Jack Oakie

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Fri May 04, 2012 3:40 pm

I like him in a lot of films, but something bugs me about him. Am I crazy or is he better when he's in an ensemble or with someone strong to bounce lines off of rather than as the star? I've seen three of his starring films and was mildly disappointed in them all. I suppose I liked Dude Ranch the best, it at least has a spectacular ending and the idea of anyone buying Eugene Pallette as a "Red Indian" tickles me. Then again, why Oakie would want anything to do with June Collyer's character was beyond me, she seemed out to humiliate him even though she knew he was only an actor. The Sap From Syracuse had me appreciating how far Ginger Rogers still had to come acting-wise and was at best a mildly diverting time-killer. The Gang Buster just seemed...off. I couldn't react to it the way the film wanted me to except when he walked out expecting to be shot and a dozen cops tackle him.

I haven't seen Sea Legs, The Social Lion, or June Moon (seems the most promising of the three), which all seem Oakie vehicles, and would appreciate any thoughts on whether any are worth the effort from thems that's seen 'em.

Donald Binks · Post by **Donald Binks** » Fri May 04, 2012 7:35 pm

Can't say I cared for him that much - too much of a wise-cracking smart-alick. He was though aptly suited to playing the role of Musso... - Mussi.... - Musco...that Italian dictator in "The Great Dictator"

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Fri May 04, 2012 7:43 pm

I like him well enough when he doesn't get too carried away with his own silliness, but he's much, much better as a supporting player, in my view. Anyway, when major supporting players were, occasionally, granted a "film of their own," it was invaribly an ultra-cheapie, so the deck was stacked against them. The one with Ginger, however...that I'd like to see.

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Fri May 04, 2012 7:46 pm

Donald Binks wrote:Can't say I cared for him that much - too much of a wise-cracking smart-alick. He was though aptly suited to playing the role of Musso... - Mussi.... - Musco...that Italian dictator in "The Great Dictator"

He was born to play Il Duce.

Changsham · Post by **Changsham** » Fri May 04, 2012 8:53 pm

I was very impressed with Jack Oakie in Murder At The Vanities. His wisecracking character was kind of a bridging link to gel all the absurdities going on in this bizarre film that made it work.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sat May 05, 2012 7:44 am

entredeuxguerres wrote:I like him well enough when he doesn't get too carried away with his own silliness, but he's much, much better as a supporting player, in my view. Anyway, when major supporting players were, occasionally, granted a "film of their own," it was invaribly an ultra-cheapie, so the deck was stacked against them. The one with Ginger, however...that I'd like to see.

If you want to see Ginger in that film, I think you're in for a letdown. I can take Ginger's non-acting because I've seen enough of these to know that ingenue parts at Paramount then were pretty thankless and required little if any acting, hence I am not expecting much. As far as quality, some of the Paramount cheapies are surprising but for me they are underwritten and mostly don't hold together throughout. Once in a while I'll run into a Madame Racketeer or something else consistently entertaining, but usually it'll start fairly strong and groan in the middle to some sort of finish.

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Sat May 05, 2012 4:13 pm

I think I know what you mean- Oakie can be rather overpowering if he's allowed too much screen time. He's also very dependent on material- sometimes he's relatively intelligent and sympathetic, other times he's a dumb braggart.

I think he's quite good in CLOSE HARMONY as part of a singing act with Skeets Gallagher. They both have a nice chemistry together, even though Buddy Rogers and Nancy Carroll are working hard to split them up (all for good reasons of course)

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sat May 05, 2012 4:46 pm

FrankFay wrote:I think I know what you mean- Oakie can be rather overpowering if he's allowed too much screen time. He's also very dependent on material- sometimes he's relatively intelligent and sympathetic, other times he's a dumb braggart.

