NitrateVille.com

Wm. Charles Morrow wrote:My first acquisitions were mass market paperbacks: the 1968 edition of Leonard Maltin’s film guide, and his Movie Comedy Teams a couple of years later. What I found intriguing about the latter were all the obscure teams I hadn’t seen on TV or anywhere else: Wheeler & Woolsey, the Ritz Brothers, Clark & McCullough, etc. It took a while to catch up with their output, but it was fascinating to learn about them. The paperbacks themselves were cheaply manufactured, however, and my introductory copies fell apart long ago. My first keeper, i.e. the first hardcover movie book I acquired, was The Films of Charlie Chaplin. I hadn’t even seen any of his movies yet, aside from excerpts in the Youngson compilations. Next came the Daniel Blum set (silents & talkies), the Joe Franklin book that wasn’t really written by Joe Franklin, and a book someone gave me on musicals, All Talking! All Singing! All Dancing! After that, it was off to the races. Somehow I didn’t discover Mr. Brownlow until later, but The Parade’s Gone By instantly became my favorite book on the silent era. Where the talkie era is concerned, Joe Adamson’s books on the Marx Brothers and Tex Avery were a revelation to me, as he demonstrated twice over that film books didn’t have to be dry and academic, they could be witty and fun.

I recall buying a paperback copy of THE PARADE'S GONE BY in my teens, and a senior work colleague remarking that it looked rather 'heavy'. I took this remark literally at first, (the book being somewhat chunky) and the book (a hardback, now) is still an essential part of my library, now joined by a few of Brownlow's later works.

Two books I reread rather often have one thing in common--daughters who greatly admired their famous show biz fathers. In this case the memoir by Joan Benny, SUNDAY NIGHTS AT SEVEN, about Jack Benny. And LOU'S ON FIRST, by Chris Costello. I find it always heartwarming to know that these beloved icons of comedy were such kind and respected people. This leads me to ask, is there a special selection of movie books you reread way more often than others?

1. My trouble with the Benny book is that Joan, or her publisher, took Jack's previously unpublished memoir, cut it down, and poured Joan's story into the mix. One unhappy result was that both the George Burns foreword, and Joan's text, dumped on Mary; it seems nobody liked her, but that info belonged in another book. Jack's unedited manuscript should have been published separately from Joan's memoir.
2. A few years before her Raymond Strait-assisted memoir came out, Chris was a participant in Strait's Star Babies, a Hollywood Kid interview book. If I recall correctly, in this earlier volume, Chris related a story where she told a cab driver- at ride's end- that he reminded her of her late father, and that he replied that he was, then drove off.

A sampling of one show’s authors, leaving out one Van Dyke book and a million Reiner books, including his collabs with Mel Brooks

Has any other series had a greater % of published cast members? Star Trek?

>Niven's anecdotes ... they're damned entertaining.<

I'll second that! And even moreso, in his own voice (he recorded abridged versions.)

-Craig

Alas, many of my movie books went astray over the years in the chaotic aftermath of a couple of bad marriages but I still have a few and some fond memories of those absent, such as the wonderful biography of Sam Goldwyn by Scott Berg, An Empire of Their Own by Neil Gabler, Sin in Soft Focus by Mark Vieira.

I still have the indispensable (however much one might find his judgments wrong-headed and infuriating) A Song in the Dark by Richard Barrios, Wheeler and Woolsey by Edward Waltz and several more.

Hands down the worst book I have ever read in this genre is Humphrey Bogart: The Making of a Legend by Darwin Porter. I hadn't heard of this writer when I started to read the book so was quite unprepared for the lunacy to follow. Mr Porter scorns sources. I was at first amazed by the reams of private conversation that Porter had access to between Bogey and stars such as Spencer Tracy. That 90% of the conversations concerned the size of their dicks, which female and male stars they had bedded lately, etc also surprised. Were all these stars completely obsessed with sex, both gay and straight, all the damn time? No, of course they weren't. Darwin Porter was, and all of this conversation was coming directly from his fevered imagination. Checking him out confirmed that he was a talentless hack who had churned out dozens of trashy Hollywood biographies.

I've always loathed the idea of book-burnings but if anything might make me waver in my belief it's Mr Porter.

