The Great Katharine Hepburn

[ClassyCo]

Forgive me, but I tried searching for a discussion going here solely devoted to Katharine Hepburn. I know there's a lengthy discussion concerning a popularity poll between Hepburn and Bette Davis, but I failed to find anything that singled out Miss Hepburn by herself.

I have been known to be semi-critical of Katharine Hepburn in the past. While I have always acknowledged her gifts as an actress, I have occasionally found her lacking in a certain versatility that I see in other actresses of the same period. At the same time, I have to admire Hepburn's career longevity and how she overcame many odds to solidify herself as Queen of the Movies. The American Film Institute ranks her as the best Hollywood motion picture actress in the history of cinema.

There are few specific eras in Hepburn's career I generally think about when thinking of her: 1) Her early career success that was quickly followed by a series of high-profile flops and her "box office poison" era, and 2) Her later career reemergence as a grand lady of critically and commercially successful prestige pictures. I was thinking earlier today just how many films Miss Hepburn turns up in that I hold close to my heart. She was a perfect example of art meets life in STAGE DOOR, the 1937 melodrama about young female hopefuls trying to make a name for themselves on the New York stage. It showcased some fine performances, not only out of Hepburn, but also out of Ginger Rogers, Gail Patrick, Andrea Leeds, Lucille Ball, Eve Arden, and Ann Miller. I love those classic, Old Hollywood ensemble pieces. Hepburn was also superb in BRINGING UP BABY, the hilarious 1938 screwball comedy with comedy king Cary Grant. Her ability to play a high society airhead seems effortless, and I find that movie to be the pinnacle of the classic screwball comedy sub-genre. It also fascinates me that both of these movies were not mainstream hits during their time, but yet have earned appreciation in the years since.

As she aged, Katharine Hepburn seemed only to get better. Her reputation had vastly improved, and she slid into a successful career playing likable older spinsters. THE AFRICAN QUEEN (1951), co-starring Humphrey Bogart, is as good a film as any to describe this later career reemergence to cinematic greatness. She seemed to get first choice for those roles intended for an actress "of a certain age", and continued wracking up Oscar nominations along the way. She continued strong in such works as SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER (1959) and LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT (1962). Although I personally wish she would have given it a shot, I have to admire Hepburn's determination not to lower herself to the hagsploitation sub-genre that swept through the movie industry in the sixties and seventies.

Katharine Hepburn was truly great. She made her duds, sure, but I feel she is one of the few who had her share of better pictures than bad ones. Not only was she gifted in terms of acting, she was indeed a very beautiful woman. It baffles me just how rarely it is mentioned that she was a very attractive woman.
​

 

[Crimson]

I like Kate and think she was a terrific comedienne -- the best of her era, which is saying a lot considering the competition (Colbert, Loy, Lombard, etc). I also think she was great at light drama, such as STAGE DOOR or STATE OF THE UNION. However, I find her rather bad in heavy drama like SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER or LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT. I find her 'serious' acting to be shallow, arch and theatrical.

In terms of being a star, I think she's unparalleled. She was a leading lady in 1932 and she was still a leading lady (albeit on TV) in 1994; all that without ever trashing herself the way Davis, Crawford and Stanwyck resorted to keep their careers afloat.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

As she aged, Katharine Hepburn seemed only to get better.

Which is why she's listed today at #1 instead of Bette Davis. Bette was considered the undisputed Queen of Hollywood in the late-'30s thru the mid-'40s when she was at Warner Bros., receiving an Oscar nomination for something like seven consecutive years (still a record today) and winning two. She displayed a versatility then that Hepburn did not, and Bette was called "the first lady of the American screen."

And Davis had a certain slattern capacity that Kate lacked but seems a prerequisite for resonant stardom. Bette was a character actress who was also a top star, yet Kate was merely perfecting an independent, almost lesbianic persona which some women admired but the public at large found less interesting or nuanced than the series of vulnerable but electrifying bitches Bette Davis played... Decades later, Joan Collins opined that Bette should have been #1 on AFI's list and not Katharine Hepburn; Davis was, after all, more important during "the golden age."

