Social Icons

Pages

Tuesday, 6 October 2015

Movie Quote of the Day (Gary Cooper, Unnerved by Barbara Stanwyck)


Professor Bertram Potts(played by Gary Cooper): “Make no mistake, I shall regret the absence of your keen mind. Unfortunately, it is inseparable from an extremely disturbing body.”—Ball of Fire (1941), written by Charles Brackett and Billy Wilder, based on an original story by Wilder and Thomas Monroe, edited by Howard Hawks

Today marks the 70
th anniversary of the release of Ball of Fire, which came toward the end of Hollywood’s magnificent screwball-comedy era. Five days later, Pearl Harbor would be bombed, and once Hollywood was done with its propaganda products and home-front dramas, it began to explore in earnest a genre it only began to touch this year, in The Maltese Falconfilm noir that reflected a newfound understanding of man’s darkest impulses. The world would never look so bright again.
 
Ball of Fire would be the last film that 
Billy Wilder, chafing under the restrictions placed on his work by the men behind the camera, would make only as a screenwriter. The following year, The Major and the Minor began his nearly 40-year career as a director. In the meantime, he convinced the studio to allow him to observe the work of Howard Hawks, whose films he greatly admired.

For all the fast-and-furious action that Hawks packed into this two-hour film about a “nightclub singer” holing up with a group of linguistic professors to avoid police questioning about her mobster boyfriend, the film really can be seen as one long wink to the audience. Even the quote marks in that prior sentence represent a raised eyebrow.
Barbara Stanwyck’s “nightclub singer” is a stripper, one of two she would play in her long, illustrious career (the other being Lady of Burlesque, based on a mystery by Gypsy Rose Lee, whose pretensions as an intellectual exotic dancer were mocked by lyricist Lorenz Hart in the musical Pal Joey.)

The more knowing members of the audience would also catch on to the film's central satiric premise,  seven professors studying slang centered around one brassy female with an especially vivid sense of it--Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, if you will. And Hollywood insiders were probably beside themselves guffawing over box-office champion 
Gary Cooper--so laconic that Art Buchwald, in one of his funniest early columns, used the actor’s characteristic “nopes” and “yups” to respond to Coop’s own questions--as the chief linguisticsprofessor. (How Cooper got around the formal, polysyllabic but hilarious lines above, addressed to Stanwyck, can only be imagined.)

And how can you not find a place in your heart for a stripper namedSugarpuss O’Shea?

The queen of film bloggers, Self-Styled Siren, has a characteristically astute analysis of what made this film so worthwhile 
here
.

