spiderwort
Junior Member
@spiderwort
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 9,340
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 12, 2017 0:10:01 GMT
And what a golden age it was! So many talented writers, directors, and actors contributed to the success of that era, many of whom went on to become significant feature film talents.
Live shows, later filmed ones - movies, hour to half hour dramas and comedies, all through the 1950s and into 1960-61, with individual sponsors so they ran without commercials. I saw them as a child/young teenager, but I still remember the impact they had on me, even though I can't remember a lot of the titles I saw. Those I remember the most are:
The Lark (1957) (Hallmark Hall of Fame) - starring Julie Harris (director: George Schaefer)
Victoria Regina (1961) (Hallmark Hall of Fame) - starring Julie Harris (director: George Schaefer)
Bang the Drum Slowly (1956) (U.S. Steel Hour) - starring Paul Newman (director: Daniel Petrie)
Amal and the Night Visiters (1955) (The Alcoa Hour) - Gian Carlo Menotti's opera
The Turn of the Screw (1959) (Startime) - starring Ingrid Bergman (director: John Frankenheimer) (later made into the film, The Innocents (1961))
Judgement at Nuremberg (1959) (Playhouse 90) - starring Claude Rains & Maximillian Schell (director: George Roy Hill)
Crime in the Streets (1959) (Elgin Hour) - starring John Cassavettes (director: Sidney Lumet)
No Time for Sergeants (1955) (U.S. Steel Hour) - starring Andy Griffith (director: Alex Segal)
Ah, Wilderness! (1959) (Hallmark Hall of Fame) - starring Helen Hayes (director: Robert Mulligan)
In the last 15 years, I've had the good fortune to see some of the live television episodes that I don't remember seeing when they ran in the 1950s, but three are certainly among the best of all time. They include:
The Days of Wine and Roses (1958) (Playhouse 90) - starring Cliff Robertson & Piper Laurie; director John Frankenheimer (age 27) [light years better than the feature!!]
Requiem for a Heavyweight (1956) (Playhouse 90) - starring Jack Palance (director: Ralph Nelson)
Marty (1953) (The Philco-Goodyear Television Playhouse) - starring Rod Steiger (director: Delbert Mann)
The Traveling Lady (1957) (Armchair Theatre) - starring Kim Stanley (director: Robert Mulligan)
I'm a Fool (1954) (General Electric Theatre) - starring James Dean & Natalie Wood (director: Don Medford)
Your thoughts, memories, comments about this important time in American television and any of these shows or others?
|
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Sept 12, 2017 0:24:00 GMT
...and Ernie Kovacs and his pioneering work prior to Laugh In and Saturday Night Live...!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 0:35:45 GMT
Another I found superior to the film version (good as it was) was Franklin Schaffner's 1954 Twelve Angry Men (Playhouse 90 In Hollywood), primarily for the in-the-moment, urgent spontaneity of Robert Cummings's diffident persistence (in place of Fonda's unflappable coolness).
What's that I say? Cummings better than Fonda? In this case, yes. The sense of other jurors becoming infected with Cummings's uncertainty plays more effectively than their being won over by Fonda's tenacious determination.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 12, 2017 1:18:34 GMT
Watched this a couple of years ago.
“What Makes Sammy Run?” Sunday Showcase. Directed by Delbert Mann. Performed live over two consecutive Sundays in 1959 (September 27 & October 4), this adaptation of Budd Shulberg’s 1941 novel starred Larry Blyden as the titular young movie up and coming producer who will use, cheat, lie to, and backstab anyone to get what he wants – which is everything. John Forsythe plays Al Manheim, the mediator who narrates and interprets Sammy for us and who, for reasons that even he cannot fathom, follows Sammy in his journey up the ladder of success. Forsythe is excellent, as is Ruth Roman who is in love with Sammy’s ambition but is seriously loved by Al. Dina Merrill is the jet-setting daughter of the studio’s main money man. Sammy sets his sights on her as the perfect wife for a future mogul. In the first part, Blyden is a little strident with not much variation in his voice or mannerisms, but during the second week his portrayal gels and he gets closer to the humanity of a man who doesn’t seem to have much. Most of my memories of Blyden are as a panelist on early TV game shows like “To Tell The Truth” or “What’s My Line.” I find out now that he was a popular Broadway star who just never made his mark on either the big or small screens. He was all set up in a TV game show hosting job when he died at age 49 in a carjacking in North Africa.