But as time wore on, and the aging actresses' careers aged, Bette Davis slipped into an overly-mannered default setting for her acting -- and into a series of horror movies not all of which were as dignified or as A-level as BABY JANE --- while Kate seem to relax and turned in stellar performances in top material like THE LION IN WINTER (her most deserved Oscar of the four she received) and box office hits like ON GOLDEN POND. By this point in her life, the audience developed a newfound fondness for the regal Hepburn, viewing her as a kind of "grandmother to the world" (as even Kate acknowledged) full of wisdom, class and good taste.

Bette Davis had become relegated to TV movies (not all of which were as good as 1979's STRANGERS with Gena Rowlands) and down-market shockers at the theatres, her persona mimicked and seen nostalgically as a relic from the past, while Katharine Hepburn had become the embodiment of geriatric candor and resilience: Kate was alive in a way Bette no longer was.

And that's what affected AFI's judgment about the rankings: Kate still felt utterly engaged and relevant, and Bette just didn't anymore. Both stars seemed a bit imperious and cranky, but Hepburn was cranky with clarity, beckoning people to "listen to the Song of Life"; Bette was now just a mean old lady with a cigarette pettily carping in interviews about what bitches Crawford or Dunaway or Miriam Hopkins were, not without some justification but otherwise displaying minimal insight.

Kate had "won" and knew it. She even refused to sit with Bette in a dual photo session in the '80s, with Davis remarking "the woman's insane!" over Kate's decision. There had been mutual respect between both movie icons, but Kate didn't like to do things which were expected or what she saw as predictable. And being snapped in a studio alongside Davis in their golden years was just not something Hepburn was going to do.

 

[The First Noele]

I have to be honest and say Kate never did it for me as an actress especially when she was younger but I did enjoy her in On Golden Pond with henry Fonda in early 80s

I found her rather "cold"

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I find her rather bad in heavy drama like SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER or LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT. I find her 'serious' acting to be shallow, arch and theatrical.

SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER was the closest Kate would come to doing a gothic horror movie, but I'm okay with her performance there. It's LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT which drives me up the wall with her inconsistency: I find her quiet moments as the haunted drug addict nothing less than heart-stopping, yet she's so overwrought in the other scenes that it's almost unwatchable.

Sometimes less is more, and her histrionic fluctuations mostly didn't work.

 

[Crimson]

And that's what affected AFI's judgment about the rankings: Kate still felt utterly engaged and relevant, and Bette just didn't anymore.

Of all the fan-fic hokum of FEUD, the one moment that felt true -- even if it perhaps wasn't -- was Davis' simmering resentment of Hepburn's late career renaissance. Davis' post EVE career had her barely one step ahead of being a has-been; even her successes in JANE and CHARLOTTE were viewed as déclassée. Hepburn's late career was like a twist on the old adage of sitting by the river; audiences that had been chilly towards her in her heyday later viewed her as some kind of national monument.

I have to assume at least some consideration was made toward Kate being offered THE WHALES OF AUGUST?

 

[Crimson]

Since I have a Lucy-anecdote for all occasions, here's my favorite involving Kate.

Kate and Lucy knew each other for over 50 years, being studio mates at RKO in the 30s and MGM in the 40s. They worked together twice, both times with Lucy in support. They weren't, however, exactly friends.

At some point in the later 80s, Hepburn began phoning Lucy regularly. These conversations were mostly monologues on Hepburn's part. Lucy, still star struck by Hepburn, was mostly tongue tied. When Hepburn was done talking, she would simply hang up. Exasperated, Lucy at one point asked her husband, "Why does she keep calling me?"

I imagine Kate was lonely in her later years and viewed Lucy as a friend from a bygone era, but was too self-absorbed to actually hold a conversation. Also funny to think that if technology was more advanced, Lucy probably would have sent Kate straight to voicemail.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Of all the fan-fic hokum of FEUD, the one moment that felt true -- even if it perhaps wasn't -- was Davis' simmering resentment of Hepburn's late career renaissance. Davis' post EVE career had her barely one step ahead of being a has-been; even her successes in JANE and CHARLOTTE were viewed as déclassée. Hepburn's late career was like a twist on the old adage of sitting by the river; audiences that had been chilly towards her in her heyday later viewed her as some kind of national monument.

