On the Subject of Ingrid Bergman

If you've been reading my blog for a while yet, it's probably no news to you when I say that I love plenty of actresses. I'm always discovering new favorites, altering my list, and forever trying to emulate these ladies because there's a part of me that aspires to be a little bit like each of them. My favorite, far and away (thus this should give you a idea of how much she means to me), is, obviously, Lucille Ball. But after that it's hard for me to rank them in a chronological order. It's like trying to pick between your children, okay?

However, if I really had to pick a second favorite, it would probably be the lady I'm writing about today: Ingrid Bergman.

Today would be her 97th birthday - and it is also the 30th anniversary of her death. It's exactly what it means; she died on her birthday. I think it would be pretty terrible to die on your own birthday (and, alas, there's only one day to celebrate Ingrid rather than two), but all the while, it seems quite neat and particular and special - so it's no wonder it happened to Ingrid. Isabella Rossellini thinks it was "just like Mama to die on her birthday" because she was "very orderly, and it was a tidy thing to do."

There are so many things I love about Ingrid, I wouldn't even know where to begin to tell you. I believe I have seen more movies of hers than any other actress (as so many of Lucy's B movies are hard to find). I'm in awe of her as an actress, and respect her as a human being. So here's a post to celebrate my second favorite star on the occasion of her birthday - and the anniversary of her death. It's cliche, and you saw it coming, but how can I not say it? Here's looking at you, kid.

Happy birthday, Ingrid

[ and rest in peace! ]

Inspirational - because I have learned quite a few things from Ingrid and the way she lived her life. For one, there is the passion for her occupation and how much she genuinely enjoyed her work. "If you took acting away from me, I'd stop breathing!" she once declared, and I'm pretty sure she would have. And for another, she lived honestly, always, with no regrets, and I'd like to be that way too.  

Natural - Ingrid Bergman was the most natural actress in Hollywood. When she first arrived in this country, David O. Selznick wanted to pluck her eyebrows, cap her teeth, and change her name ("how about Barrymore?" he suggested). But Ingrid, forever true to herself, would have none of it. Selznick had to think of a different way to market/typecast her, so she became the "natural goddess," wearing little to no makeup on screen and appearing most often in wholesome, saintly roles, so much so that the public saw the private Ingrid as one and the same. Thus, they were all the more shocked and scandalized when their St. Ingrid of Stockholm had a love affair with her Italian director in 1950. But she was natural - natural at acting, and natural in her beauty. 

Gorgeous - Well, I'm pretty sure this one needs little to no explanation. All you have to do is take one look at her and get the general idea. She was very nearly perfect looking, and I love how tall she was, making her less than conventional amongst the petite starlets of the day. Stories about how her famous male co stars, like Humphrey Bogart and Yul Brynner, having to stand on lifts when doing love scenes with her never fail to make me grin! 

Resilient - I have told this story on here before, but I think it is one that best demonstrates Ingrid's love and passion for her craft; and what resilience she had. By the time she was working on her final project, a biopic of the life of Golda Meir - this would win her a posthumous Emmy - she was deep into the stages of her cancer, and her arm had swollen up to the point where Ingrid had dubbed it her "big, overgrown, ugly, sick dog." Meir used to often make the gesture of crossing her face with her two arms, and this was televised and seen around the world, but Ingrid could not physically lift up her right arm. Though she had been assured she did not need to do it, Ingrid knew the part would not be complete without it, so the nights before she had to film she would have to suspend that arm in the air so the fluid would go down and she would be able to do the simple task of raising her arm. She would do this all night long, and she wouldn't sleep, but she would do it, and she did. That's how devoted and resilient she was.

Interesting - Or, rather, for lack of a better adjective starting with I, her life was interesting! I've read her life story multiple times and it's never a dull moment. She had a great personality, one that seemed warm and kind, and she seemed like she'd be fun to be around. Especially those stories about her in the 1940s, when she was a young star in Hollywood, and she enjoyed pulling pranks. Her husband often thought this was childish of her, but of course, that didn't stop her. I love the story about her and her Gaslight costar Joseph Cotten going to a Hollywood party, except they dressed up as the maid and the butler. She did have an affair with Victor Fleming, and on Halloween one year, she swept into his house dressed up in a ugly witch's costume, throwing bags of candy into the laps of his daughters. AND, she died on her birthday! Tell me that isn't interesting or particularly special?!

Darling - Well, okay, before you laugh this was one of the better adjectives I could find starting with D! Besides, anyone who knows me a little will know that it's just one of my favorite words, okay? And Ingrid was just that. Darling. In absolutely all sorts and kinds of ways. So yes, I'm going to go with darling for this one, because she definitely was. I mean, have you seen those incredibly adorable closeups of her?

Brilliant - As in a brilliant career. Everyone makes stinkers, everyone must, and trust me, she did. (Of course her performances were always that: brilliant!). But she also made so many fabulous films in Hollywood; so many of my favorite films are Ingrid movies. Notorious. Gaslight. The Bells of St. Mary's. Spellbound. But, most appropriately, there is Casablanca - and I think because of this movie she will live in on film eternally. Patricia Clarkson once narrated a tribute for her for TCM, and in it she says, "After all, you never heard anyone say, who was that girl in Casablanca?"

Elegant - Of course, just because she was one of the more natural beauties in Hollywood doesn't mean that she couldn't be just as elegant or glamorous as the rest of them. How about the party scene in Notorious (1946)? She has on that long, black gown and the way she carries herself in it so regal. In reality, she was a pretty classy lady herself. She speaks with such grace and the perfect drop of candor in all her interviews. I've seen many from the late 60s or early 70s where she is asked if the film industry is getting better and better, but she begs to differ: "they were better in the old days." Her explanation for this is exactly how I feel about old films. One would wonder what Ingrid - who, for her time, was considered 'notorious' - would think of some movies today.

Romantic - Because, I think, Ingrid did romance better than anyone else in Old Hollywood. After all, when Humphrey Bogart was asked about Casablanca (1942), he easily credited his performance to Ingrid, saying "when the camera moves in on that Bergman face and she's saying she loves you, it would make anybody feel romantic." And, of course, the many romantic scenes in Notorious cannot be forgotten, most especially that famous kissing scene between her and her husband Cary Grant where they skirt the three second law on kisses. She played different characters but she was always best, perhaps, when playing a woman in love. 

