Who should have played the male lead? - Bell Book and Candle (1958) Discussion

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

(aka ecarle)

I … almost love this film, but not quite, and I think Jimmy Stewart is the problem with it.

---

I agree with you and I think that the movie studios -- and ultimately Jimmy(James) Stewart himself -- agreed as well.

---

I'm actually a big fan of the guy but he's just too old and plain to play the guy who has two beautiful young women chasing after him, his humor doesn't really fit with the film or the subtext, and he doesn't seem to have a clue there IS a subtext.

---

The things working in Stewart's favor in BB and C are the gorgeous art direction and his very stylish "New York City publisher" clothes -- great suits, a stylish winter overcoat, a hat floats off the top of a skyscraper in a great shot.

HIM...not so right for the role for all the reasons you mention. Irony: right below James Stewart, in support(for pretty much the last time AS support) is Jack Lemmon , who would romance Kim Novak for the same director four years later in "The Notorious Landlady" and fit just fine. (That director, Richard Quine, managed to carry on an affair with Novak for a few years, its why she looks so great in her Quine movies -- SHE picked her clothes and make-up. Hitchcock wouldn't allow that on Vertigo.)

That said, I don't thick Jack Lemmon would have been a good lead for BB, C in 1958. So...who else?

---

I know Cary Grant was considered and he would have been much better.

---

Yep. Its a PERFECT Cary Grant role. Basically the same as his suave New Yorker Roger Thornhill in North by Northwest the next year.

Stories are told that Grant WANTED this lead, but Columbia head Harry Cohn and MCA agent Lew Wasserman wanted Stewart in it -- Cohn as a trade off for "Vertigo"(Columbia's Novak was loaned out for that Hitchcock movie), Wasserman to make money off of Stewart he couldn't make with Grant.

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Same for Rock Hudson, I think, I'm not a fan of his in general but he could do light, flirty material like this. Who else?

---

I shift here again to "North by Northwest." Evidently James Stewart wanted the lead in that real bad, but Hitchcock --sensing that Stewart's looks had aged out of romantic leads(and he was YOUNGER than Cary Grant!) wasn't the right guy for that part.

MGM wanted Gregory Peck for North by Northwest. Too serious, thought Hitch. He wanted Grant and he got Grant.

But what if he didn't get Grant?

What indeed -- and this is for North by Northwest -- I'd go with Rock Hudson. Or William Holden. Or maybe Frank Sinatra(NXNW was written with Sinatra in mind by screenwriter Ernest Lehman.) Or maybe Frank's pallie, Dean Martin(star enough yet?) Tony Curtis was cast sometimes in Grant parts, but I think he was too young for the twice-divorced Thornhill.

NOW: shift ALL those guys to Bell, Book, and Candle (Grant first, then Holden, Hudson, Sinatra, and Martin)..and there's your alternate casting.

Meanwhile, back at James Stewart. 1958 found him in two movies the same year -- Vertigo and BB and C -- famously looking too old for Kim Novak and too old to play a romantic lead. From then ON, Stewart played loners(Anatomy of a Murder, Flight of the Phoenix), married husbands and fathers(The FBI Story, Take Her She's Mine) and Westerners. He courted schoolmarmish Vera Miles (Hitchcock's original casting choice for Vertigo) in The FBI Story and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, but those were very prim and proper romances.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Meanwhile: back at Cary Grant. Grant only worked once for Frank Capra, in the way-over-the-top 1944 mystery farce "Arsenic and Old Lace," with a way-over-the-top mugging performance by Grant that he HATED, but I rather like(he screams like Bugs Bunny in one bit.) I found a quote where Grant said: "James Stewart should have played that part." So Grant KNEW that Stewart was alternate casting for him...but in a different way.

In the forties, Grant and Stewart were a bit more similar - two young men, apt at comedy in different ways. Stewart COULD play Grant's romantic comedy role in Arsenic and Old Lace. The both had dark hair.

I'll say this: though Stewart looks gray-haired and too old for Grace Kelly in Rear Window and Kim Novak in Vertigo, there's evidence that a lot of women thought Stewart was hot even then -- the famous voice, the macho rep from Westerns on screen and WWII in real life. Still, 1958 was about the end of the line as a hearttrhob.