Hitchcock And Actors

Herewith, my humble contribution to a wonderful cinephilia-friendly cause, the third For The Love Of Film Blogathon, proceeds from which will help finance a restoration of a worthy film in which the maestro had an early-career involvement. Please see the bloggers cited in the logo below, and/or look at today's piece by my friend Self Styled Siren. And click here to make what will be a much appreciated and worthwhile donation.
Blogathonhome2
I cannot find the exact citation, unfortunately, but I recall reading back in the '90s a magazine story chronicling the making of director Gus Van Sant's ostensibly shot-by-shot recreation of Psycho, and said piece containing many quotes from the participating actors in which they justified/rationalized their participation in the project, which, depending on who you were talking to was either a senseless kockamamie scheme or some kind of conceptual coup. And I remember William H. Macy, who was playing the part of Arbogast that had been originated by Martin Balsam, opining that one good reason, for him, to get on board with what many might consider a desecration was to get some kind of payback with respect to Hitchcock, because Macy didn't like that thing Hitchcock said about actors, that they were "cattle." And I read this, and I sighed. Because Macy is a soulful and not unintelligent man, and his misbegotten notion that Hitchcock was somehow the enemy of actors is unfortunate. And, I guess, very hard to kill. 
The Hitchcock of 1939, anticipating a trip from Great Britain to Hollywood, in an interview in Film Weekly (reprinted in the invaluable Sidney Gottlieb-edited compilation Hitchcock on Hitchcock), revealed not just a great enthusiasm for American stars, but (and this shouldn't really come as a surprise) an acute sensitivity with respect to both particular abilities and potential. On Gary Cooper: "[He] has that rare faculty of being able to rivet the attention of an audience while he does nothing." Andre De Toth saw this in Cooper too, although he did not articulate it in quite the same way. On Carole Lombard: "I should like to cast [her] not in the type of superficial comedy which she so often plays but in a much more meaty comedy-drama,giving her plenty of scope for characterization." Once in Hollywood, Hitchcock and Lombard became friends. And they collaborated, on Mr. And Mrs. Smith, a 1941 divorce comedy that Hitchcock, in one of his legendary interviews with François Truffaut, kind of pooh-poohed: "That picture was done as a friendly gesture to [...] Lombard...I didn't really understand the type of people portrayed in the film, all I did was photograph the scenes as written." It was on the set of this picture that Lombard played the famous practical joke in which she built a mini-corral on the set and stocked it with three pieces of livestock tagged with the names of the film's three principal players. 
Hitchcock's retrospective disconnection from Mr. And Mrs. Smith, juxtaposed with his previously stated eagerness to push Carole Lombard's performance envelope, suggests several questions, the most obvious being "What happened?" Well, it's entirely possible that nothing happened. That while Hitchcock's observations concerning the various actors were sharp and truly meant, his stated desire to remold them in certain ways was little more than public-relations bluster/diplomacy.On the other hand, the fact is that Hitchcock did approach Gary Cooper for the lead in Foreign Correspondent, and Cooper turned it down, which he (Cooper) later regretted.  But whether or not Hitchcock's creative struggles with David O. Selznick during the making of Rebecca made the director subsequently dig in his heels harder with respect to hermetically sealing his creative process in the future, it's difficult to argue against the notion that the actor had a very specific and kind of immovable secondary place in Hitchcock's creative process. But it's also incorrect to translate this into an attitude of actual hostility. In his autobiography, Elia Kazan goes over the ways that different directors handle/respond to actors. His view: "Hitchcock told his screen stories as much as possible without help from his actors' performances. When Cary Grant, going into a film, asked him how he should play his part, Hitchcock answered, 'Just do what you always do.' Hitchcock relied on his camera angles and his montage [...] to do what on stage we relied on the actors for." Note the neutrality of Kazan's description; recall also Hitchcock's observation on Gary Cooper's ability to resonate while doing "nothing;" juxtapose with the theory behind the Kuleshov effect; and there's all the more reason to regret that Cooper and Hitchcock never got together.
Of course, Hitchcock made no bones or apologies for the fact that he considered shooting to be the most boring part of making a film. His pre-production work was the process by which he developed the movie in his head and assembled the means by which it could be materialized. So the actual shooting became a mechanical process, not unlike stuffing sausage casings. You could understand why an actor who was savvy to this attitude might build a resentment toward this. You can also understand how one actor might take "Just do what you always do" as a compliment and sign of respect, or as an insult. Until the period when he was getting all weird with his leading ladies, Hitchcock's expectation of a performer was that he or she would bring their best abilities and have whatever homework they felt they needed to do, done. Various acting methods and the work of directors like, well, Kazan, brought a notion of a more active collaboration between actor and director to the fore. The actor would not be playing a role in someone else's motion picture but creating a character/characterization, and hence the actor's notion of what was proper for the picture was to be taken rather seriously. This kind of idea, I don't think it's an exaggeration to say, was anathema to Hitchcock, who was only concerned with filming what HE saw. Here's how he describes (to Truffaut) his difficulty with Paul Newman during the filming of 1966's Torn Curtain, discussing a scene that was ultimately cut from the film: "As you know, he's a 'method' actor, and he found it hard to just give me one of those neutral looks I needed to cut from his point of view. Instead of looking toward Gromek's brother, toward the knife or the sausage, he played the scene in the 'method' style, with emotion, and he was always turning away." If we look at the camera as a pen, then here we can see Newman as runny ink. Martin Scorsese can be seen as having, in some ways, synthesizing Kazan's sympathy for actors with Hitchcock's plastic storytelling style. Talking about working with Newman some twenty years after Hitchcock's Torn Curtain, for 1986's The Color of Money, he recalls (in the Faber and Faber book Scorsese on Scorsese): "Paul [is the] kind of actor who doesn't like to improvise that much on the set, so [...] everything was rehearsed beforehand. We did it the way he suggested, which was to take two complete weeks and just work out with the actors in a loft. I was really nervous, because it was like the theater [...] So when he said, 'What you do is take a tape and mark out an area for a chair; then you tape out an area for a bed,' I could foresee those terrible theater things when people pretend a door is there, which I hate. I said, 'What if we use a real chair?' 'A chair is good,' he said, to my relief."
While we cannot imagine Hitchcock in such a situation getting anywhere near to, let alone beyond "just work out with the actors in a loft," we shouldn't, by the same token, beat his ghost or his films over the head with some conception that he, and they, are anti-human-performer. That's a rap more applicable to, say, Michael Bay.
Hitchcock:Bergman