The worst movie book I ever had was the Citadel Films of series book on Clark Gable. If you read the synopsis of Gone With the Wind, it's obvious that the writer never saw the film but did read the book. They talk about things that were not in the film at all, like Scarlett having a second child, etc.

I don't know the title of the worst movie book I've seen, but I had it briefly in the early '80s, via a movie book club. It was a picture book (with captions), said pictures being full-page b&w star closeups. They were atrociously printed, and such awful choices as stills that few were recognizable as the supposed stars. When I got to one of Mae West, along with its comment on WC Fields and "their many films together", I looked no further. Back to the book club it went, despite their instructions that books were not on approval and could not be returned. I explained that it was the worst film book I'd ever seen, and I never heard back from them...I can only assume that they had to agree with me!

That reminds me of a slight sin I commit occasionally with library books. Some movie books have an occasional howler of a mistake, either in a photo caption or text that I lightly pencil in a correction. It's a sad state that book editors or someone along the chain does not catch some truly mind numbing errors. Even with a respected author--one history of Broadway outraged me in that it had a circa 2000 photo of "Laurel & Hardy" (figurines) pulling the 42nd Street EmpireTheater several yards to publicize its new location on the block. Damn it, the figurines were Abbott & Costello!! They had played there in their burlesque days. How can one confuse these two comedy teams? It made me want to burn the rest of the book.

I have not read this book yet, but just by looking at the cover I can tell that it is poorly researched.
http://www.amazon.com/Carole-Landis-Suc ... ole+landis


I don't even need to read the horrible reviews on Amazon.

I used to have Hollywood Babylon I and II but don't any more ...

What I do have:

all the US studio histories (Stories: MGM, Paramount, RKO, Universal, Warner Bros, United Artists, Disney; The Films of Twentieth Century-Fox),
most of Kalton C Lahue's books (Ladies in Distress, Gentlemen to the Rescue, Clown Princes and Court Jesters, Riders of the Range, Bound and Gagged, Continued Next Week, Winners of the West),
The Paramount Pretties, The RKO Gals, The Debonairs, Hollywood's Love Teams, Starring Fred Astaire, The Films of Gene Kelly,
many of Alexander Walker's books (Garbo, Joan Crawford, Bette Davis, Hollywood England, National Heroes, Stardom, The Shattered Silents, Sex in the Movies, Icons in the Fire),
several Hollywood Albums from the 1950s, two 1930s Film-Lovers Annuals, Picturegoer's Who's Who (1933), Quinlan's Film Stars/Character Actors/Film Comedians, Ed Katz's book on Wheeler and Woolsey,
Leslie Halliwell's Double Take and Fade Away and The Dead That Walk, Barry Norman's Hollywood Greats, Film Greats, Movie Greats, 100 Best Films,
The King of the Movies: Siegmund Lubin, The Elstree Story, Forever Ealing, Shepperton Studios, The Forgotten Film Factory (Isleworth), autobiographies by Esther Williams, Maureen O'Hara, Katharine Hepburn, Lauren Bacall, Lou Tellegen, Lionel Barrymore, biographies about Spencer Tracy, Dana Andrews, Katharine Hepburn, Jean Harlow, Virginia Cherrill and Garbo.
Rachel Low's British cinema histories and George Perry's study of the same.
David Thomson's Biographical History of Film, Have You Seen, The Big Screen, Moments That Made the Movies.
Lots of coffee table picture books and probably lots of other things ...

That Lana Turner cover takes my breath away for all the wrong reasons. Browsing through Facebook can be a fulltime job correcting similiar photo gaffes.

My mother gave me an original 1958 copy of Blum's "Pictorial-Talkies" book that a friend had given her. I fell in love with the book yellowing though it was. But several pages and still pics were cut out. Before the internet I had to go to the Library of Congress to get the full book with no missing pages or cut-outs. Anybody who knows Blums 'Talkies' books knows the '58 version differs from later update versions as the later versions were deleted of material in the '58 version. For instance full page portraits of Marie Dressler and John Barrymore are left out of later updates. Some sections for the years 1932 and 1933 are completely excised or telescoped down.

silentfilm wrote:I have not read this book yet, but just by looking at the cover I can tell that it is poorly researched.
http://www.amazon.com/Carole-Landis-Suc ... ole+landis


I don't even need to read the horrible reviews on Amazon.

looks like one of those ebooks put together based on info from Wikipedia, (hawked through ebay). Doesn't even mean its a bad book but since when did Lana Turner become Carole Landis?

