Auteur List: Howard Hawks - Discussion and Defenses

[knives]

I was being coy, but feel the same way.

[therewillbeblus]

Oh I wasn't even thinking about your comment. Now that I am, I can't help but think that Hecht contributed his most "uncomfortable comedy" in Monkey Business, though surely not the kind he intended.

[hearthesilence]

Some notes I posted on two rarely screened Hawks films:

I actually saw a rarely screened 35mm print of Howard Hawks's Fig Leaves at MoMA, which looked great. Probably the best one out there too - like the program notes say, the movie survives because of MoMA, and though it's his second film, it's his earliest surviving film as his first (The Road to Glory) is considered lost. After watching it, it really dawned on me that so many of Hawks's films, regardless of genre, turn on the distinctive way he handles the relationships between men and women - not just within couples, but between all members on both sides. It's something that works well in pretty much any context and probably explains his protean talents as a director. As a result, much of what made him the auteur we now know is already on glorious display even at this stage of his career (though to be fair he was already 30 by the time he made this film).

It was great seeing this fresh, but I was startled by two discoveries after doing a cursory search on this film. First, the fashion sequence was actually shot in Technicolor - it's generally accepted as lost but it looks like the George Eastman House found four frames that were in the possession of a private collector, and these were eventually used for the cover of a recent book called The Dawn of Technicolor. Second, the two most prominent women in this film went on to early and tragic ends, with their careers ending well before they died. What happened to Olive Borden is one of the saddest stories I've ever read about a once-major Hollywood star.

----

Here we are, almost three years later (Nov. 2013), and a print of the Film Foundation's restoration for The Big Sky was finally screened again last night in NYC, this time at the Museum of the Moving Image. (Had to be re-booked too - it was originally scheduled for late October.) Never seen it before, but what a great film - as usual, all the hallmarks of a Hawks film, all of which were very enjoyable. For example, the amusing way they handled the finger the amputation, the communal singing seen in so many of his films, this time at a French-run bar and led by Kirk Douglas (which prompted one person in the audience to sing along with the choruses), etc.

Some stretches were just beautiful, like the long shot of the horned deer passing by the boat along the river. The first 15 minutes or so definitely looked a little crummy, probably because it was sourced from dupes, but thankfully most of the film was an immense improvement. I didn't feel like it lost steam in the second half like therewillbeblus - there's something about the way it's structured like an odyssey that makes any dramatic peaks or valleys much less relevant for me. There are certainly plot elements, but its strengths come more from poetic elements than anything driven by a narrative plot.

FWIW, here's a brief excerpt of Jonathan Rosenbaum talking with Jim Jarmusch about his program of double features nearly 20 years ago. (Jarmusch had paired The Big Sky with Dead Man):

JR: The one you have with Dead Man is another particular favorite of mine, Howard Hawks’s The Big Sky. What made you think of it? I know you’re fairly critical of the way Hollywood generally shows Native Americans.

JJ: Yeah. In a way you kind of convinced me when we talked earlier, though it was one of my suggestions. It’s a voyage film, and the way it takes characters through those landscapes — even the title refers to that — is kind of amazing. But this was a hard category because I had a lot of wacky ideas...I thought of Cheyenne Autumn; one reason was because of the really bizarre cast. I would have some problems, again, with how Native people are depicted in that — and that’s the most gracious film of [John Ford]'s on that level. I have problems of that kind with The Big Sky -- their transporting of an Indian princess.

JR: But one thing that makes it an apt choice for me is that The Big Sky is such a mysterious film, as I think Dead Man is. Compared to most westerns, they somehow have a different relation to period; it's almost as if they were both taking place during the Middle Ages.

JJ: Yeah, well, in The Big Sky they're sort of trapper guys. It's not a western where the guy cleans up the town and marries the schoolmarm.

JR: They're both very much about the wilderness.

JJ: Yes, and for me the landscapes in Dead Man are almost like characters in the film.