Menotti’s Amal and the Night Visitors was the first opera to be composed explicitly to premiere on television.
|
|
spiderwort
Junior Member
@spiderwort
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 9,340
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 12, 2017 19:03:25 GMT
Watched this a couple of years ago. “What Makes Sammy Run?” Sunday Showcase. Directed by Delbert Mann. Performed live over two consecutive Sundays in 1959 (September 27 & October 4), this adaptation of Budd Shulberg’s 1941 novel starred Larry Blyden as the titular young movie up and coming producer who will use, cheat, lie to, and backstab anyone to get what he wants – which is everything. John Forsythe plays Al Manheim, the mediator who narrates and interprets Sammy for us and who, for reasons that even he cannot fathom, follows Sammy in his journey up the ladder of success. Forsythe is excellent, as is Ruth Roman who is in love with Sammy’s ambition but is seriously loved by Al. Dina Merrill is the jet-setting daughter of the studio’s main money man. Sammy sets his sights on her as the perfect wife for a future mogul. In the first part, Blyden is a little strident with not much variation in his voice or mannerisms, but during the second week his portrayal gels and he gets closer to the humanity of a man who doesn’t seem to have much. Most of my memories of Blyden are as a panelist on early TV game shows like “To Tell The Truth” or “What’s My Line.” I find out now that he was a popular Broadway star who just never made his mark on either the big or small screens. He was all set up in a TV game show hosting job when he died at age 49 in a carjacking in North Africa. Menotti’s Amal and the Night Visitors was the first opera to be composed explicitly to premiere on television. Yet another I never saw (or if I did, I don't remember it)! Very interesting cast, though I confess I don't really remember Larry Blyden. Anyway, I love your comments. And Delbert Mann was such a good director in this medium. As for AMAL AND THE NIGHT VISITORS, I don't think I remembered that it was the first composed for television, though something about that does ring a bell. But I saw it when I was about ten years old, and what an impression it made on me! I haven't seen it since, but it's something I will never forget. P.S. Can you tell me where I can find WHAT MAKES SAMMY RUN? I have a DVD collection of several live shows from various venues back in the day, but that's not one of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 19:41:12 GMT
Oh, I would love to see this! Maybe I did when I was young and just don't remember. I love your assessment of it. I've always been a Robert Cummings fan. He wasn't a great actor by any means, but in many cases in the right role he was a very good one. What's so amazing about these productions (so many of them) is that they were live! Quite a challenge for all the casts, many of whom were film, not stage actors. To say nothing of being a challenge for all the directors! Speaking of that, I'd forgotten until my research that Arthur Penn started in live television where he directed The Miracle Worker before directing it as a feature. There are several copies available for online viewing on YouTube, Dailymotion and ARCHIVE; not usually the optimal viewing circumstances, I know, but inasmuch as they're kinescopes, bigger-screen viewing doesn't necessarily benefit them, either. A Bing video search for "Twelve Angry Men 1954" will yield all your options. It's especially interesting for those familiar with Lumet's film to compare the approaches to character and performance: Edward Arnold in place of Ed Begley; Franchot Tone in for Lee J. Cobb; Walter Abel doing the E.G. Marshall role and so on. I often reflect on the differing demands, advantages and disadvantages of live performance - either stage or television - versus those of single-camera film. In the latter case, there's the advantage of less worry about mistakes and the freedom of multiple takes until it's just right, but also the disadvantage of interruption and lack of continuity of performance. The former is higher risk, but affords both that continuity and the momentum and dramatic concentration to which live performance lends itself. As well, there's the opportunity that extended pre-production rehearsal offers to fully explore and inhabit a character prior to the performance that film doesn't traditionally allow, what with only brief, day-of-shooting camera rehearsals, last-minute script changes or "We're doing scene 9 instead of scene 17 this morning" surprises that are so much the rule in film. And in either case, spontaneity can be either aided or hindered (often depending on the individual performer, I'm sure). As you suggest, the real "sweating bullets" must be on the director's part. At least onstage, each performance isn't make-or-break for the show; there's always tomorrow night and the night after. The poor live-TV director has only the one chance, by which time it's mostly out of his control except for the technical crew. Small wonder everyone involved always states how exhilarating it was! |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Sept 12, 2017 20:30:11 GMT