And this funny line from the otherwise serious Matthew McConaghey movie "Dallas Buyers Club," someone remarks about Rock Hudson's recent death from AIDS: "You know -- Rock Hudson -- he was in North by Northwest."

reply

[–] Otter (24464) a year ago

Yeah, we all knew you were ecarl, your style is unmistakable. Why the name change?

Anyway, out of the possible alternate casting, Cary Grant would have been great! He would have been a great fit for the subversive humor and style. Tony Curtis... NO. Most of his 1960s comedy work was as shallow as a pond, and while he was handsome, he wasn't stylish or subtle. Jack Lemmon was better cast in the supporting role he had, for all his talent and subtlety, he just wasn't the kind of guy who gorgeous women fight over.

But you know, the more I think about Rock Hudson, the more I like him as an imaginary recast! He was tall and handsome, definitely the sort of man that women would compete for (for all the good it'd do them), and good with light material. But I like him because he would have grasped all the lightly subversive subtexts - especially the gay coding! Oh yeah, Rock Hudson would have brought his light touch to the role, but more than that, he'd have enjoyed the heck out of his role, a role that Stewart found an awkward fit.

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Yeah, we all knew you were ecarl, your style is unmistakable. Why the name change?

---

I didn't change it on purpose, and I don't like it. It has proved confusing. Bottom line: I bought a new computer and its programming is such that I couldn't sign in as ecarle anymore. Except from my cell phone. So I send out "teeny tiny" posts from my cell phone(typed with my thumb) as ecarle, and longer form as Roger1. I will keep trying to get ecarle back.

Not everyone knows its me. Its not a sock puppet...I was allowed back in. I announce my ecarle credentials to identify myself...and to allow those who wish to ignore me in the new name to do so. Hah.

---

Anyway, out of the possible alternate casting, Cary Grant would have been great! He would have been a great fit for the subversive humor and style.

---

The role practically cries out for Cary Grant which makes James Stewart's every scene "wrong." Stewart was obviously a major star, too -- one of the biggest male stars of the 50's --- but there came a point where even Jimmy knew he shouldn't be doing too much "heaving necking and nuzzling" in romantic scenes.

When I read -- with a grain of salt, of course -- in a Grant biography that not only did Grant WANT Bell Book and Candle, but he took action when he didn't get it --it further bugged me.

---

Tony Curtis... NO. Most of his 1960s comedy work was as shallow as a pond, and while he was handsome, he wasn't stylish or subtle.

---

Well, first of all -- even though I named him as a possibility -- Tony Curtis was probably too young for BB and C at the time. Truth be told, I do believe that in the early 60's as he matured, Curtis sometimes took roles that were offered to Grant first. Curtis was on the "handsome suave comic actor list."

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Alas for him, Tony Curtis's run as a top star was fairly short lived. The 50's and the early/middle 60's. By the 70's, he did a few movies but moved to TV roles. Actually, with the coming of all the "New Hollywood" young male actors in the 70's(Redford, Nicholson, Reynolds, Eastwood..) a LOT of 50's/60s male stars got sent off to TV: Tony Curtis, Rock Hudson, Kirk Douglas(mini-series)..and one I forgot: Glenn Ford.

People forget Glenn Ford. He was one of the biggest stars of the 50's, and seems like the "forgotten leading man" of that era. Grant and Stewart and Hudson and Wllliam Holden(VERY big) are remembered, but Glenn Ford was very bankable. He did a lot of Westerns(he's the tough cattle drive boss mentoring Jack Lemmon's Tinhorn in "Cowboy" from the same year and studio as BB and C.) BUT Glenn Ford also tried a few suave "Cary Grant type" roles where the ladies chased him -- like "The Courtship of Eddie's Father." (1963.)

Ford was almost a cross between James Stewart and Cary Grant. He had that odd, apologetic way of talking, kind of shy.

And consequently, if Cary Grant did't get BB and C...I might give the role to Glenn Ford before James Stewart.