[Rayon Vert]

Ball of Fire (revisit). There’s definitely a continuity with Bringing Up Baby in terms of the nerdy male intellectual and the female force of nature (plus you've got the group/community at work here, so it encapsulates most of Hawks' main themes). But even with Wilder and the tough gangsters included, this ends up feeling mostly sweet and cute, without the edge in most of Hawks’ comedies. It’s also not as creative or sustainedly funny or inspired as the movie with the leopard. It’s still overall a likeable film, and the scenes with Stanwyck are the most enjoyable, who kind of plays the same strong-headed, ambitious, manipulative flirt but with a sensitive heart underneath that she is in The Lady Eve. But then for all of the enjoyable moments there are definitely also the “lagging sections” like twbb pointed out, and some scenes are stretched out too long like the one where the professors are held hostage by Lilac’s henchmen. So solid but not Hawks at his most vital.

[therewillbeblus]

RV, I seem to recall you expressing some negative thoughts on A Song Is Born in the 40s thread(?) but I hope you revisit it for this project, since it rose immensely in my esteem following a recent rewatch of Ball of Fire. The strengths are really fleshed out in a side-by-side comparison, and as someone who I believe is also a fan of spacious breathing narrative when done right, the later film capitalizes on a style that could have easily fallen flat on its face, and in the process of loosening up actually fixes nearly all the problems with the earlier film.

[Rayon Vert]

#-o I was expecting and afraid you were going to suggest that... Honestly my reaction to it was so horrible (it's easily dead last in my original Hawks rankings) that I'm not quite up for the revisit. I'm probably partially biased by not liking remakes in general (we'll get to that with Bravo/Dorado...), but I don't remember liking a single thing about it (and it doesn't have Stanwyck, which is BoF's main selling point!). I might have been tempted to put myself through the ropes for your sake and your write-up if there wasn't a parallel 50s thread that I didn't want to a waste 2-hour window on... Sorry but I'm gonna be selfish on this one blus!

[therewillbeblus]

Fair enough- I mean, if you had told me that Virginia Mayo would best Stanwyck, especially by utilizing Stanwyck's own sensual style better than her in the remake, also with a viewing long ago (also with minimal esteem) under my belt, I would have laughed and called you crazy - but I'm telling you, she does!

I'm not into remakes either (I don't think most people are) but when someone takes a film and tweaks it to make a better product, which are very rare occurrences, I do think they deserve credit. I'm sure we'll get into the Rio Bravo/Ed Dorado contrast down the line, but while there's a part of me that wants to run for the hills at Hawks repeating himself (in some scenes, literally) the choice to change the power differential is key to embracing his own ethos, and transforms the film -that is deceptively a watered down version of the first- into a kinetic force of more complex relationships and its own beast entirely. I think that the dynamics between Hawks' characters are the core of the hangout movies, and so regardless of all the narrative similarities, the structure of the friendships are different enough to call these not estranged, but distant cousins!

[domino harvey]

A Song is Born is better than Ball of Fire in every way that a movie can be. Like, Top 5 material for sure

[mizo]

Co-signed. And the addition of the musical element not only makes the plot way more logical, it allows the film to dramatize the joyousness of cooperation (and creativity through cooperation) more vividly - and infectiously - than in any other Hawks. It's also a strong contender for Hawks' most visually stunning movie. Virginia Mayo's entrance in the nightclub might be my favorite flicker of "pure" cinema in any of these. All we see is one eye and a tapping finger, then the curtain opens and, like magic, we see her head now flung to the side. A delightful (if obvious) trick that made me gasp the first time and never fails to thrill me. A perfect flourish.