Global - Ingrid did all kinds of foreign films. She started out her career in her native Sweden, also doing one German film, and when America sent her packing thanks to her affair with Roberto Rossellini, she did movies in his native Italy, as well as France. She played roles that travelled to all parts of the world and experienced a handful of different cultures, like the Chinese missionary in The Inn of the Sixth Happiness (1958) and the Israeli prime minister Golda Meir in The Woman Called Golda (1982). You can't help but grasp the feeling that Ingrid had a openness to experiencing many different ways and walks of life. And she definitely returned to her Swedish roots - one of her final film roles was Autumn Sonata (1978), completely in Swedish with Ingmar Bergman and Liv Ullmann. 

Multilingual - This ties in with the latter, and it's honestly one of the things I admire most about her because I muddle through learning the alphabet in French. (This is also coming from the girl who took five years of Spanish in elementary school and wouldn't be able to say more than "Hola.") Guess how many languages Ingrid spoke? FIVE. Her native Swedish, English, French, Italian, and German. She learned German as a child from her aunt (and excelled in this class at school!), and picked up English, French, and Italian over the years. I can hardly imagine being fluent in FIVE different languages. How incredible is that?!

Actress - This one is obvious, and she was truly one of the best. The very best. When you watch her on screen, you can believe anything she does or says. When I watch her in any film, whether it's amazing or really terrible, I'm in awe of her brilliance, of how she can bring small things to a performance to make it believable, how she was a master at drama but could also be incredibly witty and funny. I love her as a human being, obviously, and as an actress just as much. I really have yet to find a performance of hers that I found so-so. Her work in Gaslight (1944)? Really and honestly one of the most worthy Oscars given. 

Notorious - Before you think that using this adjective as a way to end off a post filled with so much affection for her is meant to be negative, believe me, it's not! Nor is it meant to be a pun! I mean this in a positive way. Being notorious to a particular group of people is not always a bad thing. At the time people may look down their noses at you, but later on you'd realize that being notorious was something you had to do. I'm referring to her scandal with Roberto Rossellini in 1950, of course. The way people treated her at the time was incredibly terrible. Was it really nessescary to take to the floor of the U.S Senate to condemn her?! I think it was because Americans thought of her as such a saint, scrubbed with soap, that when she went out and did something as outrageous get pregnant by her Italian director, it drove them wild. It was as if she had turned on them. Thankfully, she was forgiven - and publicly apologized to - but it still must have been a hell of a time for her. Perhaps what she did was notorious, but rightfully so. She was not the public's slave, and she lived honestly. I suppose she could very easily have covered up the scandal (as Loretta Young had done a few years before when becoming pregnant with Clark Gable's love child), but she didn't. I guess you could say there was a little feminism showing in her in this action, too. It was her private life, and her body, and she did what she pleased.

“Do you know what I especially love about you, Ingrid, my dear? I can sum it up as your naturalness. The camera loves your beauty, your acting, and your individuality. A star must have individuality. It makes you a great star. A great star.”

- George Cukor 

The Great Recasting | Barefoot in the Park (1943)

Welcome, guys, to the first day of the blogathon!! Nat and I are really excited and a load of links have already come in and we can't wait to get through them all. :) Once again, as you have your post written you can leave it on this post, or my update post, or any post really - just so long I get them. :D 

***

I went through a lot of indecision, but for my recasting I finally came to the conclusion of Barefoot in the Park (1967). A mere two years from our 1965 cutoff date, I'm sure it wouldn't be considered a "modern" movie by most, but it's still a few years off from the "studio era" (of course, Nat and I were well aware that the studio system was nearly long gone by '65, but the 60s fan in me nudged it over a bit. Hope no one minded).

Barefoot in the Park might not be five star viewing, but it's a movie I love - and have loved for quite a bit - all the while. Its stars are Robert Redford and Jane Fonda, two of my favorite actors from that interchanging period between the decline of the studio system and the dawn of modern movies. I really like the both of them and they're absolutely fabulous in the film as a "stuffed shirt" Paul and free spirit Corrie. (They're also seriously beautiful looking together.) They are supported by a very bohemian Charles Boyer and a delicate Mildred Natwick, the graceful character actress I very much love. It is directed by Gene Saks (Cactus Flower).

The plot is a prime example of 1960s fluff, and its one of the main reasons I love it. In the 1967 trailer it's advertised as "one of the happiest movies," and I couldn't agree more. This is a pick-me-up sort of movie that I can always rely on to cheer me up, one I've seen countless times with my mom, so much so that I know all the lyrics to Shama-Shama. Each time I finish watching it, I feel like I've swallowed a big gulp of fresh air and it's always guaranteed to leave me with a smile on my face. And then I feel like running barefoot through the park, too.


Jane Fonda plays Corrie Bratter, a pretty girl with a thirst for adventure and excitement. She's the type of character that'll never turn down the opportunity to do something wild, like dancing to exotic music, tasting strange foods, and appropriately, running barefoot through the park. She's madly in love with a man quite her opposite: Paul Bratter, played by Robert Redford. He's a quiet and neat attorney who likes to follow the rules, stay within the lines, and stick to the familiar. As it so often happens in romantic comedies, opposites attract, and the movie starts off with the newlyweds at the Plaza Hotel for a week long honeymoon that leaves Paul's lips "numb from kissing."

As he heads off to work on the last day of their honeymoon, Corrie rushes off to get settled in their new apartment. A small flat overlooking New York City, there are six flights (plus a steep stoop which Paul calls "that big thing out front") to reach the Bratter apartment at the top. Their apartment complex is also shared by some of "the greatest weirdos in the country," including a couple of whose sex no one is quite sure of. The bedroom can barely fit a bed and to Paul's chagrin, there's no bath, but worst of all, there's a hole in the skylight! They can't figure out how to work the radiator, and it's February, so they spend their first night in the apartment freezing as snow collects in their living room through the skylight.

But Corrie, being the free spirit she is, can't help but love the new apartment, as well as makes friends with the avant-garde bohemian that lives in the attic, Victor Velasco, played by Charles Boyer. He eats strange Japanese foods and scales the building to get into his apartment. Corrie decides to play matchmaker with Victor and her dainty mother, Ethel, (played by Mildred Natwick) who lives out in Connecticut and sleeps on a board each night - more like Paul than Corrie. Naturally, disasters occur which are exemplified by the Bratters' strange living conditions, and puts a humongous stain on the Bratter marriage. And, of course, all these events unfold in utter hilarity.

