MovieChat Forums > The Music Man (1962) Discussion > Elmer Gantry vs. The Music Man

Elmer Gantry vs. The Music Man

posted 16 years ago by schappe1
34 replies | jump to latest

In the documentary that goes with the DVD, Shirley Jones said she was offered the role of Marian Paroo while she was making Elmer Gantry "a very different film". He roles in the two films were certainly different but were the films really different, except in style and tone? Both are about con men who try to exploit people's ability to believe in things, only to find the situation more complicated than they realize. Both films in the end puncture illusions but retain a respect for people's ability to believe in things.

I'm not saying it would have worked out as well. but I can easily see Robert Preston playing Elmer Gantry and Burt Lancaster playing Harold Hill. It might have been interesting to see the same actor play both roles to compare and contrast the takes the films have on America and the nature of faith.

[–] DryToast 16 years ago

Very interesting comparison. Lancaster's character in The Rainmaker is also very similar.

I've been married to one Marxist and one Fascist, and neither one would take the garbage out.

[–] mikwalen 16 years ago

You know, I was thinking of posting a similar comment. After seeing ELMER, I thought Lancaster would have made a great Harold!

"Samantha! You picked a lemon in the garden of love!"

[–] schappe1 16 years ago

...after I made my post. The problem with Lancaster as The Music Man is that he comes on a bit strong. Preston has a softer touch- a bit more charm- and it works for the musical. I can see Preston as Gantry more than I can see Lancaster as Hill.

[–] schappe1 16 years ago

Lulu Bains, (the character Shirley Jones played in Elmer Gantry), and Marian Paroo have one this in common: they are both cynics who try to "take down" the con man and come to regret trying to do so. Lulu succeeds, Marian does not and is glad for it.

[–] mikwalen 16 years ago

I'm about to play Harold in my church's production, and I was considering Burt Lancaster's performance in Gantry while I was piecing together my characterization. It's a real problem to *NOT* imitate Bob Preston!....however, I think I finally managed to come up with an interpretation that seems to work without being an imitation!

"Samantha! You picked a lemon in the garden of love!"

[–] starline 16 years ago

I'm glad it worked out the way it did...because I adore Robert Preston in the Music Man and never tire of seeing him or the film... but I have never particularly liked Elmer Gantry...or even been much of a fan of Burt Lancaster's...(although I did like some of his work).

Has anyone ever seen Steve Martin in Leap of Faith... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104695/
He's very entertaining...singing and conning...lol He would make a good current Music Man... surely better than Matthew Broderick's weak attempt.

[–] mariahfan-1 15 years ago

I like both films but to me Prof. Hill is more of a gentle con man Than Gantry is and Preston has better Chemestry with Shirley Jones than Lancaster does

"why are you married to him then if you can't work with him how do you live with him?"

[–] rekcilorf 15 years ago

This is an interesting idea. However, in the end, Hill shows some sign of redemption and repentence for his past, while Gantry does not. At the end, Gantry is just as cynical as he was at the start. His "love" for Sarah was only to get her into bed (it's a bit unclear if he did but I kind of suspect that he did). Hill at the end seems that he genuinely cares for Marion and Winthrop and maybe will make amends. (Or, maybe not, but I can be a bit of a romantic at times). But Music Man concludes on a upbeat note while Gantry does not.
Both, in their way, are fine moives, but the parallels just don't hold up for me!

[–] lmchildress 15 years ago

Same idea played as comedy and drama? Interesting... I have never seen EG. I will have to now, in light of all this.

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

One HUGE problem with Lancaster trying to play "The Music Man." Burt cannot sing or dance. He would have been a disaster.

[–] joeparkson 14 years ago

One HUGE problem with Lancaster trying to play "The Music Man." Burt cannot sing or dance. He would have been a disaster.
____________________________________________________________________________

Lancaster could sing. Have you seen "Elmer Gantry"? at the start, Gantry gets off a train and walks into a black church where they're singing a rousing spriritual. They all stop singing when they see a white guy. Gantry then starts singing the song by himself with gusto, and gradually they all sing with him. It's a great scene.

Lancaster was a superb athlete. He could easily have learned complex dances.

Absurdity: A Statement or belief inconsistent with my opinion.

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

Yes, I saw Burt in Gantry, and worse in a thing on stage called "Knickerbocker Holiday," and Burt could NOT sing or dance. Lancaster was an athlete, but a dancer he wasn't, and his voice was god-awful. Plus, he would have been too old for the role being 48 at the time of filming, and Harold Hill was supposed to be around 40. Robert Preston was perfectly cast. Meredith Willson would not do the film unless Preston was in it...thank God.