But wait, there's more...

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Jack Lemmon was better cast in the supporting role he had,

---

Its interesting seeing how Jack Lemmon is clearly in a support role in BB and C...but pretty much ready for stardom. It came the very next year, with his "co-lead"(opposite Tony Curtis doing a Cary Grant imitation!) in Some Like It Hot. Lemmon got a Best Actor nom for that, and then got one the next year for The Apartment...and he was now a leading man. But NOT right for the type of leading man in BB anc C.

---

for all his talent and subtlety, he just wasn't the kind of guy who gorgeous women fight over.

---

Nope. Lemmon was handsome enough, but realized he had to play out his career as somewhat of a nebbish who gets the girl almost out of pity(see: The Apartment.) By the time he played Felix Unger in The Odd Couple, he pretty much sacrificed leading man-hood for nebbish-hood.

---

But you know, the more I think about Rock Hudson, the more I like him as an imaginary recast!

---

Something interesting about Rock Hudson(as I understsand it) is that he might not have FIT Bell Book and Candle in 1958...because he needed "Pillow Talk" with Doris Day in 1959 to "change his image" into a suave comic romantic leading man in the Cary Grant tradition. Prior to that he'd been in Universal-International tearjerkers and in a major serious role in "Giant" but...not known for comedy.

Still, he proved his comic chops in Pillow Talk...he'd probably have proven them in BB and C, too.

--

He was tall and handsome, definitely the sort of man that women would compete for (for all the good it'd do them),

---

Well, in real life...but on the screen, he could get all the women he needed

---

and good with light material.

---

Yes, but again. evidently only AFTER Pillow Talk established him for comedy. Doris then used him again in Lover Come Back and Send Me No Flowers(where the strapping Hudson is truly hilarious as a nebbish hypochondriac who mistakenly things he is terminal.)

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

But I like him because he would have grasped all the lightly subversive subtexts - especially the gay coding!

---

Its my understanding that the witches and warlocks of BB and C, with their "underground nightclub" were indeed gay coded for 1958 Add Rock Hudson into that mix, and I supposed we'd have a real cinematic study in "the hidden life" of the era. It always seemed to me, growing up, that Hudson's hidden reality wasn't all that hidden -- everybody knew about it eventually -- but he kept mastering those manly romantic roles.

Note in passing: Rock Hudson is very funny in Howard Hawks romantic comedy "Man's Favorite Sport?" of 1964, opposite a sparkling, funny and sexy Paula Prentiss. The role was first accepted by Cary Grant, but he backed out. Hudson was a fine substitute for Grant, and I think he could have done BB and C OR North by Northwest, accordingly.

---

Oh yeah, Rock Hudson would have brought his light touch to the role, but more than that, he'd have enjoyed the heck out of his role, a role that Stewart found an awkward fit.

---

That's key: Stewart looks UNCOMFORTABLE in the role, start to finish, as if he knows its wrong for him.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) a year ago

Well, glad to have you around, whatever name you use!

And yeah, Stewart is like Humphrey Bogart in "Sabrina", trying his best in a role that was made for a Cary Grant, and knowing he's not Cary Grant. Grant would have knocked the role out of the park, and Rock Hudson could have been a perfect fit if he'd had a shot, and I think those are the only two actors of that era who would have been right. Tell me more about Cary Grant not getting the role, and being angry about not getting it, I hadn't heard that before!

As for Glenn Ford, and Rod Taylor (someone else brought him up), honestly, I've never found either of them either attractive or interesting. William Holden was in the same mold but a better actor, but nobody with that perma-worried face should ever do comedy! Hell, Dean Martin would have been better, the late 1950s was the period when he proved he could actually act when he wanted to, and it was before he fell into a pattern of 1960s sex comedies and stopped trying to act at all. He was actually handsome, funny, and charming in those days, and might have been decent in the role if they couldn't get anyone better. And he might have been better than Stewart, not that the role was meant for anyone but Grant. Or Hudson.

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

And yeah, Stewart is like Humphrey Bogart in "Sabrina", trying his best in a role that was made for a Cary Grant, and knowing he's not Cary Grant.