It's a super fun film. It is based off a Neil Simon play of the same name which premiered in 1963. The dialogue is truly funny, there's a dash of physical comedy involved, and the characters hit their marks. I'm sure there are those that definitely wouldn't agree with me, but in my humble opinion this is a good example of a fluffy movie that can be pretty darn excellent for its genre. To sum the movie up: it's a comical spoof on being newlyweds.

Okay, so now that I'm babbled enough about the movie - and I'm crossing my fingers you grasped the plot, but if you need some help still, check this out - let's get onto the recasting!

I have chosen the year 1943 to recast the film. Twenty-four years before the original release date, my version of the movie would have been released into World War II America, where fluffy, cheerful films were just the kind of getaway moviegoers needed at the cinema. The story is definitely a comedy, requiring a bit of physical comedy  (that mainly has to do with the six flights to reach the Bratter apartment) that, if produced in 1943, could have even resulted in a screwball comedy. That's a entraining thought. The 1967 movie came from the stage as well as by then the screwball comedy was near extinct. But in 1943, this could have easily transferred in a ridiculous romp: with Corrie's vivacious, daffy personality and Paul playing her straight man.

As for the character of Paul Bratter, I have gone with Cary Grant. Cary, my favorite actor was a flawless human being who I would be happily married to  could play anything, and he was particularly fantastic at comedy. Paul is a conservative guy who Corrie accuses of being a "stuffed shirt". Cary was a fantastic straight man to Katharine Hepburn's zany Susan in The Perfect Screwball Comedy (Bringing up Baby), so I think the casting of him as Paul would be spot on.

Then there is Corrie Bratter, a young woman with a magnificent lust for life and thirst for adventure. For this role, I have chosen my second favorite actress, my favorite Swede, that wonderful doll, Ingrid Bergman. Perhaps casting early 1940s Ingrid in this role is against type. After all, there are probably quite a few other actresses at the time who would, by studio moguls, have been considered more appropriate for the role. Though it is true that Ingrid in the 40s did pretty much all dramas (though she did get to show off her comedic flair a little in The Bells of St. Mary's), there's no question that she could do comedy. She got opportunities to do so later in her career: Indiscreet (1958) - also with Cary - The Yellow Rolls Royce (1964), Cactus Flower (1969) - which was a role that had been originally offered to my Lucy - but never in her studio system days. Which is a shame because Ingrid was fantastic at comedy. She had good timing combined with a almost nonchalant subtly to her comedy, and she was fantastic. I adore Ingrid being funny. (She also nearly worked with the Queen of Comedy, Lucy, on an episode of Here's Lucy, but due to some technical difficulties it fell through. ugh. I could DIE.)

I also picked Ingrid because as it is well obvious to anyone who has seen Notorious (1946) - and if you haven't, please go and do so - that Ingrid and Cary have really some of the best chemistry on screen, especially amazing considering they were never romantically involved in real life, wonderful friends, but never lovers. (Though, in my fantasy world, they might've been married...) They re-teamed for Indiscreet twelve years later, a movie that's far from perfect, but I love anyways pretty much because of the two of them. That's a comedy, but I did want to cast them in something when they were younger, hence the year 1943 - Cary would've been thirty-nine, maybe a little long in the tooth for a newlywed but it wouldn't have mattered, and Ingrid would've been twenty-eight - and more youthful. Corrie and Paul are a couple that's really quite in love for a great deal of the picture and Cary and Ingrid would've captured that perfectly. It's the romance of Notorious (which was spoiled when they become bitter to each because of the project, etc.) in the setting of a movie like Indiscreet.


Also, at the end of the day, it only seemed fair that Ingrid & Cary should be the main players of my be recasting, for they were what inspired this blogathon (that time I did a tumblr text post wondering what a 40s version of The Sound of Music would be like with Maria and the Captain played by these two flawless beings).

[all GIFs in this post are mine - the dialogue is from Barefoot in the Park.]

For the role of Victor Velasco, I chose John Barrymore. It was nearly obvious that I was going to have to go with one of the Barrymores for the amorous Victor. Of course, Ethel was out and I couldn't picture Lionel-Mr.Potter.-Barrymore in this type of a role at all. There was always the opportunity to resort to other male character actors of the early 40s - I mean, they were definitely plenty - but none of them deemed the perfect type for the role. John Barrymore, however, I feel would click right into it. Whenever I see John Barrymore, he's playing slightly 'lost' characters, so I could definitely see him tackling on this role. 

And as for an older lady actress appropriate for Victor's affections, I struggled with this quite a bit. All the character actresses I could think of would've sent this movie into a time warp: Thelma Ritter (who didn't seem appropriate besides; for even though I love her I think of her as secretaries and housekeepers), Mildred Natwick (well obviously not!), Mildred Dunnock, etc. All of them were all 50s. I was torn trying to find an actress of the right age. I even considered changing the character to an old maid sister. Finally, I landed up choosing Beulah Bondi. I wish I could have chosen a actress with more star power, but I suppose Bondi would round out the film making it financially possible. (I got to add here, if this film were going to be redone today - I mean, God forbid but still - wouldn't Julie Andrews be a good choice for this role? Maybe Jools is about five or ten years too old in reality, but she doesn't look it.) 

Then there is the director. The director of the '67 film was Gene Saks - Bye Bye Birdie, Cactus Flower, The Odd Couple, Mame. Obviously, there are many directors of the early 40s that would've been compatible with the cast and would've been fit to direct a screwball comedy (for, like I said, I can definitely see it going in that direction). So many choices! Preston Sturges, George Cukor, perhaps an early Billy Wilder - all directors I like very much, but in the end I chose Howard Hawks. Why Hawks? Well, after all, he did direct Bringing up Baby, which, as I said earlier, is my idea of the perfect screwball comedy. Obviously, Cary and Hawks collaborated together but Ingrid and him never did. And so the opportunity for these to greats to have worked together would be too awesome for me to pass up. 

