Author and Screenwriter Michael Druxman takes on ‘The It Girl’

For a period during the late silent era, Clara Bow, was firming seated at the dizzying heights of Hollywood’s Dream Factory. Her face drove the press pack and studio’s publicity machines and her films ensured Paramount’s financial stability for most of her short career. But her entire life from childhood to adulthood was filled with shocking scandal and tragedy alongside the fame and fortune of film stardom.  Her youth was plagued by poverty, a psychotic and violent mother and an abusive parasitic father. Her one solace was the movies and a desperate desire to be a part of that perfect community. Wining a magazine contest began Bow’s journey to becoming the ‘It Girl’ of the silver screen and with it several relationships with Hollywood elite, including Gary Cooper and Victor Fleming. However, her time in the sun was short lived with mental and physical breakdowns, scandals and conflicts with studio heads prompting her early retirement from acting aged only 28.  Her personal and private life was more volatile and complicated than any film plot; screenwriter, author and playwright, Michael Druxman, attempts this difficult task of analysing Clara Bow for his one-woman play, Clara Bow. 

Emma: Clara Bow was a complicated woman, what elements of her life and personality did you focus on for the play?

Michael: Clara’s life, in many ways, mirrors the life and career of Marilyn Monroe.  Both women were the reigning movie sex symbols of their day.  Both had mentally ill mothers.  The studios and the men in their lives “used” both women, and both were perfect fodder for the scandal newspapers and magazines. 

In a play, as opposed to a full biography, one has to pick and choose what you are going to focus upon.  In Clara Bow, I deal with the major elements of Clara’s life and I also try to bring her to some sort of resolution, so that she is, finally, “at peace” with who she is and what she has accomplished.

The play, much of it told via flashback, is set on the morning of the funeral of her estranged husband, former cowboy star and Nevada’s then-Lieutenant Governor, Rex Bell.

Clara Bow may, indeed, be a sad, tragic tale, but the story is also told with humor, because Clara was an out-going, warm and likable person.   Her problem was that she trusted the wrong people.


Emma: She was known as much for her private life as her professional achievements, did these relationships and scandals also become a part of your representation of Miss Bow?

Michael: They absolutely became a part of the play.   Aside from the mentally disturbed mother who once tried to kill her, Clara Bow deals with the actresses’ relationships with actors Gary Cooper and Gilbert Roland, song-and-dance man Harry Richman, film director Victor Fleming and others.

In researching the play, I interviewed Roland, Charles “Buddy” Rogers (her Wings co-star), and I even flew from Los Angeles to Las Vegas where her son allowed me to go through her trunk, which contained some intriguing personal letters.

Clara Bow and Gary Cooper, 1927

Emma: Tell me the basic information about where the play can be read and purchased?


Michael: The paperback version of the play can be purchased on Amazon, through Barnes & Noble or can be ordered though any bookseller.  The play is also available on Kindle, and has now been adapted to audio with Nancy McLemore, a terrific actress from Birmingham, AL, performing the role of Clara.  This version, which is presented in the style of a radio drama, with music and sound effects, can be downloaded from Amazon, audible.com and iTunes.


Emma: You have also completed many other one-person plays focusing on acting greats – Carole Lombard, Al Jolson, Errol Flynn and others. What made you interested in these characters and classic Hollywood in general?


Michael: I have always been a fan of classic Hollywood.  In the early 1980’s, I became intrigued with the one-person play format and decided to give it a try.  Up to that point, Hal Holbrook had done Mark Twain, James Whitmore had done Harry Truman and Will Rogers, Henry Fonda did Clarence Darrow and Julie Harris had played Emily Dickinson…but nobody had really done a great movie star, so I chose Clark Gable.  A local theater staged it, with my friend, actor Michael Ansara, directing.  The play was a huge success, so I started writing more one-person plays.  I now have 9 such plays, several of which have been produced in various venues around the United States.  These works, as well as a 2-person play (Jeanette MacDonald/Nelson Eddy), are available individually in paperback and Kindle or in a single volume, entitled The Hollywood Legends.  Orson Welles, performed by Ed French, is also available as an audio download.


Emma: Before you began writing stage plays, your writing career began composing scripts for Hollywood films. How did you get a start in this industry and what were your highlights?