Gary Cooper is born

Gary Cooper, the star of High Noon and other classic Westerns, is born in Helena, Montana.
Born Frank James Cooper, he was the son of well-to-do lawyer who eventually won election to the Montana Supreme Court Justice. The family owned a 500-acre ranch near Helena, where Cooper became a skilled horseman. As a young man, Cooper put his backcountry skills to good use as a guide at Yellowstone Park, but his real dream was to become a cartoonist for a big city newspaper.
After attending Grinnell College in Iowa for several years, Cooper moved to Los Angeles in 1924. At the time, Hollywood was churning out countless low-budget western movies that catered to the American fascination with a mythic west of noble cowboys, brave cavalry soldiers, and vicious outlaws. In a city dominated by cars, however, the studios found it difficult to find skilled horsemen to ride in these so-called “horse operas.” On a lark, Cooper had applied for work as a movie extra. When producers discovered he had grown up riding horses on a Montana ranch, they quickly put him to work as stunt rider and a cowboy heavy. Soon after, he abandoned the dream of becoming a cartoonist for the glamorous world of Hollywood.
Cooper appeared in a string of low-budget two-reel Westerns for the next two years before he finally caught the eye of Sam Goldwyn of the famous MGM studio. Goldwyn gave him a small role in the popular 1926 movie The Winning of Barbara Worth, which earned Cooper favorable reviews and bigger roles. Three years later, Cooper won the lead part in a movie version of the famous Owen Wister western novel The Virginian. Cooper’s laconic, understated style of acting was well suited to portraying the Virginian, a coolly competent cowboy who avoided trouble when he could but was quick with a gun when his honor was at stake. Generations of subsequent cowboy actors, from John Wayne to Clint Eastwood, borrowed many elements of Cooper’s Virginian for their own characters.
The success of The Virginian made Cooper one of Hollywood’s leading male actors. He went on to star in a number of films, including A Farewell to Arms (1932), Beau Geste (1939), and The Pride of the Yankees (1942). Cooper never abandoned the genre that began his career, though, and he continued to appear in successful Westerns like The Plainsman (1937) and The Westerner (1940).
Appropriately, one of Cooper’s last great roles was in a Western that is generally considered a classic of the genre. In High Noon, Cooper plays an aging town marshal who faces a showdown with four killers arriving by train at noon. Despite having honorably served the citizens of the town for years, Cooper’s marshal is unable to convince any of the cowardly townspeople to stand with him as he confronts the outlaws. As the hands of a loudly ticking wall clock inch towards high noon, the marshal prepares to fight alone. A profound meditation on the dangers of social conformity and cowardice, High Noon was also a hugely entertaining and successful western tale of suspense. Cooper won his second Academy Award for Best Actor with High Noon (his first had come in 1941 forSergeant York), confirming his status as one of the most talented actors in western movies.
Cooper was 51 years old when High Noon was released. During the next decade, he made several other films, though none were as successful as his earlier works. In 1961, the Motion Picture Academy gave Cooper a special Academy Award for career achievement. When his friend Jimmy Stewart rose to accept the award for Cooper, Stewart broke down and revealed that the actor was seriously ill with cancer. Cooper died shortly after at the age of 60.