[Red Screamer]

I also found A Song is Born to be awful when I caught it recently. The jazz numbers are solid fun, but the Ball of Fire remake between them is wooden through and through. It seems like Hawks didn't rehearse with his actors as much as usual here: some of the long, fluid scenes of the original (a key Hawks signature) are split up into shorter, choppy ones and the actors don't zip lines off each other like you'd expect. He repeats camera set-ups from the original even when it's awkward to do so in a new context and there are leftover slang jokes from Ball of Fire thrown in without any relation to anything and seemingly no one noticed! The other professors don't have individual personalities here either, but they also don't have a strong group dynamic or flow. I could understand liking Danny Kaye's goofy take on the character over Cooper's earnest underplaying, but Virginia Mayo? Give me a break. One look at her introductory scene—where she rigidly lipsynchs while her arms flop limply at her sides—tells you everything you need to know. If Mayo had done her own thing with the role it might have worked, but she's doing a pale imitation of Stanwyck at every turn, even copying some of her gestures. Mayo tries calling people "kid" a dozen different ways and each time it unconvincingly tumbles out of her lips with a clunk. Even though I just watched the film, and nearly back to back with Ball of Fire at that, the hosannas here almost make me want to rewatch it. Just because, frankly, I find them so inconceivable! I mean, do you guys really find that long, lead-footed opening funny?

EDIT: Mizo, I didn't see your post before sending mine. Funny to have us both single out that scene from, uh, different perspectives. Reminder that the shot of Mayo you mention is a repeat as well. Though Stanwyck is on beat and Mayo is anything but.

[therewillbeblus]

I think the “wooden” qualities better embrace the group’s lack of social skills in toned-down deadpan awe, but it’s a matter of preference. Also I know I mentioned it before but even if Mayo’s perf May irk Stanwyck devotees when she ‘copies’ her I do think she brings her own kind of sexuality too, and what is most striking about her performance is that she is able to transition between that sexpot role and an empathic sensitive person more than Stanwyck’s character did in the original. I wrote it in my initial writeup but the scene where they get the phone call about the dead mother allows the quiet minimal performances to flow towards both a dry gag and an honest emotional reaction as Mayo sympathizes with Kaye by silently staring at him with powerless affection as he reacts. It’s one of my favorite Hawks moments.

[Rayon Vert]

I thought of a way to find time to give it a spin, so, given I was so wrong in my first impression of Man's Favorite Sport'?, this is another opportunity to be less rigid. Do, dear me, reading Red Screamer's write-up kind of reminds me about what I disliked, so I'm not expecting a turn-around! But we'll see...

Actually the film I didn't like that I'm most eager to revisit and see if I'll change my mind is Red Line 7000!

[domino harvey]

Actually the film I didn't like that I'm most eager to revisit and see if I'll change my mind is Red Line 7000!

RIP Rayon Vert’s good ideas

[Rayon Vert]

I dunno... Robin Wood was so steadfast about his positive appraisal, I mean there's gotta be something in it! That's basically what is exciting me, that very curiosity. I'll really make sure to read closely what he says about it and then view it in that perspective to see if it will trigger a completely new appreciation! I'm hoping it does in that I really like Hawks' late work (Bravo to Sport anyway) and hope this can add another cool hangout movie to the list...

[domino harvey]

I should also say, when I first brought my A Song is Born love to the board, I stood alone and most people thought the same thing they had for decades, that it was one of Hawks’ worst and most forgettable films. We’re just starting to get the balance corrected a bit now that more disciples are starting to see the light, but we’ll always be the fringe. Doesn’t mean we’re wrong, though!

[mizo]

Funny to have us both single out that scene from, uh, different perspectives. Reminder that the shot of Mayo you mention is a repeat as well.

Haha, but cutting in the middle ruins the effect!

It's hard to explain (and, no doubt, even harder to convince a skeptic) why a much more limited actress's performance works better for me, but I just think Mayo's more one-dimensional sexpot fits the material better. Stanwyck's more nuanced perf, where she evinces enjoyment of her time with the professors pretty early on and rarely comes across as just callously exploiting them, sort of butts up against the mechanics of the story in an unfortunate way. Every time I've seen Ball of Fire, I'm pretty jarred by that scene where Dan Duryea and the other guy visit Stanwyck to convey Dana Andrews' marriage proposal. Her total willingness to ditch the professors clashes with the way she's treated them earlier which, while brash and demanding, also had a kind of glittering, bemused indulgence that wasn't malicious. Meanwhile, I get the opposite sense from Mayo, who is every bit the bull in the china shop (or rather, pin-up in the cathedral, which could be the film's alternate title) that the professors treat her as, going along with them for nothing but convenience and her own personal, vaguely cruel, amusement. Her change of heart takes much longer and feels more earned, coming as it does once the stakes are higher and she can no longer extricate herself from the group bloodlessly. I'm sort of surprising myself here in arguing against greater emotional subtlety, but both movies are essentially fairy tales, wildly modulated opposites-attract stories that intermix the most starkly divergent sensibilities and strata of society. The blunt approach fits like a glove, while the nuanced one leaves some slack.

