Tag Archives: Claudette Colbert

‘After Office Hours’: A Forgotten Comedy Classic

Poster from original release. In the title credits, Constance Bennett gets first billing. She was the highest paid woman in Hollywood at the time.

“After Office Hours” (Metro, 1935), an extremely appealing lightweight comedy, is little known today, but it’s hard to know why. It’s a cheerful mess, written by Herman J. Mankiewicz, and it has his fingerprints all over it: it’s funny, irreverent, illogical, smart, cynical, sloppy, slapdash and fast. The guys who drink too much are the guys we root for, and only saps make a habit of telling the truth. Mank (as he was known) was generally regarded as being much smarter, funnier and more talented than his younger brother Joe, who would later go on to win four back-to-back Oscars (two for “A Letter to Three Wives”; two for “All About Eve”), but Mank’s drinking made him totally unreliable. Legend has it that Orson Welles had to lock him up for two months in a safehouse in Victorville, California, in order to get him to finish the screenplay for “Citizen Kane.” (It’s hard to know how much to credit this or indeed any story about Welles, because Welles rarely opened his mouth except to tell another pack of lies.)

The stories of Mank’s boozing and gambling are countless, but I believe my favorite story about him is one told by his friend and fellow screenwriter, Irving Brecher, which, surprisingly, involves neither boozing nor gambling, but another vice altogether. According to Brecher, he and Mank were eating at the Metro commissary one day when Elizabeth Taylor’s mother stopped by their table to say that she had a meeting with Mr Mayer, and asked if they’d be willing to let Elizabeth sit with them while they ate their lunch. She’d only be gone for a few minutes. Of course, of course! Who wouldn’t want to spend time with a gorgeous little girl like the twelve year-old Elizabeth? In those days, she had a pet chipmunk that she took with her wherever she went. The little chipmunk would run up her arm, then disappear under her blouse and a moment later poke his head out from her sleeve, then run up her other arm, disappear down her blouse again and eventually reappear somewhere else; he frisked about like a furry electron orbiting an Elizabeth Taylor nucleus. The little girl chatted with the two writers while they ate, and all the while, the chipmunk was zipping round her torso like crazy; Brecher says she hardly seemed to notice. At length the mother returned, thanked the gentlemen and took Elizabeth away with her. As the two writers watched them walk out of the lunchroom, Mank leant over to Brecher, and, shaking his head appreciatively, murmured, “Gee, I wish I was a chipmunk!” Hmm . . . Herman Humbert.

Elizabeth Taylor and friend.

I was gratified to read in Pauline Kael’s “For Keeps” that Mank had written “about forty of the films I remember best from the twenties and thirties. I hadn’t realized how extensive his career was . . . [I]t’s apparent that he was a key linking figure in just the kind of movies my friends and I loved best. These were the hardest-headed periods of American movies . . . [and] the writers . . . in little more than a decade, gave American talkies their character.” Nunnally Johnson said the two most brilliant men he ever knew were George S. Kaufman and Herman Mankiewicz, and that Mankiewicz was the more brilliant of the two, and (Kael again), “spearheaded the movement of that whole Broadway style of wisecracking, fast-talking, cynical-sentimental entertainment onto the national scene.” I would like to offer “After Office Hours” as a prime example of what Kael was talking about.

Boy Meets Girl, Boy Fires Girl

Clark Gable plays Jim Branch, the hard-bitten, cagey editor of a daily newspaper. He’s on the trail of a high society scandal that he knows is about to break. But his boss, the newspaper’s publisher, orders him to drop the story because it may possibly involve a personal friend whom he hopes will be elected as a state senator in the upcoming election. This first clip takes place right after Gable storms out of the publisher’s office. Notice how long the takes are. Robert Z. Leonard points the camera at his two stars and lets them get on with it. It helps that most of their patter is so good, and it helps that they both handle the material so energetically.

I love the way Constance Bennett delivers the line, “I haven’t so far.” For my money, she is the best of all the glamorous comediennes of the thirties. She’s as beautiful as any of them, including Harlow and Lombard, but I find her wittier and more pleasant to listen to. A big part of Harlow’s appeal was the appalling foghorn squawk that emanated from her throat, but I have to be in the mood to listen to her. Lombard’s voice tended to be shrill and unpleasant. Claudette Colbert was as chic and high-tone as Bennett, and had a beautiful voice, but I find her attractive without being sexy. But Constance Bennett is chic and sexy and obviously very shrewd. She was, in fact, known to be one of the best female card players in America. She was the only woman with a standing invitation to play high stakes poker with the studio heads, and she usually won. When she was married to Gilbert Roland, he once lost fifty grand in a poker game, and didn’t have the ducats to cover it — nowhere near. So it fell to Connie to pony up her hard-earned dough, which she did, saying: “Oh, the fucking I’m getting for the fucking I’m getting.” (The marriage didn’t last.)