Michael: Actually, I wrote several of the plays before I started selling my screenplays.

I began in the industry as a self-employed publicist.  I opened my own office and, very shortly, began representing some very important people.  I did that for about 35 years.  In the early 1970s, I started writing my non-fiction books about Hollywood and the movies, then the plays and, finally, I made my first screenplay sale in, I believe, 1989.  After that, off-and-on, I wrote several pictures for producer Roger Corman, including Cheyenne Warrior w/Kelly Preston, Dillinger and Capone with Martin Sheen and F. Murray Abraham and The Doorway with Roy Scheider, which I also directed.

You can read about my Hollywood adventures in my two memoirs, My Forty-Five Years in Hollywood and How I Escaped Alive, and the recently published, Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Hollywood: More of My Wacky Adventures in Tinseltown.

Clara Bow and her father

Emma: You also moved into writing nonfiction works and biographies as well as novels, was this an easy transition? Is it a different process writing books then it is creating scripts and plays? 

Michael: As I said in my previous answer, the non-fiction writing came first.  It’s definitely easier to sell non-fiction because you already have somewhat of a pre-sold audience.  People either want to read a book or play about Clara Bow or Basil Rathbone or movie remakes or whatever… or they don’t.  With fiction, you are, essentially, starting from scratch.  You have to “wow” the potential reader  (or producer) with your story concept, so that they will buy (or read)  your book or screenplay.

Certainly, the major difference between writing plays and screenplays, as opposed to books, is “real estate”.  In a dramatic work, you only have a limited amount of pages in which you can tell your story, so you must boil it down to its essence.  With a book, within reason, you do not have that limitation.


Emma: You have had a long and exceptional career; do you have any plans for future projects?

Michael: I now reside in Austin, TX, but I always have future projects.  Currently, I am researching a couple of new plays for The Hollywood Legends collection, a one-woman play and also a 3-person drama. 

I’m also planning to update a biography I wrote over 30 years ago about singer Dinah Shore.  Due to a legal dispute between the publishers of the hardback and paperback editions back then, the book was never published…although I did received some very nice advances which I was able to retain.  Now BearManor Media has asked me to update the material (no specific deadline), so this biography will, eventually, be published.

Clara Bow in ‘Call Her Savage’ (1932)

 

 

 

A Little Bit Precode-er: Top 5 Exploitation Films

Sometimes disguised as documentaries or news reports, Precode exploitation cinema focused on education, knowledge and warning audiences against dangerous behaviours…or so the films promoted. They mostly aimed to make money and tempt audiences through a filmmaker’s favourite method – lots of sex, violence, nudity and drugs. Below is my top five accompanied by amazingly saucy and provocative poster art:


1) Ingagi (1930)

A ‘documentary’ film from the Nat Spitzer's Congo Pictures company. It was promoted as a factual journey of Sir Hubert Winstead in Africa and his encounter with a gorilla-worshiping tribe of women. The film was denounced by the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association for the fabricated scenes and subject when it was announced that the picture was mostly filmed in Los Angeles. The nudity and insinuation of sex between women and gorillas made Ingagi a notorious exploitation movie.

2) Elysia, Valley of the Nude (1934)

A look into the lifestyle of people in a nudist camp. The 45 minute ‘documentary’ was film in the largest nudist camp in California, located 10 miles from Lake Elsinore. This Bryan Foy Productions film is seen through the eyes of a newspaper reporter sent to investigate the people living within the Elysia nudist camp.    

 

3) Road to Ruin (1934) 

This exploitation film, directed by Dorothy Davenport (aka Mrs Wallace Reid), shows the journey of a young girl whose life is destroyed by drugs and sex. The movie concludes with main character, Ann (Helen Foster), pregnant suffering drug and alcohol addiction and forced to get an abortion. This movie is part of the precautionary sub-genre of Pre-code exploitation but was considered tamed compared to the original 1928 silent version.

 

4) Narcotic (1933)

Another precautionary tale, Narcotic, shows the impact of drug use on promising medical student, Dr. William G. Davies. The story continues with his downward turn into opium dens and the deterioration of his medical practise. The doctor slowly reverts to more powerful drugs, such as heroin and cocaine, causing hallucinations and an eventual mental breakdown. This hour length feature stars Harry Cording, Joan Dix and Patricia Farley.    