I prefer Marty, Requiem, and Bang The Drum in their TV incarnations
Two 1955 TV plays by Gore Vidal, Visit To A Small Planet (w/ Cyril Ritchard) and The Death Of Billy The Kid (w/ Paul Newman), are not known to survive in their original productions. Newman filmed TDOBTK as The Left Handed Gun
The Traveling Lady was filmed as Baby The Rain Must Fall
The original version of The Trip To Bountiful w/Lilian Gish and Eva Marie Saint (1953) survives, but is not easy to see
Saint also appears in a 1949 version of June Moon w/Jack Lemmon
There was an American version of 1984 w/Eddie Albert, Lorne Greene, and in bits, Martin Landau and Robert Culp. More highly regarded is the BBC production w/Peter Cushing. Both versions survive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Sept 12, 2017 20:37:35 GMT
...and Ernie Kovacs and his pioneering work prior to Laugh In and Saturday Night Live...!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Sept 12, 2017 20:41:08 GMT
Another I found superior to the film version (good as it was) was Franklin Schaffner's 1954 Twelve Angry Men (Playhouse 90 In Hollywood), primarily for the in-the-moment, urgent spontaneity of Robert Cummings's diffident persistence (in place of Fonda's unflappable coolness). What's that I say? Cummings better than Fonda? In this case, yes. The sense of other jurors becoming infected with Cummings's uncertainty plays more effectively than their being won over by Fonda's tenacious determination. I won't say the TV version is better overall than the film, but like you I prefer Cummings in the role. I also prefer Walter Abel as Juror #4. He's a bit more human than the icily reactionary E.G. Marshall. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 21:26:56 GMT
Another I found superior to the film version (good as it was) was Franklin Schaffner's 1954 Twelve Angry Men (Playhouse 90 In Hollywood), primarily for the in-the-moment, urgent spontaneity of Robert Cummings's diffident persistence (in place of Fonda's unflappable coolness). What's that I say? Cummings better than Fonda? In this case, yes. The sense of other jurors becoming infected with Cummings's uncertainty plays more effectively than their being won over by Fonda's tenacious determination. I won't say the TV version is better overall than the film, but like you I prefer Cummings in the role. I also prefer Walter Abel as Juror #4. He's a bit more human than the icily reactionary E.G. Marshall. As it happens, I only last night watched a film I'd DVRd: We're On the Jury, a comedic 1937 depiction of a similar situation, in which Helen Broderick begins as the lone holdout against conviction in a murder trial, and brings other jurors over one by one to share her reasonable doubts. It of course was a completely farcical representation of courtroom procedure, rules of evidence and jury room deliberation (for example, Broderick arranges for the jury to visit the scene of the crime without even getting the judge's permission...and then proceeds to solve the case on the spot, Perry-Mason-style, with the guilty party conveniently in attendance), and was saved only by the charm of the acerbic Broderick and her costar, affectedly-pompous but befuddled Victor Moore, along with reliably colorful players like Billy Gilbert, Charles Middleton and Charles Lane. Even Twelve Angry Men has its weaknesses in that area. I was on jury duty early this year, and the D.A. cited the film as an example of a violation of rules of evidence; namely, Juror #8's independent investigation resulting in the purchase of a knife identical to the supposedly-unique murder weapon in the same neighborhood where the defendant resided. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Sept 12, 2017 22:14:05 GMT
Even Twelve Angry Men has its weaknesses in that area. I was on jury duty early this year, and the D.A. cited the film as an example of a violation of rules of evidence; namely, Juror #8's independent investigation resulting in the purchase of a knife identical to the supposedly-unique murder weapon in the same neighborhood where the defendant resided. has a number of plot problems. For example, many people fall asleep with their glasses on. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 22:15:32 GMT