[Rayon Vert]

I should also say, when I first brought my A Song is Born love to the board, I stood alone and most people thought the same thing they had for decades, that it was one of Hawks’ worst and most forgettable films. We’re just starting to get the balance corrected a bit now that more disciples are starting to see the light, but we’ll always be the fringe. Doesn’t mean we’re wrong, though!

Domino, I've always suspected that twbb is a sockpuppet of yours, given how much you see alike on so many ill-favored movies, and now I'm convinced it's the case!

[domino harvey]

TWBB and I do overlap quite a bit, though an easy differentiation point is that he likes far more movies than I do and he’s far politer about those he doesn’t. But funnily enough, I think we almost always like the same movies for different reasons. And we both err in opposite directions of post length too!

[therewillbeblus]

But funnily enough, I think we almost always like the same movies for different reasons.

*except for optimistic Bogdanovich type/playful nouvelle vague-infused movies, which is a lot of overlap! I’d even say modern French in general -i.e. Mouret. Though I take my psychological and philosophical readings into overdrive often, causing quite a divide, the core attraction of identity and emotional development via social engagement remains pretty similar (I think) at heart.

[therewillbeblus]

I dunno... Robin Wood was so steadfast about his positive appraisal, I mean there's gotta be something in it!

Well there is a scene of involving attention on a French beauty at a dance, but like most parties the voyeuristic spectacle is where that excitement ends. Also James Caan finds a way to be far more off-putting than ever, which is something, but not positive.

[Rayon Vert]

A Song Is Born. So I have watched it again and unfortunately I still consider it by far the worst Hawks movie I’ve seen. I guess it has some historical value because of the jazz legends on screen, and there is actually an interesting new and funny scene near the beginning, the Polynesian love chant, where we have extra Hawksian primitivism clashing with “civilization”. Red Screamer is dead-on in all his points, i.e. the woodenness of everything, the slavishly imitative rehashed scene stagings (where, struggling to be a bit “different”, I noticed, Hawks will often just reverse the left-to-right direction in which the actors are placed), the lack of any significant individualized characterization to the group members, and the performances of the leads. I’ll be more severe in this latter regard, and say I can’t see anything of worth in either Mayo or Kaye. They’re both utterly charmless and lacking any charisma - Kaye unusually unfunny, whereas Cooper, though usually not the greatest actor, pulled off a character you cared about. Mayo is simply not believable as a gangsters’ moll, either in terms of toughness or evoking convincing sexuality. (Especially when dressed in the "academic clothes" of the professors' residence, whereas Stanwyck’s vulgarity and naughtiness still came through in the same situation.) She’s completely miscast - she looks and acts like the girl next door, rather than the tramp she’s supposed to be, and her acting and performances are awkward. And it goes without saying there’s zero chemistry between the leads, whereas you felt sparks and the sexy when Stanwyck yum-yummed Cooper. And the actors playing the parts of Andrews and Duryea in the earlier movie are even more bland. There’s simply no sense of convincingness or likeability to any of these characters.

The film only comes alive during the musical scenes, otherwise it’s flat and dull throughout. Hawks did this film for the buck only, never had anything good to say about it, and it shows. (And I don’t think I’ve ever come across any serious critic say anything good about this movie?) Put my vote with the majority on this one…

[therewillbeblus]

Their ‘lack of chemistry’ is a source of the comedy! Oh well, we’ll always have Only Angels Have Wings

[Rayon Vert]

We're also both fans of Ceiling Zero. I'm pretty sure we'll be able to throw in Red River and The Big Sleep in that mix too! (Sgt. York, Air Force will also make my list, but probably not as high as you).