---

As I think I mentioned upthread, when Gregory Peck did Arabesque in a movie first pitched to Grant, Peck kept apologetically saying to the director, "sorry, I"m not Cary Grant." Grant's shadow loomed over men trying to take on his roles.

One actor actually took on a Cary Grant type role as a challenge, to see if he could change his own image. It was Kirk Douglas in a 1963 film called "For Love or Money." The whole movie is the usual smooth romantic comedy that Grant would have done and as I recall Douglas was fine in his nice suits and romancing women, but Douglas himself felt it was an experiment that failed.

---

Grant would have knocked the role out of the park, and Rock Hudson could have been a perfect fit if he'd had a shot, and I think those are the only two actors of that era who would have been right.

---

The only two? Well, that's good and precise. I'm reminded that in the 50's, 5 of Alfred Hitchcock's leading men in 10 years of movies were -- Cary Grant and James Stewart. It was as if Hitch felt that most times with his movies , it had to be Cary or Jimmy, nobody else.

In the 50's, Grant did 2 Hitchcock movies(To Catch a Thief and North by Northwest) and Stewart did 3(Rear Window, The Man Who Knew Too Much and Vertigo.) Intersting to me: Grant could have played Stewart's roles, but I don't think Stewart could have played Grant's roles. For instance, Grant does a long scene in To Catch a Thief in swim trunks outdoors, showing off his tan, fit torso. Stewart shows HIS torso for about 6 seconds in Rear Window(taking off his pajama top for a rubdown) and...he has the body of a 70 year old man, with chicken skin.) Grant did suave, Stewart COULD romance Grace Kelly, Kim Novak(and a rather matronly Doris Day) but it took more effort to believe.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Hitchcock also worked with Montgomery Clift(as a priest in I Confess) and Henry Fonda in The Wrong Man -- those roles would not have worked with Stewart or Grant.

Hitchcock tried to get William Holden for 2 movies in the 50's: Strangers on a Train(Farley Granger took the part) and The Trouble With Harry(John Forsythe got the part) . Perhaps had Hitchcock pitched Holden one of his "bigger" movies -- like Rear Window -- he could have landed him. That said, Stewart's leads in Rear Window and Vertigo were strange, weak, almost cowardly men and its hard to picture Holden taking those roles.

Meanwhile, Billy Wilder tried to get Cary Grant four times -- The Major and the Minor, Sabrina, Love in the Afternoon and One Two Three -- and always failed. But Wilder COULD get William Holden. An interesting trade off : Hitchcock and Grant; Wilder and Holden, but not crossover.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Tell me more about Cary Grant not getting the role, and being angry about not getting it, I hadn't heard that before!

---

I got this from about five books and articles, I can't find them right now.

The starting point is that Kim Novak was on contract to Columbia and Columbia boss Harry Cohn had to agree to loan Novak out to Paramount for Vertigo. He did after reading the script saying "Its a lousy script, but its Hitchcock. You've got to do it."

To get the trade of Novak to Paramount, it was agreed that James Stewart would do a Columbia Picture. It just so happened that Bell Book and Candle was in pre-production, so Stewart was slotted in.

However, evidently Cary Grant was making inquiries to get Bell, Book and Candle for himself, and the "final referee" was Lew Wasserman, Stewart's agent(but not Grants') and Wasserman evidently figured he would "earn" off of Stewart but not Grant, so he protected Stewart's deal. And evidently this angered Grant (who KNEW he was better for the part than Stewart)-- but Grant would work for Wasserman at Universal a few times, so I don't see that Grant really did anything in revenge. Just stewed.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

As for Glenn Ford, and Rod Taylor (someone else brought him up), honestly, I've never found either of them either attractive or interesting. William Holden was in the same mold but a better actor, but nobody with that perma-worried face should ever do comedy!

---

I've always liked the concept of "comparing male actors" OF an era, from era to era.

For instance, in the 90's while promoting Armageddon, Bruce Willis said "I have a license to save the world -- there's about 7 of us guys in Hollywood who do," and you could instantly think, "oh, he means Arnold and Sly and Mel and Harrison...and maybe Clint...and possibly Kevin," but Willis himself knew -- there are always several actors available a given part, but they are not interchangeable nor necessarily at the right level of stardom to cast.