Scandals of Classic Hollywood: That Divine Gary Cooper

Let’s talk straight: there was no cowboy handsomer than Gary Cooper. John Wayne had the sneer, and Gene Autry had the voice, but no one smoldered quite like Cooper. In his early films, he was glamour on a horse: his eyes lined, his face powdered, yet somehow right at home in the saddle — in part because unlike so many city-boys-turned-screen-cowboys, he grew up in Montana, one of the last veritable frontiers of the early 20th century. Over his 30 years in Hollywood, he would play variations on the cowboy — the cowboy goes to war, the cowboy goes to the city — but in each turn, he not only won the girl but did so righteously. Unlike other major stars, who allowed for and even reveled in the opportunity to play against type, Cooper kept things simple. He played slight variations on the same character, but their moral center remained constant: as he once told a screenwriter attempting to fine-tune his character, “just make me the hero.”
Cooper became a hero to many, even as he developed a reputation as one of the most notorious philanderers in Hollywood. He had stiff competition — Clark Gable, Spencer Tracy, the list goes on — but Cooper may or may not have slept with EVERY. SINGLE. CO-STAR. No matter his age, no matter their age, he was insatiable, before and during his marriage. How to reconcile his moral righteousness onscreen with his philandering offscreen? That was the work of Fixers, gossip magazines, and the studio system at large, which ensured that Cooper was never caught, never denounced, and held up as a paragon of American values. Of course, the way he looked in pants didn’t hurt. 
Cooper was born Frank James Cooper in Helena, Montana, in 1901. His parents were recent immigrants from England, and after nine years returned home for an extended stint in the homeland that just happened to coincide with much of the First World War. His family came back to Montana in 1918, and Cooper enrolled in Grinnell College (cue massive Grinnell rally cry in comments) to study agriculture.
If you’ve never been to Helena, here’s what you need to understand. It’s the capital of Montana, which makes it a big deal in a big state with few people. Cooper’s father went from being a farmer to being a lawyer to being a supreme court judge, demonstrating the sort of upward mobility that now seems a distinct relic of the 20th century. Cooper rode horses and had impeccable manners, which meant that he had none of the problems usually associated with “low class,” ethnic stardom (see especially: the case of Clara Bow). I imagine him not unlike Brad Pitt’s character early in A River Runs Through It, full of potential, swagger, and perfectly sun-kissed, golden shoulders.
The fact of his Montana childhood (never mind those pesky British years!) provided the raw material from which the fan magazines could weave elaborate, Louis L’Amour-esque backstories. One Photoplay article, purportedly penned by Cooper himself, highlighted his natural, rugged, un-urban upbringing on his Montana ranch:
Nights, lying very quietly on your bunk, you attune your ears to every sound that the darkness gives. The faint mournful note of the loon, in the far distance. The round gurgle of Andy’s creek as it parts to pass the huge boulder at its center. The soft patter of chipmunks as they stealthily come to nuzzle at the door, in search of food.
All I’m saying is that if this small-town-turned-sorta-city girl read that in a fan magazine, I’d be all over that Cooper in the same way I want to go live with Bon Iver in a cabin and do watercolors in thick sweaters. In other words: Cooper’s back story appealed to something seemingly primal, something in women, both in the 1920s and today, that wants to go live in wide open spaces with a man who knows how to chop some mother-f-ing wood.
Cooper spent a few years at Grinnell, but when his father retired from the bench and moved his mother to Los Angeles, Cooper gave up ag classes to try his hand as a Hollywood extra. A casting director replaced his given name, Frank, with “Gary,” because she thought Cooper evoked the “rough, tough” nature of her hometown of Gary, Indiana. (Can you imagine “Gary” not being a name for dads and uncles? Up to this point, though, it was just a city. Look at the ridiculous uptick in baby boys named Gary following Cooper’s rise to fame.)
Cooper played an extra in a handful of films before arriving on the set of The Winning of Barbara Worth in 1926. The actor cast as the second male lead didn’t show, and someone shoved Cooper into the part. He didn’t need much — some gesturing, but no words, since the cinema was still silent — and Cooper had his break. Shortly thereafter, he signed a contract with Paramount. When Clara Bow saw him on the Paramount lot, she insisted he be cast in her upcoming film, It. As longtime readers of Scandals of Classic Hollywood know, It made Clara Bow a star — and it also made Bow and Cooper somewhat of an item.
Cooper’s scene in It was unremarkable, but his appearance in Wings, released later that same year, truly launched his career. He plays a World War I flying cadet, and although his screentime was still relatively short, there was one scene — an extended close-up shot, the light streaming in from outside — in which he looked gorgeous. His gorgeousness was compounded by his character’s tragic fate (everyone knows a character gets hotter when he dies at the end of the film; just ask Leo).
The fan mail poured in, and in classic Hollywood, fan mail was one of the main gauges of where a contracted star would go next. Did fans like him as a romantic hero? Okay, fine then, let’s do more of that. After Wings, Cooper appeared in a slew of silents, usually playing variations on the romantically rugged yet sophisticated hero. He embodied the Jazz Age masculinity, which is to say he was tall and dressed impeccably, but wasn’t a complete dandy.
In 1929, he filmed The Wolf Song with Lupe Velez. Cooper plays a cowboy who somehow makes his way to Taos, where he meets Velez and falls in love, but nevertheless feels drawn by the call of adventure. Sounds like every guy trying to get out of staying together with his girlfriend for summer break, but bygones. The film is mostly forgotten, but you might seek it out simply because it shows Cooper in full-frontal, Fassbender-style nudity. It’s brief; he’s brushing his teeth in the river; BUT WHATEVER.
If Bow was “The It Girl,” then Velez was “The Mexican It Girl” — spunky, beautiful, buxom, and mercurial. And since Cooper had hooked up with Bow, he naturally hooked up with Velez as well.
Look at them! Aren’t they adorable! Even more adorable? Velez purportedly claimed that Cooper “has the biggest organ in Hollywood but not the ass to push it in well.” OH MY GOD I AM BLUSHING JUST TYPING THAT.
Between poor thrusts, Cooper filmed The Virginian — his first real “talkie,” based on the tremendously successful 1902 novel of the same name. Basic premise: Cooper is from Wyoming, he is a cowboy, and he is the hero. He likes a girl from afar.