It's kind of like John Huston's axiom about old buildings and politicians, only in reverse: the whores' statures (Bette's and Joan's) were actually reduced with time. Tell-all memoirs from their angry daughters didn't help, I guess.

Even Hepburn conceded that she never felt she'd had the audience's friendship until she did COCO on Broadway, which was right after the box office success of THE LION IN WINTER in which Kate managed to be more aristocratic than ever yet more likeable than ever, too.

I have to assume at least some consideration was made toward Kate being offered THE WHALES OF AUGUST?

I don't know. Was she offered the Liliian Gish role? It was too close, of course, to the story from ON GOLDEN POND, minus the humor; WHALES was stiff in a very '80s way -- wanting to be important, yet too 'off' in its tone to really work.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Since I have a Lucy-anecdote for all occasions, here's my favorite involving Kate.

Kate and Lucy knew each other for over 50 years, being studio mates at RKO in the 30s and MGM in the 40s. They worked together twice, both times with Lucy in support. They weren't, however, exactly friends.

At some point in the later 80s, Hepburn began phoning Lucy regularly. These conversations were mostly monologues on Hepburn's part. Lucy, still star struck by Hepburn, was mostly tongue tied. When Hepburn was done talking, she would simply hang up. Exasperated, Lucy at one point asked her husband, "Why does she keep calling me?"

I imagine Kate was lonely in her later years and viewed Lucy as a friend from a bygone era, but was too self-absorbed to actually hold a conversation. Also funny to think that if technology was more advanced, Lucy probably would have sent Kate straight to voicemail.

At least Kate seemed to know this about herself: she once admitted, "I'm a me-me-me kind of person."

But just ask any waiter or flight attendant about their experience with The Mortons.

 

[ClassyCo]

It is mind boggling to me how Hepburn's career did a complete turnaround. She was couldn't buy herself a hit movie in the late 1930s. All of her movies during that time --- SPITFIRE, THE LITTLE MINISTER, A WOMAN REBELS, MARY OF SCOTLAND, HOLIDAY, as well as others --- were failures. Some of them lost a lot of money. Not even would-be classics like STAGE DOOR and BRINGING UP BABY earned what was expected. RKO put Hepburn in STAGE DOOR to give the movie some sense of prestige, but were quite opened to the fact that they were banking on Ginger Rogers to bring in an audience substantial enough to get a profit.

Hepburn's attitude was largely or at least partly to blame. She quite simply refused to act like a movie star of her day. She was beautiful and talented, but she brushed off publicity and the Hollywood game. She refused to sign autographs, and had a brash and rude rapport with the press. This is not how Americana in the 1930s wanted their leading ladies to act. Hepburn could have exerted the independent slant, but her rudeness and tomboyish fashion choices just rubbed people the wrong way. She was awarded the nickname "Katharine of Arrogance" during this time.

Still, RKO seemed fairly committed to resurrecting her popularity. That's why she was paired with Ginger Rogers and Cary Grant in the late thirties, two of the studio's biggest stars. The movies she made with those people earned small profits, and naturally the indifferent box office return fell at Hepburn's feet. Independent theater owner Harry Brandt labeled Hepburn, along with many other well-known stars, as "box office poison" in a 1938 paid newspaper article. He wrote that these stars' high salaries were not warranted by the low ticket sales for their films. This was definitely the case for an actress like Hepburn, who had not had a hit in years at the time of the article's publication.
​

​

​

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I'm also glad Kate never did a horror movie, and there's no reason to think she would have ever even considered it. She didn't even respond to calls for her to replace Joan Crawford in CHARLOTTE, later stating, "I don't have to do the things Bette does."

Foolish Stanwyck, a pal of Joan's, turned down the Mary Astor role to go do a hapless William Castle shlock-fest, her final theatrical film.

Still, I'm glad Bette slummed a bit in the shocker genre, if not quite as much as she did. I'd hate for us to have missed CHARLOTTE and THE NANNY (both of which I absolutely love) while stuff like 1980's WATCHER IN THE WOOD, sunk in part by a dreadful teenaged actress, we could have done without.

Descending in that home elevator and guiding Monte Clift through her carnivorous garden was mesmerizing but quite enough macabre gothicity from Great Kate.

