A Star Is Born
Saturday, 18 April 2009 19:42![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
apollaUntil today, I had never seen A Star Is Born. Not the first version, not the Babs & Kris and not even the Garland-Mason version. The latter has been sat on a shelf here for probably three years, waiting in the Garland box set. I don't know why I never watched it before, and I can only surmise that it just felt like I never really felt I had to. I don't know why. I mean, it's got Judy, it's got Mason (whom I've always liked), it's got a massive reputation and it's about Hollywood. Seriously, it's the kind of thing I should always have leapt at but... I just never did.
Actually, I'm still watching it. I find it awfully slow - this is the restored and reconstructed version - and although I like it, I don't love it yet.
The main thing I thought so far is that Errol Flynn would've made a brilliant Norman Maine, except that by 1954 he was too dissipated and fucked to have been able to do it.
Also, I wonder if this story would work the other way around: Big Female Star marries Unknown Male and while he becomes a massive star, she goes into career decline. Would it happen the same way, I wonder? That said, I feel bitterly sorry for Norman already now that even the postman doesn't recognise/remember him. That must be a bitch of a feeling.
After all that, I do agree with Groucho: Grace Kelly winning an Oscar instead of Judy for this is the biggest robbery since Brinks. That said, seeing Judy Garland being all level-headed and easy to work with on set somehow doesn't quite work for me. It's too sad to see when I know the truth (partial, slightly mythical perhaps) of her movie career. I mean, if you choose to look, you can even see her Matt Perry-like weight gain and loss and back and forth within this one film. Maybe acting as someone like Esther-Vicki, down to earth and stuff, is her great achievement.
"What is it that makes him want to destroy himself?" Love, if we knew the answer to that, there'd be a lot of movie stars and musicians still alive. If we make the remark genderless, too...
"Love isn't enough." Girl, we already knew that.
God, this is a long fucking film. It makes Watchmen look like an hourlong drama.
Actually, I'm still watching it. I find it awfully slow - this is the restored and reconstructed version - and although I like it, I don't love it yet.
The main thing I thought so far is that Errol Flynn would've made a brilliant Norman Maine, except that by 1954 he was too dissipated and fucked to have been able to do it.
Also, I wonder if this story would work the other way around: Big Female Star marries Unknown Male and while he becomes a massive star, she goes into career decline. Would it happen the same way, I wonder? That said, I feel bitterly sorry for Norman already now that even the postman doesn't recognise/remember him. That must be a bitch of a feeling.
After all that, I do agree with Groucho: Grace Kelly winning an Oscar instead of Judy for this is the biggest robbery since Brinks. That said, seeing Judy Garland being all level-headed and easy to work with on set somehow doesn't quite work for me. It's too sad to see when I know the truth (partial, slightly mythical perhaps) of her movie career. I mean, if you choose to look, you can even see her Matt Perry-like weight gain and loss and back and forth within this one film. Maybe acting as someone like Esther-Vicki, down to earth and stuff, is her great achievement.
"What is it that makes him want to destroy himself?" Love, if we knew the answer to that, there'd be a lot of movie stars and musicians still alive. If we make the remark genderless, too...
"Love isn't enough." Girl, we already knew that.
God, this is a long fucking film. It makes Watchmen look like an hourlong drama.