A great cast, at the top of their form. That’s what comes to mind when I think of The Philadelphia Story. Cary Grant at his dark-eyed best. Katherine Hepburn in all her lanky glory. James Stewart, morose and hilarious at the same time. I hadn’t seen the film in years before I saw it on TCM the other night, and because I have such a poor memory, it was almost as if I were seeing it for the first time.
The script is based on a play by Philip Barry; in his introduction to the film, an unctuous John Lithgow told us that Hepburn bought the rights and sold them to Louis B. Mayer with the proviso that she could choose the screenwriter, director and cast. Is it just me, or does Lithgow become more and more a parody of himself as the years go by?
Anyway, Hepburn initially asked for Spencer Tracy and Clark Gable, but they were busy, so Stewart and Grant were cast instead. What would it have been like with those other two screen icons? I can’t think that the interaction between Tracy (Hepburn) and Dexter (Grant) would have been any sharper if it had been Gable in that role. The timing of their banter is exquisite.
A big deal is made of class differences, but in reality the plot exists to get Hepburn back into the arms of Grant. We see their split at the beginning of the film, as she throws him out the door, and he knocks her on her keester. But it’s all right, we’re supposed to think: though he raised his hand to strike her, all he does is grab her by the face and push her down, where she sits looking angry but immaculately arrayed.
Tracy is engaged to George (John Howard), a putz who has come up from the “lower class” and made a thing for himself. He worships her and places her on a pedestal, and she returns the favor by bullying him and bossing him around. That’s the image of a strong woman in 1940: bullying and brassy and headstrong (I wonder if that image has changed all that much …) But of course, she doesn’t really know she’s that way, and when George says he’s worshiped her from afar, she says “I don’t want to be worshiped. I want to be loved.” Of course, with a name like “Lord” it might have been a foregone conclusion, at least in Hollywoodland. Not subtle much.
Enter Stewart as Mike, a reporter for a society rag, and his sort-of girlfriend Liz (Ruth Hussey). They are both resolutely working class, which provides him all manner of anguish when he begins to fall for Tracy. At first, it looks like the script is going to veer into farce, complete with tired mistaken-identity yucks, but early in the picture this is defused, with everybody finding out who everybody else is, just in time for the second act. I was pleasantly surprised.
The whole affair has an edge to it — there is an underlying meanness that is well-served by Grant’s hard-eyed misogyny. These days, romantic comedies are like jello: even the best of them try to be as inoffensive as possible, playing to the lowest common denominator. Story has a sophisticated intelligence and a bite that is rare in Hollywood now, but didn’t seem so at the time.
Director George Cukor stages The Philadelphia Story rather unimaginatively, with little attempt to “open up” the play. It is basicall a series of set pieces consisting of people standing around, usually with drinks in hand, talking about one topic: Tracy Lord (not Lords) and what is wrong with her on the eve of her wedding to George. Stage-bound as it is, you don’t mind so much when the characters are well written, and played by the likes of Grant, Hepburn and Stewart.
RSS 2.0
God damn, I adore TPS. I own it, actually.
This is (FAR AND AWAY) my absolute favourite performance from Kate. Of all of the motion pictures she appeared in, this is the one that I love most.
Tracy is a little more uppity and prententious than me. If I had been born with a silver spoon in my mouth (the Wildings are only upper middle class), I would never have looked down on anyone. Character is far more important than what kind of car you drive, where you live or how much money you make – and that definitely encompasses all mythical boundaries.
In North America, class has never really been a big deal anyway. In England those distinctions (faint though they are) still remain to some degree.
But I do identify with Tracy and share many of the same characteristics. I dig these strong, elegant women who are sharp as a tack. They’re outwardly intensely feminine. But they can hold their own with anyone.
I want to play Tracy (mostly likely on stage) before I’m done with this world.
But this film is extraordinary on so many levels. Kate is just magnificent and her costars are fantastic. They’re allowed to have their own little triumphs separately and in the same scenes as Ms. Hepburn.
Cary Grant was a fabulous foil for Kate. But the man could do no wrong. He made all of his female costars look good – from Mae West to Rosalind Russell to Ingrid Bergman to Sophia Loren. He made several movies with Kate. But TPS is the cherry on top of the hot fudge sundae.
Have you ever seen HOLIDAY, Rick? They were wondrously delicious in that.
