|
Post by smith on Jul 9, 2005 20:04:06 GMT -5
I thought in the Aviator scene she had short hair but I will check . In real life when Katharine met Katharine she didn't like him and they didn't see each other again for some time . By then she had broken up with her partner - they originally met in 1935 but Katharine and Hughes didn't actually get serious until 1937 - The Aviator didn't show the timing of the relationship .
In the 1992 documentary All about Me there is actual footage from some of the movie sets and they show the filming of Sylvia Scarlett - and Katharine definitely has short hair in all the sequences . The documentary also has some footage where a wave came up and nearly drowned Katharine and another one of the actresses - they reshot that scene .
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Jul 9, 2005 22:03:58 GMT -5
There's an actual photo of Kate on another set - not Sylvia Scarlett - sitting on the ground making herself up. Her knees are up and she's wearing trousers and a longish jacket and a striped top and sort of espadrilles or canvas shoes. She wears this same costume in Christopher Strong in the scene where she goes to visit them at their country home and they are all lounging on the terrace with those two Irish Setters. So I believe this makeup photo was taken on the Christopher Strong set.
Does anyone recall the photo I'm referring to? I've seen it a million times and just now cannot locate it.
I believe that the scene in THE AVIATOR that is meant to be on the Sylvia Scarlett set was actually a replication of this photo on the Christopher Strong set, where Kate's hair WAS longer, and transplanted to the beach for the sake of the movie.
THE AVIATOR played fast and loose with a lot of facts, so I don't think they would have shied away from choosing an image of her from an entirely different film and implying that it was taken on the set of Sylvia Scarlett.
No big deal, actually. Cause it's a funny, cute image of a STAR making herself up on the ground and implies certain things about Hepburn right off the bat.
I've been searching for the photo on the internet so I could tell you where to go for it. Haven't been able to find it yet, but if I do I'll let you know.
And while we're on the subject of hair and THE AVIATOR's slopiness with the facts, how 'bout those clandestine photos of Hepburn and Tracy on a boat? - the ones Hughes buys back from the sleazy magazine editor. The incident, of course, never happened. But look at Kate's hair in those photos. Cropped short again. While there were times post her meeting with Tracy that she wore her hair short, it was never quite like this. It's the same wig used for the Sylvia Scarlett sequence. Weird.
Not much about the way they made her look makes much sense if you ask me. Some of it is right on and at other times...Right down to the fact that in real life, Cate Blanchett is quite attractive, but as Kate she appears downright unattractive at times. IMO
Judy
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 10, 2005 12:25:28 GMT -5
Thanks Judy and smith. It's much clearer now. I like Sylvia Scarlett by the way. Oh, and 'All About Me' is going to air on TCM sometime during the first week of August. I cannot wait.
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Jul 10, 2005 19:29:38 GMT -5
Hi Richard,
If you have the Ronald Bergan book - An Independent Woman - the photo I'm referring to is on page 30.
I'd been searching all of my books and couldn't find it. Flipped right past it in this book and missed it. Smith found it. So from now on we can call Smith Sam Spade :-)
Anyway, it is interesting that the caption for the photo in this book reads, incorrectly, "Rapidly making up on the set of Sylvia Scarlett, in which George Cukor directed Kate for the first time."
Now, I'll be honest. I have not read the text of this book, but if its accuracy is anything like this photo caption, I guess I shouldn't bother. Not only is it NOT of the set of Sylvia Scarlett, but to say that SS was the first movie in which Cukor directed Kate? In a book ABOUT Kate? Oy.
Of course, the author doesn't always write the captions - in fact, rarely. But you'd think some simple fact checking would have been required.
Anyway, if the AVIATOR screenwriter saw this photo and had an idea to mimic it in his script, the caption would have mislead him to believe that it was taken on the set of Sylvia Scarlett. It clearly was not.
Anybody who has Christopher Strong - throw the video in and you'll see her in this exact costume in the scene I described with the dogs.
So, thanks Smith, for locating it. I'm going to scan it and send it to our webmaster to see if it can be uploaded.
But I do think that this is the photo they were trying to replicate in THE AVIATOR cause it presents a certain image of Kate. Can you imagine Joan Crawford (nothing against her) or ANY other female star sitting on the ground to make up? And she's surrounded by women in coats and high heels who - because SHE'S sitting on the ground - have to crouch or kneel down to assist her. What a riot.