The film was a MONSTER hit and cemented the foundation of Cooper’s image: volatile, full of honor, a bit of a secret romantic, yet still and always the hero. Who just happens to look smokin’ in pants:
I mean WOW.
But as Cooper scholar Steven T. Sheehan points out, even in The Virginian, Cooper is still a bit of a glamour-boy. He wears heavy makeup (look at that eyeliner!) that makes his face look even smoother and more boyish when compared to the rough terrain surrounding him. What’s more, the director shoots him in glamour close-ups — similar to the one that made him famous in Wings — usually used for female love interests. Granted, a lot of male stars were still heavily made-up during this time period, but they were usually situated in parlors and urban spaces. Cooper was essentially a pretty-boy cowboy. As will become clear, this look changed as standards of masculinity shifted with the onset of the Depression. In hindsight, the glamour-look underlines just what a product of Hollywood even the most “natural” of stars remain.
Once a studio finds what works, it runs with it — in 1930 alone, Cooper starred in Only the Brave, The Texan, and A Man From Wyoming, all of which exploited his cowboy image. InMorocco, he played a taciturn cowboy in a soldier’s uniform — only this time he was up against Marlene Dietrich. If you read the last column on Dietrich, you know why this film is awesome. And it will come as no surprise that Cooper and Josef von Sternberg, the film’s director and Dietrich’s svengali, did not get along — in part because von Sternberg insisted on filming Cooper in passive positions, always looking up at a beautifully lit Dietrich. I love this, I love it so much.
Power differential manifest.
Cooper supposedly complained to the bigwigs at Paramount — remember, this was von Sternberg and Dietrich’s first American film — and had it stopped. But the backstage intrigue didn’t stop there.
Cooper was still carrying on with Lupe Velez — he wanted to marry her, but Cooper’s mom (recall, she was right there in L.A.) thought her too “vulgar” and “tasteless.” We might attribute her verdict to good ol’ fashioned racism, but Lupe was a bit of a hot mess. Or at least that’s how the press chose to portray her, most likely in keeping with her onscreen image as a fiery Latina. She loved acting “low-class,” and threw parties with cock fights and “stag films,” a.k.a. thinly veiled porn. She got in fights, especially over men, and was prone to extreme jealousy. To wit: angry over Cooper’s close friendship with Anderson Lawler, known, in the time’s parlance, as a “swisher,” or flamboyant homosexual, Velez supposedly “unzipped Cooper’s fly at a social gathering and started sniffing his crotch, claiming to smell Lawler’s cologne.”
I can’t even.
Velez was also framed as an animal of desire: Cooper gave her two eagles, “love birds” to symbolize their predatory affection, and their shared bed was “eight feet square,” which, as film scholar Henry Jenkins points out, makes it sound more like a “wrestling ring” than a “boudoir.” I kinda want her to be my best friend, but I somehow don’t think she had best friends, or friends at all.
How much of these reports were true, and how much were fabricated to fit her image as a “Mexican spitfire,” may never be known. What’s to be relished, however, is how she and Dietrich went head-to-head on the set of Morocco.
Velez insisted on being on-set at all times — and with good cause, given Cooper’s tendencies and Dietrich’s je ne sais quoi. She became even more aggressive as filming continued and evidence of an affair seemed to materialize. (I have no idea what said evidence was; more crotch-sniffing?) The fan magazines satirized their competition, and Velez, famous for her impersonations, did a devastating satire of Dietrich at a prominent Hollywood gathering. In hindsight, Dietrich would explain that “Gary was totally under the control of Lupe.”
Part of me likes the idea of these two powerful women doing crazy shit for Cooper’s affection, and part of me realizes that it’s yet another case of romantic individualism — women dividing themselves in their fight for men. But Cooper was not immune or ignorant to the games being played in his name. He lost 40 pounds over the course of he and Velez’s three-year relationship, and Velez apparently shot at him when he left Los Angeles by train to Chicago. (She missed, started swearing at her poor aim, and fled arrest. Allegedly. Some of this stuff is just too much, but then I look at all of Lindsay Lohan’s crazy antics, and maybe not.)
Over the next few years, Cooper was paired with the most gorgeous and promising female stars in Hollywood — with Carole Lombard in I Take This Woman (1931), Claudette Colbert in His Woman (1931), and Joan Blondell in Make Me a Star (1932). The common theme: Cooper plays a man of few words who woos sophisticated women, which is exactly what’s happening in this photo with Lombard:
In 1932, Cooper and his Paramount “rival,” Cary Grant, were cast against the glorious Tallulah Bankhead in Devil and the Deep (1932). Bankhead was a loose canon who would have totally read The Hairpin, not least because her most famous quote was “The only reason I went to Hollywood was to fuck that divine Gary Cooper.”
Girl deserves an entire column, but what you need to understand now is that it appears she achieved her goal — as did almost all of Cooper’s co-stars. The next few years were more of the same. He played the lead in the first adaptation of A Farewell to Arms in 1933, a role that would eventually lead to a close friendship with Hemingway himself. He looks much better fit for the role than Rock Hudson would 20 years later — or maybe I’m just distracted by the leg?
Amid all his onscreen cowboying and philandering, Cooper began courting Veronica Balfe, a starlet best known as the blonde dropped by King Kong. This time, Cooper’s mother approved, and the two were wed in late 1933. Balfe retired from the screen, fated to become the woman with the least amount of Google Image results who also slept with Gary Cooper.
After a brief reunion with Dietrich onscreen and off in Desire (1936), Cooper appeared in a role that would retexture his image from the eyeliner-wearing cowboy sophisticate to that of a straight-talking everyman — a masculinity perfectly inline with the values of Depression-era America. The film was Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, a delightful piece of what is now known as Capra-corn, a.k.a. films made by Frank Capra (including Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Meet John Doe) that are by turns saccharine, adorable, forcefully American, and intermittently satisfying. Which is to say they take advantage of you the same way that Extreme Makeover: Home Edition does, with a potent ideological mix of chivalry, charity, and consumerism.