So back to Bell, Book and Candle in 1957 (for 1958 release.) Grant and Stewart were bankable and top stars. Tony Curtis was too young for the part(also evidently given no support here), Rod Taylor wasn't even a "Second Tier" star yet.

Glenn Ford WAS big in 1958. I recall musing one time: "How come Hitchcock never used Glenn Ford in the 50's?" and I suppose Hitchocck simply didn't see Ford as weighty enough to anchor a Hitchcock film.

---

Hell, Dean Martin would have been better, the late 1950s was the period when he proved he could actually act when he wanted to, and it was before he fell into a pattern of 1960s sex comedies and stopped trying to act at all.

--

I read a bio on Dean Martin and there was one specific movie that ended his "serious" period: Toys in the Attic of 1963. It was from a "serious" Broadway play and "serious" critics massacred Dino in the part ie "He has no business acting in an important film like this." Dino took those reviews personally and decided: that's it, that's all, I'm not workin' serious no more.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Dino proceeded to become one of the richest singer/movie stars in Hollywood and bought up 1/3 of California land, it seemed. The combo package of his TV series(a Number One hit and he barely had to show up to do it), movies, and Vegas made him rich. And the one "semi-serious" movie he took after Toys in the Attic -- "Airport" of 1970, was a huge hit and made him richer still.

--

(Dino) was actually handsome, funny, and charming in those days, and might have been decent in the role if they couldn't get anyone better. And he might have been better than Stewart, not that the role was meant for anyone but Grant. Or Hudson.

--

I mused on Dean Martin for North by Northwest once (he was great in Rio Bravo that year of 1959) and decided, no, it was just too early for him, he had not secured the long term stardom of Cary Grant and he had not quite matured into his looks.

He DID mature by the time of his 60's TV series -- he was one handsome and cool son of a gun on that show -- but almost simultaneously lost interest in acting at any serious level. His pallie Frank Sinatra took movies more seriously in the 60's, but not for very long, and soon HIS movie stardom was over.

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

As for Glenn Ford, and Rod Taylor (someone else brought him up), honestly, I've never found either of them either attractive or interesting.

---

A little bit more on this.

I read screenwriter William Goldman's book about movies and he wrote about a pre-meeting for a movie called Harper(1966) starring Paul Newman and how Newman was late and making everybody wait at a minute, and one agent said:

"OK. We'll wait. But remember, he'll be Glenn Ford in a few years." Goldman noted how mean the statement was about Ford(fading en route to TV series) and how mean it was about Newman's FUTURE (the agent was wrong.) Goldman added: "and the agent who said this was NEWMAN'S GUY.") Hollywood can be tough.

Meanwhile: I confess. I really liked Rod Taylor as a star in the 60's when I was growing up, and I knew of some "mom level women" in the neighborhood who felt that Taylor and Steve McQueen were the sexiest men in movies then.

But..it just never "took" for Taylor. He spent the 60's as a 'second tier" lead and was back to TV by 1971("Wildcats.") I've read that Taylor kept losing parts to bigger stars: he lost James Bond, he lost Dr. Zhivago, he lost Planet of the Apes, he even lost a role with pal John Wayne (in The War Wagon) to Kirk Douglas(Wayne used Taylor later in the 70's when he was kinda over: The Train Robbers.)

Still, we have a handful of classics and/or well known movies on the Rod Taylor resume, and as he himself noted while still alive, he became quite the star all over again when his movies hit Turner Classic Movies in the 90s (they called the Australian born actor "The Mel Gibson of the 60's," and they looked a bit alike.)

