On Audra McDonald

For Audra McDonald’s birthday

My good friend Ted and I were once talking about Audra McDonald and her performance of “Climb Ev’ry Mountain” in the live televised version of The Sound of Music, and what a powerhouse it was. You can see Carrie Underwood, receiving the power of McDonald at close range, and you can see Underwood almost shattered by what was going on, what was coming at her. It’s hard to look at anyone other than Audra, but I was deeply touched by Underwood. She is barely holding on. Even with McDonald’s performance, it is Underwood’s reaction – as a fellow performer – which is the true tribute. Unfortunately, I can’t find the live version on Youtube, so McDonald performing it at the Kennedy Center will have to do. I honestly thought I never needed to hear that song ever again. Or, hell, even once. I’m not a fan. But McDonald revitalizes it singlehandedly.

Audra McDonald’s voice is one of the great instruments of our time.

But we must not forget her acting and how her acting elevates her voice into a truly transcendent space, similar to what Judy Garland could do, what all the great singers can do. In that regard: I want to talk about McDonald’s live performance of “Maybe This Time.” I consider it to be a high watermark of live performance.

Sometimes it’s helpful to compare/contrast, although some seem to dislike it, assuming you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Believe me. I am not. Kristen Chenoweth has a phenomenal instrument, and she also can act. However: when Chenoweth sang “Maybe This Time” on Glee, she – in my opinion – dodged the entire point of the song. It’s a deep song: you MUST deal with the lyrics, you must FEEL those lyrics, otherwise … who cares.

I really dislike her version of it because she does not want to deal with the emotions of the song. In my opinion, she can’t relate to the self-loathing (“Everybody loves a winner, so nobody loved me”). Chenoweth is invested in herself as a “winner.” Which, of course, is great, good for her. But as an actor you can’t care about that if the moment calls for something else. “Maybe This Time” is brutal, and trying to weasel out of the song’s implications is a fake. “Maybe This Time” is not a song of plucky triumph, but that’s the way Chenoweth plays it, down to the last show-off note. Natasha Richardson didn’t have a phenomenal voice, but her performance of the song when I saw her on Broadway, was so painful it was a harrowing experience sitting through it. I’m not exaggerating: I could barely stand to be sitting there watching. I wrote about it here, when Richardson died. Liza Minnelli’s version was different from all of these (I go into the differences in the Natasha Richardson piece). Minnelli played as hard as she could Sally’s delusional state, her self-willed belief in her own amazing-ness, and it’s insanely disturbing and thrilling. The song can take different interpretations, but you can’t DODGE anything while singing it: you have to FACE it.

Back to McDonald: watch the clip above. Boy, does she FACE it.

Watch how she lets the song build, and not just the song itself, but the song’s story, and the emotions the song unleashes. The song is working ON her. As the song climbs the scales, she is not in the driver’s seat, the song pulls her up and up and up. (And of course, it’s not that simple: she IS in the driver’s seat. This is her brilliance as an actress and a performer. She is controlled enough with her instrument that she can craft it, and she does it in a way where it doesn’t look crafted at all.) The song seems to be taking her where IT needs to go. McDonald does not compromise the voice, ever: it’s clear as a bell, every note perfectly placed, no strain, no sloppiness. She is in exquisite control of her voice. Her voice is how she gets her feelings out. So often with great instruments, the feelings and/or the sense of the lyrics ARE compromised in order to get the sound out. We see this time and time again, we see this on American Idol, where the kids somehow think that SMILING while singing “Stormy Weather” is in any way a valid choice. There is such a thing as a wrong choice. It doesn’t matter if you have amazing pipes if you don’t understand THE JOB.

McDonald’s voice is so good, with such a breath-driven mix of head voice and chest voice, it can do anything go anywhere, and in the case of “Maybe This Time” the voice is such that it can TAKE the emotions exploding out of her by the end.