Cooper had already been working to eschew his glamour image. A 1935 piece in Woman’s Home Companion made the glamour image and placement on Hollywood’s “Best Dressed List” a thing of his boyhood past. According to Cooper, “I don’t know a darn thing about dressing. I just trust in the Lord and keep my shoes shined.”
It sounds like a line straight out of Mr. Deeds’ mouth. Deeds, the bumbling Vermonter-cum-greeting-card poet who inherits $20 million from his uncle, is taken to New York to sort out the estate, only to have all sorts of con artists take advantage of his straight-talking goodness. Throughout the film, Deeds makes a huge display of rejecting the ridiculous components of wealth: he refuses to be dressed by his Uncle’s valet, and calls out those who would ridicule his Hallmark-esque verse. He also falls in love with the very woman who’s been conning him most obviously — a reporter, played by Jean Arthur, who exploits his weakness for “women in distress,” then files reports of Cooper’s bumbles (feeding donuts to a horse, slugging pompous writers in a restaurant, refusing to bankroll the fiscally ridiculous Opera) on the front page of the paper.
Deeds is one of the first films to show a bit of age around Cooper’s eyes, but he also looks amazingly attractive. He speaks slowly and deliberately, with the sort of steady gaze that reminds me of the boys I used to slow dance to Garth Brooks’ “The Dance” with in high school. He’s not stupid, per se, just wholly without irony. He plays the tuba — in public, with tremendous glee — which should tell you just about all need to know about this man.
Plus look at how nicely he looks at Jean Arthur!
And all rumpled and hungover!
After Deeds figures out that everyone’s been swindling him, he makes to go back to Vermont, presumably to hang out with me on the top of the hill where I currently live, entertaining me by playing the tuba and wearing pants. But before he can go back, a desperate, jobless man — a character familiar to any viewer of films released between the years 1931 and 1939 — attacks and then appeals to Deeds, begging him to take pity on the common man.
What happens next could have been set in the present day: a benevolent, wealthy man who spreads the wealth to the less fortunate in order to make a equitable society … is framed as literally crazy. The effort to institutionalize Deeds for benevolence falls flat, Cooper gets to punch some more people in the face, Jean Arthur returns to his side, and all is well — and Cooper emerges even more American and “straightforward” than before.
At the time of Deeds’ release, Cooper was 35, two years married, and soon to be a father. Just as the country had reveled in excess and changed its ways, so too did Cooper. The extravagant, overly romantic, ascot-wearing man was no more. He was still the hero, but now he was no-frills. Importantly, the press labored to frame the shift not as a transformation, but as an illumination of the “real” Cooper. The glamour Cooper had always been a Hollywood show; the real Cooper resided beneath the make-up and intricate wardrobe.
The publicity machine also framed this “real” Cooper as filled with wisdom. A 1939 article belabored the point, relying on an anecdote from director Joel McCrea. Cooper arrived at McCrea’s ranch; the two greeted each other and agreed to take a walk. According to McCrea,
We walked for an hour or more, with never a word from him. That was like him. [The two men paused at a beautiful vista.] We stood there for five or ten minutes, perhaps, both of us silent. Finally, Coop drew a long deep breath and turned to me. “You know, McFee, that European situation is a hell of a mess,” he remarked. He launched into as intelligent a discussion of international affairs as I have ever heard. When he had finished, he shut up again.
The message: still waters run fucking deep.
With this new, Depression-era masculinity established, Cooper’s career continued to flourish. It’s an object lesson in stardom: stars whose images can shift with the times endure, those whose images are tacked to a specific cultural moment decline and fade.
Cooper turned down the role of Rhett Butler, publicly declaring “Gone With the Wind is going to be the biggest flop in Hollywood history. I’m glad it’ll be Clark Gable who’s falling flat on his nose, not me.” Cooper would later eat his words, but he recovered from the embarrassment by hanging out with Hemingway, shooting and fishing around Sun Valley (and inviting Life Magazine to come along). How very Gary Cooper of him.
Please invite me to this party.
1941 was a blockbuster year: back with Capra for Meet John Doe, this time paired with Barbara Stanwyk, an adorable lose forelock, and the slogan “Be a better neighbor.”
Later that year, he appeared in Sergeant York as a “natural” marksmen and conscientious objector who, because his religion is that of the Tennessee backwoods, is still forced into the army. After lots of hemming and hawing (at one point, Cooper goes home and begs God for answers; the WIND then blows his bible open to a passage that implies that he must serve his country, and in so doing serve God). Cooper goes to war, still morally conflicted, but when his fellow men are cornered by Germans, proves himself a tremendous hero. The moral: he killed only to end the war more quickly, thereby preventing even more killing.
Sergeant York was based on the story of the real-life Sergeant York — a man so humble he refused the opportunity to adapt his story until the producers agreed to use the money to finance a bible school. THAT was the guy Cooper was playing onscreen. The specifics of the narrative were particularly salient to a nation that was still oscillating between isolationism and engagement in the current world war. Having seen the ravages of “The Great War,” how could the nation justify going to war again? How could the “pacifist” be convinced to kill Germans yet again?
Pearl Harbor would make the decision clear just months after Sergeant York’s release — and just in time to push Cooper toward an Academy Award for Best Actor. Recall that most Academy Awards do not, necessarily, go to the best performances; rather, they often go to performances that best embody an ideological moment. See: the post-racism of Crash triumphing over the still-too-transgressive man-love of Brokeback Mountain, or last year’s celebration of a certain attitude towards race relations in the nominations forThe Help.  By awarding Gary Cooper with the Oscar for Sergeant York — by then, the best grossing film of 1941 — both the Academy and the nation at large were endorsing a particular attitude toward World War II and war in general: the war might be horrible, but it is necessary, and good, solid, Christian men like Cooper would lead the way toward what was right.
More nobleness followed: as Lou Gehrig in The Pride of the Yankees (1942) and as a sieve for Hemingway yet again, this time with Ingrid Bergman at her most boyish in For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943).