Like I said earlier, this blogathon came as a result of my fantastic imagination dreaming up a 40s version of The Sound of Music with Ingrid and Cary. While that movie most likely would've turned out a hot mess, I have good reason to believe that a film like this could've, in reality, worked. Of course, the point of this blogathon was to play with your imagination and entertain your wildest fantasies - but still, I can't help but have this glimmer of hope that in all honesty, perhaps Barefoot in the Park could've worked in 1943. I mean, after all - The Hayes Code Office would've likely given a stamp of approval to pretty much all aspects of this film (of course, the shots of Corrie in a bra and the newlyweds lying in the same bed together would have to be cut, but otherwise).

And if it were to have actually been made, I could see this being a quality film. Not even the sort you like just because your favorite leads are in it, but a genuinely good movie. This is my own humble opinion of course, and it has to do a lot with the fact that I love the movie. Because, to me, as the script is actually funny, the storyline entertaining, and the score excellent, I can only see turning the decades a few back, adding Ingrid and Cary in the leads, and putting Hawks in the director's chair as enhancing a film which was pretty good to begin with!

Alas, we'll never know, for the play wasn't even written until the 60s. Cest la'vie, I suppose.

***

Okay, that's all for my side of the blogathon! :) The running list of links as they come in (as hosted by me) can be found here. The second part of the blogathon will take place tomorrow over at Nat's blog. THIS IS SO MUCH FUN, GUYS! Thanks for joining in with us!

Let's Talk | Ingrid Bergman vs. Greta Garbo

Hi everyone, 


A few weeks ago I initiated a poll asking my readers which actress they preferred: Ingrid Bergman or Greta Garbo. Both Swedes & totally legendary. 


In this post I'm going to present the results (which I'm sure many of you have already seen as it was stuck up in my sidebar for quite a long time, lol), but I'm also going to try to introduce a new series, or, well, a new type of post, called "let's talk." One of my most faithful commenters suggested to me a few weeks ago that I do more posts that were interactive with the readers & asked you guys some questions, kinda like this one I did last year.  I really enjoyed during that post and getting opinions; I love reading varying views on things. So I'm going to give another post like that a try, by discussing the poll results with you. I think this is a good post to start this "let's talk" series with as it's obvious that my opinion on it will be kinda biased (anyone who has followed my blog for a little bit will know I worship Ingrid Bergman). I'm hoping for a good response on this one, and if so, I'll do more in the future. So - 


I really encourage everyone to drop me a comment with your opinion on this, especially if you voted in the poll! 


Now, on with it!

Ingrid Bergman (1915 - 1982)

                                                                           

Greta Garbo (1905 - 1900)



Results -
23 votes, total
INGRID BERGMAN... 12 VOTES, winner
GRETA GARBO...11 VOTES 

***
So Ingrid is the winner. The reason I created this particular poll was just out of pure curiosity. Despite the fact that both women are Swedes, I honestly don't feel that they're alike in any other way. Not in their styles of acting or even in their beauty.


As for acting - while Ingrid could definitely ham up her performances, as seen in, for example, Gaslight (1944), compared to Garbo she is easily the more refined performer of the two. Because of her silent film background Garbo had a tendency to bring an extra level of flamboyancy to her acting. And while both women are easily gorgeous, Ingrid was built up as the "natural" star, refusing to let her teeth be capped or eyebrows be plucked. She often wore very little makeup on the screen whereas Garbo's facial features were more exaggerated and dramatic, earning her the nickname 'The Face.' Her thinly arched eyebrows and heavy lipstick reflected the popular trends among the glamorous, sophisticated crowd in the 1920s & 30s.


The image studios built up for these two women are also entirely different. Ingrid was luminous, virginal, a natural star who always had a smile on her face. Garbo was in stark comparison found by movie audiences to be mysterious, moody, and forever "vanting to be alone." Though, as I said, the studios helped build up these images, these were most often true to their personalities in real life. Ingrid was warm, friendly, even to a certain extent playful, a people person. Though this isn't to say Garbo didn't like a good time, she was more of a recluse who retired from her successful career at its peak. "I vant to be alone," was not just a line in Grand Hotel (1932), but the catchphrase of her life. This, also, isn't to imply that Garbo was rude or introverted, only that she simply enjoyed keeping to herself.


Which woman had more success is a comparison that seems more cruel or unfair to make, and certainly not as clear cut. In my opinion, I will say Ingrid - which, I know, sounds biased, but this is mostly on the grounds of the success of Casablanca (1942). It is one of the most famous, critically acclaimed movies in history, right up there with Gone With the Wind (1939) and Citizen Kane (1941), and because of this movie, as well as her three Oscars, Ingrid is emblazoned into film history. This is not to say that Greta isn't; but because of Casablanca (1942), Ingrid will always be more recognizable with the general public in a way that Garbo will not.


As one can infer from all of the above, Ingrid and Greta's similarities pretty much stop at the fact that they are both Swedes. But this one, common trait between the two seems as if it will forever link them, and film buffs will always seem to make comparisons of the two because of it, despite the fact that they are so different in every other way. In fact, I can assure you that if they were not both Nordic, there wouldn't be anyone who would even bother to compare the two.


As you can see from the results, Ingrid won this one, but only by a smidge - one vote, to be precise. With results thisclose I'm especially hoping voters will comment about what swung them one way rather than the other.

I've only seen a few of Garbo's movies, whereas I've seen nearly all of Ingrid's filmography. Still, I can assure you that I will never like Garbo as much as I love Ingrid. I'm adding here, though, I'm not trying to hate on Garbo at all. But I have loved Ingrid Bergman for a long time, she is one of my top favorite actresses, and I have claimed her most often as my second favorite actress (if I had to pick one). So many of her movies are favorites of mine. My love for Ingrid is unchanging, and so it's needless to say that my pick out of the two, despite the un-proportional ratio of Garbo and Bergman films I've seen, will be Ingrid.


What is it that I love about Ingrid? I just really love her, inside and out. As an actress and as a human. As a actress I hold "Ingrid Bergman" in such a high regard, as the epitome of an actress that every actress should aspire to be. When she plays a role, it's so easy to believe every motion and every line, and you feel like all the fibers in her body are immersed so deeply into her role. I always think of Ingrid as the star who truly loved acting and considered it to be an art. After all, she was quoted as saying, "If you took acting away from me, I'd stop breathing!" Good evidence of her dedication to the art is this particular story:


Ingrid's last role, the one that would win her a posthumous Emmy, was as the Israeli prime minister Golda Meir. When Meir was elected, she covered her face with her two arms, an image that was often then relied on television and to the public many times. As always, Ingrid researched her roles to the core and when she saw this she felt like she would absolutely need to repeat this same gesture. The issue was that this simple motion was not going to be easy for her because of her breast cancer. 