Audra McDonald is a vessel. Powerful things pour through her. She is powerful enough to TAKE it. She creates her own reality when she sings, and she brings us with her. She sweeps out of the way anything between her and the song, and anything between her and us.

But watch her face during the performance. Watch what’s going on with her, through the whole thing but particularly as she approaches the end end, from minute 2:47 on.

The voice is in control, the feelings are not.

Posted in Actors, Music, On This Day, Theatre | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

July is Elvis Month on Criterion Channel!

Okay, that’s an exaggeration, there’s a lot more going on over there, but Criterion Channel will be streaming 7 Elvis movies on their channel in July. This is a big deal. Elvis gets no love from film people, as I have said a bazillion obnoxious times, so it’s exciting this is happening! I’m glad they’re streaming Wild in the Country, not enough people know it. More to come along those lines, but in the meantime, here’s the trailer Criterion launched for their series. I love the song they chose to accompany (from Jailhouse Rock, a song Elvis sings I think three times in that film, and different each time). It’s an unexpected choice but perfect. Listen to the lyrics.

Posted in Movies | Tagged | Leave a comment

Backs and Mirrors

If you’ve been around here for a while, you know how I love moments where actors have their back to the camera (back-ting) and moments where characters stare at themselves in the mirror. I started mulling about this 15 years ago, it’s insane, and I’ve devoted two pieces solely to these two things. It started as an observation about men in 1970s movies. You basically couldn’t call yourself a male movie star in the 1970s if you didn’t have a good mirror moment. But then … I’d catch a mirror moment in a movie from the 30s, or the 50s, or … then I’d catch them in the silents. Mirror moments are a constant in cinema. And then I started seeing mirror moments stretching back in literature before cinema. It’s a great metaphor: man confronting himself, DEALING with himself, either checking in or glorifying himself in a miasma of denial and grandiosity. (Mirror moments are more common for men than women, and we can speculate on why. I do so in the mirror piece. This is not to say that women haven’t had great mirror moments, they have, but a lot of cultural baggage about women’s appearances have to be gotten out of the way.) And then there’s back-ting: it’s a test of skill for the actor, to convey emotion through the back, and it’s another great metaphor for how closed off we can be, and how also we don’t need words to communicate.

Two movies I watched last month BOTH have a great back-ting moment AND a great mirror moment.

Once you start looking for them, you see them everywhere.

Jack back-ting in “Five Easy Pieces”. He knows what’s through that door. He’s gearing up. All expressed through his back.

Jack’s mirror moment in “Five Easy Pieces”. Where he makes up his mind what to do in the final moment of the film. A brutal choice. He’s reckoning with himself: Should I do this? Or: Okay, I am GOING to do this, so let me take one last look at myself in the mirror, because I won’t be able to face myself from here on out.

Harriet Andersson back-ting in “Summer with Monika” – our first glimpse of her, in stark contrast to her dead-on to-camera stare later in the film.

Andersson’s mirror moment in “Summer with Monika”. She’s left the Eden of her first love affair. She’s trapped. She is 17 years old. She’s staring at herself, taking a look at who she is, looking for her essential self, now lost. Also perhaps contemplating what she wants to do, a moment of reckoning similar to Nicholson’s in “Five Easy Pieces”