 

5) Maniac or Sex Maniac (1934)    

A loose adaption of Edgar Allen Poe’s story “The Black Cat” and with references to "Murders in the Rue Morgue". It follows lab assistant Don Maxwell who is dutifully assisting mad scientist, Dr. Meirschultz, with his work of reanimating corpses. After being asked by Meirschultz to commit suicide for another radical experiment, Maxwell murders the doctor and covers up the crime by impersonating his employer. The character of the doctor begins to overpower Maxwell as he begins a downturn into insanity.       

 

 

 

Hitchcock Halloween: The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934)

At an affluent Swiss hotel, husband and wife Lawrence (Leslie Banks) and Jill (Edna Best) and their daughter Betty (Nova Pilbeam) enjoy the relaxation and recreation of their skiing holiday. They are joined by long term friend Louis (Pierre Fresnay), a person they haven’t seen in a while. They are surrounded by other guests the mysterious, yet jolly Turk, Abbott, (Peter Lorre) and Ramon (Frank Vosper) with whom Jill is involved in a fierce shooting competition. One night at a hotel party, the flirty and gay Jill dances with Louis, taunting and teasing her husband for attention. They play with a half-knitted jumper, untwining it through the dancing couples, tangling and tripping the guests. All of a sudden Louis stops and opens his jacket revealing a deep red gunshot wound in his chest. He collapses onto Jill; before losing consciousness he whispers to Jill to find a note hidden in his room and give it to the British Consulate. Before she can speak, Louis dies. His words prove truthful and Lawrence finds a note curled up in a shaving brush in Louis’ room. On it appears a list of meaningless words: WAPPING, G. BARBOR MAKE CONTACT, A. HALL, MARCH 21^st.

He is immediately accosted by Ramon also looking for a mysterious message apparently left by Louis but Lawrence conceals its existence from both Ramon and the police. Louis body is still warm and Jill and Lawrence, still in evening clothes discover their daughter has been kidnapped. Frightened and bewildered, the couple leave Switzerland for England waiting for instructions from the unknown kidnappers. They and Jill’s brother Clive (Hugh Wakefield) instead are contacted by a member of the British Secret Service pleading for any information on the death and the disappearance of Betty. He reveals Louis was a spy working to prevent the assassination of a foreign statesman named Roper and that the death of this man could be catastrophic to world stability and peace. Thinking only of the safety of their daughter, they refuse to divulge the contents of the note and decide to find Betty themselves.

The bullet that killed Louis

Lawrence and Clive start in the town of Wapping, to a dentist practise run by a G. Barbor. They innocently enter both complaining to suffer toothache. While Lawrence is being examined, from the corner of his eye he notices Abbott enter – identified only by an unusual pocket watch – and exit to a back room. After a struggle, Lawrence sedates the dentist with gas, puts on his white coat and waits for a meeting to take place. Ramon appears and talking to Abbott reveals, unknowingly, to Lawrence that they have kidnapped the “mouse” (aka Betty) and are holding her in an adjourning building. Lawrence slinks out, finding Clive, they retreat to a bizarre, neighbouring church with a leader proficient in hypnosis. It is a front for Abbott’s organisation with Clive deep in subconsciousness – having willingly been hypnotised - Lawrence can’t escape and he is captured by Abbott. Clive, gaining consciousness, flees to a nearby telephone box urgently telling Jill to meet him at the Royal Albert Hall (A. Hall) for the March 22^nd Celebrity Concert – the intended day and venue for the murder. He is taken to jail for disorderly conduct and drunkenness after relaying the message.