I think he's quite good in CLOSE HARMONY as part of a singing act with Skeets Gallagher. They both have a nice chemistry together, even though Buddy Rogers and Nancy Carroll are working hard to split them up (all for good reasons of course)

I find I like him in the other musicals he did at that time (Sweetie, Let's Go Native), but I've never seen Close Harmony. I left those films off my list as they're not exactly Oakie-starring (I admit he shares that billing in LGN). I like how he lands Kay Francis in LGN, as she's rather too much woman for him (in every sense of the word - he can hardly carry her). Your "dependent on material" comment is more accurate than my way of putting it and I dimly remember him being a bandleader in a film and not really coming off well. Can't think of the name, but it wasn't Street Girl.

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Sat May 05, 2012 10:27 pm

In the remake of Street Girl (That Girl From Paris) he's the drummer in the band and sings a song called "Moon Face". He also intentionally drums off beat to spoil Lucille Ball's dancing- so the band will replace her with Lily Pons.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sun May 06, 2012 7:03 am

FrankFay wrote:In the remake of Street Girl (That Girl From Paris) he's the drummer in the band and sings a song called "Moon Face". He also intentionally drums off beat to spoil Lucille Ball's dancing- so the band will replace her with Lily Pons.

No...I remember that film too now you mention it. Ah, IMDB has reminded me. It was Dancer In The Dark. Couldn't warm to him there, at least through most of the film.

Rollo Treadway · Post by **Rollo Treadway** » Sun May 06, 2012 1:52 pm

He seems to me one of those actors who need to be reined in so that he doesn't fill the screen with ham, as in his irritating Southern blusterer in the otherwise fine Day/Hudson comedy Lover Come Back.

My favorite role of his is George, the idiot-savant let loose on Hollywood in Once In a Lifetime (1932). Based on Kaufman & Hart's hilarious satire on the silents-to-talkies transition period, this criminally neglected film should be of special interest to Nitratevillains, and it just happens to be available on the "tube" at the moment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcWszDqWipM

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sun May 06, 2012 2:23 pm

Rollo Treadway wrote:He seems to me one of those actors who need to be reined in so that he doesn't fill the screen with ham, as in his irritating Southern blusterer in the otherwise fine Day/Hudson comedy Lover Come Back.

My favorite role of his is George, the idiot-savant let loose on Hollywood in Once In a Lifetime (1932). Based on Kaufman & Hart's hilarious satire on the silents-to-talkies transition period, this criminally neglected film should be of special interest to Nitratevillains, and it just happens to be available on the "tube" at the moment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcWszDqWipM

Heh, the YouTube copy stinks as bad as mine in picture quality. I always thought this was one of his best, too. Aline MacMahon is very sharp here and appears the only sane, rational person in town. Kinda sad that two years after this, she was doing domestic comedies. I disagree in one sense, I think it's okay for Oakie to be obnoxious when he's intended to be, as a matter of fact it's the fusing of sunniness and obnoxiousness that I find peculiarly precode-era American. Hell, Cagney and James Dunn often got close to crossing that line themselves.

What the hell are "Indian nuts" anyway?

Rollo Treadway · Post by **Rollo Treadway** » Sun May 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Not exactly HD quality, no. (Here's hoping someone connected with the Universal/TCM Archive releases may read this and be inspired to put it on the program!)

Once in a Lifetime is also an example of what you said about Oakie being at his best as part of an ensemble. In this respect he reminds me of another Jack: Carson. The two Jacks are even a little bit alike, both in appearance and their typically oafish screen personas, though I'd venture to say that Carson had somewhat more "range". Still, Carson is another one who can be excellent in supporting roles, but a bit much when he has to carry the picture.

CoffeeDan · Post by **CoffeeDan** » Sun May 06, 2012 3:53 pm

mndean wrote:What the hell are "Indian nuts" anyway?

Hazelnuts!

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Sun May 06, 2012 5:23 pm

CoffeeDan wrote:
mndean wrote:What the hell are "Indian nuts" anyway?
Hazelnuts!

