Save the Motion Picture Home!

Once again I can hear Mary Pickford rolling over in her grave. First the greedy Oscar folk wouldn't let her Oscars be sold for charity (believe it or not that's all STILL up in the air...reportedly they are trying to privately work out a deal now)...and now the same pardon me but it must be said in all its unjournalistic-ness...douchebags...want to close the Motion Picture and Television Home and Hospital.

Created in 1921 by Mary and some fellow great actors the fund was set up to help actors in their hour of need. In 1932 Mary came up with the 'pledge program' which asked workers to deduct one half a percent of their paychecks to the fund much like social security and such these days. The program worked so well it became standard with SAG membership.

In 1939 a bunch of celebs started a radio show, donating their entire appearance fee to the fund, to benefit the charity. In 1940 Jean Hersholt (the guy who stuck up for Karl Dane) spearheaded the opening of the Motion Picture & Television Country House and Hospital (well...television was added later). The house/hospital opened in 1948 and ever since many greats have gone there and many ended their lives there. Both silents and talkies. Then the jerks came into the picture.

In 1993 the Motion Picture and Television Foundation was established and Jeffery Katzenberg was appointed chairman. But then the world went to hell, and in very late 2008 Katzenberg announced they HAD to close to homes and hospital...they were quote, "Losing $10 million a year". Hmm true the health care in this country is extremely third world (and that is a rant I could go on forever...lets just say aged 21 I owe around $20,000 in medical bills from an emergency surgery last year) but unfortunately Katzenberg's claims don't sync up.

In fact a site called thewrap.com found that for the last available tax returns (2006 and 2007) show no $10 million losses...in fact they made net gains both years! However Katzenberg was part of that Madoff scam and was said to have lost millions, many suspect he may have put the fund in hot water as well...through no fault of the patients or donors!

Look I have long accepted Hollywood has a very short term memory. I once again didn't watch the Oscars but I'm told Anita Page was left out of the in memoriam (she died September 2008)...just for the record she was the last living person to have attended the first Oscar ceremony. And she actually was one of the last major stars to have appeared in silents. But nope...forgotten. HOWEVER these people are still alive, and they have been told there was a place for them to go when they were old and no longer had the means. The motto of this place was, "WE TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN". I guess they meant "*unless we get swindled then fuck you old people we're taken the money and running!"

People have begun to protest. So far the home and hospital and staff are all still there. A website http://www.savingthelivesofourown.org/ was started to help raise awareness and protest. There is also a facebook group: Save the Motion Picture Hospital. Other ways you can help (and for the love of God SPREAD THE WORD!!!):

Volunteer:

Sign to help the Saving the Lives of Our Own Campaign by clicking here. Leave a message of support here. Join up here and keep up to date.

Write to the AMPTP

And express your feelings about their lack of support for our elderly co-stars.

AMPTP

15301 Ventura Blvd.

Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

Write to SAG:

and tell them how you feel

http://www.sag.org/

Write your Congressman:

And tell them to throw a few bail out dollars their way (if you don't know who your congressman, or CA's congressmen are click the link above). A letter is best, an email is good too.

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/contact_congres.htm

And lastly...boycott the idiots who got us in this trouble to begin with! I'm sure Mary Pickford would say it was the right thing to do! Until this is resolved, I'm dubbing this an honorary FTT Honor Project. SPREAD THE WORD!

Silent Star Photos

A big thanks to Harold at Nitrateville for this tip! The Corbis Agency has released updated their archives and there are many many silent film photos in their collection! Including proof that Nita Naldi didn't look like an old coke whore ala Anger's claims (there are some wonderful photos of her), a photo of Valentino with Thomas Meighan and June Mathis after being bailed out from jail on his bigamy charges, and many many photos of Mary. I like the one above of her and Gloria...they look like they're scheming things!

Four Horsmen of the Apocalypse...NOW ONLINE AHHH!!!

Okay...I'm just a *little* excited over this. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, the film that made Valentino a star, is now online to view and download for free via my favorite site the internet archive. For those of you who haven't used it before, its a site that allows you to watch and download films that are in the public domain (i.e. legally) for free.

Four Horsemen indeed is public domain, but for reasons I don't fully understand it hasn't seen a non bootleg DVD release in many many years. You can still find them if you ebay or ioffer around...but this is much simpler and good quality too! Click here to watch Four Horsemen. Enjoy!