 

[Crimson]

I'm also glad Kate never did a horror movie, and there's no reason to think she would have ever even considered it. She didn't even respond to calls for her to replace Joan Crawford in CHARLOTTE, later stating, "I don't have to do the things Bette does."

It's hard to imagine Kate, even under different circumstances, reducing herself to shlock or a guest appearance in a sitcom. I think at least part of that late career revival Hepburn experienced was due to the perception of her career being "classy", whereas Davis (and Crawford) gave the impression of sinking to any level to remain active. Clearly not all of Hepburn's films were "good", but not even GRACE QUIGLEY felt like bottom-of-the-barrel dreck. I think Hepburn's regal nonchalance about her career -- even though she admitted later that she cared, very much -- had a reverse-psychological effect on the audience. Davis gave off an air of almost palpable desperation.

Was she offered the Liliian Gish role?

I honestly don't know, but it seems improbable to me that the producers didn't consider the possibility of a Hepburn/Davis matchup. Mind you, I think Hepburn would have turned it down anyway.

 

[Crimson]

Among Hepburn's late career films, I'm not really all that wild about ON GOLDEN POND; I find it hoary and mawkish. I am, however, fond of LOVE AMONG THE RUINS (1975). Admittedly, the movie ain't much and with the talents involved (Hepburn, Olivier, Cukor) maybe it should be more than a piffle. But I find it breezy and charming. It's the only time I've liked Olivier in comedy, and Hepburn has at least one great comic moment.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Among Hepburn's late career films, I'm not really all that wild about ON GOLDEN POND; I find it hoary and mawkish. I am, however, fond of LOVE AMONG THE RUINS (1975). Admittedly, the movie ain't much and with the talents involved (Hepburn, Olivier, Cukor) maybe it should be more than a piffle. But I find it breezy and charming. It's the only time I've liked Olivier in comedy, and Hepburn has at least one great comic moment.

View attachment 26729

I've had a VHS copy of LOVE AMONG THE RUINS for years. It's so damn good. It bombed in the ratings though, because ABC promoted it as a snooty snob-appeal thing, which Americans in 1975 weren't really in the mood for. They should have pushed how funny the movie was.

But it earned Emmys for Kate, Lord Larry, and Cukor.

 

[ClassyCo]

I like Kate and think she was a terrific comedienne -- the best of her era, which is saying a lot considering the competition (Colbert, Loy, Lombard, etc). I also think she was great at light drama, such as STAGE DOOR or STATE OF THE UNION. However, I find her rather bad in heavy drama like SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER or LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT. I find her 'serious' acting to be shallow, arch and theatrical.

Katharine Hepburn was a gifted comedienne. In fact, she is probably my favorite Golden Age film comedienne, especially in terms of the big-name movie actresses. She was more adept in comedy than Davis and Crawford, but was too wooden in heavy melodrama. The Golden Age did have some good comediennes, just like you said, with Irene Dunne and Myrna Loy probably being my other two favorites outside of Hepburn. I haven't seen enough of Carole Lombard or Claudette Colbert to comment on them either way. ​

 

[ClassyCo]

Of all the fan-fic hokum of FEUD, the one moment that felt true -- even if it perhaps wasn't -- was Davis' simmering resentment of Hepburn's late career renaissance. Davis' post EVE career had her barely one step ahead of being a has-been; even her successes in JANE and CHARLOTTE were viewed as déclassée. Hepburn's late career was like a twist on the old adage of sitting by the river; audiences that had been chilly towards her in her heyday later viewed her as some kind of national monument.

I have to assume at least some consideration was made toward Kate being offered THE WHALES OF AUGUST?

I can easily see Davis being upset over Hepburn's late career reemergence; getting good roles, Oscar buzz, and recognition unmatched by an actress "of a certain age" during that time. Hepburn won an Oscar (tied with Streisand) for THE LION IN WINTER the same year Davis was in shlock vehicles like THE ANNIVERSARY. Davis had been the more consistent box office draw and academy darling in their heyday, and it would have been understandable had she shown some resentment towards Hepburn's success.