The films were fewer and far between, but Cooper was nominated for three straight years for Best Actor. Plus, this picture of him with Selznick and Bergman off-set just slays me:
Hemingway considered For Whom the Bell Tolls the only successful Hollywood adaptation of his work (after seeing The Killers, he supposedly yelled “Get me to the bathroom, I’m going to be sick!), in large part due to Cooper’s work. “You played Robert Jordan just the way I saw him,” Hem told Cooper, “tough and determined. Thank you.”
And then the war ended, and what was a noble hero to do? Hollywood had a gangbusters year in 1946, but then everything essentially went to shit. Newly married post-war couples started moving to the suburbs (and away from picture palaces), television began to expand, and the U.S. government made good on its threat to divest the studios of their exhibition arms (a.k.a. their theaters). The studio system was in slow decline.
The films that Cooper made next were both a reaction to and a expression of those years. He somehow managed to make The Fountainhead bearable in adaptation form, but I’m really only taking the critics’ word for it, so strong is my antipathy towards Rand. But The Fountainhead, like all of Rand’s books, is a particularly post-war, ego-driven, Americannovel — in some ways, Cooper was born to play the part. And look at this preposterous poster:
Naturally, the 47-year-old Cooper had an affair with his Fountainhead co-star, the 21-year-old Patricia Neal. Things only get smuttier from there: when Neal became pregnant with Cooper’s child, he purportedly insisted she have an abortion. Cooper’s long-suffering wife found out about the relationship and sent a telegram demanding he end it. Telegram chastising doesn’t work, however, as evidenced by the long-recycled story of Cooper’s daughter, by then in her early teens, spitting on Neal in public.
Amid all this drama, Cooper starred in what is now regarded as his defining role: the beleaguered sheriff in High Noon, battling against time to get his passive townsfolk to give a shit. The film — an obvious but effective parable of McCarthyism — won no small amount of praise, in part because Hollywood itself was one of the most high-profile targets of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). (One of the film’s screenwriters and producers, Carl Foreman, was called before the committee and deemed an “un-cooperative witness” for his refusal to name names. The film’s co-producer, Stanley Kramer, attempted to kick him off the picture, but Cooper intervened; Foreman eventually fled to England to avoid prosecution.)
Cooper had an affair with the very young Grace Kelly, who played his very young and very ardent Quaker wife. The affair presumably set Neal over the edge, as the next year, she suffered a nervous breakdown and left Hollywood. Between the daughter-spitting and Kelly’s beauty, I can see why. But she went on to marry Roald Dahl, with whom she had five children — including Ophelia Dahl, co-founder, along with Paul Farmer, of Partners in Health, a.k.a. the subject of Mountains Beyond Mountains. Between that life and a fleeting affair with aging Gary Cooper, I’d say she chose right.
High Noon is Cooper’s most famous role, and with good reason. It’s a near-perfect film, damning and yet just shy of heavy-handed. In many ways, High Noon is the natural extension of the evolution of Cooper’s image, at least how he was fated to function in the realities of America: dandy cowboy becomes principled cowboy becomes disillusioned cowboy. John Wayne would later call it “the most un-American thing I’ve ever seen in my whole life,” which, if you know any stories of old John Wayne, means it obviously had a lot going for it.
There was something particularly ironic, or maybe just fitting, in the choice of Cooper for the role of the Sheriff. Cooper himself had served as a “friendly” witness when he was called before HUAC in 1947, and was part of the “Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals” with Barbara Stanwyck, Clark Gable, Ginger Rogers, and others. While Cooper was against Communism, he did not support the practice of “blacklisting,” i.e. preventing anyone who had refused to testify from working in Hollywood. All right, all right Gary, you’re partially redeemed.
For all its cultural resonance, the Cooper of High Noon is decidedly middle-aged, and lacks the Craggy Dude hotness that settled in the smile lines of Newman and Redford. And this, I think, is why many contemporary fans don’t see Cooper as a hot Hollywood star — an important star, of course, but more Dad than Hot. I certainly didn’t understand the appeal until I saw Deeds, and then I wanted him to play the tuba and be sincere with me all night.
Cooper converted to Catholicism in 1958, reconciling with his wife and daughter. As he told Hemingway, “You know, that decision I made was the right one.” But in 1960, Cooper fell ill with prostate cancer, which quickly spread to his colon, lungs, and bones. Yet he managed to keep his illness from the press — at least until Jimmy Stewart had to accept an honorary Academy Award in his stead in April 1961. “We’re very proud of you, Coop,” Stewart said, “all of us.” And then broke down. Hemingway, watching the broadcast, had to turn away.
Hemingway would later call Cooper from the Mayo Clinic, where he himself was receiving treatment for all matter of ailments. The chatted the way older men who hate the phone do, a mix of awkwardness and guffaws. They made plans to go to Africa. But as the phone conversation came to a close, Cooper became serious. “Papa,” he said, “I bet I beat you to the barn.” A month later, Cooper was dead.
In the beginning, Gary Cooper was a beautiful, luxurious thing to behold. Then he was a moral, benevolent thing to behold, and finally he was a disillusioned yet enduring thing to behold. No star better embodies the shift in the values and masculinity that guided American society from the ‘20s through the ‘50s. Even amid the Red Scare, when many Americans began to feel a creeping sense of doubt about what their xenophobia and reactionary politics had fostered, Coop was there to prove that righteousness endured. As theorist Richard Dyer would say, he acted out what mattered to millions of people, and that act made him a star beyond measure.
And regardless of his philandering, regardless of the arduous work of his studio’s publicity departments, there was something plaintive, almost childlike, maybe even innocent about Cooper. You see it in the way he talks about himself, and you see it in pictures like the one below. His image may have been a product of manipulation, but no man could so convincingly and unerringly play a certain type of man onscreen without a seed of those characters deep in himself. He may have been a lousy lover and an even lousier husband, but everything about him seemed prime for redemption. Just look at that divine, ridiculous, contradiction that was Gary Cooper, and see if you can’t fathom forgiveness.