A Sainted Devil...infamous cast?

I know a lot of film no0bs tend to rely on IMDB as a reliable source. However its a bit like a precursor to Wikipedia: anyone can edit it, and proof doesn't really matter. I contacted them about Miriam Cooper's filmography (such as it would be impossible for her to be in a Griffith film from 1910) and they never changed it. Other people have had similar problems. Valentino's trivia still says he was a thief and gigolo (lies from the 1977 movie...MOVIE), Lillian Gish's still says she dumped a man for being a Jew (she actually dumped him for lying to her).

One of IMDB's popular myths is that Roscoe ''Fatty'' Arbuckle and Mary Miles Minter were both in the now lost A Sainted Devil. Supposedly less than a reel exists, but even that could be untrue (no one knows WHERE). The film was one of Valentino's major flops, it was 'Rambova tries to be Mathis' and it just...didn't work well. Not (obviously) having seen the film I cant say whether it was any good or not; but the costumes don't look quite right (gay matador would be the wording I'd use). Too frilly. And don't get me wrong...I'm not Natacha hating...I liked her Monsieur Beaucaire costumes!

I asked a group of Valentino fans (a few of whom are authors on him and other silent actors) if they knew about this. They were shocked...none of them had ever heard it and they had to run to IMDB to see it themselves.

Valentino and Roscoe were said to be good friends. Valentino appeared alongside Roscoe (and a bunch of other stars) in 1924's "Character Studies" where a man pretends to put on 'fantastic make up' and reappears looking just like the star he's trying to be (when in reality its the real star). Click here to view it. I adore Emily Leider's book, but I feel she played this film up a little too much...the general consensus is it was shot as a gift for Charlie Chaplin's birthday (he's the only notable star not in it) and later was released as a short. Valentino appearing in it wouldn't be a grand gesture towards Roscoe really.

That being said they were still said to have gotten along well and liked to play poker games (with one cussing the other out for winning). Roscoe barely appeared in any films during this time, he had just been acquitted over the Virginia Rappe thing and he was still a public pariah (despite not having actually DONE anything). His work was behind the cameras, and usually drunk and sad at that. To actually appear in a film that wasn't for private use would be quite a grand gesture.

As for Mary Miles Minter well...that's just as interesting. In 1922 William Desmond Taylor was murdered after seeing dear Mabel Normand off to her car. Mabel was ruled out as a suspect (though the poor thing had many scandal troubles ahead of her) but soon Mary Miles Minter was drawn in...she was 17 and a Mary Pickford clone...sweet and innocent. Apparently she didn't like living that way and had intended to marry Taylor (who was almost 50 at the time of his death) when she turned 18. She hated acting and she hated her controlling stage mother even more. Lovey dovey notes were found and not only was Mary's career ruined, she is still a possible viable suspect to this day. I'm personally a fan of her mother having a hand in it, but lord knows we'll never know.

This had all long played out by 1924/1925 when A Sainted Devil was filmed and released. To appear with her onscreen as well would have been a hell of a gesture. In fact if true it was her last film, Minter had retired in 1923.

I didn't know Valentino and Minter were close, but Caroline Rupprecht found that they indeed had been friends after being introduced while Valentino worked on Virtuous Sinners. In fact she thinks she has a whole another story that has yet to be uncovered, but isn't ready to present it yet. I eagerly await those findings alongside the Virginia Rappe (who Valentino worked with on the infamously delicious Isle of Love ) case that hopefully will come to light soon.

So to answer the question...were Roscoe and Mary in A Sainted Devil? The general consensus is as of now...NO. Even IMDB doesn't give character names, if anything they might have had small extra parts as a token gesture. However contemporary reviews (which weren't very kind) never mention either of them. Fatty was hard to miss, and Mary greatly resembled the original Mary...both would be hard to miss even in an extra role. You think with the public lynchings going on at the time reviewers would have noticed the scandal tinged actors if they appeared, and surely the Mrs. Grundy's of the world would have called for a boycott. It never happened, but if it had it would have been the most interesting thing about A Sainted Devil.

Whether this film will ever be found we do not know, but I remain hopeful.