Because of the cancer, it was physically impossible for her raise her right arm. After the mastectomy several lymph nodes were removed, which resulted in an arm swollen to the point where it was huge (Ingrid dubbed it "the big, ugly, overgrown, sick dog"). 


Still, despite this, Ingrid insisted that the role would only be accurate upon preforming this gesture. She discovered the only way to make this possible was to suspend her arm above her head for a long period of time so the liquid would go away. So the nights before she had to film, she would do this, for the entire night, and she wouldn't sleep at all, just to make the gesture correct. If that isn't devotion to something, what is?


As a person, there are so many things I love about her. One is she was never afraid to be herself. She said, "Be yourself, the world worships the original." She stuck by this during her 1950 scandal with Robert Rossellini (if anyone needs clarification of what this was, read this). She didn't try to hide what was going on. She outright boldly admitted to everything that she had done, and didn't regret any of it. She truly faced the music because she knew what occurred was a part of her. People didn't like her for it. They hated her, in fact, took to the Senate floor to condemn her; sent her letters addressing her as "whore" and "slut". Loretta Young, too, had an affair with Clark Gable and became pregnant with his love child. But she covered up the scandal by putting the child into an orphanage and making a big deal out of adopting her in the press. I'm not trying to hate on Loretta, but Ingrid's situation was pretty much similar, and I simply find the way she handled it more commendable. 


When I read about Ingrid, I laugh and smile and think, this is someone who you'd want to be around. Want to be friends with. She liked to play jokes, she loved American ice cream and butter cookies, she greatly admired her Bohemian father (who died when she was thirteen), and was proud of herself for being able to pull the tablecloth out from underneath a set table without breaking a single dish.


Greta Garbo is a woman beloved by many, and rightfully so. She was certainly a beautiful woman and a good actress. But for me, I don't think she is someone I will adore anytime soon. Just because she's not the type of star I enjoy doesn't mean that others shouldn't. I can think of many in the Classic Hollywood community who love Greta. I'm going to continue to try giving more of her movies a chance, especially as I haven't seen yet what is considered by many to be her greatest film, Ninotchka (1939). I don't exactly think her tendency to overact is my cup of tea, and I'm 99% sure she won't be rivaling Ingrid, my joie de verve, for my affections - but all the while, I will continue my exploration in the films of Garbo.


So here I shall add a disclaimer, so I won't get hate comments from Garbo fans: I definitely do not "hate" Garbo in anyway, and just because I won't be adding her to my list of favorites anytime soon doesn't mean that I don't have respect for her as a performer, because I totally do.


As for Ingrid and Garbo actually meeting face to face, she talks a little about here, but I feel that a passage from "Ingrid: A Personal Biography", by Charlotte Chandler, better sums up the meeting of these two stars. Their meeting took place years after Garbo had ended her film career; it was at a  party in Barbados, in which Ingrid's third husband, Lars Schmidt, already knew Garbo and was chatting with her while Ingrid fretted over how to handle the situation. She felt nervous about approaching the fellow Swedish star because they had passed each other several times in the Metro lot and Garbo hadn't chosen to recognize her, not even a "simple, polite hello." But it was in fact Garbo who approached her first, which led to this odd conversation as described by Ingrid:

"Even though we'd never really met, only briefly passing each other, Miss Garbo did not introduce herself. I suppose she felt no need to say her name. She assumed everybody knew who she was, and she was right."

Garbo had heard from Schmidt that he and Ingrid loved Barbados and were looking at land on which they could build a small beach house.

"Lars and I were thinking of buying some land in Barbados, and buying a simple, very simple, house." Garbo spoke in English, and Ingrid continued in what was not the first language for either one. 

"Miss Garbo said, 'You are making a very big mistake. Terrible. You will regret it.' 

"I didn't understand at all. I suppose my face showed that I was puzzled. Miss Garbo said, 'Do you know why? They will steal everything.' 

"I told her we were not going to build a luxorious mansion, so we wouldn't be troubled. We won't have anything worth stealing because the reason we are coming here is to enjoy a very simple life and to uncomplicate our lives, to take walks and swim, without the burden of possessions. I did not believe anyone would want my shorts and cotton shirts, and Lars would have even less, some trunks and sandals. 

"She repeated, 'They steal everything.' 

"'My bathing suit?'" 

Garbo rose abruptly and departed. She didn't say goodbye to Ingrid, she just left. "I suppose that was her way of saying goodbye." 

Of this incident and their near-meetings that took place in Hollywood, Garbo said, "I do not think I ever saw Miss Bergman in a film. If so I, do not remember it. We passed on the way to the parking lot when she came to Hollywood. She did not say hello or speak to me, so I think she felt the same way I did there. There is no need to be falsely polite. I spoke to her many years later at a party - I do not remember what we said."

I think the bizarre party incident and the slightly snarky comments by both Ingrid and Greta are a result of years of comparison between the two, likely resenting always being linked with one another. I can imagine that Greta became annoyed upon having to constantly hear how Ingrid was going to be the "talking Garbo" upon her arrival in Hollywood in the 40s, and that Ingrid was tired of constantly being asked about Garbo and referred to as the "new Garbo." In the end, I think it's clear that this comparison is one that is needless to be made. Besides their Swedish roots, the two don't have much in common.

As I said before, I would love for you to leave your comments below on what you think of the constant comparison of these two actresses, which actress you chose and why, which one you feel had more success, etc.!


That's it for today, but I really hope to get a nice response to this let's talk series! :)

Guest post at "Waitin' on a Sunny Day"

Why, hi hey hello readers, it's me again! I know! So soon!

Anyways, this is just going to be a short post to let you know I have a (my very first!) guest post up at Sophie's lovely blog, Waitin' on a Sunny Day. Sophie's blog is incredible and one of my very favorites so if you're not already following it (but I can't imagine that you're not), go ahead and do so! And her favorite actress is Deborah Kerr - perfect Deborah, have I mentioned my obsession with her lately? - which should hint at how lovely her blog is.