Sure about that? If I had to make an entirely wild guess, I'd say "acorns," since many tribes, out of necessity, converted them into a kind of flour or gruel. If you are after wild hazlenuts, you'd better pick them while green, 'cause if you don't, the squirrels & chippies will.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sun May 06, 2012 6:31 pm

I agree about Carson as having much more range. Though, when Carson is obnoxious (as in Stand-In) he can be really obnoxious. I found Oakie a bit less so in a similar role in those Lucille Ball Annabel films.

I wouldn't be surprised if Indian nuts were hazelnuts. Whichever nut they are, they're small. I don't see people eating acorns now, were they popular enough to buy in the shell back then? One area where I'm fairly weak in, is oddball food of that era. Some of the old recipes I've seen were enough to make me sick. It's not unusual though, Food Network recipes often have the same effect.

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Sun May 06, 2012 6:52 pm

Didn't realize they were being eaten raw on the half-shell. Acorns require soaking to remove the tannic bitterness, & can't be eaten raw at all--by humans, that is. If they were eaten right off the tree, my next wild guess is Pinyon pine nuts, about the size of hazel nuts, & an important food source for Indians of the Southwest.

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Sun May 06, 2012 7:01 pm

Even though the common name is Indian Nuts were they pine nuts? - Oakie's character would have been eating something cheap and easily obtainable, and so common as to be beneath contempt. Were Pine Nuts something easily obtainable? I've always thought of them being fairly expensive.

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Sun May 06, 2012 8:56 pm

FrankFay wrote:Even though the common name is Indian Nuts were they pine nuts? - Oakie's character would have been eating something cheap and easily obtainable, and so common as to be beneath contempt. Were Pine Nuts something easily obtainable? I've always thought of them being fairly expensive.

Certainly, they're expensive now, but before they were "discovered" by yuppies & health-food cultists, I'm not so sure...didn't cost the Indians anything to knock them down with poles, & in parts of the Southwest, Pinyon pines are plentiful. If they were actually called "Indian nuts," stands to reason there was some special relationship between them & the Red Man. Native hazelnuts, in the North East at any rate, are not plentiful.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Sun May 06, 2012 9:18 pm

FrankFay wrote:Even though the common name is Indian Nuts were they pine nuts? - Oakie's character would have been eating something cheap and easily obtainable, and so common as to be beneath contempt. Were Pine Nuts something easily obtainable? I've always thought of them being fairly expensive.

I always remember pine nuts not being cheap going back to the '70s at least, but hazelnuts were definitely not cheap, at least in my lifetime. Considering they're nearly broke vaudeville performers and the way George eats those nuts, they must be something cheap. The only nut I know that was small, fairly cheap when I was young, and was regularly opened with your teeth were pistachios. Friends of mine would get the red-dyed ones (no longer around), eat the nuts and then suck on the shells. I never heard those being called anything but pistachio nuts. The pines may have been plentiful, but did they harvest the nuts on such a scale?

Then again, some items may have been much cheaper 80 years ago and still profitable to harvest. I used to be able to buy grapefruit for very little, but just try to now.

CoffeeDan · Post by **CoffeeDan** » Mon May 07, 2012 7:50 am

Boy, did I open can of nuts, or what?

Alternatively, I think the term "Indian nuts" might apply more to filberts as well as hazelnuts, although I heard the term applied to both in different parts of the country when I was growing up. Roasted hazelnuts and filberts (in or out of the shell) were staples in the candy and nut shops I frequented as a kid, and I even got them at a local candy store back when I attended Ohio University in the late '70s and early '80s.

But how did we get on this? Oh yeah, discussing Jack Oakie and ONCE IN A LIFETIME, which I think is a better comic chronicle of the transition to sound than SINGIN' IN THE RAIN. Much of the play and subsequent movie was based on actual events -- Moss Hart must have read a lot of the same trade papers I did in my research on the period. I acquired a so-so print of the film from VintageFilmBuff.com several years ago -- is this the one everybody else has?

