Born This Way: George Cukor's "A Star is Born" (1954)

Every few decades, one remake emerges that defines the zeitgeist in some meaningful way. While there's only four versions of A Star is Born out there currently, they all have left a stamp on Hollywood and the music industries with scathing tales of fame, indulgence, and the power of creativity. Over the course of this week, Born This Way will be looking at the films, released between 1937 and 2018, and analyzing what makes each one special along with what they do right, what could be improved, and just a general celebration of all things glitz and glamour. You might want to take another look at this column, because it's something as timeless as film itself. Dive in and enjoy Hollywood's favorite franchise, which has earned 17 Oscar nominations, 2 wins, and an Honorary Award. There's few films like these, so catch them before they fade away.

Background

Release Date: October 16, 1954

Directed By: George Cukor

Written By: Moss Hart (Screenplay) Dorothy Parker & Alan Campbell & Robert Carson (Based on), William A. Wellman & Robert Carson (Story)

Starring: Judy Garland, James Mason, Jack Carson

Rotten Tomatoes Score: 97% (see reviews here)

Oscar Nominations: 6

-Best Actor (James Mason)
-Best Actress (Judy Garland)
-Best Art Direction-Set Direction
-Best Costume Design (Color)
-Best Original Song ("The Man That Got Away"
-Best Music, Scoring of a Musical Picture

*Special Notes:

-First of the series to get an Oscar nomination for Best Original Song
-First of the series to get an Oscar nomination in technical fields
-First of the series to feature original song compositions, sung diagetic

Introduction

There's a lot that seems foolish about remaking A Star is Born in 1954. It was lucky that the film did as well as it did the first time around, earning an Oscar for writing and creating one of the most exciting Hollywood stories of the 30's. To update it would require certain license, especially with the changing interests in cinema. Talkies had evolved in the 17 years since to be more colorful, desiring Busby Berkeley-esque musicals that had so much energy. Among the stars of the big musicals, mostly produced by MGM, was Judy Garland - who may be beloved now for such films as Meet Me in St. Louis, Easter Parade, and The Harvey Girls, but at the time was just another face with her own set of tragedies. The most noteworthy is the public break-up with director Vincente Minnelli that kept him from filming most of the Best Picture winner An American in Paris as the two dealt with a divorce. Still, A Star is Born was pictured as a comeback vehicle, and done by none other than the man who turned it down the first time: director George Cukor.

Cukor technically had kicked things off in 1932 with the Hollywood satire What Price, Hollywood?, which was even more critical of the industry's treatment of celebrities. He had turned down the 1937 film, which wen to William A. Wellman. By 1954, Cukor was more interested and the studio wanted to make this as a film to revive Garland's stagnant career. It was going to be everything that was needed for a great comeback. It would be a showcase of her talent and, most importantly, the rare musical that was somber and sad, using music to convey darker emotions. It would also feature lavish production numbers that wouldn't be out of place in an MGM musical. This would technically make it a remake in name only, but the central story remained largely the same down to character names and familiar plot beats in which Norman Maine drowns himself to help save Vickie Lester's ascending career. 

What will become evident in the next two adaptations is the winding road it took to the screen. In this case, there were consistent hurdles to getting the film made. Some of them were, oddly enough, caused by Garland herself thanks to being difficult to work with and issues with addiction. This behavior would later be covered in the stage production The End of the Rainbow, which chronicled the actresses' final days (which, spoilers, is really sad). In that way, Garland's remake was almost biographical. It couldn't help but be, especially in that she at times in her personal life embodied both Norman and Vickie's self-destructive and over-eager behaviors. It's why the film is widely regarded as one of the best adaptations of the story, if just because at the end of the day Garland delivers arguably her best performance and elevates the story to the work of high drama and art.

"A Star...

Norman Maine (James Mason)

In a lot of ways, 1937's Norman (Fredric March) and 1954's James Mason play the same role with a similar level of nuance. The only difference is that this time Norman is introduced to the up and coming Esther Blodgett through a more practical means. He stumbles onto the stage during one of her many breathtaking performances. Esther has been working hard to get where she is, and there's a stronger independence to her. Meanwhile, Norman is still a confident man, but he has more of a dynamic that shines as the film continues. He plays insecure very well and manages to hold onto some dignity in the process. In terms of pairings, this is one of the few times where both Norman and Vickie are equally matched by the actors who play them, and here Norman has a charisma that is believable, and you want him to succeed in spite of his shameless spiral in the back half.