I especially like the scene where they have a heart to heart about the problems in their marriage that caused them to split. Seemed very real to me. She talks about how his drinking caused him to become madly unattractive to her and he accuses her of being too much of a goddess.
(Ah, some men just can’t deal…)
Jimmy Stewart won the Best Actor Academy Award for his performance. I think he’s an absolute delight. But even back then they didn’t usually hand out the hardware for comedic performances. No matter how sophisticated and nuanced. People always say it was a makeup award because he lost the previous year for MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. Never having seen it, I can’t comment on that. But it’s probable.
AMPAS is famous for those situations.
Jimmy’s speech to Kate abut hearth fires and holocausts just before he grabs her gets me every time. He’s incredibly sincere and he nails it to the wall. She can barely gulp out a “Golly,” before she’s swept away.
But seeing as this movie was released in 1940, everything stays on an even keel and falls back into place neatly by the conclusion. I think it’s bloody genius.
The kid at the end always provokes the biggest laugh from me. “I did it. I DID IT ALL.” Well, let her have her fun. The final result was identical to what she was hoping for.
Yeah, it may be a little rough around the edges in terms of relationships and the whole male/female dynamic. But for a film that’s nearly 70 years old, it’s definitely and remarkably feminist in nature. Tracy’s no pushover. She and Dex worked it out and they started all over again. They’re older and wiser now. I think the second time they have a definite shot.
But there’s one thing that the film gets completely wrong.
Some women DO want to be worshipped. I won’t mention any names…
Great work as always, Rick. You made my morning.
Miranda, thank you. No, I haven’t seen “Holiday,” but I have seen “Mr. Smith” and Stewart’s roles are very different. The two kind of complement each other, Smith being open and naive, Connor being closed in and kind of mopey. I didn’t know about the AMPAS snub, but I kind of believe it, and I think that Mr. Smith is a more demanding role.
“Story has a sophisticated intelligence and a bite that is rare in Hollywood now, but didn’t seem so at the time.”
That about sums it up as well as can be.
This is one of my all time favorites, but it just doesn’t seem to get the attention of some of the other greats. I like it much better than Bringing Up Baby, which kind of kills me because Hawks is more interesting than Cukor, but where Hawks could make a lot from very little (exhibit A: To Have and Have Not), Cukor has a leg up here with great material. Having said that, I like His Girl Friday even better, but that’s Hawks starting with great material.
But I digress.
I think this is the movie that truly made me a fan of Cary Grant. He was witty and charming, but there was a mean, dark edge to him as well. I watched Charade recently for the first time in many years and I have to say it hasn’t held up all that well, but Grant is good and it’s great that he played his age rather than trying to be a younger man for Audrey Hepburn.
But I digress again.
Gable and Tracy are fine, but I just can’t imagine them working as well in the roles as Grant and Stewart. Maybe I’d be saying the same thing about Grant and Stewart if Gable and Tracy HAD been cast.
You’re right about the class distinction in the US Miranda, though among the high society on the East Coast where this is set, I think the distinction is much stronger than out here in the West. Hmmm…High Society. I love Sinatra and I love Grace Kelly, but Bing Crosby is no Cary Grant on screen.
Look at me digressing again…
Craig, I don’t know what the deal is with “Bringing Up Baby.” I mean, it’s ok, but not great in my opinion, which is not the majority, as you point out. Gotta agree with you about “His Girl Friday,” as well.
There always is a mean, dark edge to Grant … it’s what separates him from all the other pretty leading men. I think of that Hitchcock film, what is it, “Suspicion” where he is ambiguously a cad — is he or isn’t he? Maybe the quintessential Grant role.
Of course there are classes in this society, we say middle class, working class, blue-collar, all the time.
Rick, if you don’t mind I’d like to add to this discussion.
You’re such a gracious host I think you won’t have a problem with my contributions. That’s why I dig visiting over at CCC.
I can speak my mind freely and no one gets in my way.
Like anyone EVER could…
*tosses blonde mane*
Craig, that’s a lot of digressions. But they become you, honey. Seriously…
I remember a couple of years ago you told me that you had immersed yourself in classic cinema and that you had let your interest in the current releases slide. You never really got back into the new stuff until you got LiC up and running.
I’ve always attempted to keep my fascination for both groups going simultaneously. But that’s me. I can’t stand to be out of the loop in regards to film, music, fashion etc.
