movies she made, for years after her death. With wartime, the screwball comedy naturally faded from the scene, and the national rebuilding of the first few postwar years also did little to aid the genre.
Carole Lombard certainly looks ship-shape in that photo, Paramount p1202-964, in which she poses in front of a scale-model boat. And it’s part of a baker’s dozen of Lombard photos included in Heritage Auction Galleries’ latest auction of film memorabilia. (It’s listed as the “2010 November Beverly Hills Signature Movie Poster Auction,” but none of the 13 Carole items are posters. And you don’t have to live in Beverly Hills to participate.)
It’s hard not to think of Neil Sedaka’s 1961 hit “Calendar Girl” once you’ve seen this:
Okay, so we can’t go back in time and join Carole Lombard and Clark Gable at one of William Randolph Hearst’s famous parties at San Simeon, but you can do the next best thing at what the publisher called the “ranch” (some ranch — look below):
Just a reminder, if you live in the U.S., that Turner Classic Movies begins its long-awaited Hollywood history series, “Moguls & Movie Stars,” tonight and it will air for the following six Mondays (with repeats during each week). The initial episode, of course, begins the day before Americans go to the polls for mid-term elections — and speaking of polls, TCM commissioned one recently on how people compare current Hollywood to the classic era.
![[protected post]](https://i0.wp.com/l-stat.livejournal.com/img/icon_protected.gif "[protected post]"){kind=icon}
by 
Carole & Co. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.