As for THE WHALES OF AUGUST, I think it's a fairly good movie. I've seen it a time or two before. I could see the producers approaching Hepburn, but her casually declining because of her refusal to work with Davis.​

 

[Crimson]

because ABC promoted it as a snooty snob-appeal thing, which Americans in 1975 weren't really in the mood for. They should have pushed how funny the movie was.

At a glance, it certainly looks like it could be a stuffy, stodgy "Masterpiece Theater" kind of thing. Shame such a witty and sly film is relegated to almost total obscurity, due to being a TV-movie and a flop to boot.

 

[Crimson]

Katharine Hepburn was a gifted comedienne.

My favorite of her films is ADAM'S RIB, but also love BRINGING UP BABY and HOLIDAY. On the other hand, I find THE PHILADELPHIA STORY kind of dull (but, still, much better than the 50s remake).

I haven't seen enough of Carole Lombard or Claudette Colbert to comment on them either way.

Other than TO BE OR NOT TO BE, I'm not a big fan of Lombard, but you should watch some Colbert films. She was marvelous.

 

[ClassyCo]

My favorite of her films is ADAM'S RIB, but also love BRINGING UP BABY and HOLIDAY. On the other hand, I find THE PHILADELPHIA STORY kind of dull (but, still, much better than the 50s remake).

ADAM'S RIB is funny, probably one of the best Tracy-Hepburn film pairings. BRINGING UP BABY is my favorite old school screwball comedy; it would be the movie I'd show someone that wanted to see classic screwball at its finest. It's a funny movie and Hepburn and Cary Grant have good chemistry. The play off one another very well. I've never seen HOLIDAY or THE PHILADELPHIA STORY, but I thought the HIGH SOCIETY musical remake was good, albeit primarily because of the casting.​

Other than TO BE OR NOT TO BE, I'm not a big fan of Lombard, but you should watch some Colbert films. She was marvelous.

I vaguely remember seeing a Carole Lombard movie, but for the life of me, I cannot remember which one it was now. I have MY MAN GODFREY on one of those cheap, no-name DVD releases. Lombard was certainly a beautiful woman, but I almost always remember as Clark Gable's wife that died horrifically in a place crash. I don't know too much about her.
​

​

A similar situation surrounds my viewing relationship with Claudette Colbert. I know she was a big star for a quite a long time, and I know the producers over at Fox had originally wanted her to play Margo Channing in ALL ABOUT EVE, which is why Anne Baxter was chosen for the title character, owing to her resemblance to Colbert. This never happened, as we all know, because Colbert injured her back during the production of THREE CAME HOME, and had to withdraw, leaving the role vacant for a more-than-eager Bette Davis to take her place.

The only Claudette Colbert movie I've seen in full is LET'S MAKE IT LEGAL, the 1951 comedy where she is caught between a love triangle with Macdonald Carey and Zachary Scott. The only reason I bought and watched the movie was to add it to my Marilyn Monroe collection (she has a small role as a gold-digging model). The movie also features newcomers Barbara Bates and Robert Wagner early on in their careers, and Frank Cady (later known as Sam Drucker on GREEN ACRES). It isn't a good movie at all really, and it was, in fact, known as the worst comedy film of 1951. It was a bomb at the box office, too. So that really isn't a good start into the Colbert arena, but I'd be willing to look into more of her work.

When thinking about Claudette Colbert, I often think about how she refused to have the right side of her face photographed. It was called "the dark side of the moon", and many of her publicity stills are done in a way to hide that side of her face. She was an attractive woman, I'd say, although not really along the lines of what I'd call a typical glamour girl. She seems to have been a little more refined and elegant.
​

​

​

 

[ClassyCo]

It is baffling to me that, through all of her achievements, Katharine Hepburn never got stronger recognition for her beauty. In her prime, she was striking, and she apparently petrified Lucille Ball because she was "so beautiful" and by the way she talked. I understand that she did not fit the glamour or exotic mold, so she was not like, say, Marlene Dietrich or Dolores del Rio, and she was not sexy like Jean Harlow, but she was quite beautiful. She was sometimes called an American Garbo, and while that may be concerning her versatility in her acting, I think that could easily go towards her features, too.

I mean, look at Hepburn, she was a beautiful lady.
​

​