|
Post by Shaun on Nov 19, 2005 14:14:57 GMT -5
I remember reading that the DVD of GWTW that came out a while back included screen tests that other actresses made for Scarlett. Does anyone know if Kate's is included, or if she even made a screen test for that matter? While we're on the subject would KH have made a good Scarlett O'Hara?
|
|
|
Post by Cate on Nov 19, 2005 20:16:57 GMT -5
Hm, I doubt she had a screen test. It seems so disrespectful lol Wasn't she supposed to be the fall-back or something? I never really understood the whole Gone With The Wind thing. I read one place that she really wanted it but the director thought she lacked sex appeal (  ) but then I read that she didn't really want it and was only going to take the part if they didn't find anyone else. Which is which?
|
|
|
Post by Cate on Nov 19, 2005 20:19:20 GMT -5
PS I haven't actually seen GWTW. Yeah, I know. But it's one of those movies that gets so much attention that I just ... don't watch it. I don't know why. I really need to see it. It's like a requirement. So I can't really say whether or not Kate would have made a good Scarlett O'Hara. Judging from all the clips and pictures... I would say no. But that could be because I am used to seeing Vivien Leigh. What am I saying??? Of course she would have made a good Scarlett O'Hara. She can play anything......... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Shaun on Nov 20, 2005 9:55:44 GMT -5
You aren't alone Catherine; I haven't seen GWTW either.
Let's be honest, Kate wasn't the best at accents (i.e. Spitfire) so she probably would have been a more New Englandish, upper crust Scarlett O'Hara ;D But I think the role of a tough woman like SO would have fit her like a glove.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Nov 20, 2005 11:37:52 GMT -5
I think the same thing. OH MAN, The Iron Petticoat is the most hilarious movie just for her NE Russian accent. ;D After all, Kate did say, "I AM Scarlett O'Hara." But, ya know, fate works in mysterious ways and if she did GWTW then she wouldn't have been able to do TPS on the stage, so I guess it was just not meant to be. Yeah Selznick was an ass to her. Butthead.
|
|
Hepburner
Full Member
 
'Enemies are so stimulating'
Posts: 180
|
Post by Hepburner on Oct 4, 2006 17:40:22 GMT -5
Myself and a friend - big Vivien Leigh fan had a huge argument over this. Nearly busted up our friendship. We were watching Gone With The Wind. and I went on to explain the whole fall back thing, and that two days before shooting they hadn't found anyone, Kate was to do it, blah blah blah. Then my friend pulls out a Vivien Leigh book. In which, a telegram dated something like 4 months before shooting from Selznick, so, someone else, like, his brother - cant remember to who - anyway it listed the top four choices at that point, before they found Vivien Leigh. Kate wasnt on that list.
I of course suggested to my friend that that is just one telegram, of what was probably hundreds sent back and forth between the people involved. I then quoted what Kate had said in "Me" with regards to it. After a bit of research, and various sources etc, we found no real conclusion. To this day I believe what Kate said in "Me". But then I would. As I'm sure most of you would.
(by the way, the funny thing is, my friends name is Kate too lol)
|
|
|
Post by isis on Oct 5, 2006 0:42:26 GMT -5
You will probably lynch me but  ... I didn't like Gone with the wind, I thought it was boring and affected. I didn't like too the character of Scarlett, she's tart ( I don't know if this word exist  ) ; so I'm quite happy, that Kate didn't play this role ... but I don't doubt of her Scarlett O'Hara 's potential.
|
|
Hepburner
Full Member
 