I've contributed to her awesome Box Set Monday series; the series is basically to craft a six movie box set for an actor or actress that doesn't already have one, and I've made one up for the fabulous, gorgeous, pretty-perfect-and-I'd-watch-her-in-anything, Ingrid Bergman. In fact, Ingrid does have a box set - alas, a box set with three of the movies she made in Sweden in the 30's. I actually just bought the box set and am working my way through it, and while it's fun to see her in these films, I truly wish that there was a complete box set with the best of the films she made in her prime. And if you'd like to know which movies I would like for such a box set, check out the post at Sophie's blog! 

{My Gif / I didn't have time to watermark so please don't steal! :)}


See how excited Ingrid is for you to check it out? :)

Well, that's it for today. Thanks so much, Sophie, for giving me the opportunity to guest post on your lovely lovely blog! :)

PS: Ingrid vs. Greta Garbo? You can vote in the poll; a few votes are already in and they seem to be in Ingrid's favor, but if you'd like to contest that, vote for Greta today! (Haha, how cheesy does that sound? :D)

"And the Oscar goes to..."

Before I start today's posts, two notes: I got some positive feedback on making the Sunday Movie Review a bi-weekly segment, so we're going to give it a try! Therefore, since I posted a review for Keeper of the Flame (1943) last week, the next review will be next Sunday, and so forth, etc. And the second is thank you all so so so much for your birthday wishes on Thursday. You all the are the sweetest! <3

As you all probably know, tonight is the night of the 82nd Academy Awards. 2011 was a great year for classic film fans, I felt. You had a movie about Marilyn Monroe, a silent film, a movie structured around the splendor of silent film, and several other movies that took place in the 20th century. Not to mention that both Meryl Streep and Christopher Plummer are nominated for Oscars; and if The Artist (2011) wins Best Picture, it'll be the first silent movie to win Best Picture since 1929 - and the first black and white since The Apartment (1960).

But on this Oscar Sunday, I'm not going to sit around predicting who's going to win what awards and etc. - though I really hope The Artist (2011) sweeps it all; and The Help (2011) I enjoyed as well - since we all know by now who's going to win what anyway. Plus, of course, this is a classic film blog, and despite the tight ties between the films at this year's Oscars and the Golden Age, they still qualify as 2011 movies.

So I thought it would be fun to take a look back at some of my favorite Oscar moments with Golden Age stars! This is just a fun, rambling list of Oscar memories, mostly with my favorite actors, no particular order or anything. I hope you enjoy, and if you want to discuss this year's Oscars, or 1939's Oscars (which, hey, guess what? - took place on my birthday!), or the Oscars of any other year, feel free to leave a comment and give your input!

Lucy's last public appearance

61st ACADEMY AWARDS | 1989, presenting 

My darling girl had her last public appearance at the 1989 Oscars, about six weeks before she passed away. She and Bob Hope were presenting and they got a big standing ovation. It's bittersweet watching this; and ironic that her last public appearance would be at the Oscars, despite the fact that Lucy was never nominated for one, and is famous as a television star, despite the fact she made more than 100 films. Her sparkling, black sequined dress is definitely a product of the 1980's, but I appreciate the slit that shows off her legs, which were still lovely at 77. She's so perfect. :')

Greer's Best Actress acceptance speech

16th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1943, Mrs. Miniver 

If anyone knows anything about my lovely Greer, they ought to know that she loved to talk. I think if talking was a sport, Greer could win all the Olympic medals. She had a habit of being able to go on and on about nearly any topic (except for herself; she didn't enjoy talking about personal matters, but to the chagrin of Hedda and Lolly) in that gorgeous voice of hers. When she won the Best Actress Oscar in 1943 for Mrs. Miniver (1942), it was about 1 AM in Hollywood when she took the stand. It is said that her speech might have been anywhere from five minutes to twenty; though the latter is likely an exaggeration, being so late into the night it might have felt that way to the other attendees. It is said she thanked everyone from the doctor who brought her into this world in London to all the cast members of Miniver and beyond. This speech is the longest in Oscar history as of; and the year following the Academy Award instilled a new rule that limited the winner to only forty seconds to thank those who needed to be thanked. Greer, alongside Bette Davis, holds the record for the most Academy Award nominations in a row (from 1941 - 1946), but she only won once, despite her amazing performances. I'm a little nervous that it might be because of this 1943 speech? There's no full footage or transcript of it, unfortunately, but Miniver DVDs tend to have a little tidbit of her speech in a newsreel or such.

Ingrid's Best Supporting Actress speech

47th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1975, Murder on the Orient Express

Ingrid won the Oscar three times. The first was in 1945, for Gaslight (1944), and then in 1957 for Anastasia (1956). The latter Oscar was accepted by her good friend and secret husband Cary Grant; that was when Ingrid was in Italy and married to Rossellini, recovering from the waves of scandal her affair with him had caused a few years before. Anastasia was her comeback film and her winning the Oscar for that movie was America's way of forgiving her. But her last Oscar was a Best Supporting Actress for Murder on the Orient Express (1974), and it's this one I chose to share, simply for the reason it starts with, "It's always nice to win an Oscar..." I couldn't post the link, but you can watch it here, and I strongly suggest that you do, because it's adorable.

Grace vs. Judy

28th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1955, The Country Girl & A Star is Born

Ahh, the age old debate of whether or not Judy Garland should have won the Oscar in 1955! Every classic film fan has heard about this controversy; when Grace won Best Actress in 1955 for her fine performance in The Country Girl (1954), but it wasn't the right year to win for everyone had expected Judy to win for her comeback movie, A Star is Born (1954). Even Grace Kelly's father released a statement after the awards ceremony, revealing that even he had expected Judy to win. I can't fairly judge this situation because I haven't seen A Star is Born (1954) - I plan to remedy that soon. And though I love Judy Garland, as we all should, Grace is one of my very favorite actresses which I guess would make me look biased. So I'll just keep my lips shut. But I'll say that I'm quite grateful Grace won in 1955; everyone thinks of her as only a gorgeous fashion plate, when she is so so much more.

Audrey's Best Actress speech

27th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1954, Roman Holiday

Audrey's win for Roman Holiday (1953) in 1954 is another subject of controversy, but Roman Holiday (1953) is one of my favorite movies; it's the movie that made Audrey a star and I just love it to pieces. I'll never have a problem with her having won that year, or any year, for that matter. Plus I think it's totally adorable how when she gets on stage, she goes in the wrong direction (I totally would have done that too) and her dress is gorgeous!