Thanks, Doghouse6 . I'll see what I can find. And I love your comments about the medium of live television. So beautifully said and right on the money. It gives a much greater appreciation for directors like Schaffner, Frankenheimer, Ritt, Lumet, Del Mann, Arthur Penn, et al, who accomplished so much over a long period of time in the early days of television. I was researching Franklin J. Schaffner after reading your post and, of course, I'm familiar with his notable features ( Patton, Planet of the Apes, Papillion, The Best Man, among others). But what astounded me (and I thought I new quite a bit about this already) was that for Studio One in Hollywood alone he directed 140 episodes!! That's almost beyond comprehension, considering everything else he did before he left television. Btw, I wonder if anyone knows that Yul Brynner was a director in live television from 1949 to 1943? I wasn't aware of that about either Schaffner or Brynner. My, my, the things you learn! A further word about those remarkable live-TV tech crews: they really deserve credit for so much resting on their shoulders once the performance begins; camera operators having to compensate on-the-fly for a player who misses his mark and steps out of focus or his light, or another who might cross before his cue; sound men struggling to keep boom mikes or their shadows out of shot but in range of the performer when things like that happen and so on. Of all the forms of performing arts, it must have been the closest equivalent to a high-wire act without a net. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 22:30:42 GMT
Even Twelve Angry Men has its weaknesses in that area. I was on jury duty early this year, and the D.A. cited the film as an example of a violation of rules of evidence; namely, Juror #8's independent investigation resulting in the purchase of a knife identical to the supposedly-unique murder weapon in the same neighborhood where the defendant resided. has a number of plot problems. For example, many people fall asleep with their glasses on. Goodness knows I have...most often in a chair in front of the TV. Not so much in bed, though, because I neither read nor watch TV there, although I'm sure many do. I've also arisen from bed to stumble into the bathroom without putting them on, and in my groggy state wondered why I can't see anything! I'm glad I've never lived next to an "el" (although the middle-of-night comings and goings from the next-door driveway of the apartment building under the bedroom windows of mine in Glendale sometimes made me feel as if I was). |
|
spiderwort
Junior Member
@spiderwort
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 9,340
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 12, 2017 22:38:23 GMT
I wasn't aware of that about either Schaffner or Brynner. My, my, the things you learn! A further word about those remarkable live-TV tech crews: they really deserve credit for so much resting on their shoulders once the performance begins; camera operators having to compensate on-the-fly for a player who misses his mark and steps out of focus or his light, or another who might cross before his cue; sound men struggling to keep boom mikes or their shadows out of shot but in range of the performer when things like that happen and so on. Of all the forms of performing arts, it must have been the closest equivalent to a high-wire act without a net. I was just thinking about the tech-crews and camera operators (and those were BIG cameras) when I was watching 12 Angry Men. That was a hard one because of the number of people, but the cameras didn't have to move that much, unlike Frankenheimer's version of The Days of Wine and Roses with the frequent change of sets in continuity and all the emotion that had to be captured. Without question I believe that the live version is far superior to the film version (and Cliff Robertson and Piper Laurie were amazing!) Anyway, the crew certainly had its work cut out for it with that one - as with so many others, I'm sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 12, 2017 22:49:12 GMT
I won't say the TV version is better overall than the film, but like you I prefer Cummings in the role. I also prefer Walter Abel as Juror #4. He's a bit more human than the icily reactionary E.G. Marshall. and Richard Kimble I found and just watched 12 Angry Men, and I have to say that I agree with you both about Cummings and Abel, and even a couple of others. I actually thought Cummings was terrific. The production has a very different tone that the film, which I attribute the director - more natural, less intense. I probably still prefer Lumet's feature, but I must say I wouldn't have minded seeing Cummings in it. So glad I got to see it. Thanks to you both. And I'm glad too! I've always felt that Cummings was more naturally suited to comedy; as he matured in the '50s, his timing and low-key sense of farce became superb. But given the right dramatic role, he could pull out truly noteworthy things. Another worth remarking upon was his one-man-show in the "King Nine Will Not Return" episode of The Twilight Zone: from disciplined control to panic-ridden desperation to outright hysteria, it's tour-de-force work. |
|
|
|
Post by mattgarth on Sept 13, 2017 2:02:16 GMT
Adding to the interesting Golden Age discussion:
Small screen production of 'The Last Notch' became the big screen THE FASTEST GUN ALIVE.