Posted in Actors, Movies | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

June 2023 Viewing Diary

Succession (2018-2023)
I finally watched, having somehow resisted the DEAFENING buzz over the last couple of years. I like Jeremy Strong, liked his small moment in Zero Dark Thirty, he totally stood out in The Big Short (directed by one of Window Boy‘s best friends, who also exec-produced Succession – all part of the crowd I hung with during my Chicago years, at least when I was with him, which was …. always. All those dudes are famous now, either as actors, or writers with the best jobs, the jobs every comedy writers wants – writing for Conan or Colbert or Seth Meyers, winning Emmys etc. … but Adam McKay is FAMOUS famous.). I was intensely annoyed by all the “wow, Jeremy Strong is obnoxious, he takes the Method too far” chatter, pattered around by people who will never be excellent at anything because they suffer from tall poppy syndrome. What he was doing is not necessarily Method, Jesus Christ. It’s his process, you mediocre assholes. Vulture made fun of him for using the word “dramaturgy” – he used it correctly, I might add – and it’s a valid term, in common use in his profession. Way to … make fun of someone for using a big word correctly? And you’re a major entertainment outlet? It’s disgusting. Yes, let’s all just talk in Twitter-ese snark all the time. Fuck all those people. I hadn’t even seen the show by then and I was on Strong’s side against that ridiculous chatter. That out of the way: I binged it in … God, I don’t know. Two weeks? It’s everything everyone said it was, although I think some of the “this is the best show ever made” chatter is … more of a commentary on the state of affairs than reflective of reality. It’s a very good show, though. What’s wild is your feelings about the characters fluctuate on an episode to episode basis, sometimes even a moment to moment basis. GREG. TOM. I CAN’T KEEP UP WITH YOUR DUPLICITY. I love Roman, he might be my favorite character. And honestly, Jeremy Strong’s work in Succession is evidence of what that deep a process has given him.

Strong goes deeper because he wants to and feels he needs to and the proof is onscreen. The ending was brutal. I wish we had more closure with Marcia. Was she an asset? Like a Ghislaine Maxwell asset? With her mysterious past? Loved that character. Honestly, I think Matthew Macfadyen’s work rivals Strong’s, and in some cases surpasses it because of the nature of the character he played. A sinister snakey sycophant with an incredible public face, almost hapless. Boy, everyone underestimates him. I am trying to think of an equivalent character in current culture and I’m coming up empty. Claude Rains could have played it and, in some cases, did. But … it’s a “type” … the ambitious court jester, eye on the prize … Nobody saw Tom coming because nobody gave him a second thought and obviously that was a grave error. I dug it and I needed the escape, I needed a good binge. These people are all despicable. People like this are why the world sucks. The wrong people are in charge. Elon Musk and Zuck challenging each other to cage matches. God, they’re so embarrassing. I guess I’m just used to having better quality men in my life, not insecure losers. So watching Succession was like hanging out with the worst of the worst. The miracle of all of these actors is that they could generate sympathy for these characters, even though what they want is … despicable. What they REALLY want, of course, is to be loved in an unconditional way by their monster of a father. That’s never gonna happen. But … it’s heartbreaking in a way. All of the scenes where Kendall gets manic, and plans parties … UGH I CAN’T WATCH. You’re not a hip hop mogul, Kendall! STOP.

Mending the Line (2023; d. Joshua Caldwell)
Speaking of Brian Cox …I reviewed for Ebert.

Brooklyn 45 (2023; d. Ted Geoghegan)
I really liked this. I reviewed for Ebert.

On the Waterfront (1954; d. Elia Kazan)
Speaking of the so-called Method … but again, Brando wasn’t really a Studio guy, he was an Adler guy, but even that isn’t accurate. She said he was fully formed already in her class, a natural. His instincts were perfect. I know this movie practically by heart – my Dad loved it – but it’s always good to revisit.

RMN (2023; d. Cristian Mungiu)
I made up my list of the best films of 2023 before I saw RMN, directed by the great Cristian Mungiu, one of the leading lights of the Romanian New Wave (and that’s a pretty crowded field). He’s directed two films I consider harrowing classics – 2007’s 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, and 2012’s Beyond the Hills (which I wrote about here). Both films are unforgiving and relentless, brutal and mortifying – as in the religious meaning of “mortification”. I highly recommend both films, as well as Graduation (2016). Mungiu, like Christian Petzold, like Jafar Panahi (well, him most of all) are two of the international directors I wait – patiently – to hear from again. And so we’ve heard from him again. RMN quickly shot to the top of my unofficial list of best movies I’ve seen so far: another harrowing experience, things moving to an inevitable climax, nothing to stop it, the vicious bigotry of small towns, the xenophobia, the racism … all incited by a small boy walking through the woods where he sees something, something so traumatic he stops speaking. We in the audience don’t know what it was. The entire film is powered by that mystery: the forest on the edge of town, filled with bears, wolves … The final sequence is just terrifying because … this is how these things go, it’s how it would go. Same with his other films. Beyond the Hills is based on a true story and the others might as well be. Great film. There’s also one incredible scene – with about 40 people onscreen at the same time – a town meeting where people debate the crisis – and it plays out in one, the camera in a static position, the “debate” – poisonous and divisive – plays out in real time. Extraordinary.