 

Jill ready to witness murder

Meanwhile, Lawrence and Betty are reunited; however, Abbott tells them their time together as well as Jill’s on this earth is short as he plans to kills them after the assassination is successful. Jill arrives, dutifully waiting for a signal from Clive.  She bumps into Ramon who gives her a broach once belonging to Betty. The concert begins and she sits and waits. A woman screams. The singing stops. Roper has been shot but he has survived. Calm and calculated, Abbott lounges in an apartment close by, lighting a cigarette and waiting. The police surround the apartment, Ramon immediately begins shooting rapidly from an upstairs window. The police gather their weapons and attempt to enter the building by force. Two of Abbott’s group are killed and, in desperation, Abbott orders Ramon to get Betty to use as a shield. During the commotion, Lawrence escapes and finding Betty attempt to flee to the roof. They are discovered by Ramon who shoots Lawrence and follows Betty to the roof. They are in full view of Jill and hoards of police officers with Ramon menacingly pointing a gun to Betty’s face. They are too far away for a clear shot and with Abbott still wildly – yet with a strange calm – raining bullets from the window, the film is set for a hopeless ending. 

 

Abbott, Lawrence and Betty

Unlike many of Hitchcock’s later classic films, the villain is the centre of the film. Whether this was done deliberately or accidently, Peter Lorre as the unwavering Abbott steals the picture. His physical appearance is shocking with a long scar over one eye, a thick grey streak down the middle of his head and deep bulging eyes he is the quintessential evil genius. Lorre’s Abbott is unnervingly calm and calculated and never without a cigarette dropping casually to the side of his mouth. His presence is added with Hitchcock’s brilliance, misrepresenting him as being a jolly, charming and exuberant character in the films first scene slowly altering this perception as the movie progresses. The director is visually hampered, however, by the lack of sound technology. There is minimal dialogue and sounds with the legendary Hitchcock using an abundance of extreme close-ups and suggestive visuals to depict meaning to the audience. He is in this film learning his craft. ‘The Man Who Knew Too Much’ is not in its plotline a horror worthy of Halloween, but one look at Peter Lorre would frighten any moviegoer.       

The great Peter Lorre

This is my contribution to Backlots Halloween inspired appreciation of all things Hitchcock. For a list of other posts click here:
 

 

Fredric March: A Consummate Actor - An Interview with author Charles Tranberg

With over 70 screen appearances and countless stage and television performances, Fredric March one of Hollywood’s classic heavyweights. Add to the list of achievements two Academy Award wins and three nominations, one Golden Globe and a handful of other accolades to his long list of successes. However, even with a career that spanned from the silent era, to the talkies, the golden studio age and the coming of television, he is often forgotten compared to his contemporaries, Cary Grant, Humphrey Bogart and Gary Cooper. For over fifty years he was a stable and enduring part of Hollywood’s A-list and for the most part a massive hit at the box office. Below is an interview I conducted with author and film historian, Charles Tranberg on his newly published biography, Fredric March: A Consummate Actor and the life of March both in front and behind the camera.


EMMA: Where did your interest in classic Hollywood come from and why did you choose Fredric March as a focus for a biography?

CHARLES: I grew up in the Los Angeles area and there were local TV stations that would show old black and white movies--I one was called ‘The Million Dollar Movie’ and so as a kid I got exposed to a lot of older films and classic movie stars.  That led to an interest in reading about these movies and those stars of yesteryear. 

I chose Fredric March as a subject because I believe that he is an unjustly forgotten actor of that era.  I was amazed when a few years ago the American Film Institute chose the fifty acting legends and the name Fredric March wasn’t among them.  If that same poll had been taken in 1955, Fredric March would have been among the top names listed.  It was amazing to me how far his star had fallen.  I feel he deserves to be rediscovered and so I decided to do a book. 

EMMA: You have written books on Robert Taylor, Fred MacMurray, Agnes Moorehead and even the Thin Man series, what attracted you to these topics? Which did you enjoy researching and writing the most?  

CHARLES: I got started quite by accident.  I always wanted to write a book but I had no idea of what to do or if I could even do it.  I now live in Madison, Wisconsin and one day I went to the Wisconsin State Historical Society Archives just to look around.  I was going thru the list of collections they had and discovered that they housed 159 boxes of Agnes Moorehead material.  I was interested because I knew of her not only as ‘Endora’ on Bewitched but also as an Oscar nominated character actress and one of the great voices of old time radio.  So I go thru some of these boxes and see scrapbooks, scripts with notes in her own hand, letters, cards--you name it--and I was hooked.  I decided then and there that I was going to use this material as the foundation for a book because there had never been a full length biography of Moorehead written before and I was determined to write it and did so.  Luckily it was also published!