Well, I guess their both being blonde was "close enough."

silentfilm wrote:I have not read this book yet, but just by looking at the cover I can tell that it is poorly researched.
http://www.amazon.com/Carole-Landis-Suc ... ole+landis


I don't even need to read the horrible reviews on Amazon.

Maybe they bought that photo from Movie Market. Dig this photo of "Norma Shearer" http://www.moviemarket.com/Photos/P201865_C44598.html" target="_blank

or this one of "Cleo Moore"
http://www.moviemarket.com/Photos/P203880_C62837.html" target="_blank

or this one of "Greta Garbo" (a little closer guess than the others admittedly ) http://www.moviemarket.com/Photos/P200729_B75032.html" target="_blank

Well, this is not entirely fair because mine are tax deductible, I'm OCD so my relaxation is book shops and book sales, I have a second garage, and I started collecting in the late 1970s when they were really cheap. But let's just say I seem to have a lot. Especially if you consider all the other books I've bought related to film -- like fifteen books on Edward S. Curtis and five books dealing with Anna Sokolow (Shirley Clarke's best friend).

My first film book purchase was in 1979 when I was at the Smithsonian and they had a cutout of THE WAR, THE WEST AND THE WILDERNESS for $3.97. (It explains so much) The next week I found myself in a used bookshop in Plainfield, NJ and bicycled home two saddlebags filled with film books. Continued that for a while.

My favorite books I own -- none of them actually about film -- were THINGS MEN DIE FOR by "C", a signed copy of PAPRIKA and Italianamerican, Catherine Scorsese's cookbook. But there's a lot more friends have given me that are just as loved.

What's funny is that I just went to a book sale in Montclair, NJ that I hadn't been to since I was in college and I bought a large number of books I probably first bought from them in 1980 like SPELLBOUND IN DARKNESS, FILM SOCIETY PRIMER (Cecile Starr) and FILM AS ART -- in part to give to new friends. (The books I bought for me included two monographs of the "Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XI on Motion Pictures.")

I can't say what the worst film books I have because some writers are still alive. But I hate when people write Hollywood fables as fact when the really story has long been proven. Arbuckle's the obvious example.

I'm awfully tempted when certain books online go for literally a penny (albeit maybe not in great condition), as compared to certain books that become instant collectibles way beyond my price range. And unless I'm rabid for a new book I generally wait until it's at least 35-40% off. Sometimes there are library sales that go for a buck a book. But ultimately it has to be a subject or person I'm genuinely interested in, and good for repeat reading.

westegg wrote:I'm awfully tempted when certain books online go for literally a penny (albeit maybe not in great condition), as compared to certain books that become instant collectibles way beyond my price range. Ad unless I'm rabid for a new book I generally wait until it's at least 35-40% off. Sometimes there are library sales that go for a buck a book. But ultimately it has to be a subject or person I'm genuinely interested in, and good for repeat reading.

I have a hard time resisting Amazon's Instant Gratification Delivery System for the kindle, especially when I get a notice that (Insert Book Here) is on sale for $1.99. You click, it downloads, pay the bill later. (Unhappy surprise.) Most of the $1.99 specials are novels, though, I rarely see a history book discounted, and so far no film histories. I have noticed more classic film histories are now available for kindle, which wasn't the case a couple of years ago.

I was able to "borrow" an academic text for two months recently (for $10), which I hope is a service Amazon plans on offering in future--even on kindle this book was over $70 to purchase and absurdly expensive in hardback. I don't necessarily want to keep the book but I do want to read it, and I don't want to schlep up to UCLA to do it.

Jim Reid wrote:The worst movie book I ever had was the Citadel Films of series book on Clark Gable. If you read the synopsis of Gone With the Wind, it's obvious that the writer never saw the film but did read the book. They talk about things that were not in the film at all, like Scarlett having a second child, etc.