Shiny Happy People (2023)
I can’t believe this exists now. It’s akin to what Leah Ramini did to Scientology. She didn’t just go after the symbolic figures. She went after the whole thing. This looks like it’s about the Duggars, and it is to some degree. But it’s really about the IBLP, and if you are into this sort of thing – and follow controlling groups with queasy fascination the way I do – then you know about the IBLP. But I don’t really matter: I am an outsider, an onlooker, the people who grew up in it REALLY know what it is, and they are the ones who matter. The Duggars saw their TV show as a “ministry”. They are such dyed in the wool hypocrites it really is amazing, to use a cliche, that they can sleep at night. So for the tabloid part of it, you get all the Duggar shenanigans. But that’s window dressing for what’s really going on. Very bold documentary, with victims centered in the story.

Don’t Bother to Knock (1952; d. Roy Ward Baker)
I’ve written quite a bit about it over the years, including recently.

Asteroid City (2023; d. Wes Anderson)
Some directors have quirks – most of the good ones do – and in some cases, the quirks drive me insane. In other cases, I love them and when people complain about a certain director’s quirks, I feel like … you want him/her to get rid of the thing that makes them unique? Wishing they would just stop it with this or that artistic quirk is … like asking Titian to stop being so obsessed with the color red. Like, dude, it’s his thing. Find another painter who never uses red if you can’t stand it, but Titian’s gonna Titian. This happens all the time with Lars von Trier and Baz Luhrmann, two examples of directors who get criticized for the very things – in my view – that make them successful and unique. Take away Baz Luhrmann’s so-called over-the-top-ness and you don’t have Baz Luhrmann. He chooses material wisely and well, considering his sensibility. He comes from OPERA, people. Why are you looking for subtlety? It’s idiotic. People have very strong opinions about Wes Anderson! Wow! I wouldn’t say he’s my favorite, but I love a couple of his films DEARLY, they are in my heart forever, and his wistful-ness and bittersweet-ness is a real sweet spot for me. I think the farthest he ever pushed his quirks was in The French Dispatch (which I reviewed) – the film was almost alienating. It kept you at arms’ length. The film was the opposite of welcoming, and the nostalgia was abstract. Not nostalgia for family or childhood but a magazine’s heyday, a magazine which pre-dated Anderson’s own existence. (By the way: I really relate to that kind of nostalgia). I think French Dispatch is one of his best films. I loved the alienation effect, the sheer obsessiveness on display. Asteroid City is, in a way, back to the early themes he’s explored: childhood, sad yearning, loneliness, flawed parents … but the atmosphere, the colors, the fake desert, the fakeness of it all … It’s as far out there at the very edge of his quirks, just like French Dispatch was, only in a different way. I adored it. I really loved my pal Glenn Kenny’s review.

Morning Glory (1933; d. Lowell Sherman)
Allison and I watched this. I sometimes forget how damn DARK this film is. Long ago I wrote about Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. in this. It’s just really upsetting. A departure for Hepburn. She’s out on a limb.

