A Streetcar Named Desire is one of those movies I’ve never seen for some reason but always had good intentions about watching - I’ve been trying to get my hands on a copy since Brando died, but my local Blockbuster said, I quote, “Spell that?” :smack: Anyway, my hold at the library finally came in and I watched it tonight.
I quite enjoyed it, of course, and I can definately see the appeal of a young Brando. When he just walked in and took his shirt off, I was all :eek: and then :o . But this is the Movie that Changed Acting? He mumbles! I never did catch some of his lines. He chews the scenery. He’s a little embarassing, and I don’t mean in the intentional sort of way. And of course Vivien Leigh is way over on the other end, all classical acting, and the two of them together is, I dunno, claustrophobic. Which might have added something to that movie, but I’m not sure that’s the direction acting really needed to go in, you know? Am I just an ignorant philistine who can’t appreciate the greatness of method acting, or what?
Also, I thought I’d read that the DVD now available is a restored version with additional scenes cut from the theatrical release - some dialogue about Blanche’s past, etc. Was the overall effect of the restored scenes dramatically different?
Yes.* It’s cut out of the film, but there is some specific dialog in the play when Blanche talks about what happened to her husband. I’ll see if I can find a quote for you.
*The dark, horrible secret that causes madness and suicide in just about any Tennessee Williams play is that somebody’s gay.
I thought there was something more explicit, but here’s a quote from Blanche in the play which I’m pretty certain was not in the film (it’s been awhile since I’ve seen it, though):
Also, at different points in the play, both Blanche and Stella call Blanche’s late husband “a degenerate,” which to the audience of the day could only mean one thing.
Slight hijack . . . I just read the new biography of Tallulah Bankhead (excellent book, I highly recommend it, even if it hardly has any photos), and Tallu was supposed to play Blanche in the movie–but she was too much of an alcoholic mess by then.
Tragic! What a Blanche she would have been. She played her once onstage and was apparently electric.
Vivien Leigh actually uses three acting styles. The first is her Southern Belle character, and yes it is all about artifice. It’s her comforting illusion. The second style has a higher pitched voice, and comes out in times of panic, when she becomes a frightened child. The third and least affected, most natural style is in the rare moments when she drops the artifice to address reality, such as when she talks about the fate of Belle Reve and pulls out all the documents of mortgage and forclosure. Altogether, it’s a brilliant performance, my favorite by an actress in all of sound cinema.
I like to imagine that Blanche is a continuation of Scarlett O’Hara, where she’s lost Tara and has to go live with younger sister Suellen in New Orleans.
As for the censorsed and restored scenes, some are as specific as individual closeups. In the famous “Stella!” scene where Stanley is bellowing for her at the bottom of the stairs, the uncensored version had closeups of an entranced Stella slowly walking down the stairs with an expression that says “the make-up sex is incredible”. The censored version substituted long shots of her walking down the stairs.
So the original version didn’t have those “my brain has shorted out” shots of Stella from a low angle? That would be an entirely different scene! (And not half so good.) I take it, then, that in the original it’s harder to see why Stella stays with Stanley.
I loved the bit where Vivien Leigh quits shrieking around with Mitch and goes into “style three” with “I have had many meetings with strangers.” Dayyum.
So nobody’s going to address the thing about Brando being on-fire-hot but entirely incoherent?
Well, I think that’s why it changed acting. It made it acceptable for actors to act like real people that you know, instead of the bombastic, perfectly articulate, standing up straight actors of the early movie years.
It’s more natural to mumble, and I disagree, I understood every word. Streetcar is one of my ALL TIME favorite plays and ALL TIME favorite movies. I saw Gary Sinise play Stanley and he was AMAZING…AMAZING, but no one is as great as Brando for playing “The Brute I Love”
Well, we can certainly agree on “it changed acting”, I suppose. The thing is, everybody they always cite as being “heir to Brando” in that sense is at least somewhat more coherent.
Would she have agreed to appear in a film with Brando after The Eagle Has Two Heads? Supposedly she was insistent that he be cast opposite her and then equally insistent that he and all his Method mannerisms be sacked.
According to the book, he got himself fired from The Eagle Has Two Heads because it was crap, and he had bigger fish to fry. Tallulah would have acted with Satan himself to do Blanche onscreen. Plus, she was well-known for not holding grudges.
Interesting bit of trivia: the four main leads of the original Broadway production of Streetcar went on to win Oscars. The last of the four to win: Jessica Tandy.
Brando’s film performance was great, but I think the film cut out a lot of the sexual elements of the play. It’s probably about time for a remake as the play was written.
In my The 50 Most Important Hollywood Films thread (which I’m proud to say met the approval of none other than Cervaise), I selected Streetcar as number 2. It was a very important film. Here’s the blurb I wrote about it:
2. A Streetcar Named Desire1951, Elia Kazan
Released admist a firestorm of controversy, this film marked the beginning of the end for Hollywood’s infamous Production Code and the meddling Catholic Legion of Decency. Kazan (around whom enormous controversy swirled when he cooperated with McCarthy’s committee) was convinced that Americans were tired of being pandered, and for his adaptation of Tennessee Williams’ play, he pulled out all the stops available at the time. Even though censors had combed through the movie and excised several scenes and tempered others, what remained was a steamy, deeply sexual, raw, and provocative film. Marlon Brando redefined acting, using his Method acting style to bring an intensity to his character (Stanley Kowalski) that influenced other actors ( like Montgomery Clift, James Dean, Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro, and Sean Penn) for the rest of the century. This is the film that you can point to as bridging two eras: the old hammy style of modest decorum role playing, and the modern realistic feel-your-pain acting. Even within the movie, you can see the contrast between the two styles, Vivien Leigh’s perfect diction and proper manner contrasted with Brando’s mumbles and pauses. Mild by today’s standards, the movie pretty much covered every topic that was forbidden at the time, from homosexuality to nymphomania, from insanity to rape. The Academy showered the film with an incredible twelve award nominations, including three from the acting categories (this was the first of 4 nominations in 4 successive years for Brando). A 1993 re-release restored much of the censors’ damage, including Blanche’s sexually charged visit with the newspaper boy and Stanley’s rape of Blanche.
He was a good, old-fashioned ham, just like John Barrymore and Bette Davis, only with a “Method” label tacked onto him. Not that that’s a bad thing, I’m a big fan of ham acting.
You want “Method” without the title? Go look at Spencer Tracy, Greta Garbo, Lillian Gish, even (though I can’t stand him) Charlie Chaplin in some of his movies.
You’re a little confused here. Elia Kazan appeared before the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1952. Joseph McCarthy was in the Senate, never in the House, and did not pursue Hollywood figures.