'Enemies are so stimulating'
Posts: 180
|
Post by Hepburner on Oct 5, 2006 0:46:08 GMT -5
No lynching required. I like the movie. I like Scarlett. But I'm happy she didn't play it. It wouldn't have suited Kate that well. She would have acted brilliantly, but it still wouldn't have been right. I just dont like the idea that she never had a chance. lol.
|
|
|
Post by Judy on Oct 5, 2006 8:58:17 GMT -5
You will probably lynch me but  ... I didn't like Gone with the wind, I thought it was boring and affected. I didn't like too the character of Scarlett, she's tart ( I don't know if this word exist  ) ; so I'm quite happy, that Kate didn't play this role ... but I don't doubt of her Scarlett O'Hara 's potential. I'm with you, Isis. I have never understood what all the hoo-ha was about. Movie LOOKS beautiful, and I know well the legends surrounding the filming - but the finished product bores me to tears. Mainly because I find zero chemistry between the actors from whom there should be genuine heat. And...I've said before and I'll say it again: Leslie Howard may just be the worst piece of miscasting in the history of the movies. It always heads the list of the great movies made in 1939. Personally, I'd put any one of those great films ahead of it on my list of the best of that year. I think the only casting worse than Howard would have been if Kate had done it. I know she thought she needed it to get her out of the dungeon her career been cast into in the late 30's. But I think it would have been a huge mistake on her part. The Philadelphia Story is always viewed as a savvy move on her part because it capitalized on her image. But, in spite of the fact that there were no wide angle long shots of bleeding soldiers in the road, in my opinion it was also head and shoulders a better movie :-) Judy
|
|
|
Post by isis on Oct 5, 2006 10:00:43 GMT -5
ooohh I'm not lonely !! Only things I liked in the movie were clothes, landscape. Leslie Howard  , the love of Scarlett for him ... not credible ;D. In fact I didn't really like the famous love stories as Gone with the wind, Dr Jivago, Love story...
|
|
|
Post by Sherry on Oct 5, 2006 18:30:30 GMT -5
Jeez -- now it can be said -- a whole bunch of us don't like GWTW and are glad that Kate didn't do the film. I agree with Judy -- glad Kate didn't get the part because fine an actress as she was, Scarlett was not a part that would have suited her. Plus, there were a ton of other films made in 1939 that were better than GWTW. I think it gets all the huzzahs because of the whole publicity thing that Selznick threw behind it. Gable was huge at that time and then they did that search for Scarlett and the premiere was held in Atlanta and on and on. Plus, it was filmed in color and color films were still a novelty in 1939 so it had a bunch of stuff going for it. TPS is great in black and white due to the superb photography of Joseph Ruttenberg BUT wouldn't you give a body part to have seen Kate in color in that film? That red hair, those blue eyes, and those gorgeous white Adrian gowns -- wow! Also agree that Leslie Howard was miscast in GWTW. No way could I believe for a nanosecond that Scarlett was pining away for him. Too wimpy. We live in a different era -- perhaps if we'd been moviegoers in 1939, we'd have been caught up in the GWTW craze, too.
Sherry
|
|
Hepburner
Full Member
 
'Enemies are so stimulating'
Posts: 180
|
Post by Hepburner on Oct 7, 2006 15:45:58 GMT -5
on the contrary... The hoo ha was because its the film version of a literary classic. Don't forget the book was huge, and therefore the film was hugely anticipated. Also, for all its bordom (fair enough, i guess you either like it or loathe it) it is a very well done movie. Not one of the best of all time, by any means. But then nor was Citizen Kane. What was that fuss over as well?
But touche on the glad Kate didnt do it point. I too, am glad. It would have been a bad film for her. I also think it would have landed her deeper into the box office poison fiasco, more than get her out of it. Plus, just..meh. It's better that Kate didn't do it. As has been said, had she, she wouldn't have been off doing The Philadelphia Story (play). And it might never have ended up being brought to the screen...and the histroy of film would have been rather sad without Tracy Lord...
|
|
|
Post by Sherry on Oct 8, 2006 1:34:44 GMT -5
Well, yes, it goes without saying that part of the reason for all of the hoo hah was because it was the film version of a best selling book. But it isn't a literary classic. It's an overblown soap opera.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Oct 8, 2006 1:43:03 GMT -5
Meh.
As a kid I was always told that I should revere it because, well, you know the reasons....
But.
TPS is the better film.
There HAVE been better films.
My Gawd, I would have liked Ninotchka to take away the Oscar for Best Movie in '39. And it doesn't even have anything to do with my devotion towards Garbo, either. GWTW DRAGGED, it took out significant parts that were in the book, Howard has less personality than the flat Diet-Pepsi that has been sitting on my desk for two weeks, and I just think the movie was so loved because it was popular to like it. Therefore, 60 years+ down the line, it's one of the only classic movies that NON old movie people can remember. And I resent that. Gosh, if I hear one more poser say that GWTW is the BEST movie ever I think I will have to kill them. NO JOKE.
all this aside, I still LOVE GWTW. I can look at it from both sides. Thank God Katty didn't do it, man. *phew*
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Oct 9, 2006 16:52:40 GMT -5
Gosh, if I hear one more poser say that GWTW is the BEST movie ever I think I will have to kill them. NO JOKE. all this aside, I still LOVE GWTW. I can look at it from both sides. Thank God Katty didn't do it, man. *phew* GWTW is the best movie ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Sincerely, though, GWTW is one of my favorite movies -- not the best but it's up there. I guess, maybe, I was drooling the whole time over Vivien Leigh. And, it was photographed in GORGEOUS Technicolor. Back me up, Shaun, at least with the Vivien Leigh bit. Oh, and I too cannot possibly imagine Kate as Scarlett. I'll agree with you all there.
|
|