Summer with Monika (1953; d. Ingmar Bergman)
It’s been a minute since I watched this. In 1953, Harriet Andersson appeared in two Ingmar Bergman movies – this one, and Sawdust and Tinsel: two totally different characters, so much so it seems like two different actresses. A CRASHING talent, which of course was not a fluke, as the rest of her performances with Bergman show, particularly Through a Glass Darkly where she gives, in my opinion, one of the greatest performances in cinema. But it all started with the coming-of-age (in the truest sense) Summer with Monika, which expresses the Eden – almost literally – of first love, young love – and then what happens when you leave Eden. As of course you must do. You can’t be 17 in a Utopia forever. Her direct-to-camera look grips you. She’s daring you to judge her. It’s beautifully shot too: the light, the water, the silvery-ness of it all.

Catching Killers: Body Count: The Green River Killer (2021)
This is how I relax. I watch docu-series about serial killers. I was actually not familiar with the ins and outs of this case, although I knew the bare bones of the facts. The cops who worked the case are still alive, and they still seem haunted by it, they still get upset in their current-day interviews.

The Wild One (1953; d. László Benedek)
Marlon Brando is outRAGEOUS in this. The charisma is inSANE, and he oozes it everywhere. It’s a very QUIET performance, tender and thoughtful – one of his instincts for material (see: the cab scene with Rod Steiger in On the Waterfront). Brando’s willingness to retreat into interior thoughtfulness and interior pain is one of his tendencies – if you could say he has a tendency. This tendency, or instinct, or whatever you want to call it, unbalances The Wild One, tilting it towards Brando. Which of COURSE we’re gonna tilt towards Brando. If you don’t want us to tilt towards Johnny in The Wild One, then for God’s sake DON’T CAST BRANDO. We’re supposed to be on the townspeople’s side. I mean, Stanley Kramer produced. He was the opposite of counter-culture anti-establishment. But who on earth is going to be on the townspeople’s side watching this? You want to get on the back of one of those bikes, and roar out of town! There’s a lot of silliness: the biker gang is more like a group of rowdy teenagers or drunken frat-boys as opposed to the criminals on a rampage they often were. (See: Hunter Thompson’s entire book about the Hell’s Angels, particularly the incident in Hollister in 1947 – on which The Wild One is loosely based. The bikers in Hollister weren’t jitterbugging in the club, and goofing off on the sidewalk. They were tearing shit up, and dragging girls into the bushes, and the situation was extremely scary.). The guys in The Wild One look like Grease extras. And strolling through it all, calmly, deliberately, sexy as FUCK, is Marlon Brando. This performance launched a generation, it’s not too much of an exaggeration to say. This performance inspired James Dean (who had yet to appear, although he was right around the corner), it inspired Elvis (sideburns, motorcycles, motorcycle cap).

The performance inspired young actors – it was more influential than Streetcar, at least in terms of the coming youthquake. Elvis was only two years away. (He recorded his first tracks at Sun Records in 1953, the two quavering ballads he said he recorded for his mother. Uh-huh. Okay, Elvis.) Brando’s reply to the question “What are you rebelling against, Johnny?” was “Whaddya got?” You could say, again without too much exaggeration, that the late 1960s youthful rebellion was launched over a decade before in 1953 with those two words.

Stalag 17 (1953; d. Billy Wilder)
It’s hard to choose, considering the body of work, but Stalag 17 is maybe my favorite Billy Wilder. I talked about it on my pal Nic Rapold’s excellent podcast, The Last Thing I Saw. (It was a group event: my friend Farran, Steven Mears and I were all guests. Each of us had to pick a Wilder to discuss and I picked Stalag 17. We each – without planning it – chose films from different eras so it was a nice balance.) At any rate, Stalag 17 appeals to a part of me not really socially acceptable, the part that doesn’t want to play well with others – at least not if the “others” are assholes. Maintain your independence. Not everyone is going to like you. Fuck them. Don’t try to fit in to a group dynamic if the group dynamic is SICK. (See: Twitter. When I hear writers – writers!! – saying “This wouldn’t play on Twitter” I think: “Why are you judging what will or will not play based on the sickest dynamic on the Internet?” Fuck Twitter. Pretend it doesn’t exist. Write as though it doesn’t exist. Refuse to participate and refuse to let it get inside you. I mean, you can be on Twitter – I’m still on Twitter – but there’s a dynamic there and you can actually refuse to participate in it. RESIST THE GROUP.) I think Stalag 17 is one of Holden’s best. Hard-bitten. Tough-minded. His final line … yeah, you could see it as a wisecrack, but I think he means it. I never want to see any of you assholes again and if we run into each other on the street let’s pretend not to know each other because FUCK each and every one of you. Now THAT’S a catharsis.