One of the problems with many of the Citadel 'FILMS OF...' series is that much of the commentary and opinion (if any) is from reviews rather than the author. Obviously some films (especially then) were very hard to see, if not impossible. However, anyone writing a book of this kind should surely attempt to see as many as possible. There are honorable exceptions, such as THE FILMS OF PETER LORRE, but this is a fault that mars an otherwise handsome series. Eversons's genre histories are a different breed of book, although he was better qualified than most to write entries in the series - of course he did do Stan and Ollie, bless him (and them).

earlytalkiebuffRob wrote:One of the problems with many of the Citadel 'FILMS OF...' series is that much of the commentary and opinion is from reviews rather than the author. Obviously some films (especially then) were very hard to see, if not impossible. However, anyone writing a book of this kind should surely attempt to see as many as possible. There are honorable exceptions, such as THE FILMS OF PETER LORRE, but this is a fault that mars an otherwise handsome series. Eversons's genre histories are a different breed of book, although he was better qualified than most to write entries in the series - of course he did do Stan and Ollie, bless him (and them).

I agree. For the most part, if it's not Otis Ferguson or James Agee we're talking about, and not a lost film that is impossible to review now, I'd much rather hear an evaluation from the author of the book I am reading with a consistent point of view that I have familiarized myself with from reading the rest of the book then some randomly selection newspaper review from the time the film came out, and I found that to be a big problem with many Citadel books. Another example of a book that I remember having a consistent critical point of view was I believe THE FILMS OF RITA HAYWORTH; at least, I hope I am remembering it correctly, I read the book from the library, I never owned a copy of it, and it's been many years, but I remember liking it for that reason.

If I have anyything on my wish list it'd be bound volumes of Variety obits 1905 to, say, 1950. I've browsed through them at Lincoln Center years ago. Maybe it's accessible online? It should be--why hide it? But actiual book volumes would be nice--nothing presents a more raw overview of show biz than those volumes as noted among long forgotten entertainers or those who we still remember. Vanished worlds revisited: showboats, minstrel shows, medicine shows, circuses, and of course vaudeville. Early silent stars too. Amazing how anyone stuck with a showbiz career back then, which is why I also collect early show biz bios, when "trouping" was a hardscrabble journey from one town to another.

I remember checking a lot of the above-mentioned books from the library (Pekin, Illinois) when I was a boy: Classics of the Horror Film, Blum's books, Whatever Happened To series as well as joining one of those Movie Book Clubs. My first 5 or 6 books for a penny (around 1975) were: Hugh Fordin's World of Entertainment; Christopher Finch's bio of Garland, Rainbow; Movies and Magic (something like that, about SFX); and one or two Anobile books -- it was either Frankenstein or the Marx Brothers one. I later read an interesting bio of Griffith (the Babylon set was the cover), and a great Laurel & Hardy book with a reconstruction of each of their films via stills.

Years later in college, the LIVELIEST ART was a text book for film class. If memory serves, it has since been discredited for repeating myths (like maybe the Gilbert voice chestnut)

I am embarrassed to admit that I've never read THE PARADE'S GONE BY, though I did see the Hollywood series and have the companion book. Ditto CLASSICS OF THE SILENT SCREEN by Franklin/Everson. Are either of those still worth seeking out or have they become dated as more films have been preserved/discovered, etc.

Decotodd wrote:I am embarrassed to admit that I've never read THE PARADE'S GONE BY, though I did see the Hollywood series and have the companion book. Ditto CLASSICS OF THE SILENT SCREEN by Franklin/Everson. Are either of those still worth seeking out or have they become dated as more films have been preserved/discovered, etc.

The Parade's Gone By is still a great book. Sure, lots of films have been rediscovered since it was published, but Mr. Brownlow approached his subject with keen understanding, warmth, and wit, and that still shines through. Plus, he was just in time to meet and interview many of the key players of the silent era, and the interviews alone make the book well worth reading. I'd say that Classics of the Silent Screen is a good starting place for someone interested in the basics about silent movies, but it's pretty dated; it was first published in 1959, after all. It's long since been superseded by a number of other books on the topic, including The Parade's Gone By.

Wm. Charles Morrow wrote:

Decotodd wrote:I am embarrassed to admit that I've never read THE PARADE'S GONE BY, though I did see the Hollywood series and have the companion book. Ditto CLASSICS OF THE SILENT SCREEN by Franklin/Everson. Are either of those still worth seeking out or have they become dated as more films have been preserved/discovered, etc.

