Leffingwell disappears about 1 1/2 hours into the film. And at the very end the new President says he would rather appoint his own Secretary of State. Did he mean he was going to appoint Leffingwell??? I didn't get an explanation even from the commentary. What happened to Leffingwell??????
shareYes SPOILERS.....
Just going from memory, it's been over twenty years since I read the books.
"Advise and Consent" was just the first in a series of Washington novels. Leffingwell remains a major character throughout, but chastened and matured by the consequences of his own deceit shown here and the tactics of his "allies". President Harley Hudson redeemed Leffingwell's reputation and credibility with important advisory panel appointments. After Harley's assassination, President Orin Knox appoints him Secretary of Defense.
Right, but in the film, the new President, Harley Hudson, in saying he'd prefer to appoint his own Secretary of State, makes it clear he has no intention of naming Leffingwell.
Constitutionally, Hudson became President (or at least ceased to be Vice President) the moment the President died. Therefore, he was no longer President of the Senate and so could not legally cast a tie-breaking vote for (or against) Leffingwell at the end, after he learns of the President's death. Therefore, if he had wanted Leffingwell as SOS, he would have had to let Leffingwell stand defeated by the tie vote, then resubmitted his name for the office later on. But from his comments it's obvious he's not going to do so.
One point of difference from book to movie.
The Senate is royally p.o.-ed about Brig Anderson and most of them blame the President.
The nomination goes down by a blistering NO vote.
And after that, the President dies, knowing that he lost.
Sam Tomaino
Thank you mousealope, I prefer your explanation. Wonder why they didn't follow the novel for the ending. It would have made thing more clear.
shareThe stage play version of "Advise And Consent" (which for some reason changed Leffingwell's name to "William Huntington") also had a tie vote ending (with Van Ackerman still voting) but in that one Harley casts a tie-breaking no vote.
sharefanaticita,
I think you misunderstand mousealope's explanation. He was speaking about what happens to Leffingwell over the course of several successor books to the original novel, Advise and Consent. He was not referring to what occurs in that novel.
In fact, in so far as that first novel goes, the movie does pretty much follow the book's ending. Leffingwell is defeated -- not in a tie vote, but by around 3-1 -- and then the President dies. There is nothing more about Leffingwell in that book, on which this film is solely based. The film is therefore essentially consistent with what happens to Leffingwell in the novel Advise and Consent. The other books, and what happens to Leffingwell in them, came out later.
So it's not a matter of "preferring" someone's explanation, but understanding it correctly.
[deleted]
In fact, in so far as that first novel goes, the movie does pretty much follow the book's ending. Leffingwell is defeated -- not in a tie vote, but by around 3-1 -- and then the President dies. There is nothing more about Leffingwell in that book, on which this film is solely based. The film is therefore essentially consistent with what happens to Leffingwell in the novel Advise and Consent
Right, Eric, I'd forgotten about the sinecure President Hudson created for Leffingwell in the novel. But that's sort of an incidental coda. The main point in both movie and book is that Leffingwell is defeated.
Actually, I find it interesting that Leffingwell disappears almost from the movie 45 minutes before its end. Henry Fonda was, after all, the nominal star and his character at the center of the movie. It's just a bit odd to see the top star and central character vanish 2/3 of the way through the film. Outside of Janet Leigh, of course.
[deleted]
No, I mean her most famous performance, as the absconding Marion Crane who stops at the Bates Motel about halfway through a little thing called Psycho.
Leigh didn't play Sinatra's wife in The Manchurian Candidate. She was just a girl he met on the train, who decided to hook up with him.
"Actually, I find it interesting that Leffingwell disappears almost from the movie 45 minutes before its end. Henry Fonda was, after all, the nominal star and his character at the center of the movie. It's just a bit odd to see the top star and central character vanish 2/3 of the way through the film. Outside of Janet Leigh, of course."
Well, if you follow the flow of the movie, his character wasn't needed anymore. There was nothing he could really do once the Senate concluded the confirmation hearing. The top billing might just be a marketing ploy. To me, the movie was really an ensemble performance, with Pigeon and Murray as the two main stars.
As for Psycho, I agree with you. Could Leigh also be considered a Mcguffin along with the money?
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
Leigh though didn't have top billing in "Psycho" her name came last as a kind of "special guest star" sort of billing which should have been a tip-off to viewers who wouldn't have understood why her name didn't come first. Hitchcock should have given her top billing and that would have increased the shock level even more.
There is however it seems in the film a gap in the narrative to explain how the President talked Leffingwell out of his desire to withdraw when he confessed to him.
Well, it's true that most of Leffingwell's story had been told by the time Fonda disappears, but even so, it seems some sort of coda is called for. I always thought showing him watching or hearing about his defeat, and reacting to the president's death, would have been fitting -- sitting quietly in his living room, hearing the news on television, reflecting, getting up, turning off the set and walking slowly away...then cut back to the Senate. Just having him disappear without any visible resolution just makes the movie feel somehow incomplete.
shareYeah, I get that. Sort of a bookend to his story. I wonder if they cut any of that. The film running time is about 2:15. Maybe they needed to trim some stuff.
Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade.
A bookend -- yes. I never heard that they cut anything of that sort, but it would be interesting to find out. Movies are always cut before release, and lots of scenes that are shot wind up on the cutting room floor. But I wonder if there's any way of finding anything out at this remove. I've never read of what if anything may have been cut from the original print or script.
share