The Earrings of Madame de … (1953; d. Max Ophüls)
Masterpiece. I’ll never be “over it”. Breath-taking accomplishment by every single person involved, before the camera and behind. Wow.

Prisoner’s Daughter (2023; d. Catherine Hardwicke)
I just reviewed for Ebert. I love Catherine Hardwicke’s work, so this gave me a chance to sing her praises.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Monthly Viewing Diary, Movies, Television | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 21 Comments

After Hours: available for pre-order today

Proper release date is July 11! Very excited to see it all put together (including my essay).

Posted in Movies | Tagged | 5 Comments

Happy Birthday, James Cotton

Blues-harmonica legend James Cotton was born on this day in 1935 on a cotton plantation. He was a working musician by the time he was 10 years old. He toured with Howlin’ Wolf. Eventually he hooked up with Muddy Waters and toured with him for years, his harmonica solos an integral part of the songs. Later on, he formed his own band, and toured as a solo act for 60-plus years. He played with everyone.

In the early 1950s, he – like so many others – gravitated to Memphis, to Sun Records specifically, the space Sam Phillips had created to record blues and gospel music. Cotton’s Sun tracks are incredible, with that unmistakeable Sun sound, a sound you would recognize in a blind sample. There’s a raw-ness to the Sun stuff, because even though you had to pay to record there, it wasn’t really a commercial enterprise. At least not at the start. (One arm of the business was the money-making arm, which paid the bills, Phillips recording weddings and stuff like that.) Phillips was on a mission. He wanted these musicians and this music to be heard.

Of all of James Cotton’s Sun stuff, I love “Cotton Crop Blues” the best, a 1954 recording, with a grinding slightly distorted and totally modern-sounding electric guitar solo by Pat Hare.

Here’s a live clip from a Muddy Waters show from 1966. A performance of “Got My Mojo Workin’,” James Cotton harmonica solo.

And here, James Cotton, alone, slows it all way, way, WAY down. Center stage. His harmonica was as eloquent as human speech. Maybe more eloquent. Because I’ve listened to a lot of people talk, and they never sound like THIS.

He died in 2017. Here’s a full obituary, with more information.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Music, On This Day | Leave a comment

R.I.P. Alan Arkin

Deaths come in clusters. In the past couple weeks we have lost Treat Williams, Frederic Forrest (Valley Girl!), and now Alan Arkin.

A constant theme in my life: My adventures with afternoon television where I watched whatever the hell was on, because there were only three channels – well, four if you count PBS which of course I do, and the old movies played in constant rotation, with no rhyme or reason to the programming. I saw everything. And then my high school boyfriend introduced me to The Marx Brothers and WC Fields, and also film noir, and so I pieced together, by osmosis, the history of the fascinating artform. All on my own. Just soaking up what was in the air.

I was 11, 12, and I saw The Russians are Coming The Russians are Coming, and I fell in LOVE with it, the chaos and shenanigans (I grew up in the tail-end of the Cold War. I was steeped in Russian paranoia/terror without even thinking about it). But mostly I crushed hard on Alan Arkin. There is nothing like a crush when you’re 11. At some point I segued from peers to grown men. Which makes sense, puberty being what it is. There was Lance Kerwin … the first … and then there was James Dean and Al Pacino (almost simultaneously, and these two were more about their acting chops than anything crush-y, although crush-feelings also came into it) and Ralph Macchio … … and then came Harrison Ford in Empire, the game-changer, the real puberty kicking in. Within those years where crushes proliferated, I saw The Russians are Coming, and Alan Arkin – in that movie only – I saw nothing else he did – loomed large.