... is Born"

Esther Blodgett, a.k.a Vickie Lester (Judy Garland)

Unlike 1937's Vickie Lester (Janet Gaynor), the 1954 version clearly has more of a career and drive to her. It shows early on when she sings the only Oscar-nominated song from this musical, "The Man That Got Away." Garland has always been able to sing so beautifully and powerfully, and here she gets to prove her strengths in a musical that at times recalls the MGM hits that came before, while others reflecting a deeper and sadder vulnerability that comes with being a performer. In terms of range, Garland is the quintessential Vickie in arguably the only true remake of A Star is Born (more on that in the 1976 and 2018 entries). She gives her all to be a star, and for this moment in time you're convinced that she has what it takes. How much of that is Vickie and how much of that is Garland is a tough nut to crack, but it all builds to one of cinema's greatest performances in one of Hollywood's saddest musicals of the 1950's.

What This One Did Right

The idea of remaking older movies into musicals in the 1950's wasn't a terribly new idea. For instance, the Cukor classic The Philadelphia Story would later be remade as High Society. However, what's interesting is how easily the film could've gone wrong, and that's specifically in being a carbon copy of the 1937 film. Here, we get the exact reason for this franchise's longevity, and it comes from updating to the times. Much like the 1976 version turning towards grittier rock 'n roll, the choice to make this a tale revolving around lavish color schemes out of MGM musicals, such as Garland's ex-husband Vincene Minnelli's An American in Paris, the film had a chance to evolve and look artful. This was a familiar Hollywood to audiences of the 50's, one that was exuberant and had performers who rehearsed endlessly to get one routine right. It's still winking at the audience, at points literally, but now there's a deeper and more mature text that subverts everything that the genre tends to be known for. Add in the meta subtext of Garland's private life, and all of the magic finally starts to sink in.

By updating the film to reflect the era, it established the fact that A Star is Born was a story that could be told throughout the decades (and approaching century) and still hold vitality. It wasn't just something indicative of the 30's. It was also true of the 50's in a very different way. The fact that little of the story had to change was also revelatory of how well it all clicks. It also helps that Garland is one of those charismatic performers that, if you weren't aware of the tabloids, could still deliver an incredible performance that never ceased to amaze. If you add in the subtext, suddenly this comeback vehicle was bittersweet and reflected a performer who probably deserved better than to be harassed on the set of Wizard of Oz consistently. The film also began to have self-aware recurring themes, such as conflicts with issues and changing to meet the studio's standards. This is a story that will probably work in 2037, and being able to shift genres and performers so effortlessly only does it justice. Also, this was the start of putting songs into the story (all exclusively sung diagetically), which was a nice added touch that made the films feel more personal and gave them a life beyond the films.

A Few Issues

Whereas the 1937 version used title cards to play with the audience, here they're done in more of a tragic way. While most of the audio is still in tact, the modern DVD release of A Star is Born is a bit disheveled. A full cut of the film does not currently exist, as the film was cut to meet running time issues. They were never properly recovered, and thus many DVD copies feature audio that plays over notes regarding what is being seen on the screen. It isn't the worst thing, especially since at least part of the whole film is still in tact, but it still makes for a jarring experience for those who don't enjoy using their imagination. It still works when these missing scenes aren't called upon, but it still leaves a sour taste knowing that the best version of A Star is Born (according to some circles) is also the most incomplete of the four, released in a time before deleted scenes were considered anything of value. 

Best Moment

The simple answer is "Anytime that Judy Garland is performing." She is magnetic no matter what she is doing on screen. However, there is one scene, a bit more stripped down than the lavish MGM musical-esque number. As she prepares to film a dance scene that takes her around the world, she performs in a hotel room for Norman. All that is accompanying her is a variety of household items and a soundtrack. She talks out the scene transitions as she moves around the room, taking on a new part in the show. What could easily be a performer running around a hotel room is the height of her creativity, managing to convince even the audience that she is someplace else. She is a performer who knows how to entertain, and there's also the underlying sense that this is where she's most happy. She needs that affection and validation. She can't have it any other way. Also, the chemistry in this moment between Mason and Garland have never been better. It may be a simple scene, but thanks to such a willing and physical performance, it becomes an example of how Garland was always a star, even if she never got the credit she deserved.