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Mon May 07, 2012 8:12 am

In his autobiography ACT ONE Hart goes into his inspirations for the play in some detail, plus his trials in trying to work out some plot issues- which is how he began his collaboration with George S. Kaufman. The book is very sentimentalized but good reading.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Mon May 07, 2012 8:27 am

CoffeeDan wrote:I acquired a so-so print of the film from VintageFilmBuff.com several years ago -- is this the one everybody else has?

It's the one I have.

entredeuxguerres · Post by **entredeuxguerres** » Mon May 07, 2012 10:11 am

mndean wrote:
CoffeeDan wrote:I acquired a so-so print of the film from VintageFilmBuff.com several years ago -- is this the one everybody else has?
It's the one I have.

It's the one I want.

Re the enigma of Indian nuts, I retire. (But should the subject of goat nuts arise...any perplexities I can resolve.)

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Mon May 07, 2012 11:47 am

entredeuxguerres wrote:
mndean wrote:
CoffeeDan wrote:I acquired a so-so print of the film from VintageFilmBuff.com several years ago -- is this the one everybody else has?
It's the one I have.
It's the one I want.

You Don't Want It. It's barely tolerable at any size above that little YouTube window. Watch it there. It's isn't quite the worst thing I got from Vintage Film Buff, but it's certainly #2 on the list. I have some VFB disks that are quite decent image-wise, but they're almost always obscure things like The Vice Squad or Two Fisted. Dude Ranch (to drag this back towards Oakie) is very good, as if it was done from a 16mm print.

Wm. Charles Morrow · Post by **Wm. Charles Morrow** » Tue May 08, 2012 8:34 pm

Dragging us still further from nuts and back to Jack Oakie, I was fortunate to see June Moon at a rare screening at Film Forum in 2005. It was introduced by George Kaufman's daughter Anne Schneider, and Kitty Carlisle, who of course knew Kaufman through her husband Moss Hart. They both affirmed that co-authors Kaufman and Ring Lardner hated the movie. It's not all that bad, really, but if you're familiar with the play (which I was when I saw it), you can understand why the playwrights didn't like the changes in their script. Oakie is fine, but the problem is that the film adaptation throws away the satirical point of the source material, and bogs down in a standard romantic triangle. I wrote an IMDb review of it a couple of days after seeing it, for anyone interested in more detail.

Like a lot of earlier post-ers, I appreciate Oakie in small doses, less so in leads. He made a good foil for Spencer Tracy in Looking for Trouble (1934), a rather obscure but enjoyable comedy-drama-action flick. He's really obnoxious in his first 2 or 3 scenes, but then downplays and gets more laughs as it rolls along. And I have to add, Oakie is perfectly cast in Million Dollar Legs, practically playing staight man to Fields and all the silent comedy vets. I enjoy that film more every time I see it, and I can't imagine a better Migg Tweeny.

mndean · Post by **mndean** » Tue May 08, 2012 10:51 pm

Wm. Charles Morrow wrote:Dragging us still further from nuts and back to Jack Oakie, I was fortunate to see June Moon at a rare screening at Film Forum in 2005. It was introduced by George Kaufman's daughter Anne Schneider, and Kitty Carlisle, who of course knew Kaufman through her husband Moss Hart. They both affirmed that co-authors Kaufman and Ring Lardner hated the movie. It's not all that bad, really, but if you're familiar with the play (which I was when I saw it), you can understand why the playwrights didn't like the changes in their script. Oakie is fine, but the problem is that the film adaptation throws away the satirical point of the source material, and bogs down in a standard romantic triangle. I wrote an IMDb review of it a couple of days after seeing it, for anyone interested in more detail.

Like a lot of earlier post-ers, I appreciate Oakie in small doses, less so in leads. He made a good foil for Spencer Tracy in Looking for Trouble (1934), a rather obscure but enjoyable comedy-drama-action flick. He's really obnoxious in his first 2 or 3 scenes, but then downplays and gets more laughs as it rolls along. And I have to add, Oakie is perfectly cast in Million Dollar Legs, practically playing staight man to Fields and all the silent comedy vets. I enjoy that film more every time I see it, and I can't imagine a better Migg Tweeny.