It’s important for me to be cutting edge or at least know what the hell is going on. In my view, it would be totally unacceptable to be immune to the vagaries of the zeitgeist. Slipping through the cracks just isn’t an option.
Seems to me that you did say something about liking TPS. But I wasn’t entirely aware that you held it in such high esteem. It’s always fabulous to be on the same page with you.
There have been a lot of leading men before or since. But there is only one Cary Grant. The industry will always compare various generations of actors to try and maintain a selling point. But Mr. Grant had some rather unique qualities that I don’t think can ever be successfully duplicated in that precise manner.
Similar? Sure. But similar is NOT the whole enchilada.
Totally agree with you on the east coast/west coast divide, Craig. This is what I found out when I was reading all of those guidebooks about both cities last year.
Generally L.A. (in spite of the fact that it has its share of wealthy people) is laid back and fairly relaxed. There are a million fun things to do in the Golden City that don’t have to involve massive outlays of cash. (Though of course they CAN. L.A. does include Bel Air, Beverly Hills and Rodeo Drive after all.) But you can find fairly luxe accommodations, great food and wondrous shopping in the Los Angeles area without breaking the bank. It won’t (of course) be found in the districts that I just mentioned.
You can’t do very bloody much in New York unless you have dollars…or a whole lot of creativity. New York is all about old money and making a certain kind of impression.
As far as Cukor and Hawks are concerned, I think it’s a dead heat. Pretty much an even split.
I’ll just tackle the films that I know and admire.
Cukor had: TPS, CAMILLE (with Garbo), HOLIDAY, THE WOMEN, A STAR IS BORN (JUDY GARLAND), HELLER IN PINK TIGHTS (Sophia as a blonde!!!) and RICH & FAMOUS (my nonguilty pleasure).
Cukor also gets about 3,000,000 bonus points because even though Fleming took over the direction, won the Oscar and soaked up all the glory, GONE WITH THE WIND’S final cut is still quite influenced by Cukor. Vivien Leigh and Olivia De Havilland continued to consult concerning character motivation and rehearse with Cukor (in secret) all though the production. They sure as hell weren’t getting much assistance from Fleming.
He wasn’t exactly an actor’s director.
Hawks had: TWENTIETH CENTURY (Barrymore/Lombard), BRINGING UP BABY, HIS GIRL FRIDAY, BALL OF FIRE, TO HAVE & HAVE NOT, THE BIG SLEEP and GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES.
Looks fair and equitable to me.
Interestingly enough, I have an ex named Cary. But I had a huge fascination for Cary Grant long before that came around.
None of those other gentlemen (Mr. Stewart, Mr. Sinatra or Mr. Crosby) do a damn thing for me. But Cary Grant is another story all together. If I had ever met them, I might have felt entirely different.
But simply going on screen personae and looks, Cary Grant is the only one that intrigues me.
But I did hear that Grace Kelly was romantically involved with both Sinatra and Crosby. At the very least, she knew both of them very well.
I wonder what she’d have to say about that.
Now it’s my turn to digress, my beloved Mr. Kennedy…
That’s true Miranda, but not quite accurate. I came to film-fandom through old movies and they were where my passion was in the early days. I branched out, but still wasn’t seeing a ton of new movies in a given year. It was only when I started LiC that I really started to focus on current movies.
I guess I felt I had more to add to a conversation about movies where the critical consensus hadn’t calcified yet. I tend to need to form my opinions in a vacuum.
Sadly, I spend so much time blogging, I’ve neglected old films in the last couple of years. I’d like to get back to it and posts like this one from Rick inspire me.
As for Bringing Up Baby, I have to admit it’s grown on me after multiple viewings, but altogether it’s a bit shrill and goofy for me. I like something with the sparkle and class of Philadelphia Story much more.
Miranda, you’re always welcome around here … I love your unique voice. Anyway, you might actually have felt different about Grant had you met him. Rumor has it he was quite a misogynist. I think you can see it in his performances. But I hear women like dangerous men …
Craig, I don’t know how you do it, blogging as much as you do. But a major reason I do classics is that my cinematic choices around here are so poor.
Actually, I’m concocting another blog, I hope it to be a team blog, just doing the classics and etc. I’m thinking of calling it “Kurosawa’s Knees” If we got four or five team members, we’d only have to write a post every week or so … if you’re interested, let me know. (You too, Miranda!)