[–] dmnemaine 14 years ago

Robert Preston was actually only just under 5 years younger than Burt Lancaster, so there really was not much of an age difference between the two. Age-wise, there would have been no difficulty in Burt Lancaster playing the role, but I think he would have been miscast as Harold Hill for other reasons.

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

You are right dmn, Lancaster would have been miscast, period, for MANY reasons. After seeing that stage turkey with him, "Knickerbocker Holiday," it was quite clear that Burt could neither sing nor dance, and seemed quite out of place in a musical. Also, having seen him and Jones in "Elmer Gantry," though beautifully acted, and they both got Oscars for it, I did not feel that they had enough chemistry, sexual or otherwise, to be effective as Harold and Marian. On the contrary Preston had tremendous chemistry in all ways with Jones. And he was sexy in a way Lancaster never could be as Harold Hill. Pres WAS Harold Hill, Lancaster would have just been "acting" the part.

[–] dmnemaine 14 years ago

The stage version of Knickerbocker Holiday that you saw must have been a revival or something because the original was in the 1930s and starred Walter Huston. It has a very beautiful score by Kurt Weill with "It Never Was You" and "September Song" as the standouts.

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

It WAS a revival, and Lancaster was TERRIBLE. People were walking out. Could you imagine him as Harold Hill? God forbid, but then Warner was thinking of Frank Sinatra for the part, lol. Could you see hipster Frank in a band uniform? Warner then BEGGED Cary Grant no less to take the part, and the wily Cary turned it down thank God, saying something about if Preston didn't play the part he would not even go see the movie. Meredith Willson owned the rights and basically said, "no Preston, no movie." Gotta love Willson, the KING of Iowa Stubborness.

[–] dmnemaine 14 years ago

Actually the Cary Grant story was with "My Fair Lady", and Jack Warner wanting him to play Henry Higgins, but I agree with your sentiments.:)

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

It was BOTH "The Music Man," AND "My Fair Lady," and Cary's response was the same for both flicks. Unlike most performers, I don't think Cary took himself too serously, or had delusions of grandeur about his talents. He knew he would be horrible in BOTH movies, and was honest about it. And Willson would have vetoed it anyway.

[–] dmnemaine 14 years ago

Actually, I can see Cary Grant as Henry Higgins quite easily. he would have been a very good choice for the role if Rex Harrison had turned it down.

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

Yes, Cary WOULD have been a good Higgins, and he was ALWAYS wonderful with Audrey, who was HORRIBLY miscast and dubbed. But Cary would have been a godawful Harold Hill, being 31 years older than Shirley, and with that English accent, lol. Harold was supposed to be much older than Marian, but not 30 years, lol. Maybe about 15.....

[–] schappe1 14 years ago

...would certainly have been better than Lancaster or Grant in The Music Man. But I think you are over-using the word "HORRIBLE". Lancaster could have played Harold Hill but poorly. Preston would have been interesting as Elmer Gantry but not as powerful as Lancaster.

My main point is that there are similarities in the stories and roles and it would be interesting to see the same actor play both. With both films haivng been made into movies and The Music Man having been more recently done on TV, perhaps it is something that could be done on stage. Kevin Spacey might be an interesting choice.

[–] clore_2 13 years ago

The Internet Broadway DataBase has Preston as being born in 1913 also, just like Burt Lancaster. I've always thought that Preston's reported 1918 birth year was somewhat a stretch as I've seen his first film, the 1938 King of Alcatraz and he looks a bit older than 20 there and older than 21 in Union Pacific or Beau Geste.

It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

The bottom line on "The Music Man" is that Lancaster COULD NOT SING OR DANCE, which would have ruined the film. He is NOT genteel in ANY way, and too "New Yorkish." He was perfect for "Gantry," but would have been a disaster as Harold Hill. On the other hand, Preston would have been excellent as "Gantry" and could have easily handled the role.. but he would have NEVER been as good as Lancaster in that part.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

And of course there was Burt Lancaster's scary, scary hair to contend with... *shudder* ;D

OHMYGOD, how true, and the audience would have been freaked out by Lancaster's unruly locks. I believe Willson, especially in the movie novelization, made a big deal of Harold's gorgeous curly hair. Preston had GREAT hair. Women wanted to run their fingers through his rich, curly, chestnut brown hair, lol. I have yet to come across a woman who wanted to run her fingers through LANCASTER'S awful mop.