I also like Clark Gable’s bawling-into-the-hidden-microphone style of acting. It’s artificial, but in a way that suits the material. The dialogue is presentational: these characters are cartoon cut-outs: if we took them seriously, their constant double-crosses would make them unbearable.

Boy Loses Girl

Look at the beautiful way she dismisses Gable just before she turns her back on him. It’s the most elegant brush off ever. There’s the tiniest flicker of her eyes at the end of it and bang go the shutters and down comes the gate. And it’s important to remember, when this picture was made, Gable was King of Hollywood.

Boy Meets Mother, Rehires Girl

In this scene, which takes place a few minutes after the previous clip, we meet Billie Burke in one of her most typical performances. I must say I find her brand of silliness endlessly amusing and occasionally dazzling. I don’t know how anyone could keep a straight face when she turned her dithering up to full intensity. She’s the Human Hummingbird.

Look at Connie slink! It takes a good deal of presence to keep the sublime Billie Burke from stealing the scene completely with her bottomless bag of tics. You will note that Miss Burke prolongs her exit by fingering the draperies as she passes through the archway. She wasn’t Mrs Florenz Ziegfeld for nothing: she knew how to pull focus when she wanted to.

I fear that Gable hadn’t yet shed the Blue Plate Special corniness he picked up from Frank Capra’s overemphatic seltzer-in-yer-pants kind of comic hijinx in the previous year’s “It Happened One Night.” Capra’s Common Man, when merry (his natural state), invariably becomes brainless at the top of his lungs. I hear more Capra than Mankiewicz in Gable’s reading of “Nooo, nooo! Only in months with AARRR in ’em!” He lands on the antic dopiness so hard that any stray champagne bubbles of wit are flattened beneath the weight: it’s Bambi Meets Godzilla. On the other hand, we’re to understand that everyone has been drinking all night, that Jim Branch is an excitable man and that he is working extra hard to amuse this elegant woman, of whom he hopes to take advantage in as many ways as he possibly can. The corniness of that one line reading actually serves a useful purpose: it gives the scene a jolt of energy at exactly the moment more energy is wanted. I don’t like it, but I admire how well it works. Moreover, Gable has the magnetism and virility to ride the phony zaniness the way a surfer rides the crest of a wave: the difference is Gable has to create the wave all by himself. When Connie Bennett begins to laugh, her amusement is genuine enough to justify the Capra-corn. It’s infinitely less irritating than the lunkheaded lecture Gable delivers on the fine art of dunking a sinker in “It Happened One Night.”

Capra Shakes Hands with Wit: an Allegory.

Boy Gets, Loses Girl

This is my favorite scene in the picture. I love the deco set design: that backdrop of the 59th Street Bridge is in just about every Metro picture that takes place in Manhattan. In Louis B. Mayer’s New York, everyone lives and plays in and around Sutton Place. I love the surprise appearance of Margaret Dumont as Mrs Murchison (this picture came out the same year as “A Night at the Opera”). In her brief moments onscreen, she looks more like a Helen Hokinson cartoon than ever. But most of all, I love the chemistry between Bennett and Gable and the snappy patter that Mank has written for them.

“You say awfully nice things Mr B!” She speaks that line so charmingly that I almost forget the sound of Shirley Booth as the irrepressible, horrible busybody maid, Hazel, in the early sixties TV sitcom of the same name. Unfortunate readers will remember that Hazel always addressed her employer as “Mr B,” and always sounded as if she were speaking with her mouth full of crumb cake and cottage cheese.

Separated at Birth? Helen Hokinson Clubwomen, Margaret Dumont.

He Who Gets Slapped

I’m fond of this scene for a lot of reasons, but chiefly because of the public service performed by Mary MacLaren at about 2:28. The fellow who claims to be the coroner’s assistant is actually Jim Branch’s lead photographer. The actor is Stuart Erwin.

I have occasionally watched that slap ten times in a row just because it makes me so happy. Every time William Demerest shows up in any one of the more than one hundred and sixty pictures he appeared in, I feel like slapping him.

Mank Speaks!

Herman J. Mankiewicz, apparently pretty sober.

Herman J. Mankiewicz, looking unusually sober.