The double Best Actress of 1969

42nd ACADEMY AWARDS | 1969, Funny Girl and Lion In the Winter

The only time there was a tie for an Oscar was in 1969, for Best Actress. Both Katharine Hepburn, for Lion In the Winter (1968) and Barbra Striesand, for Funny Girl (1968) won the Oscar. Katie never showed up to accept her Oscars, but Barbra was there to collect her award in a very interesting outfit; handed over to her by none other than Ingrid - who was back in popularity thanks to Cactus Flower (1969). I LOVE the surprise on Ingrid's face when she realizes that it's a tie! Plus, as we all know, I consider Katharine Hepburn to be flawless and I really like Barbra Striesand too, she's adorable. Funny Girl (1968) isn't really my favorite film of hers, but I did like her performance in it; I mean, it made her a star, didn't it? And I know, it's terrible, but I've yet to see Lion in the Winter (1968); don't worry, I will really soon. You can watch it here.

No Natalie Wood unfortunately, because she never won an Oscar, despite being nominated four times. How stupid is that? I like to think that had she not drowned in 1981 she would've either made a comeback and been one of those winners who gets an Oscars in her late 40's or 50's; or later on she would have been awarded an Honorary Oscar.

Humphrey's Best Actor speech

25th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1952, The African Queen

Why it took as long as 1952 for Humphrey Bogart to win an Oscar, I'll never understand, but thankfully he finally did and The African Queen (1951) was a good movie for him to win it for. I love Greer's little intro and reference to her long, 1943 speech - "I have ten minutes left over from a highly emotional speech I gave a few years ago; I'll be happy to let you use it!" as well as reminding everyone of those "anticipatory noise reduction devices". And then the look of glee on her face when she realizes Bogie won; and Bogie's short and simple acceptance. I mean, I know he wasn't into that whole Hollywood scene, but from what I read in Betty Bacall's autobiography, everyone was thrilled to have him win. You get that impression from the cheer that comes up from the audience, too. You can watch it here.

Cary's Honorary Oscar speech

43rd ACADEMY AWARDS | 1970, Honorary Oscar

All I'm going to say is that this was a long time coming. A long, long, time coming. #WHYYY?

I think this might have been with Ingrid's Oscar, because he was much older when he won his Honorary one.

Sidney Poitier's Best Actor speech

37th ACADEMY AWARDS | 1964, Lilies of the Field

I don't think I've mentioned it before, but I love Sidney Poitier! He's one of my favorites. He's so sophisticated and distinguished, and really helped smash those racial barriers; I mean, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967), anyone? The film that he won the Best Actor Oscar for, in 1964, was Lilies of the Field (1963), which I have yet to see. But I love this footage of him accepting the Oscar from Anne Bancroft, another person I adore and don't talk enough about. I mean, it was 1964 and racial tension was high, but Anne just throws her arms around Sidney and you can tell how excited she is for him. Therefore, this all results in one of my favorite Oscar moments. You can watch it here.

To prevent this list from becoming forever endless, I'll stop here. But there are sooo many Golden Age Oscar moments I love. So I'll also add the links to these: Vivien Leigh's 1940 Best Actress speech / Hattie McDaniel's 1940 Best Supporting Actress speech / Myrna Loy's 1991 Honorary Oscar speech / Greer Garson's 1962 acceptance for Sophia Loren's Best Actress and I hope you check them out because they're just as wonderful <3

***

Alright, that's it for this Sunday. I had a lot of fun writing this post! Do you have any favorite classic Oscar moments? Let me know in the comments!

Despite being hardcore classic film, I'll certainly be watching the Oscars tonight, how about you all? If so, Happy Oscar watching and if not, well, I hope you have a good evening anyway, my dears!

Valentine's Day Movie Meme

So many surveys around the blogosphere lately! As you probably know, I put one of my own out last week, and one of my favorite bloggers, Meredith of Forever Classics, is doing one too in honor of Valentine's Day! I'm a romantic at heart so this will be a lot of fun to answer.

Valentine's Day Movie Meme ♥

1. What is your favorite romantic comedy?

It's hard for me to pick just one! A lot of classic films to me are romantic comedies. And of course, there are a lot of new romantic comedies, and though I have seen my share of them they're more entertaining then something I would feel sentimental about. So I don't think I can pick just one :/ But some towards the top of the list would have to be The Philadelphia Story (1940), It Happened One Night (1934), all the Audrey Hepburns - Roman Holiday (1953), Sabrina (1954), and Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961), all the Doris Day/ Rock Hudson, like Pillow Talk (1959)... do His Girl Friday (1940) and Bringing up Baby (1938) count??? Several of the Fred and Gingers, too. Oh, and if you're interested in a more modern romantic comedy I like, I did enjoy While You Were Sleeping (1995) - Sandra Bullock is a modern actress I must admit I do like, at least a little. ;) There's my very very complicated answer for you.

2. What is your favorite romantic drama?

These questions are so mean!! -;) If I'm to pick one, I'll likely go with An Affair to Remember (1957). This one makes me tear up everytime. Cary and Deborah are just so perfect. <3 But there are plenty of others I like too. Now, Voyager (1942),  Casablanca (1942), Random Harvest (1941), Woman of the Year (1942), This Property is Condemned (1966), West Side Story (1961) - just to mention a few. Old movies are so romantic! But I would probably have to choose Affair as my favorite.

3. Worst romance film you've seen?

I don't know if this really counts, but I've got to go with Lucy and Desi: Before the Laughter (1992), a TERRIBLE, tacky, awful, TV movie about Lucy and Desi's marriage, covering their meeting and marriage in 1940 up to the start of I Love Lucy in 1951. {Thank goodness it ended there and did not cover Lucy and the divorce, I'm picturing what this would have been like and am dying a little inside} Frances Fisher plays Lucy very unconvincingly. If she holds her head really still and stares profoundly into space, she does resemble Lucy a tiny bit, but I'm just going to be blunt and say she wasn't beautiful enough to play Lucy. Plus she had all these wrinkles and craw's feet on her face, she just looked way too old. Then some nonsense soap opera actor named Maurice Bernard or something like that played Desi, and he was even WORSE. He had the most terrible Cuban "accent" I've heard in my life, and an annoying habit of saying "Joo" instead of "you" {My friend and I have a joke about this, "Joo want to marry me?"}. This movie takes Lucy and Desi's love story and tears it apart and turns it into a parody. This is by far the worst movie on Lucy I've ever seen. It's on the Tube that was you, but I would say to avoid it like the plague. Lucie called it tabloid fodder and countered it with the amazing documentary about her parents that included their home movies. Thank God for Lucie Arnaz.