Thanks! Someone has at least answered about the most interesting of the films I was wondering about. I really like Looking For Trouble, and I believe Oakie was intended to be obnoxious early, with his better qualities coming out as the film went on. I had more gag reflex visualizing Spencer Tracy in a G-string than in anything Oakie did.

Million Dollar Legs is one I hated Pauline Kael for. After reading her writeup I avoided the film, thinking no silly comedy could be that good, not even a Fields film. Damn. I learned my lesson, and when Blessed Event came out I was on that one the day it came into the rental store.

Richard Finegan · Post by **Richard Finegan** » Thu May 10, 2012 3:58 am

Wm. Charles Morrow wrote: I was fortunate to see June Moon at a rare screening at Film Forum in 2005. It was introduced by George Kaufman's daughter Anne Schneider, and Kitty Carlisle, who of course knew Kaufman through her husband Moss Hart. They both affirmed that co-authors Kaufman and Ring Lardner hated the movie...

I was there too! It was Thursday, June 30, 2005. It was double-billed with FOLLOW THRU (1930).
I was able to have a very brief chat with Kitty Carlisle afterward and she was just as nice as could be!

I enjoyed JUNE MOON and wish the rights issues could be cleared up so it can be shown on TV (it would be nice to see on TCM) or be released on DVD.
Likewise, Paramount's 1937 remake BLONDE TROUBLE seems to be totally unavailable. I've always wanted to see that one too. (Hey, it's an El Brendel film that his fans need to see!)

s.w.a.c. · Post by **s.w.a.c.** » Thu May 10, 2012 8:22 am

Once in a Lifetime was shown in 35mm at Cinefest in Syracuse this year, and it was a treat to see it under the best possible circumstances (now I can avoid the versions that are circulating elsewhere). I especially loved the text intro where Laemmle pats himself on the back for having the guts to tell the real truth about Hollywood. I'd be curious to know how the play was toned down for the big screen.

And thanks for the reminder that I need to watch Million Dollar Legs again. I haven't watched it since a TV viewing in the '80s (and it's sitting on my DVD shelf, tempting me from within that UK DVD box set that includes a few Fields titles that didn't get issued in North America).

It's interesting that Oakie gets billing over Fields in this particular bit of advertising art (it's not a one-sheet, maybe a pre-release poster or a window card?).

Wm. Charles Morrow · Post by **Wm. Charles Morrow** » Thu May 10, 2012 2:48 pm

Richard Finegan wrote:
Wm. Charles Morrow wrote: I was fortunate to see June Moon at a rare screening at Film Forum in 2005. It was introduced by George Kaufman's daughter Anne Schneider, and Kitty Carlisle, who of course knew Kaufman through her husband Moss Hart. They both affirmed that co-authors Kaufman and Ring Lardner hated the movie...

I was there too! It was Thursday, June 30, 2005. It was double-billed with FOLLOW THRU (1930).
I was able to have a very brief chat with Kitty Carlisle afterward and she was just as nice as could be!

That's great you were able to talk to her. I saw her in the lobby before the show, chatting with Ms. Schneider, but didn't get a chance to meet her. Oh well, there goes that opportunity . . .

I'd also like to see the 1931 June Moon available on DVD, or shown on TCM. There was a TV production of it in the '70s with a bit of unusual casting: Maxie, the wisecracking pianist, was played by none other than Stephen Sondheim. This adaptation was much closer to the original play, but somehow it fell flat, although Sondheim was good. The guy in the Jack Oakie role wasn't very appealing. Oakie had the ability to play a dimwitted character in a believable and sympathetic way, but the guy in the TV production just came off as irritatingly dumb. Despite the changes in the script I think the '31 film version is the better of the two.

Jack Oakie

Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: Jack Oakie

June Moon and remake Blonde Trouble

Re: Jack Oakie

Re: June Moon