MovieChat Forums > Kings Row (1942) Discussion > Robert Cummings

Robert Cummings

posted 14 years ago by oldblackandwhite
16 replies | jump to latest

Contrary to what many of the reviewers had said, I thought Robert Cummings was terrific in his part as Parris. I can't imagine Henry Fonda or Tyrone Power in the part. Well, I can imagine how miscast either would have been.

Most people remember Bob Cummings as the loveable, babe-crazed photographer or the bumbling real estate agent of his TV comedies, but he was a fine actor with a great range. He could do sensitive nice guys or tough guys with aplomb. For one of his tough guy roles check out Anthony Mann's 1949 opus Reign of Terror (aka: The Black Book). Cummings is such a tough guy in that one, in the opening scene he kills a man with his bare hands and throws him out of a window!

He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good... St. Matthew 5:45

[–] netitans17 14 years ago

I often thought Robert Cummings was the weakest member of the cast. I think the reason he came off that way and why I changed my thinking was because his character was by far the most serious, thoughtful, and level-headed of them all.

[–] oldblackandwhite 14 years ago

swwlu73-1:

You're right. Though he did lose his head under crazy Cassie's seduction, like most of us (at least when young) do when it's a battle between better judgement and hormones.

He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good... St. Matthew 5:45

[–] aloha498 14 years ago

When the cast of a movie makes you think that no one else could play a certain part, the movie has done it's job.

Robert Cummings was great. So were they all.

[–] kingarthurup 14 years ago

exactly right... Cummings played the glue for the pieces... He should not have stuck out anymore than to have been the stablilty... well done

[–] ginbelt 12 years ago

If you haven't already seen it, and want to see a good example of his incredible range, check out, if you can, the original Twilight Zone expisode "King Nine Will Not Return". This was the opening episode of the 2nd season, so it's like 1960 or so. The large majority of the episode is him stumbling around a crashed WWII bomber in the desert, wondering where the rest of his crew is. The narration is mostly done with his voice-over, with him doing essentially silent movie-type acting (acting with his facial expressions) as the viewer hears his thoughts. His expressions range from concern, to disbelief, to puzzlement, to amusement, to hilarity, to outright horror (and prob several others I'm forgetting)....and it's all believable; he pulls it off.

This was my first introduction to him, it was years before I saw his Hitchcock films "Dial M For Murder" or "Saboteur". It's interesting to compare his appearance in Saboteur to his appearance in the Twilight Zone episode; nearly 20 years separates them, but he doesn't really appear to age very much...the guy stayed pretty youthful looking even into his 50s!

[–] jake-ryan1968 12 years ago

It seemed like Robert Cummings had the same sense of timing as Gregory Peck. Calm, thoughtful and decisive. Precise language and a kind of moral strength many other top actors then and now can't achieve. Whenever he's on, I'll watch or tape his performance. As for Kings Row - its an American Masterpiece.

[–] crlnrgbrght5 12 years ago

Wasn't He always trying to find the secret for staying Young?

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] blanche-2 9 years ago

I love Robert Cummings, always have, and I do think he did a good job in this movie. But this was a star role for a big name, bigger than Robert Cummings - this in fact would be his best year in movies. I agree with Robert Osborne and many of the reviews here.

Tyrone Power was a perfect Parris. And he was very important to the way this film would have been perceived.

It's obvious to me that 20th Century Fox screwed with Warners up to the last minute. The little boy Parris to me looked like Tyrone Power; also, Parris is the only character with a star entrance.

As far as not being able to imagine anyone else in the role, I'm a theater person and have seen different people in the same part multiple times - you never can imagine anyone else. And then you see the next person and think the same thing.

Here's the problem - Kings Row was intended to be a huge movie and it doesn't come off that way. An example: Robert Cummings and Priscilla Lane in Saboteur. Now, I suppose many people feel that this is one of Hitchcock's smaller efforts. Not at all. Saboteur was as big as anything else he did. Would you have said "oh, this is one of Hitchcock's smaller films" if Gary Cooper and Barbara Stanwyck - whom he wanted - had starred? The studio wouldn't let him use those people so he had to use people under contract.

I thought everyone did an excellent job in the movie, but I'll always feel bad that Tyrone Power didn't play it. He lost a lot of roles because Fox was furious about him just having what was a supporting role in "Marie Antoinette," although he shared top billing.

He was a huge star, and to this day he's one of the top 100 box office stars of all time - even including today's stars like Depp and DiCaprio. And he did with the garbage Zanuck gave him.

[–] crlnrgbrght5 9 years ago

Fox wasn't the only studio to not release their contract players to others. Warner Bros. did it too. And, I can see where they were coming from. It's a money making business, the film industry, if Fox was to put their biggest male star, in a rival studio's picture, for instance, MGM's "Marie Antoinette", then audiences would run to see Tyrone Power in an MGM film instead of a "Twentieth Century Fox", whih could have brought more revenue into their studio.

[–] blanche-2 9 years ago

Yes, you are right. But Fox would have lent him out had he not made Marie Antoinette. That ruined it for him being lent out. They were very unhappy that he was given a supporting role.

The thing is, when studios lent out their stars, they made a fortune. A studio might pay $200,000, a lot of money in those days (and I wouldn't mind it now) to get an actor, and the actor wouldn't make anywhere near that. I remember an interview with Binnie Barnes - her studio lent her out for a good deal of money and she was making $100 a week. Now of course Tyrone Power wouldn't have made that, but Warners would have paid a fortune for him.

MGM had no problem lending people out, on the other hand, especially actors they didn't have anything for them to do, like Laraine Day. And actually they lent Harlow to Fox for In Old Chicago, and Power was going to MGM for something (before Marie Antoinette of course), but she died and the deal fell through.

[–] crlnrgbrght5 9 years ago

Olivia deHavilland, who was at 'Warner's' said in an interview, she had to beg her bosses to let her take the role of 'Melanie' in "Gone With the Wind" at the 'Selznick' studio. She said they were hesitant at first, but finally relented. Next to Bette Davis, wasn't she the biggest female star at 'Warner Bros.'?

[–] blanche-2 9 years ago

off the top of my head, yes. I imagine the studios had projects for their biggest stars so they had to really think about letting the bigger stars do a loanout. The smaller actors, I'm sure they lent them out very easily. But loanouts of big stars did happen - they were usually traded for a star the other studio wanted so it was quid pro quo. For In Old Chicago, originally MGM was going to loan out Jean Harlow for Tyrone Power. Just an example.

[–] blanche-2 9 years ago

re lending out Olivia, adding to my last post - remember also that everyone thought Gone with the Wind was going to be a big flop. People made fun of Selznick. It was like Star Wars in that respect - Star Wars delayed its opening and everyone predicted it was going to be a big flop. When it was released, there were something like 18,000 theaters in the country (I think) - and that week they could choose The Other Side of Midnight or Star Wars. Forty chose Star Wars!

[–] crlnrgbrght5 9 years ago

Ms. deHavilland said, "Jack Warner told me 'GWTW' was going to be the biggest bust'.

[–] joeparkson 9 years ago

Cummings did well, but I can't help feeling that Tyrone Power or even William Holden would have been better. Though younger than Cummings, Cummings looked younger than they did! In fact, though Reagan was younger than Cummings, he looks older; looks like he's had a tougher life. That in general was the problem with Cummings throughout his career; too much of a light comedy type; no gravitas. In this movie, Cummings is an orphan being raised by his sick grandmother. You'd think it would show on his face, yet he looks like a trust fund youngster. Reagan looks like he's actually seen something of life.

Soy 'un hijo de la playa'