I’ve always had a special fondness for funny drunks. I’ve known more than my fair share of turbulent tipplers, and I almost always come to regret, or at least rue, my association with them. By definition, they are unreliable, self-pitying, self-destructive, exasperating, boring, embarrassing and eventually pathetic. But I find the funny ones hard to resist. The really heavy drinkers don’t last long, so to befriend one of them is like finding yourself in charge of a short-lived breed of dog who bites people. You love him, but he’s a handful; when he dies you miss him, but can’t help feeling relief that he’s gone. Had I been around when Mank was still alive, I make no doubt I would have loved him: he strikes me as George S. Kaufman with a bun on. (They were friends: Kaufman gave him a job at the New York Times; Mank left Kaufman high and dry by going out to Hollywood.) Of course, there’s a good chance he’d have had no use for me whatsoever. Still, I’ve known a great many drunks because I usually get along well with them. Anyhow, I don’t know when I’ll be returning to the subject of Herman J. Mankiewicz, and feel I owe it to the old soak to finish this piece with a few examples of the sort of hilarious things he said before he died of uremic poisoning on April 5, 1953.

Mank sent the following telegram to Ben Hecht (the last sentence is particularly in character): Will you accept 300 per week to work for Paramount? All expenses paid. 300 is peanuts. Millions are to be grabbed out here and your only competition is idiots. Don’t let this get around.

This is Mank on his favorite actress, and his dream of domestic bliss (again, his last sentence is the most characteristic): Barbara Stanwyck is my favorite. My God, I could just sit and dream of being married to her, having a little cottage out in the hills, vines around the door. I’d come home from the office tired and weary, and I’d be met by Barbara, walking through the door holding an apple pie she had cooked herself. And wearing no drawers.

Barbara Stanwyck: Apple pie and no drawers

Barbara Stanwyck: One Eve with a lid on, hold the drawers!

Upon seeing Orson Welles: There, but for the grace of God, goes God.

On Production Code morality: In a novel the hero can lay ten girls and marry a virgin for the finish. In a movie this is not allowed. The villain can lay anybody he wants, have as much fun as he wants cheating and stealing, getting rich and whipping the servants. But you have to shoot him in the end. When he falls with a bullet in his forehead, it is advisable that he clutch at the Gobelin tapestry on the wall and bring it down over his head like a symbolic shroud. Also, covered by such a tapestry, the actor does not have to to hold his breath while being photographed as a dead man.

Finally, on Louis B. Mayer (the past tense is amusing, since Mayer outlived Mank by two years): He had the memory of an elephant and the hide of an elephant. The only difference is that elephants are vegetarians and Mayer’s diet was his fellow man.

In Praise of Melvyn Douglas

1 Reply

Greta Garbo and Melyvn Douglas in ‘Ninotcha.’

Melvyn Douglas was the man who made Garbo laugh. What most people remember about “Ninotchka” is that it was Greta Garbo’s first comedy; they probably also remember that she plays a humorless Commie who comes to Paris on official business and a little while later begins to laugh for the first time in her life. Many people remember that she ends up wearing a hat that looks as if the milliner had taken a large, soggy Frito and wound it round a dented traffic cone on an upward diagonal. (Adrian designed it, presumably as an homage to Dr Seuss.) Garbo got the publicity, the headlines and the legend; but it took Melvyn Douglas — ebullient, feckless, persistent Melvyn Douglas — to knock her seriousness into a cocked hat and make her roar with laughter.

Garbo Laughs! Melvyn Douglas hands Comrade Garbo a laugh in ‘Ninotchka.’

His performance in “Ninotchka” has always been cast deep in the shadow of Garbo’s million-watt glamour, but in this picture, he’s a far more interesting screen presence than she is. Garbo was rarely as good as she is in “Ninotchka,” but that is largely because so much of the comedy demands only that she be immobile, unapproachable, humorless — the Frosty Deity was a role she knew something about. The picture lampoons her Ice Queen persona; by doing nothing, Garbo becomes witty by default. Douglas does nearly all of the heavy lifting in their scenes together: after each failed attempt to warm her up, he must try a new tack; at the same time, he must not lose our sympathy, exhaust our patience, or do anything to make us turn against him. He must never seem less than charming and appealing. And to make things more difficult, if you judge Count Leon D’Algou by his actions, he is worse than a cad: he is a conniving gigolo without honor; he’s a titled parasite. And yet, we’re supposed to root for him. With Melvyn Douglas in the part, we do.

An irresistible force meets an immovable object. Greta Garbo and Melvyn Douglas meet cute in ‘Ninotchka.’

Two years earlier, in “Captains Courageous,” Douglas played a relatively small role for a star of his magnitude, but he didn’t pull any cheesy tricks to draw attention to himself during the brief minutes he’s onscreen. As Mr Cheyne, the wealthy industrialist father of Freddie Bartholomew, Douglas acts the part with conviction and immediacy — in his performance, we see Mr Cheyne’s very carefully concealed inner life thrown into a riot of doubts and confusion when he recognizes how his own well-intended miscalculations have brought his life to grief — and he does it without stealing focus from the real star of the picture, the thirteen year-old Freddie Bartholomew. Douglas gives an extraordinary performance, but it’s done with such finesse and understatement that very few ever realize the amount of skill, discretion and exquisite taste that went into its creation.

With Freddie Bartholomew in the final scene of ‘Captains Courageous.’

In “A Woman’s Face,” he miraculously spoke lines of unspeakable badness without betraying contempt or embarrassment for having to breathe life into such excruciating nonsense. In that one, he played a plastic surgeon who repaired, with spectacular results, Joan Crawford’s face, hideously ravaged in childhood by a bottle of acid her father shied at her (perhaps the gentleman was a connoisseur of good acting?). The woman’s disfigurement has led her to shun good companions and to travel down the crookedest paths, to haunt the meanest resorts, keep company with the lowest scum, pursue the worst vices. (The seamy underworld gets the standard Metro treatment: it is depicted as a weird fairyland of Germanic kitsch. The lowest criminal haunt is a hunting lodge/clip joint set in a sylvan glade deep in the heart of Metro’s Hansel and Gretel soundstage forest; the backdrops appear to be from “The Wizard of Oz.”) When Douglas first encounters Crawford, she’s a dangerous criminal (she manages a clip joint where they water the drinks and overcharge the drunks): as a surgeon, he feels ethically obliged to help her; as a citizen, he is decidedly ambivalent about curing such an evil ham.

Conrad Veidt, Joan Crawford, Melvyn Douglas: Crawfor's torn between Satan and the sawbones.

Conrad Veidt, Joan Crawford, Melvyn Douglas: Crawford’s torn between Satan and the sawbones.

In “Hud,” he played an aged Texas rancher whose cattle have contracted hoof and mouth disease and must be destroyed. The old man insists on killing his prize longhorns himself, an almost unbearable sorrow for him. Before he raises his rifle, he says, “Lord, but I have chased them longhorns many a mile. I don’t even know if I can kill ’em . . . But . . . I guess I can.” Douglas’ reading of the line doesn’t ignore or avoid its belles-lettres-in-chaps quality, nor does he stress its poetry; he speaks the words simply and sadly, and makes the phrasing sound utterly natural but richer in meaning; it’s plain, but more eloquent, more resonant than everyday speech. Characteristically, he does not allow a single drop of sentimentality to bedew the line’s bitter pragmatism. You hear the echoes of the man’s entire life when Melvyn Douglas speaks those words.

In ‘Hud’ with Paul Newman. His first Oscar win.

In another beautiful sequence, he attends the picture show with his grandson, played by Brandon De Wilde. When they enter the little auditorium, the old man is sick at heart. He’s burdened with the knowledge that the only world he ever gave a damn about, and the only way of life he knows and trusts, have already vanished; the lab results haven’t come back yet, but he has a sinking feeling that his cattle will have to be destroyed. He complains that he’s “wore out,” but it’s more serious than that: he’s ill and won’t get better; what he’s got is going to kill him. When they sit down, the old man looks at all the young people around him and wonders aloud how young folks can be so foolish as to waste sixty-five cents to come here to “get their knees pinched,” when a hayloft is free. When the first featurette begins, it’s a follow-the-bouncing-ball sing-along of “Clementine.” It turns out that the leathery old cattleman loves to sing. He sings loudly, lustily and with a lofty indifference to accurate intonation. On each repeat of the chorus, he sings louder and more enthusiastically — he keeps getting ahead of the beat, and drowning out all the other people in attendance. You’d expect his sensitive, painfully shy grandson to be in agonies of embarrassment at his grandfather’s stupendous lack of inhibition; but Douglas’ raucous enjoyment is unstoppable, irresistible, triumphant; it seems to fill the boy with admiration: the old-timer puts a higher value on the pleasure he gets from singing than on making a favorable impression on a pack of foolish youngsters who don’t have his magnificent zest for life or his lung power. De Wilde throws in with the old man, and sings for all he’s worth. He’s young and has his whole life ahead of him, but it’s the dying old man who knows how to have a good time. Douglas permits no sentimentality in this sequence, either; if it were sentimental, it would be unbearable. It’s a very brief sequence, but Douglas fills it with radiant life. In its own small way, the scene is thrilling. Whenever I look at this scene, I think — Yes: this is an actor who really knew his business. He won his first Oscar for this performance.

Many years later, when he was 79 years old, he was nominated for his great performance in “Being There.” That same year, Justin Henry, who played the little boy in “Kramer vs Kramer” was nominated in the same category. Douglas remarked, “The whole thing is absurd, my competing with an eight year old child.” Happily, Douglas won his second Oscar for his performance, and the absurdity was relegated to a footnote in Oscar history.

The grand old man in ‘Being There.’ Douglas’ second Oscar win.

Nowadays, Melvyn Douglas seems to be considerably less familiar to audiences than Bogart, Cagney, Cooper, Gable, Grant, Tracy and some others. In my view, if he’s less familiar to modern audiences, it’s because he exists in a different category from all the other famous leading men. He was unquestionably an A-List Leading Man for many years — he costarred with the likes of Greta Garbo, Claudette Colbert, Joan Crawford, Cary Grant, Myrna Loy, Deanna Durbin, Paul Newman, Gene Hackman, Peter Sellers and virtually every other name-above-the-title star in Hollywood. As he aged, he became a superb character actor, and often those character parts were also leading roles. He continued to work in prestige pictures until the end of his long life. His career lasted fifty years, and for most of them, he was a major star. His career endured and carried on through all the post-Studio Era upheavals better than any of his contemporaries (including the supremely gifted Bette Davis, who made very few worthwhile pictures after 1950: not her fault, but there it is), partly because he aged well, like an excellent Burgundy, but mostly because (like Davis) he was always an actor first and a movie star second. And yet, for all his longevity and famous roles, he’s not always remembered by the sort of people who draw up numbered lists of the most popular/influential/important/famous Hollywood stars. Even at the peak of his popularity, I have the sense that his skill was such that audiences had come to expect him to give a fine performance, so that his excellence eventually became something of a foregone conclusion: only a bad performance would have attracted critical attention, and that’s the one kind of performance Melvyn Douglas didn’t give.

Critics are constantly saying that Cary Grant’s special gift was his ability to make everything look so easy, as if he weren’t acting at all. I think Cary Grant acts far too much — at his best, he pleases and amuses me, but I just about never believe a word he says: he’s too busy pulling faces and doing bits. But then there’s Melvyn Douglas, who nearly always makes you forget he’s acting. He was a very big star and had a commanding presence, but he wasn’t a show-off. All of his best qualities are the opposite of showy histrionics: he doesn’t stammer like Jimmy Stewart, arch his eyebrows like Joan Crawford, gulp like Gary Cooper, squinch up the sides of his mouth like Clark Gable, pull faces like Cary Grant, insert “naturalistic” pauses like Spencer Tracy, or rely on any other mannerisms to remind us that we’re watching Melvyn Douglas give a Great Acting Performance: his only trick is to beguile us into believing he is the character he’s playing. There’s the effortless ease of his delivery, which is almost too smoothly eloquent and well-spoken to be credible, yet is nevertheless completely natural; there’s his technical skill, which is so masterful that it’s nearly always invisible. Perhaps most amazing is his ability to play every style, genre, historical period with equal success (one wouldn’t question his presence at the trial of Socrates for a second, but imagine Gable, Cooper, Tracy or God forbid, Duke Wayne in that setting!). If he doesn’t get as much credit as he deserves, it’s because he’s too real, too perfectly believable, to call attention to his virtuosity. It is only when you look at the list of his credits that he becomes an astonishment. As an actor, I rank him in the same category as Claude Rains and Walter Huston, which is to say, I’m prepared to see him act in the worst rubbish just to watch how his superb aplomb gets him through the wretched stuff without mussing his hair or unsharpening the perfect crease in his trousers. You only have to see him come through a rotten picture like “A Woman’s Face” with his dignity intact to know what I’m talking about.

Melvyn Douglas in his leading man days.

Of all the first-rate all-round leading men of the Studio Era, Melvyn Douglas gets my vote for finest and most versatile. He played debonair heroes, suave bounders, champagne-swilling boulevardiers, sober surgeons, likeable cads, tough-minded businessmen, amused husbands, aggrieved fathers, put-upon architects, resilient dupes, learned judges, grizzled seamen, sozzled swells, steely generals, shifty plutocrats, noble ranchers, incorruptible authoritarians, and even average fellows (his average fellows were always, by virtue of the man himself, well above average, though he was a fine enough actor to make them seem believably “average”: he was the average man’s dream of himself). Every one of these parts he played with authority, distinction, style, grace, wit and above all finesse. Bravo, Melvyn Douglas!

The Claude Rains Fan Club

Among Other Things