Why Silent Films will always by gypped come Award time

With the overrated Academy Awards tonight (who's traffic will bar me from even setting foot NEAR Hollywood) I would just like to take a moment to state my annoyance with award shows, top grossing lists, best selling lists, and overall collective movie lists. Why? Because so so VERY rarely are silent actors and silent films counted on them. For instance Mary Pickford came in #24 on American Film Institutes Top 100 actors (for the past 100 years) list!!! Below freakin Mae West! Don't get me wrong...I like Mae West...but seriously? On a top movie list they ranked Birth of a Nation as #44!!! Seriously.

Most of these problems stems from the fact that not only do most people not remember silent films, they cant remember anything pre color (I mean 1950s color, not 1929 color)! As one person put it, "Most historians forget anything before Marilyn Monroe". The public is one thing, its even sadder when film buffs are guilty as well. Look at that stupid list yourself, most of the actors are from the late 40s and 50s...the fact Gloria Swanson isn't even on the list (or Valentino and the fact Chaplin is not #1) says it all. Back in the day there may have been reason for this...there was no internet, no easy 'click and order', no TCM. In this day and age there is no reason for anyone receiving an Oscar tonight to have no clue who Mary Pickford is (sad thing is I doubt even one of them does!) I guess karma is a funny thing though...80 years from now no one will care who Brangelina is or know anything about Tom Cruise beyond his couch jumping career suicide (and even that will only be film buffs).

Top grossing lists never seem to include silents. In fact the only time they do is if they don't adjust inflation, and suddenly Birth and Four Horsemen top the list. The trouble with highest grossing lists is even when limited to silents exclusively (or talkies only) they are so flawed its stupid. The oft repeated list of top grossing silents comes from a 1932 article in Variety (click here to read). Even in this day and age that list is still likely very flawed.

The way silent films were distributed was this: they'd play a very large theatre in the major cities for a premiere. Once that was done a road show would begin to other smaller but still important cities. Finally they would trickle down into the sticks. This could literally take years (thus why films weren't seen as valuable beyond the first release). To make matters even more complicated the profit system was different then now; and accounting was very lax (and probably crooked). The best indication we have of what did what business is the trade journals from the day and the magazine popularity polls.

With things so hard to account for the stars didn't exactly help. Fake numbers were put out for press releases and later in life in autobiographies or interviews they would give a number that was just ridiculous. Mabel Normand's film "Mickey" is usually cited as being released in 1918 and the highest grossing picture of the year making $18 million. No one stops to realize that up to 1932 "Birth of a Nation", the highest grossing film forever-ty-ever, made only $10 million. No way "Mickey" beat that. That number came from Mack Sennett later in life, and everyone just believed him. Four Horsemen and Birth suffer similar problems, no one can agree on how much they really cost or made during their original runs.

Even if the Variety list is as dead on as we'll ever get, Silent films will never be able to compete in top grossing lists. There is a fundamental flaw in these lists: ticket prices change, inflation changes, and distribution changes. In 1915 tickets to Birth were $2 (at a time when most other pictures were 5 or 10 cents) which would be near $40 in this day and age. In 2008 tickets to Dark Knight were around $11-$12 in big cities...which would be an extremely high price back in 1915. It could take 2 years for Birth to reach the sticks, and even longer to reach beyond the States (in fact it was playing Europe in the mid 1920s). In 2008 Dark Knight could play in Los Angeles the same as Podunk, Iowa...and Rome. And the grosses could be immediately tabulated. Obviously this will always slant newer films to the top of the list.

What makes it even more unfair is re-releases which rarely occurred during the silent era but occurred on and off over the past 90 years, are not counted. Revival house showings aren't counted. Home prints of any format are not counted (and by now what with all the various formats over the years it would be very hard to count). And once again...we don't even have the proper original totals! And even if we did...it'd be hard to compare!

I think modern people like to overlook just how powerful some of these films were. Birth will probably be the highest grossing film (and most important at that) for all time...just given what it was and what it did...similar success is impossible to match less a new art form is discovered and quickly devoured. I also think Big Parade, Gold Rush, and Four Horsemen are very underrated in their overall places in history.

Gross lists are one thing...I still think its saddest that the very people who made these films are so underrated today. If the day ever comes that I encounter someone who doesn't know the name 'Charlie Chaplin'...well that's the day I'll give up hope.

Mabel in New York: The Extra Girl on March 1st

Thanks to a tip on the Mabel Normand facebook page, I found out "The Extra Girl" is being screened on March 1st at the Brooklyn Public Library in New York. The screening will start at 1:30PM in the Dweck Center. This is one of Mabel's last features and contains some of her finest comedic sequences including the infamous 'lion on a leash' segment. I highly suggest if you're in the area you check it out!