I think with Fred MacMurray I felt he was an unjustly overlooked classic age star.  He was remembered for his TV series My Three Sons and all those Disney movies--kind of a national father figure.  But here was a guy who had been around since the mid 30’s acting opposite the most delicious actresses of his time:  Colbert, Lombard, Hepburn, Stanwyck, Arthur--the list goes on and on--without being overshadowed by them.  He was a wonderful romantic leading man--and very adept at light comedy--and when necessary could handle a meaty dramatic role.  He dominates Billy Wilder’s Double Indemnity, for instance.  Stanwyck is fantastic in it--but it’s really MacMurray’s film--Actually I should say it’s MacMurray and Robinson’s film--that is the real love story of the film.   Neither was nominated for an Oscar for that film and they deserved to be.

I put Robert Taylor along with MacMurray--unjustly overlooked, but in Bob Taylor’s case a lot of people think he was a light-weight pretty boy.  I think, however, he grew as an actor.  He also worked opposite some of the great actresses of Hollywood and married one of them--Barbara Stanwyck.  He gave some excellent performances in some wonderful films:  Waterloo Bridge couldn’t be better than it was with Vivien Leigh and Bob Taylor.  Leigh wanted Olivier to be cast opposite her, but the studio wanted Taylor and he was perfect.  Later on Leigh admitted that it was her favorite film of those she made including Gone With the Wind.  I think he out acts Hepburn in a wonderful little psychological drama called Undercurrent; He does a superb job in a nifty little noir titled High Wall; plays an American Indian who fights in the Civil War and becomes a hero but is treated with bigotry when he returns from the war in Devil’s Doorway; and is truly an obsessive evil man in The Last Hunt.  There were more dimensions to Robert Taylor and I wanted to explore those. 

March and Clara Bow in The Wild Party (1929)

 

EMMA: March began his film career as an extra, what qualities or events turned him from part of the crowd to a leading man?

CHARLES: March was living in New York working as a banker when he decided to become an actor.  He found banking a bore and was excited by the stage.  But he was no overnight success.  He got some stage work--but still had to support himself as a model.  He did modelling for several top magazines of the day.  This gave him a little extra money, but then he found out that he could get even more money working as an extra in films at the Paramount-Astoria Studio--as much as $8.00 per day or $40 per week which was some real money back in those days.  But in actuality he only did a few movies and in every one of them he is an extra.  He returned to the stage which was really his true love and between occasional parts on Broadway he toured the country and did summer stock.  It was while performing in summer stock at Elitch Garden in Colorado that he met Florence Eldridge who would become his second wife.  Shortly after they married they made a lengthy tour of the country for the Theatre Guild and while in the midst of this tour he was offered the role of Tony Cavendish (really John Barrymore in disguise) in The Royal Family by George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber.  He had to turn it down because he was committed to this Theatre Guild tour.  Later, when he was free, he was invited play the part in a national tour of the production. 

It was while The Royal Family was playing in Los Angeles that Paramount movie executives saw him and were impressed not only by his good looks and acting ability but also by his voice.  Silent films were going out and talkies were coming in and the studios wanted actors who had stage trained voices.  Paramount felt he would be perfect supporting some of their silent leading ladies as they made the transition to talking pictures.  Over next few years he supported Clara Bow, Colleen Moore, Mary Astor, Nancy Carroll, Mary Brian and others as they made the transition from silent to talkies.   Eventually he did the film version of The Royal Family of Broadway (1930) and stole the movie with his flamboyant performance and was nominated for the first time for an Academy Award as Best Actor.  I would say that was his real breakthrough as a movie actor and it eventually led to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931), which was a real tour-de-force and one of the gems of pre-code Hollywood. 

EMMA: His first Oscar win was a notorious tie with Wallace Beery, what was the circumstances surrounding this decision and what was March’s reaction to it?

CHARLES: Back in those days if there was a one-vote difference between the top two nominees it was called a tie.  March had one more vote than Beery, so under the Academy rules of the day it was called a tie.  So March got his first Oscar for Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Beery got his Oscar for The Champ.  March made a very witty acceptance speech.  He and Beery had both recently adopted a child and March said something to the effect that it was ‘a little odd that we were both given awards for the best male performance of the year.’  Very funny and witty--March really did have a good sense of humor.  It brought down the house.  March had no adverse reaction to sharing the award with Beery--after all they both got their own statuette and didn’t have to share custody of one trophy.