Recommended from Rod: The Time Machine and The Birds(his two classics) but also: Sunday in New York, Hotel, Chuka(a tough Western), Dark of the Sun(an ultra-violent mercenary movie loved by Tarantino) and Darker than Amber( a Travis McGee movie with a great fight scene between Taylor and Big William Smith.)

reply

[–] Lily Magnum (264) a year ago

Jimmy Stewart. It's one of my favorites and I think the "miscast" narrative is overblown. However, Grant would have been good, but he was even older than Stewart. It's a hard no on Hudson and Holden. Sinatra wouldn't be right either. Dean Martin was hot, but he was 40 already by 1958. Gregory Peck might be a possibility, but did he ever do a light romance? Roman Holiday is technically a rom-com, but it's really pretty serious. Rod Taylor would have been good because he was ruggedly handsome and always looked good in the tailored fashions of that time, but he was only 28 and still pretty unknown.

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Jimmy Stewart. It's one of my favorites and I think the "miscast" narrative is overblown.

---

Whenever the "Jimmy Stewart was miscast in Bell Book and Candle" argument comes out, I am personally intrigued to see a rebuttal and...OK, there you go. We all see characters in different ways.

---

However, Grant would have been good, but he was even older than Stewart.

---

Yes, Grant was older than Stewart but around 1958, Stewart looked older than Grant. Some have written that Stewart's WWII experiences(as a miltary leader sending fliers in planes out to die) prematurely aged Stewart. Still, I know the ladies liked Stewart for his "sexy" drawl, blue eyes, laid back manly manner, etc.

I think maybe Stewart fit his 50s Hitchcock roles better than Bell, Book and Candle: the rugged world photographer in Rear Window, a doctor and father in The Man Who Knew Too Much, even against Novak in Vertigo because the movie emphasized his age and fears.

---
It's a hard no on Hudson and Holden. Sinatra wouldn't be right either.

--

Well, thats a clean sweep! I added Glenn Ford -- a top 50's star -- to the possibles. Thoughts?

---

Dean Martin was hot, but he was 40 already by 1958.

---

Martin struggled a bit trying to establish himself after Jerry Lewis, but in 1958-1960, he proved his acting chops AND his leading man status in The Young Lions, Rio Bravo and Ocean's 11(where he's the coolest guy on the team.) So MAYBE he would have fit here. He was a big star in movies in the early 60's, but shifted to TV stardom and bad movies in the main.

---

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Gregory Peck might be a possibility, but did he ever do a light romance? Roman Holiday is technically a rom-com, but it's really pretty serious.

---

Oh, Designing Woman, maybe -- I think Humphrey Bogart was supposed to do that with wife Lauren Bacall, but Bogart died, so Peck did it with Bacall. Before that casting, they were going to try to bring Princess Grace Kelly back ...with Cary Grant.

Peck just lacked that light touch playing a role Cary Grant turned down in "Arabesque," Peck kept telling the director, "sorry, I'm not Cary Grant." Yep. But he was fine in the roles that fit him: To Kill a Mockinbird, The Guns of Navarone.

---

Rod Taylor would have been good because he was ruggedly handsome and always looked good in the tailored fashions of that time, but he was only 28 and still pretty unknown.

---

Yes..Rod Taylor(an unsung favorite of mine) didn't really achieve stardom til the 60's, and only had it FOR the 60s. Doris Day used him in "the Rock Hudson role" in two films, and he's suave in a movie called "Hotel," but he also went for rugged, violent action roles.

Put BB and C into 1964 or so...and Rod Taylor would be a fine choice.

When you think about it, James Stewart was perhaps too unique an actor to "fit" standard romantic roles. His Westerns show a great deal of buried rage; his Hitchcock thrillers showed a great deal of human weakness. He was a major, great actor. Cary Grant said of Stewart when Brando hit big: "We already have our Marlon Brando. He's James Stewart."

reply

[–] Lily Magnum (264) a year ago

"Well, thats a clean sweep! I added Glenn Ford -- a top 50's star -- to the possibles. Thoughts?"

Hmm..I usually think of him as a "westerns" actor, but he might have worked. He doesn't really do it for me in the looks department, though.

Gary Cooper would have been perfect in his younger days, but he was 57 by then. He's still one the sexiest "movie stars" ever. Peter O'Toole could have done Shep justice, but he was too young and unknown in the US. Sean Connery was about to become a huge star and he could have been good, but he was also too young and unknown.

