No credit is listed for the young man in the newsroom who first gives Richard Conte the idea of calling the murderess "Blue Gardenia." I say it's Robert Arthur of "Ace In the Hole." It looks and sounds just like him, but I can't find confirmation anywhere. If anybody has both movies, check it out.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I never have found out! Hopefully somebody will come through with the info. Someone must know!
shareHey Sleepybone,
I am not so familiar with Robert Arthur, so I checked out a bunch of photos for him so I could compare the pics with the close shot of his face in the film. In his scene in the newsroom, you can clearly see a mole like blemish on his right upper lip about 3/4 of an inch to the right of and about 1/2 inch down from the lower right edge of his nose. In all of the pics I saw of Arthur, I did not see any such blemish. I doubt if it was Arthur, but I certainly have no other idea as to whom it may have been.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
Thank you, David. The mystery goes unsolved, although I tend to agree, now that I've checked it out, that it isn't Arthur. Somebody sure did look & sound like him!
shareHe isn't listed among TBG's credits, but he looked to me like Tom Irish, who made his film debut playing one of Elizabeth Taylor's brothers in Father Of the Bride (and reprised the role in Father's Little Dividend).
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/actor-tom-irish-poses-for -a-portrait-in-circa-1955-news-photo/169747976
Poe! You are...avenged!
I watched "The Blue Gardenia" late last night on TCM and the boy in the newsroom looked so familiar I too initially thought it was Robert Arthur. But after looking at his features, I realized it was NOT Robert Arthur (the actor looked considerably younger than Arthur would have looked in 1953). Having seen this movie as a child when it originally came out (on the bottom of a double bill with "By the Light of the Silvery Moon"), I remember being quite disappointed with it (it started off so well, then seemed to evaporate at the halfway mark). But I finally realized the reason why. Obviously intended as no more than a 'B' rush job, it was shot in a scant 20 days. Moreover, there was absolutely zero chemistry between Anne Baxter and Richard Conte (both of whom were totally miscast), and the "twist" ending was simply ridiculous. Even so, the movie still had enough tantalizing elements to make one wish that the Brothers Warner had doubled the budget and the shooting schedule, thereby allowing enough time to rewrite the script, redo the cast, and "get it right". Yet another example of a botched "if only . . . " movie!
shareI've replied to sleepybone with my guess that the actor in question might be Tom Irish, and I'm replying here to indicate my general agreement with your assessment of TBG.
I'm an admirer of Lang's, but I found this production largely flat from a directorial standpoint. As well, Baxter's breathy naivete, so effective in early All About Eve scenes, appears forced, and Richard Conte here displays only a shade more charisma than the eternally wooden George Raft. And to your examples of miscasting, I'd add Reeves.
What vitality there was among the performances came primarily from the work of Sothern, Donnell and that old scene dominator Burr. Lang's flair for arresting visuals seemed to come to life only in the brief struggle between Burr and Baxter.
Here's a daring casting idea: reverse Burr and Conte. The latter's emotional coldness might have suited "Prebble," and Burr could have exhibited the same combination of solicitude and doggedness as "Mayo" that he later displayed so well as "Perry Mason."
Poe! You are...avenged!
Hi Doghouse,
I agree with all your comments. Ray Burr had real chemistry in his scenes with Baxter and would have been wonderful in the Conte role. He never got a chance to play leading men, but in my opinion, he stole the film and would have been terrific playing the reporter.