I have had a long life enjoying Alan Arkin’s performances. I was always happy when he showed up in something, and he always delivered. I am happy he worked up until the end, with great integrity and authenticity.

But first, there was the impact he made when I was a kid-on-the-verge-of-puberty: the way he stood in that movie, the way he RAN that movie, with hilarity and confidence, his whole outfit, the hat, the jacket … it all tapped into something in my soul, and I am trying to put it into words. It was so long ago but I remember it vividly, and it is not an isolated incident. It happened with others. Jack Wild in Oliver! All the boys in The Outsiders. Even James Dean in East of Eden. My “way in” – the acting bug, to the love of movies, to my own desires/fantasies as a small human – was through the boys. Julie Harris was great in East of Eden, but I didn’t project myself onto her, I didn’t “see myself” in her. I didn’t question this. It was all completely organic. When I watched Alan Arkin in The Russians are Coming, I felt a weird strong yearning, and if I had to put it into words, I’d say what I was feeling was sort of a self-projection, a wish-fulfillment, a desire to merge. Not sexually but psychologically. I didn’t want to marry him or kiss him. I didn’t want to be his sidekick or his love interest. I wanted to BE him. There’s a huge difference, and this might be worth writing more about. As I say, this happened a lot with me and male stars when I was a kid, and it was all very unspoken and organic, a natural thing for me, a miasma of feelings, all very pleasurable. Like, I couldn’t wait to dress like Alan Arkin in The Russians are Coming, and, if you knew me in my 20s, you know I did …

So when I heard the news, it’s The Russians are Coming I thought of. Because there’s nothing more powerful than a first impression. It lasts a lifetime.

Posted in Actors, Movies, RIP | 6 Comments

Happy Birthday, Lena Horne

Mitchell and I – in yet another of our series of conversations – discuss Lena Horne. Weirdly, we had an enormous discussion about her one night when I was staying with him in Chicago. We watched endless clips of her singing and talked about her with enthusiasm and love. We woke up to the news she had died. Mitchell looked at me and said, “We didn’t even know it, but last night we gave her a sendoff.”

Part of this “series” was me asking Mitchell to describe whoever it was in “one word” as a launching point.

On Lena Horne

SOM: One word.

MF: Angry.

SOM: Talk about that.

MF: It’s almost like she was the Mike Tyson of singers. There was always this idea that she might bite. She bit her words, and she bit her phrasing.

I read that beautiful biography about her, Stormy Weather: The Life of Lena Horne. It talked a lot about how she would stand in these clubs as a black woman who was considered pretty. How generous of the white audience to consider her pretty, right? And she wouldn’t be able to go in the front door, but she’d sing for these rich white people, and her friends and family couldn’t come in, and she was so furious that it kind of created her style.

She was angry about a lot of things. She was angry about the fact that she was never really given a role at MGM. All of her roles were AS Lena Horne. Well, not all of them – there were two exceptions and they were primarily black movies. But most of her movies, she was basically Lena Horne singing a song, which they would then take out when the movie played in the South. She was the link between Ethel Waters and Hattie McDaniel and the next generation, with Diahann Carroll.

And she was pissed about it. She didn’t want to be anyone’s link. She wanted to be a movie star, and she wanted to be a top-rated concert singer, and she got stuck in the middle. She was very angry politically, when she got older. Totally justified. She was labeled as a female Uncle Tom, in a way, because her career was based on a white world. Her credibility as a black woman, or a civil rights activist, was called into question and that made her mad.

I think a lot of people get disappointed when they hear Lena Horne for the first time. They think she’s going to be a soul singer. And of course she had a soulful voice because she sang from the heart, but she was like Sinatra and Dean Martin and Judy Garland and Peggy Lee and Rosemary Clooney.