Rick, you are an absolute prince.
You have ALWAYS been a terrific guy and a real sweetheart. Though you haven’t been a frequent visitor until fairly lately, you supported CP right from the start.
Believe me. Just as I was telling Craig over at home plate, these things are significant. I have a very long memory…and that goes both ways.
Well, there’s a lot of misogyny going around – on the net and off. As I’m sure I stated quite emphatically over at CCC once upon a time, I can’t see how it will ever be eradicated COMPLETELY. Times may change and the world may improve (just look at the 20th century in terms of the growth of freedom and basic rights for people who are not specifically white and male) but individual perspectives endure.
Was Cary Grant a misogynist? Well, he had five wives. But actors can usually sell bridges in swamp country.
Who knows what sort of person he was off screen? I certainly don’t.
But I think if we knew what went on in our idols’ private lives or were effectively able to ascertain what they were really like that many of us would pick different individuals to admire.
In terms of Mr. Grant, I respond to his sleek, dark handsomeness, his incredible elegance, his great fashion sense and his enormous underrated talent. He was a Brit and I find them irresistible. Plus (no small thing) he was also a Capricorn.
Some women do dig men that are dangerous. ON SCREEN, those dudes are distractingly hot. OFF SCREEN, those personality types are a bloody disaster. I won’t go anywhere near them.
I am unfailingly attracted to men that are kind, sensitive and decent. Contrary to a lot of women, I do dig nice guys. They can have an edge to them. But just because some boy has character – is upstanding and generous – doesn’t mean he’s boring.
It can be problematic. But I know how to work it. Decent guys don’t behave like players. They don’t have pickup lines or act like garden variety sleazeballs. So they can be VERY intimidated by a tall, glamorous blonde who wears her sensuality on her sleeve, knows exactly what she wants and speaks her mind without hesitation.
(But it did work for Katherine Heigl..)
I have heartbreaker written all over me. It’s not the part that I was born to play in real life. But I am doomed to be cast in that role perpetually.
So I have to let these guys know (at some point) that I am actually a lovely person under this bold manner and fashionable exterior. If they get to know me (we work together or become friends) then it gets a whole lot easier. Their intimidation just falls away after that.
It was like that for my boy. I used to hang out at his restaurant a lot. (He’s a server.) So everyone knew me and he wasn’t afraid to approach me. We had to be discreet. But hypothetically management would have been the only ones to have problems with it.
The only ones that actually did were guys that also worked there. Ha ha.
I mean, Christ. I’m just a girl…
I actually would’ve been really jazzed to have a classic film blog. There are some people on the net that have sites like that and they’re superbly done. But I was afraid that it would limit me too much and I resolved to stick with current releases. I can always address some individual films in essays.
Well, I had quite the experience writing for someone else.
If you can’t trust someone and they don’t have your best interests at heart, then I think you’re better off dumping it at the curb. So called people that have their own agendas will have plenty to answer for…and lots of individuals close to me (both on the net and off) know ALL the precious details of that intricate scenario all ready.
As in what goes around comes around. HARD.
But you don’t fall into that category, Rick. I am very honoured that you would even ask me.
I can’t speak for Craig (and I would never want to – he’s his own man…) but I would hope that he would be interested in following up on this.
I’d be absolutely delighted to be a part of this endeavour.
Rick, if you want to get hold of me, email me at the address I used in this post or through my site.
This sounds seriously amazing…
I hadn’t ever seen The Philadelphia Story when, sometime late in 1987, it came on a small portable TV I had on for distraction as I washed the previous two nights’ dishes (newly divorced, I was lapsing back into Norwegian bachelor farmerhood). Within five minutes I sat down, dishes forgotten, entranced notwithstanding two or three commercial breaks, until about forty minutes in the screen went blank in the middle of a scene and a voice-over, contriving to sound simultaneously stentorian and contrite, apologized to the station’s viewership for having cued up the wrong movie, whereupon the flick they’d actually scheduled took its place on the screen. It was (wait for it) The Philadelphia Experiment. Jesus wept. I just went back to washing dishes, and finally caught up with this one a dozen years later…
The Philadelphia Experiment? Jeez … what a burn. Not exactly the same thing … I’d have thrown something at the TV, myself.