March in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1931)

EMMA: During the mid-1930’s March always seemed to receive strong, dramatic A-film roles, such as, Anna Katerina (1935), Les Misérables (1935), Anthony Adverse (1936) and A Star is Born (1937). Was he an incredibly ambitious man or did other factors like the studio system or luck play a part?
CHARLES: In 1934, March’s contract with Paramount was up and he did a very unique thing for that day--he decided to freelance.  He didn’t tie himself to any one studio.  He did sign a two-picture deal with Fox which allowed him to do outside pictures.  Now remember most actors of the studio era were under contract to a studio as March was originally with Paramount.  But he didn’t like being tied to one studio which dictated what pictures he would make, he wanted to have the say in what films he would make and negotiate the best terms he could.  So he went to MGM for Anna Karenina, Goldwyn for The Dark Angel, Fox for Les Miserables, Warner’s for Anthony Adverse and Selznick for A Star is Born.  By doing so he was able to command top salary and by the late 30’s he was one of the highest paid actors in the industry.  He liked having the variety of scripts that he was offered which he never would have gotten had he just tied himself to one studio.  As usual luck was on his side because it was by no means clear that an actor could succeed freelancing in those days but March had the talent to succeed and as it turned out nearly every studio in town wanted his services during the 30’s. 

EMMA: His acting career spanned almost 50 years from the silent era to talking pictures to television, through it all remaining popular and relevant. What do you think contributed to his longevity, was it pure talent or the ability to reinvent himself that made March enduring?

CHARLES: I think what made him an enduring star during his lifetime was the fact that he did such a variety of pictures and so many of them became classics.  He could play in costume pictures, romantic love stories, comedies, war pictures, adventures, and serious drama--many different genres without being typed.  It’s not all together true that his popularity didn’t wane.  After The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) for which he justly received a second Oscar--his film career kind of fizzled for several years.  In part it was due to his name being among those accused of being a Communist sympathizer during the blacklist period.  He wasn’t--He was a dedicated liberal democrat--never a Communist.  He fought back, too, and won a retraction from a vial publication called “The Red Channels.”  Unlike some of those accused he didn’t sit back and take it--he fought back and without naming names.  But for a few years he didn’t get the top offers from Hollywood that you would expect.  He did some good minor films such as Another Part of the Forest (1948) and An Act of Murder (1949) that failed at the box office.  He then returned to the stage for a few years.  Even Death of a Salesman (1951) didn’t perform well at the box office.  Eventually he did come back in popular esteem by the mid 50’s. 

What made him such a great actor--his ability to submerge his true personality into any role he played is also why, I think, he is not as well recalled today (as opposed to contemporaries such as Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant and Bogart).  He didn’t have a recognizable screen persona that he carried with him from film to film.  He was a true creative actor opposed to a personality star. 

EMMA: March also continued doing stage appearances regularly over his career; which medium do you think he preferred?

CHARLES: For much of his career he said he preferred the stage and he certainly did have his share of considerable successes including The Skin of Our Teeth (1942-1943) and especially Long Day’s Journey Into Night (1956-1958).  He was awarded two Tony Awards--including the very first one ever awarded to an actor (for the 1947 play Years Ago).  But near the end of his career and life he finally said that he preferred the screen.  Perhaps it was age--working in the theatre can take a lot out of a person, but finally it seems it was because film lives on while a stage performance is just a memory.

EMMA: March did some of his best performances during the 1950’s and 1960’s when he himself was well into his 50’s, such as, Death of a Salesman (1951), The Desperate Hours (1955), Inherit the Wind (1960) and Seven Days in May (1964). Do any of these films stand out to you? Was this period just a continuation of his previous successes in the 1930’s or like a second career?