Lena Horne sang standards. She sang on the jazz edge of standards, but really, she was more of a pop singer. Not a blues singer, not a soul singer, not an R&B singer. She was a black woman who sang the standards. She was famous for singing Cole Porter, Rodgers and Hammerstein, Harold Arlen. She was also stunningly beautiful.

It was interesting because she married a white man, and then seemed to regret it. She regretted that she had done that because she felt like it took her credibility away. She seemed to die fairly bitter. If you want to get a real sense of her, watch her in Cabin in the Sky (1943).

Then watch some of her TV appearances in the 60s. Watch her sing with Judy Garland on the Judy Garland Show. They do two duets. They do “Day In Day Out”, and then they sing each other’s songs, which is really brilliant.

I think my favorite recording of hers, for some reason, is from her Broadway show The Lady and Her Music that she won a Tony for.

She does “Surrey With the Fringe On Top”, and it’s kind of a throwaway but I think it’s genius. She starts it off by saying, “I’m gonna sing this one …….. cause I like it.” And then she sings “Surrey With the Fringe On Top”, and it’s so good and jazzy and informed and sexy.

To me, that’s a real mark of her artistry, that she could take a lyric and make it very much about whatever her story is, and it didn’t have to do with the context, it had to do with whatever she was thinking about. That’s the mark of a great singer.

I love Christina Aguilera, and I know it’s a different tradition of singing, but she’s so busy acting like she’s singing, which she doesn’t have to do because she is in fact singing better than 90% of the planet. But she’s always showing us that she’s singing, and it’s like “Why don’t you talk to us about the story that you’re telling, and we’ll understand that you’re singing”.

SOM: One last thing about Lena: Could you talk to me about her gestures?

MF: Her gestures really are so unique, so connected to whatever she’s going through, but also really out there. Her gestures are less striking to me, though, than her facial expressions. She would do this wide-mouth to get the sound out, and her weird vowels. Like she wouldn’t say “there”, she’d say “thay-ah”. So if you say that, you can feel your mouth open – and it’s this open-mouthed A, even though that’s not really the vowel sound of the actual word. Her gestures were a lot of clenched fists, but her face – she sort of made her eyes huge, and she would scrunch up her eyes and growl. In a weird way, she had a tightness to her gestures, whereas Judy’s gestures flowed out, or Ethel Merman‘s gestures flowed out. Lena Horne’s was more of a clenched-fist gesture. In comparison to Shirley Bassey, who has the other extreme: the weirdest gestures ever.

I mean, really. And Bassey got validated for it pretty early in her career so they kept getting more outrageous. She stopped judging herself. She knew she would get great reviews if she did the wildest gestures that anyone had ever seen. I feel like Lena’s gestures were born out of anger. According to a lot of reports, Lena Horne could carry a tune but wasn’t necessarily considered a great singer at the beginning, and she developed her style while doing those club dates that she hated. A lot of her style, which became famous and sexy, was based on her fury.

The biography of her is really good, because it’s about her but it’s also about that time, and what a lot of performers of her time went through. She had a lot of support in Hollywood, except she felt very very lonely, because as much as they supported her they still didn’t have much to say to her. She wasn’t working with everybody like everybody else was. They supported her, they went to see her shows and concerts, but they weren’t on set together. That kind of camaraderie, she didn’t have it. There’s that famous black and white clip showing all the MGM stars having lunch. Watch it again and see that she’s not talking to anyone, and no one’s talking to her. She looks lonely, and beautiful, and stuck there around people she doesn’t know. That’s Lena Horne in Hollywood.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Actors, Music, On This Day | Tagged | 6 Comments

The Best Films of 2023 So Far

The collection of writers at Ebert voted, and of course came up with a massive diverse list. I think our individual lists will be published eventually. I wrote about The Eight Mountains (which I reviewed for Ebert). You can see the full list here, with blurbs by each of us.

Posted in Movies | Leave a comment

Review: Prisoner’s Daughter (2023)

I dig Catherine Hardwicke’s films, but I didn’t dig this. My review at Ebert.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment