tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post1131883810845569409..comments2023-12-06T02:25:20.424-08:00Comments on The Great Katharine Hepburn: THE PHILADELPHIA STORY (1940)Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16581509646636552299noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-87368323171128016112017-01-26T00:28:15.497-08:002017-01-26T00:28:15.497-08:00You don't know what you're talking about. ...You don't know what you're talking about. Hepburn didn't have "almost exclusive control over casting of the film." Hepburn wanted Clark Gable to play Dexter Haven, and she wanted Spencer Tracy to play Macaulay Connor. She got neither. Both were busy. True she had sold the rights to the film to MGM for a paltry $250,000 with the proviso that she be cast in the lead and that she have supposed veto over the picks of producer, director, cast and screenwriter. But she was using this film as the vehicle to revive her flagging movie career. She'd been labeled "box office poison" after four box office flops, and was leveraging her ownership to the rights for the film to revive her flagging movie career. She only secured the rights to making the film version of the play because her boyfriend, Howard Hughes, had purchased the rights for her.<br />MGM was not about to take a chance on her without two A-list actors to prop up the film. When neither Gable nor Tracy would do the film, Hepburn was told by MGM that whomever played Dexter would only be paid $150,000 max. Cary Grant agreed to do it, but only if he got top billing. Hepburn was in no position to object. Hence, MGM hired Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart. Grant donated his salary to the British War Relief Fund.<br />I loved the film, save for the script's fatal flaw: the creepy father who blames his daughter (Hepburn) for his philandering, arguing (in front of his wife) that he had to search somewhere else for the love he hadn't gotten from his daughter. Incest anyone? Since you say Hepburn had control over the screenwriter, why did she agree to allowing her father's argument to prevail after she'd denounced him as a coward for blaming her for his affair? Her argument that he was a slimebag who wouldn't take responsibility for betraying his wife should have won the day, especially if she was in charge of the script.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-9242765347370426672012-11-20T05:03:16.211-08:002012-11-20T05:03:16.211-08:00It's one of my favourite classic films! :)It's one of my favourite classic films! :)Kate Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02981103578975768299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-76782659289258028792012-11-19T12:18:09.762-08:002012-11-19T12:18:09.762-08:00It certainly is a classic!It certainly is a classic!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16581509646636552299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-62195683734759166022012-11-19T12:17:52.532-08:002012-11-19T12:17:52.532-08:00Yes, it does give some depth to the reading, doesn...Yes, it does give some depth to the reading, doesn't it? Thanks for commenting!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16581509646636552299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-58282267197242761132012-11-19T07:42:24.395-08:002012-11-19T07:42:24.395-08:00I love everything about this black and white movie...I love everything about this black and white movie! Kate Gormanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02981103578975768299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-19273528428705216112012-05-22T10:03:16.871-07:002012-05-22T10:03:16.871-07:00Nice, Margaret! I hadn't thought about just ho...Nice, Margaret! I hadn't thought about just how seemingly contradictory this character is, and how if nothing else it's a great battleground for the debate between 'woman as object' in film and a more empowering perspective. Really cool.Meredithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15156051197099180915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-5569015295130881162012-05-20T14:25:27.062-07:002012-05-20T14:25:27.062-07:00Thank you so much for your comment. That is a wond...Thank you so much for your comment. That is a wonderful reading of Liz, a character I must admit that I tend to overlook. But you are so right - she is respected as a working woman in her own right. I will say that although she is treated well, she is still only an "enabler." By that I mean that she, as a female character, does not have any sort of dominion over the arc of the film plot - she is also helpless to alter her own destiny in relation to Macaulay Connor, or is she? Although she has reasons that motivate her not "scratching Tracy's eyes out," at the end of the film when Connor proposes to Tracy, Liz appears helpless to assert her own agender, though it is saying something for the film that another FEMALE character, Tracy, does that on her behalf. Very Very interesting! Thank you again for you great insight!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16581509646636552299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2825694783801781047.post-2598456979318406332012-05-20T14:13:40.008-07:002012-05-20T14:13:40.008-07:00Nice piece. I like your point about this is not TA...Nice piece. I like your point about this is not TAMING. I always thought the male characters in THE PHILADELPHIA STORY "handled" Tracy the way they did not to tame her, but because the chip on her shoulder dictated that she be handled that way.<br /><br />Look at the Ruth Hussey character, Liz. She was strong and independent, too - in fact, she had more right to take Tracy's attitude because she was working hard on her own in real world, as opposed to Tracy, who had everything handed to her. Yet everyone treated Liz with respect (except Uncle Willy - hehe) because she treated them with respect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com