CHARLES: I think in Death of a Salesman he humanized Willy Loman, however, the playwright, Arthur Miller, didn’t like his performance at all.  He felt he played Willy as a lunatic.  March later felt he didn’t do justice to the part.  Originally Paramount wanted Spencer Tracy for The Desperate Hours, but Tracy decided to pass on it and March was cast.  He made a strong and compelling counterpart to Bogart--yet you could sense the fear he also felt--after all he was just an ordinary man up against this gang that was terrorizing his family.  In this instance the screenwriter was full of praise for his performance and rightly so.  Inherit the Wind is a marvellous film but I think Stanley Kramer occasionally allows March to overact as the Bryan character.  March usually told his directors to tone him down and not allow him to ‘ham it up’ and at times Kramer didn’t rein him in.  I wonder if it was because Tracy was always underplaying?  I think one of his finest pieces of acting is his president of the US standing up against a coup in Seven Days in May.  The confrontation scene between him and Burt Lancaster is a masterpiece of screen acting.  I would also say that Middle of the Night (1959) is another of March’s late career triumphs. Of course his final film performance, which he made while he was very ill was Iceman Cometh, and he was unbelievably good in that, too—especially considering how ill he was. 

I would say during the 30’s he was a true movie star--but by the 50’s and 60’s he is still a star but more of a character star as opposed to a big name box office star.  His name was often used for prestige as if ‘well if it has Fredric March in it--then it must be an important picture.’

March in Seven Days in May (1964)

EMMA: During this period, March also dabbled in television – even hosting his own program Tales from Dickens ­­- did his like this new type of entertainment and the different demands it put on actors, for example, the live format and no retakes?

CHARLES: He adapted to television well and did several programs--including playing Scrooge in a musical adaptation of A Christmas Carol with Basil Rathbone as Marley’s Ghost.  He also played Dodsworth and hosted/narrated several TV documentaries during the 1960’s.  He didn’t think television was the ideal medium--he felt it was too rushed.  But he also didn’t dismiss it as many actors of his day did--he saw that television was here to stay.  He actually made his TV debut in the very early days of the medium in a live production of Twentieth Century in 1949 with Lili Palmer.  He went up on a line and Palmer had to bail him out. 

EMMA: From the surface March’s private life seems unremarkable and admirable, unlike many of his contemporaries. Was this true and are there any elements of his non-professional life that the public are not aware of? Also, did he have any hobbies or interests outside of acting?

CHARLES: I think that many people didn’t know that he had been married prior to Florence Eldridge.  But he did have a short-lived marriage that really was a mistake and he was married when he met Florence and fell in love.  He left his wife and sent his brother to arrange a divorce--not exactly admirable.  He did love Florence and admired her as an actress.  They were married for 47 years.  But he also acquired a reputation in Hollywood as a womanizer.  There is no proof that he had any long-term mistresses or anything like that but he may have had a few one-night stands and he did make kind of adolescent passes on starlets and even established stars--Claudette Colbert told Rex Reed that March had twenty fingers and they were “all over my ass.”   Elia Kazan said that when Florence was around he was the somewhat staid and obedient husband and then when she was away he turned into this fun-loving guy who loved to tell dirty jokes and loved to get a little on the side.  But for all of that March was also one of the great acting talents of his day, a committed and concerned citizen and a husband who enjoyed working with and being challenged by his wife--somebody he respected and adored--and in his way always looked out for. 

When he and Florence did Long Day’s Journey Into Night, March was getting most of the accolades and people were coming back stage to tell him how marvellous he was and he would ask them, ‘what did you think of Florence?’ and they would say, ‘she was wonderful,’ and he would say, ‘why don’t you go and tell her.’  His hobby was running his farm in Connecticut where he and the family could just be together away from the grind of Hollywood or New York and enjoy each other’s company.  Later when his daughter had married an Italian businessman he and Florence would spend every other summer with them in Italy.  They did enjoy traveling a great deal as well.

EMMA: This is your seventh book, do you have plans for any other biographies in the future?  

CHARLES: I am currently doing a book on William Conrad who is best known probably as Cannon on the popular 70’s TV-series, but he also was one of the great voices of dramatic Old Time Radio and was especially good as Matt Dillon radios Gunsmoke.  He also was a producer and director during the 60’s which was an interesting period of his career that probably many people don’t know about but which I hope to examine. 

March and his wife Florence Eldridge

This is Charles’s seventh book, Fredric March: A Consummate Actor and others can be found at the Bear Manor Media website and Amazon.