The Parade's Gone By is still a great book. Sure, lots of films have been rediscovered since it was published, but Mr. Brownlow approached his subject with keen understanding, warmth, and wit, and that still shines through. Plus, he was just in time to meet and interview many of the key players of the silent era, and the interviews alone make the book well worth reading. I'd say that Classics of the Silent Screen is a good starting place for someone interested in the basics about silent movies, but it's pretty dated; it was first published in 1959, after all. It's long since been superseded by a number of other books on the topic, including The Parade's Gone By.

'Classics of the Silent Screen' is still well worth seeking out and decent copies shouldn't cost too much. Over half a century later one would perhaps disagree with what is included and omitted, and of course films which were difficult to see or missing at the time are now more easily available, often in superior prints. Nevertheless, it's a very useful film to have and shouldn't be sniffed at.

In addition, American Silent Film, also by Everson, is well worth a look.

I picked up American Silent Film at the library a few days ago and honestly, I'm pretty disappointed with the book. I have more qualms with it than positive things to say. Perhaps I picked it up expecting the wrong things.

For one, Everson spends a good deal of chapters on a few films and then spoiling the entire film. I know this was written before many of these films were easily available for viewing, but I don't see why it would be recommend today.

Secondly, why is there no chapter dedicated to Orphans of The Storm? The cover uses a still from that movie rather than Birth of a Nation and Intolerance -- both of which have chapters completely dedicated to them.

There's also the picture placement which makes zero sense. It went from having a few about every 10 pages to a bulk every 50 or so. Also, these bills of images often interrupt a sentence midway-through!

Also, there's no mention of Italian epics. Why? I know the title specifies American films, but that didn't stop the author from talking about other foreign film.

If anyone would kindly recommend a book that details things like the production history of the films along with neat tidbits like set construction I would appreciate it.

It is interesting how the importance of booksyou own is changed in times of the internet. I own still a lot of film related books, but find that even today the fact oriented books like the AFI catalogue, the French (and much lesser elaborate) books on the French features until the seventies, or the Italian or German sound movies of the thirties are frequently consulted by me, while a lot of opinion or description stuff (like the Variety Film review volumes) has become obsolete in times when the movies can be seen easily in many cases. I do regret very much that the AFI obviously has discontinued the publication of their catalogue in print, as online research is fine, but somehow a different matter. With books you, by experience, knew which trust could be given to which source, while websites come and go, and sources in many cases become very unclear. You have to consider and evaluate credibilty more and more.

Still I buy books that are movie related, but fewer items (The Dawn of Technicolor was the last, well worth any cent spent). When seeing a movie I normally make notes, sometimes stop the disc to verify, and find it compelling how older texts, using only memory, differ...

Just received The First King of Hollywood: The Life of Douglas Fairbanks by Tracey Goessel. Am very much looking forward to the read. He's my favorite silent actor outside of Lon Chaney, Sr. The book is wonderfully researched and seems to be well written and well edited, besides. Accolades from the right people, too: that's a genuine plus. Even Jeffrey Vance has thumbs-upped it!

Also received Bob Fells' A George Arliss Photoplay Reader: The Arliss Archives, Volume 5. It is spectacular for what it incorporates! Nice job, Bob. I nearly went through the whole thing last night. Was particularly interested in the interview in the automobile taking Florence along... I've got all the Arliss books, and I'll look forward to any others you may prepare!

Reading Silent Players by Anthony Slide's.
His treatment of some of the actors feels harsh and unfair. He also constantly mentions the possibility of someone being gay. Gosh, what do I care if they're gay or not? There are some heartwarming tales contained in the book though. Reading about forgotten actresses crying tears of joy after going to a small screening for one of their films is a pure delight.

FlammableNitrate wrote:Reading Silent Players by Anthony Slide's.
His treatment of some of the actors feels harsh and unfair. He also constantly mentions the possibility of someone being gay. Gosh, what do I care if they're gay or not? There are some heartwarming tales contained in the book though. Reading about forgotten actresses crying tears of joy after going to a small screening for one of their films is a pure delight.

There are some actors where their sexual orientation is important to their careers and their story, like William Haines or Nazimova. However, Slide seems to think that any two women that lived together must be lesbians, even though older divorced women were likely to live together to save on living expenses, and they were likely friends. I have a quite a few of Slide's books, but this one was really gossipy and he supposes that many actors were gay without much corroboration.