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

"Well, thats a clean sweep! I added Glenn Ford -- a top 50's star -- to the possibles. Thoughts?"

Hmm..I usually think of him as a "westerns" actor, but he might have worked. He doesn't really do it for me in the looks department, though.

---

Its funny. Whenever discussing film stars of the 50s, I tend to focus on such "majors" as James Stewart, Cary Grant, Henry Fonda, and William Holden(who got first dibs on all scripts, I think I read somewhere.) John Wayne was big in the 50's, but got BIGGER in the 60s.

But I remember reading one time that Glenn Ford was a BIG star in the 50s and this is perhaps the first time I've offered him up for consideration.

It didn't work. On the Western thing, it has been noted that in the 60s, even as John Wayne was a Number One star, guys like Glenn Ford, Henry Fonda, Richard Widmark, Kirk Douglas were kind of "put out to pasture in Westerns." William Holden was, too(Alvarez Kelly) but the hip, ultra-violent Wild Bunch rescued him.

---

Gary Cooper would have been perfect in his younger days, but he was 57 by then.

---

And as the movie "Love in the Afternoon" proved(where director Billy Wilder often put him in shadow opposite young Audrey Hepburn)...he was an OLD 57.

While some actors got old and retired(James Cagney, Cary Grant) some flat out DIED in the late fifties/early sixties: Tyrone Power(while filming a swordfight scene), Clark Gable(1960), Gary Cooper(1961) and later, Spencer Tracy(1967.)

(Cooper) He's still one the sexiest "movie stars" ever.

---

Oh, yeah, in his prime Cooper had it all: tall, strapping, handsome, quielty well spoken.

---

CONT

reply

[–] roger1 (3626) a year ago

Peter O'Toole could have done Shep justice, but he was too young and unknown in the US. Sean Connery was about to become a huge star and he could have been good, but he was also too young and unknown.

--

This "movie star business" for men (here) is a tricky business. James Stewart and Gary Cooper: "too old." O'Toole and Connery -- not only "too young," but NOT STARS YET when BB and C was made. Meanwhile, Rod Taylor probably never hit the A list where he could topline this movie. He worked in lesser films as a star, or supported other stars.

Back to Glenn Ford: famous director of the 30's Frank Capra made his final film just as the 60's began: "Pocketful of MIracles."(1961). In his autobio, Capra claimed that the star of that movie, Glenn Ford drove him nuts. Capra suggested that Ford drove him to retirement , but actually Capra was fired off of later films(Circus Wordl with John Wayne, The Best Man) and never worked again. (No matter, his 30s and 40s classics lived on.)

Anyway, Capra noted that he offered the lead(30's gambler/gangster "Dave the Dude") to Sinatra and then Dino , but got turned down. He wanted young Steve McQueen...but the studio didn't find McQueen big enough yet.

So Capra ended up with Glenn Ford, whom Capra declared "a garden variety star" and went nuts. Ford's girlfriend Hope Lange replaced new Oscar winner Shirley Jones. Bette Davis switched in for Helen Hayes as "Apple Annie" the old hag with a heart of gold. Capra was famous for fibbing, I don't know if Ford is REALLY why the co-stars changed, but Capra's indictment of Glenn ford as "a garden variety star" always stung to me.

reply

[–] Shannon82 (56) a year ago

Who should have played the lead?
Jimmy Stewart. Shep is supposed to be older, sophisticated, professional, stable and ordinary. Both the fiancee and Gillian are looking for just that, for different reasons. Jimmy Stewart is handsome, though, particularly in a suit. And neither women are immature school girls, appearing older than they probably are.

Cary Grant often played the handsome, charming man caught in a net, of some sort, using charm, with and humor. It would have been routine. Jimmy Stewart has a gentlemanly quality; even tempered, polite, rational. So, when he is confused or angry, it's memorial and appropriate. He fumbles, or the eyebrows flair. There's a noticeable change, and it's genuine.

Finally, when he holds and kisses Gillian, there is sincere warmth and passion. You know why Gillian fell in love with Shep.

reply

[–] Foster (878) a year ago

Uhhh He's got money that's usually reason enough

reply