Judy
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Jul 12, 2005 8:29:42 GMT -5
I'm trying to post that photo of Kate. I will fess up to total ignorance about how to do this. I THINK this will do it, but if it doesn't - I apologize for the tease. Judy
|
|
|
Post by Cate on Jul 12, 2005 14:36:55 GMT -5
Ha! Thanks Judy Haven't seen that one before. Good job on posting it by the way
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 12, 2005 16:47:25 GMT -5
Thanks Judy. I've seen that picture before.
Oh, and I just finished watching Quality Street. It's pretty dull, but watchable. Hepburn saved it /methinks.
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Jul 12, 2005 22:22:23 GMT -5
Quality Street: I think she DOES save it - well almost. Along with Fay Bainter....Material like this is SO special and so hard to do. It's hard to avoid the obstacles of being precious or overly sentimental.
But I still say that when one looks at the movies that were supposedly the cause of her Box Office Poison label, they are not half as bad as some others around at the time. And SHE is never less than good in them. And fun. You can usually not take your eyes off her.
One could argue the fact that all these costume/period pieces wore on the public's patience. But that argument doesn't hold water when you consider the fact that Stage Door, Bringing Up Baby and Holiday - all three the height of late 30's snap and modernity - were not enough to keep her employed in Hollywood either.
No. I think it was just Kate. She irritated. Her image irritated, Lord knows why. I do find it funny that when I first started seeing her movies, I didn't find her irritating at all. And I had known nothing about them and very little about her back then. So I didn't have anyone telling me what to like or telling me that she was supposed to be grating.
I found her irresistible. I guess that just proves how modern and unique she was. The times had caught up to her so that a 13 year old kid - namely, me - didn't think there was anything irritating about her. Powerful? Yes. Definite? Yes. And I was immediately drawn to her.
Judy
|
|
|
Post by smith on Jul 21, 2005 18:22:08 GMT -5
The Trojan Women - quite an unusual role for Katharine - I think she is miscast but its still an interesting film - I find some of it quite moving .
It shows what happens to women in a time of war - they basically get used and abused . Vanessa Redgrave is brilliant in the role
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 27, 2005 21:37:12 GMT -5
I absolutely hated 'The Little Minister'. I just couldn't figure out what that movie was about, plus the sound was really bad on the VHS tape I was watching it on and everything the characters said was muffled. I finished it alright, but it was achingly long even though it's runtime was only 110 minutes. Horrible experience on my part. Although Katharine looked good-- even as a gypsy, that wasn't reason enough for me to like this film. Maybe I'll watch this film again, but definitely not in the near future. Thank God for 'A Woman Rebels'. This was on directly afterwards (but on a different VHS tape) and everything was good. I liked the movie, but unfortunetly it was nothing special. The story is pretty mediocre, and Hepburn did great as far as I could tell. It wasn't too bad, though a little weak at some points. (With me, when something's weak in a movie my mind starts to wander. For instance, I remember watching 'The Little Minister' and at some point I was thinking about 'Singin' In The Rain' and how awesome Gene Kelly is.)
|
|
|
Post by Shaun on Jul 28, 2005 9:08:11 GMT -5
Hmm...maybe it's best that I didn't watch The Little Minister yesterday...
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Jul 29, 2005 1:23:49 GMT -5
I have to disagree. LITTLE MINISTER is one of my (many) favorite 30's Hepburn performances.
Judy
|
|
|
Post by karina on Jul 29, 2005 6:10:27 GMT -5
I like all Katharine's 1930s performances, including The Little Minister - although I can't say it's one of my favourites. Of her "lesser/box office poison" films I prefer Quality Street & A Woman RebelsAnd of course nothing can beat BUB, but I refuse to believe that was ever BOP How could they misjudge it so
|
|
|
Post by Shaun on Aug 6, 2005 10:08:02 GMT -5
I saw 'Rooster Cogburn' yesterday for the first time in its entirety and it wasn't a bad film. Actually, I really enjoyed it. Wayne and Hepburn made a good team. The only Katharine Hepburn movie that I've ever thoroughly disliked was Quality Street...I couldn't wait for it to end.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Aug 6, 2005 20:27:00 GMT -5
The Trojan Women. Horrible. But I say that because I wasn't at all familiar with the play or it's history. I doubt anyone who has zero knowledge of it's setting or story will be able to understand the words that come out of these women's mouths. They sound magnificent, but I have no idea what the hell they're saying!!!. It probably is a good movie.
|
|