[knives]

The Crowd Roars
Apparently Fairbanks was originally set to play the younger brother rather than Mr. Golly Shucks Gee-Willikers whom we are stuck with and that would have elevated this in a very necessary way. The current actor just drags everything down to the dumps when he's on screen ruining a perfectly good movie. Conversely Joan Blondell as the local bombshell single handedly saves the movie by acting as if she were in a screwball picture which probably is the better tone for this. From the frame she first appears on screen the film finally tries to be something other then filler. Though I suppose that makes sense for the most underrated actress of the '30s. The racing scenes are also really great showing an acceptance of cruelty that's at odds with the film, but really great all the same. Having a driver quit because they can't handle the smell of burning flesh is a powerful detail.

Beyond that though the film's not terribly good and fails to succeed past the compelling ideas. One thing I've been thinking of as I've been going through Hawks' films is that unlike a lot of other directors of the time there's no stable of actors he's really built with the exception of Grant and Wayne. At best you get two off like Dvorak and Karloff, but there's really no Ward Bond equivalent. No doubt a major factor is how Hawks bummed around through various studios so couldn't be pegged to a group, but that doesn't really explain the lack of supporting help.

Colour me surprised on Tiger Shark, but while this isn't one of Hawks' absolute best (though I think it comes close) it's fascinating on so many levels that I think it deserves more examination then has generally been given it. This seems to be another attempt from Warner's to reform their bad boys into socially acceptable bad boys as Robinson plays a romantic Ahab obsessed with his missing hand and a local girl. The film, from a Hawksian point of view, is most interesting as the most explicit display of homophobia in his career. There is a lot of joshing about his missing hand and his lack of interest up until the point of the film is played for laughs. There's a cruelty in the making fun of this queer, little man that only later on seems to have purpose. In the beginning it only seems to serve an expressive outlet for Hawks' distaste of that type of masculinity. Though as it goes on and the story reveals itself more of an Othello sort it becomes impossible not to care for someone so strung up by his own petard that the film's relationship with him becomes muddied with sadness being the only concrete reaction for me.

The film resulting from that succeeds as a melodrama showing the ugly side of the lady fights that had piqued Hawks' curiosity since A Girl in Every Port. Robinson's arrogance and bluster take the better of him when the girl who's been telling him she's a goose the whole time decides to fly south for the winter. I think I've said this before, but this kind of narrative is one of my favorites and it works remarkably well here.

Though, as must be said in every review, Hawks' contributions here aren't the star, but rather Rosson's second unit work which seems to singlehandedly invented Italian neo-realism (Stromboli might as well as be a remake of this told from the woman's point of view). There's an attractive hard working quality to the action on the boats that gives it a mechanical sense. It's the same sort of attraction that Soviet silents and Fischinger's films have as well. Process is fascinating and adds flavour to a degree of making the central melodrama seem more exciting with the infinite possibilities of real life now open.

Also I'm just a sucker for San Diego based films.

[therewillbeblus]

I know that McCarthy's book isn't too analytical, but his thesis on Hawks as an enigma of contradictions, realising his fantasies on film, and abstaining from anything but neutrality regarding class and, at times, gender, to adhere to this thematic prioritization is really on point. It's also fascinating how Hawks' upbringing of essentially being spoiled and likely spoonfed virtues of excellence, as not only possible but more easily attainable than most people believe, could have contributed to his worldview. At the same time, I like how McCarthy points out the death he witnessed at four y/o and leaves that there, not making the connection himself, but it's clearly fitting for his reference of Molly Haskell's quote regarding Hawks painting these willful fantasies of excellence against a backdrop of acknowledged meaninglessness and vapid existence. I think that goes too far into nihilism, but it does draw a more laborious relationship of reality vs fantasy in actualizing Hawksian existentialism, which is validating to how I read a lot of these works, especially Only Angels Have Wings.