Connections and Similarities

The most obvious connection to the A Star is Born franchise is that it's a direct remake of the 1937 original. There's even some prestige in having that film's rejected director Cukor take up the mantle. The rest of the film is predominantly the same plot and structure as the original, even as it adds music and finds ways to add depth to the Vickie Lester character, in part because the subtext of Judy Garland was delightful enough on its own. It's far more colorful and accomplished from a technical standpoint, most likely because of cinema's rich advancements in the decades since 1937. To date, it's also the only other adaptation to feature acting nominations for its leads (though that's likely to change with the 2018 version).

There's not a lot of similarities to the later versions, in part because the film's central cast and crew were retired or dead by 1976 when Barbra Streisand decided to take on the role. It also didn't help that by that time, the MGM musical was unpopular, and Streisand knew first hand due to several studio flops, including Hello Dolly. Both the 1954 and 1976 films were considered to be hazardous behind the scenes, though the latter was better chronicled. While the 1976 film had no input from the cast and crew of the 1954 version, this doesn't mean that Garland and Streisand never worked together. They briefly appeared together in an episode of The Judy Garland Show, where the two performed opposite each other for an entire hour (a clip of them performing "Hooray For Love" can be seen above). The scant connections to the 2018 version include references more to the artists than the actual film, such as the title card appearing over a rendition of the Garland standard "Somewhere Over the Rainbow." Even if the later versions aren't necessarily the most explicit in homage, it's still there somewhere.

Differences

As mentioned earlier, this is technically the only real remake of A Star is Born. It's because everything about the film shares some similar thread to the 1937 film. The story follows the same beats almost verbatim at points, even winking at the camera. However, the one smart thing that the film did was give Vickie Lester more depth, in large part because Judy Garland's life had more interesting fodder to work with. While she's still a performer working her way up, the choice to also make her a singer was easily the most brilliant touch that the film could make, allowing the future films to take risks with their soundtracks and make worlds that were fully designed to match the times. This is likely to be the last time, maybe ever, that A Star is Born will focus around the plight of actors - even in a time where actors have different demands put upon themselves. From here on out, it's a story of musicians looking to work together. It's the same story technically, but this is the most conservative of artistic license that's going to be seen. The rest are almost unrecognizable by comparison. Still, it shows just how evergreen the story remains. 

Closing Remarks

There is a good chance that the definition of which the best A Star is Born is will never be answered. There will always be purists who love the 1937 best because of its originality. Many will enjoy the 2018 version for updating the text in very effective manners. However, there's going to be a large contingent who remain certain that the 1954 version is the best. I count myself among the list, and the reason becomes apparent when adding in how we relate to cinema as an art form. Why do we love certain actors? It's not because they hang out with us and become our friends, yet they're tangible in ways that are like that, filling us with some joy when it's needed. Judy Garland is just that for me, having grown up on The Wizard of Oz and having a strong affection for her voice. Add in the tragic story of her later career and that she never won an Oscar, and it all becomes more powerful to see her perform both for the characters' approval, as well as ours. There's so many layers to a simple routine that she almost exudes charm by accident.

This film will always be the best to me because of Garland's ability to make it seem autobiographical. It's also because the work of Cukor does wonders to make the rare musical that is a somber ride through fame, capturing its glitz so perfectly while adding a sense of melancholy. Few films before or since were brave enough to make whole numbers with that sort of power, and it helped that Garland had the voice to make it all convincing. If there had to be one version to represent the whole idea behind this story, please let it be this one. More than anything, it embodies what Classic Hollywood means to me, and has some of the most assured and effective acting of the bunch. It's heartbreaking that it's also the most incomplete of the four, because if it wasn't it might even be flawless. This is where the franchise realized that it had legs, and for better or worse it meant that the adaptations to come could change the wrapper without changing the contents and still have a satisfying product.