One critic said something like, "If joo gonna do something this tacky, at least make it funny!"

4. How do you feel about the majority of romantic films being labeled "chick flicks"?

My understanding about this question is, what's my opinion on romance films being labeled as a fluffy genre for females to weep over? I could be wrong, that's the way I interpreted it, however, and that's the way I'm going to answer it, lol. Anyways, to that note, I'm not sure how I feel about it exactly. I guess females do lean to romantic films more than men do, but to that, there's no reason why guys shouldn't be able to enjoy or get teary over romantic films the way girls do. It shouldn't make them any less 'manly'. Also, a majority of romantic films {especially, you know, the classic ones ;D} are excellent movies that shouldn't be labeled as fluffy, and "chick flick" usually suggests "fluffy" or "mindless". So maybe "chick flick" isn't a nice term after all.

5. Favorite on-screen couple?

Another mean question! Lol. I can't just pick one pair. {I'm sorry that I have no ability to be decisive!} I'm really not sure. Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler, certainly, though you know that I feel that "Gone With the Wind" isn't a great love story. Ronald Colman and Greer Garson's characters were adorable together in Random Harvest (1941), and so were the Bette Davis and Paul Henried couple in Now, Voyager (1941). I also have to give a nod to Nick and Nora and the Minivers - both of which had perfect marriages! Also, David and Susan in Bringing up Baby (1938), just because that movie is perfection. And Alicia and Delvin in Notorious (1946), because Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant are perfect together and they should have gotten married and had a bunch of gorgeous children together - you know, like, Isabella Grant. {CRUEL QUESTIONS.}

One day I'm just going to have to do one whole post on the two of them and, you know, let all the feelings out ;-)

6. Favorite off-screen couple?

Like you guys are really there scratching your heads, wondering what my answer could possibly be to this, and like I'm sitting here on my side of the computer screen contemplating hard between oh, Bogie and Betty and Carole and Clark and Kate and Spence and - LUCY AND DESI. There's probably no need to get into this because everybody knows how I feel about the two of then, but I'll get into it anyway! Yes, Lucy is my favorite actress, but it's not like I assume by default that Desilu is my favorite. If there is one question on this list I'm decisive about, it's them. I know as well, and likely much much more, as the next person that their marriage was riddled with problems. And that it ended in divorce. But their love for each other inside, despite everything else, was so strong, and that's how they managed to stay together for 20 years. And that love never died, despite the divorce. I mean, Lucy called Desi two days before his death and told him she loved him. It would have been their forty-sixth wedding anniversary. If that doesn't kill your heart, what does??? Plus - lest we forget - this is the union that forged I Love Lucy!

7. Best kiss in a movie?

This may sound prudish, but the kisses in classic films are so much more romantic. I don't care that they were limited to 3 seconds, they were always more meaningful than the kisses in today's movies, despite the fact that today they can go on forever - and usually do! I'll probably go with the famous scene from Notorious (1946). Ingrid and Cary's little kisses while they chatted about the chicken in her icebox was Hitchcock's way around the Hays Code rule, which might just contradict what I said, but Cary and Ingrid are perfect so I don't really care :)

8. Favorite romantic scene?

asdfghjkl This is hard ;) I guess my response to the latter question could qualify as a romantic scene, since it's really a string of kisses and dialogue that lasted for a few minutes. Maybe the the phone scene from It's a Wonderful Life (1946)? Though several scenes from An Affair to Remember (1957) are tugging at me...

9. Who are two film characters you wished had gotten together, but never did?

I thought that Greer Garson's character and Robert Taylor's character in When Ladies Meet (1940) would have been a good pair but they never did get together. But I guess in reference to something better known, I'll opt for Scarlett and Rhett in Gone With the Wind (1939). Yes, I know they SPOILER did get married in the movie, but if you check out the link above to the post about GWTW not being a love story, you'll understand my reasoning behind that. Besides, Rhett did leave Scarlett in the end of the movie. Bonnie Butler was dead. Melanie Hamilton was dead. All Scarlett had left was Tara and wimpy Ashley. So in my opinion, Rhett and Scarlett never truly "got together" in ultimate joy and happiness. And besides, Real Gone With the Wind never came out, so we'll never know if Rhett ever did give a damn about Scarlett again!

10. Two actors you think would have great chemistry, but never done a film together?

Easy. Cary Grant and Greer Garson. These two would have been a match made in heaven, don't you think??? But all they did together was an OTR broadcast of Bedtime Story. This breaks my heart. WHY? Why did it never happen? Them both being British - and Greer being the top box office draw during WII - I mean, seriously? I weep. Buckets and buckets of tears.

11. Favorite romantic song in a film?

I don't know if it's my all time favorite, but it definitely one I like and it's the first song that popped into my head when I heard this question. 

I guess the lyrics aren't obviously romantic - I mean, they could mean a lot of things -but considering what's happening while they sing it, I think it qualifies!

12. Best score from a romance film?

The theme from Now, Voyager (1942). I think it's called, "It Can't Be Wrong". It was used in Mildred Pierce (1945) too, which makes me giggle - a score from Bette's movie used again in a Joan Crawford film! But this music is so beautiful it should be used in every movie, lol. So gorgeous!

13. Most romantic film quote?

"Oh, it's nobody's fault but my own! I was looking up... it was the nearest thing to heaven! You were there..." said by Deborah Kerr's Terry McKay in An Affair to Remember (1957). There are a lot of romantic quotes, though. This is the first one I thought of. I just love this movie though! ♥

14. A film you'd recommend to watch on Valentine's Day?

Well, you'd probably watch a romantic film on Valentine's Day. I can't pick just one perfect romantic movie! There are SO many! But if I am to suggest just one, I'll follow up on the latter question and go with An Affair to Remember (1957). 

I know I already answered one of the questions with this movie, but I just love it so much! Deborah and Cary are just asdfghjkl. I need to talk about Deborah more. I LOVE HER {this reminds me, you see}

***

Well yeah, that's it! Thank you, Meredith, I had a lot of fun with this meme. It's not Valentine's Day yet, but I'll say it anyway: Happy Valentine's Day, readers!