Journeyman performer Jeff Morrow didn't match up to Glenn Ford's intense portrayal of the lead character. However, the standout TV performance was Richard Jaeckel as the ego-driven and psychotic gunman. He correctly played the role as a wild teenage 'Billy the Kid' type. In the film version, Broderick Crawford was too old, too paunchy and too urban -- delivering his usual 'Do what I'm tellin' ya!' lines that were shouted out.
Jaeckel was not unfamiliar with Western roles opposite Ford -- appearing with him in THE VIOLENT MEN, 3:10 TO YUMA, AND COWBOY.
|
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Sept 13, 2017 17:25:51 GMT
...a few more good ones:
Yancey Derringer
Man with a Camera
Range Rider
The Life of Riley
|
|
|
|
Post by teleadm on Sept 13, 2017 18:39:29 GMT
May I ask where it all went wrong? As a non American I'm interested.
From the innovate Golden Age that could give viewers new contemporary plays mixed with classics by Shakespeare and others, has somehow been broken down to totally uninteresting fake reality shows á la Kardashians.
I think it was an interview I read by Paddy Chayefsky in the early 1980s, that dumbing down viewers started with the success of The Beverly Hillbillies TV-series. So there must have been serious thoughts about what way television was going already back then.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 13, 2017 22:45:49 GMT
rget. P.S. Can you tell me where I can find WHAT MAKES SAMMY RUN? I have a DVD collection of several live shows from various venues back in the day, but that's not one of them. I keep a detailed record of films I've seen. One of those details is format: Theater, DVD, Cable, Computer (e.g. YouTube). For some reason, I didn't keep a record of "What Makes Sammy Run." I seem to recall a DVD but can't be sure. THIS JUST IN: It is on DVD available on Netflix. That's probably it. The DVD is part of a series called The Archive Of American Television Presents. Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Sept 14, 2017 0:02:26 GMT
May I ask where it all went wrong? As a non American I'm interested. From the innovate Golden Age that could give viewers new contemporary plays mixed with classics by Shakespeare and others, has somehow been broken down to totally uninteresting fake reality shows á la Kardashians. I think it was an interview I read by Paddy Chayefsky in the early 1980s, that dumbing down viewers started with the success of The Beverly Hillbillies TV-series. So there must have been serious thoughts about what way television was going already back then. What happened was the switch from live TV in NYC to film on the West Coast, and the Hollywood assembly line. In the early days of anything there is experimentation and openness to risk taking. Eventually this evolves into efficiency and routine. As far as TV goes, viewers preferred the reassuring predictability of series w/recurring characters to one-off dramas. The fact that filmed programs had rerun potential -- and thus were potentially far more profitable -- didn't hurt. Don't get too wrapped up in talk of the "Golden Age of TV", either then or now. Never forget Sturgeon's Law |
|