Liberties; Hainan Noon, Starring Gary W. Cooper

WASHINGTON— It was tense.
On his first big international test, going mano a mano with the fearsome and mysterious Chinese dragon, could W. cut the mustard? Could he stand the heat and stay in the kitchen (where the mustard is)?
But now that we've been vouchsafed the insiders' account of Hainan Noon, it is abundantly clear that the man is the man.
W. never picked up the phone to Beijing. The truly cool have no need of the hot line.
His bedazzled staffers report that he never blinked and never broke a sweat. It only took the president three days to tell aides that it was time to find a solution to the crisis. Sang-froid City. They were amazed at how his mind hardly wandered: Potus Focus.
The president, they marveled, stayed one step back to come out ahead. He was the hidden hand, the unseen demiurge, the eye of the storm, the wind beneath our wings. He made Josiah Bartlet look like Bridget Jones.
He set the tone and the parameters. His aides almost wept at his unslakable thirst for knowledge.
''He really does seek information,'' Karen Hughes effused to Reuters. ''He's very curious, and so he asked a lot of questions. He asked some detailed questions. Several times he asked, 'Do the members of the crew have Bibles?' 'Why don't they have Bibles?' 'Can we get them Bibles?' 'Would they like Bibles?' ''
She had never seen a man so indifferent to his own needs, so vigorously serving others.
One day, the president got off a helicopter at the White House and barked, ''Get me Condi.'' It was the bark of an engaged man, a big man, a man who puts his ego aside, who is unashamed of his reliance on others. The reporters who heard his aides' account of his need for Condi were plainly moved.
This is the dependence of a truly independent man, a man who is prepared to leave the diplomacy to the diplomats and the interior decorating to the interior decorators.
He even left troop movements to the brass. It seems his top command knew it did not need to consult him on such details as whether to send an aircraft carrier up the Chinese coast to flex some American muscle.
Blissed out Bushies confided to reporters doing ticktocks that W. ''grilled'' Condi about the contents of the letter of regret to Beijing and ''peppered'' his staff with questions about the crew. When you are in the steaming kitchen sweetening the hawks and cutting the mustard (why is it supposed to be hard to CUT mustard?), you don't simply ask questions. You grill and you pepper. A man for all seasonings.
He gave his underlings a free hand, checking in only on the points that particularly interested him: Are the crew members getting enough exercise? Do they have free weights? Are there treadmills for everyone? How about massages?
Other presidents would not have let Colin Powell out of their sight during the crisis. This one needed to meet with him only twice.
All through the China standoff, W.'s aides kept thinking about that Kevin Costner movie about the Cuban missile crisis, about J.F.K.'s 13 sleepless days when he saved the world. And when it was over, they gazed reverently at G.W.B. and thought: He did it in 11! He was lucid, rested, steady, rested, measured, curious and rested.
Other presidents have to work all night or late into the night. This one can get the job done by working late into the evening.
W. is not known for his linguistic precision. But his aides revealed with tremulous pride that he actually read and signed off on the drafts of letters to the Chinese written in highly specialized and nuanced diplomatic argot: Sorry? Very sorry? Very, very sorry with whipped cream and a cherry on top?
The president's triumph was all the sweeter because he flew solo. He did not have the distracting advice of any China experts -- or ''panda huggers,'' as the Bush hawks like to call them -- because he has none in his inner circle.
Then there was the grandeur of the ending. Like Gary Cooper, W. left town when his work was done, flying off for a four-day weekend at the ranch. He did not hang around for applause or tarry for accolades.
His presence here is so powerful that it does not require his presence here.
 
 
Blogger Templates