All joking aside, I do wonder what would happen if the characters of Harold Hill and Elmer Gantry happened to cross paths somewhere... bet that would be an interesting meeting!

Yep, interesting to say the least. They would have compared conquests, with Harold coming out on top with sheer numbers. It's hard to beat the seduction of 102 piano teachers in as many Illinois counties, plus girlfriends in all of them, too. Also, I think Harold would be a little bit too genteel for Elmer's taste. I don't think he would seduce Marian on the alter of a church, lol. He would think Elmer was tacky, and horror of horrors, poorly dressed.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

Heh heh - I wonder if Harold Hill really "took it away" from 102 piano teachers in Illinois, or that was just the jealous and petulant Charlie Cowell exaggerating in order to hurt Marian as much as possible. Even for a man of Harold's reputation, that seems a tad much. But of course, there is no doubt he certainly got around! :D

Hah, I'll just BET he "took it away" from ALL the 102 piano teachers in Illinois. What woman on earth could resist Harold Hill in that gorgeous white suit, and on the footbridge, no less? Preston was to die for in that outfit. And. Willson made it clear, in the play, movie, and novelization, that Harold's sexual skill was unmatched, and that EVERYBODY enjoyed it, including the 102 piano teachers in Illinois, lol. He was not just after his own pleasure, but giving it to all of the ladies, too. Casanova would be envious!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

Dear God Gregory Peck as Harold Hill. ROTFLMAO!!! Too much of a beautiful matinee idol. Harold Hill was a RUGGED sexy guy, not a wooden, limited actor like Peck who could also not sing or dance. It was all he could do not to trip over his feet.

Your mother and aunt have got to get with the program, or else they will be drawn and quartered. This is fantasy, not real life, and on top of it, musical comedy. My parents, which included my Iowa born and raised mother, saw the original "Music Man" production in New York in 1957. And WHAT a SCENE it was, never seen in a Broadway play before or since. They said the audience was literally SCREAMING during the numbers, and completely lost it during 76 Trombones. Preston brought down the house, and the crowd began to roar, and march around the theatre, probably thinking they were in the band, just like the parents were onstage. Women AND men were swooning and sighing during the footbridge scene, and were ROARING with laughter at the end, when that loopy Mrs. Hix yelled out, "THAT'S MY BARNEY," making people in the audience again, LITERALLY fall off their chairs laughing. To top it off, women were practically charging the stage, trying to get at Preston... not that I blame them. Mother came home laughing hysterically, saying that "The Music Man" thoroughly captured small town Iowa, of 1912. And she should know, as she was brought up in a very small town in Iowa, similar to River City.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thehair100 14 years ago

Well, it was, and if you can imagine an audience of high-brow Broadway types, screaming during the songs, and marching around in the aisles, you would be in heaven. I now have the movie on DVD, and everytime I screen it, I start marching around the room, thinking I am one of the 76 Trombones, lol. I also got to see Preston and Mary Martin in "I Do I Do," for which Preston won his second Tony, the first being for "The Music Man" of course, and it was sensational. I can't believe Mary didn't win a Tony for that, too. "Ben" was supposed to be excellent, even though Preston was having an affair with his leading lady.. who went back to her husband after the run of the play was over, lol. He had had another affair with Glynis Johns just prior to "Ben" and she left to do a TV series in Hollywood. Plus, a long-running affair with Peggy Lee, no less. And a wife at the same time, as all of this. WHOA!!!! Harold Hill would be envious!

[–] schappe1 13 years ago

but not because he was a "wooden., limited actor", which he certainly wasn't. He just exuded too much integrity, (although that might help a real con-man). His style was a bit too slow-loving and laconic, more in the Jimmy Stewart/Henry Fonda mode.

And again the point here is not really comparing performers but stories. Shirley Jones said that "Elmer Gantry" was "very different" from "The Music Man" and it was, but not a different as she thought it was. It would make an interesting double for the same actor, if they wanted to try something like that on stage- go from drama to comedy on alternating nights. Things like that have been done before.

The past is a series of presents. The present is living history we are privileged to witness

[–] clore_2 13 years ago

I recently posted on the TCM message boards when someone said that no one else but Lancaster could have played Gantry that Robert Preston could have done it. I was told "no way, the role called for a big, athletic type" to which I responded "you mean like Pat Hingle?"

Hingle was originally scheduled to play Gantry.

As Dry Toast later mentions in this thread, The Rainmaker is another that falls into this type of character.

It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]