Silent Films for No0bs

The Silent Movie Theatre held a screening of one of Griffith's many masterpieces, "Broken Blossoms" the other day. A bunch of high schoolers were forced to attend and proceeded to ruin the event for everyone by believing they could talk, call, and text through a silent film. During the Chaplin short they discussed what was going on, and by the time the feature started they had moved on to more important topics such as if they should go on a date with this girl who is calling or not. I am a BIG fan of exposing youngins to Silents, but finally I had to ask them to be quiet. Via their other ramblings it turns out they had been forced to attend, and didn't even know what the film was about. I blame their teacher as well...its hard to muster up enthusiasm if a film is treated like a museum piece that's a bit like broccoli: good for you but bleh.

A looooong time ago I thought about making a guide to Silent Films for no0bs (newbies for the older crowd). However I figured most people reading here were familiar with silent film. But I think the guide is still needed especially judging by certain google queries that lead here. So for the no0bs and curious here ya go:

Silent Film (and film in general) for Beginners

*The first films were created in the 1880s. Whether America or France won the honor is in debate (especially since so many are lost) but the earliest surviving film is Roundhay Garden Scene from 1888.

*Silent films weren't all jerky and silly. They got this reputation from being projected at the wrong speed when sound came along. Unlike sound film silents had no standard projection speed, thus causing the problem.

*There were 3 eras of silent film, leading to a major misconception about quality. The first era was the flickers, which lasted from 1900-1915. These were one reel (10 mins or so) films that had simple plots and began very crudely but evolved with the years especially thanks to D.W. Griffith. During this time actors were thought disposable and plot as an afterthought. 1915-1923 ushered in the feature (which had existed for a few years but was really brought into its own by Birth of a Nation) which began more experimenting and longer but still slightly clunky films (mind you they were inventing this new medium at that time!) By 1923 films began to become more refined and until the majority of silent films ended in 1928 these were some of the finest films ever made. It would take talkies several decades to reach the same greatness as these films. These films are much like watching a modern film, there is no talking but they are so refined they are easy to enjoy.

*Silent films were never ''silent''. This is a HUGE misconception. When flickers first came into vogue they were silent for a few months, but eventually nickelodeons began adding either phonograph music or a live accompanist. By the time features came around films began to send out their own scores (Griffith started this one too). From then on they were accompanied by a live pianist or organ player, and sometimes a full orchestra! You never just sat in pure silence watching a silent film. Random side note: in addition to a score most silents had a theme song, which also started with Birth. These were very popular and were sold as sheet music. The first soundtracks!

*And on that note quite obviously just because a silent film has no talking doesn't mean you should talk. Its like any other movie, SHUSH. This includes commentary. The same rules that apply at a talkie theatre apply at a silent one.

*There is a huge misconception about color and sound. Color and sound for film were both invented soon after film itself (both in 1895). However both were expensive and complicated, and the audience seemed happy enough with this new fangled moving picture thing anyways. Tinting was used, such as to imply indoor and outdoor scenes. The first feature length color film was 1922's Toll of the Sea which starred Anna May Wong. And yes it still exists. When talkies came about most of the early ones were in color. However once the Great Depression set in this was ruled too expensive and they reverted back to black and white for a few decades.

*The first sound films began in 1895 and various shorts and experiments were made well up to 1920. The first mainstream feature to make an attempt at sound was Dream Street in 1921 by D.W. Griffith. However only the premiere theatre installed the photokinema system, and all other theatres presented it as silent. Interestingly enough Griffith was also one of the first people on TV as well (in 1929!). Sound was considered silly except for in cases of adding music. In fact that's what the earliest uses were for (and thus making the first music videos!) Contrary to popular belief The Jazz Singer wasn't the first talkie. It was just the first majorly successful and adapted one. And by today's standards its really not a talkie...Jolson sings a few songs and ad libs to his Mommy, but most of it is silent with title cards.

*There is a lot of talk about actors who overacted in silent film. Usually when you hear of a really big star (like Valentino or Mary Pickford) the 'they were so natural' thing is used. True there were a few actors who overacted, but these were usually actors brought from the stage to the screen (as this was the stage acting technique of the time). Your actual movie stars rarely suffered this problem. Of course some things like Keystone comedies were never meant to be well acted (though Chaplin, Arbuckle, and Normand all did anyways).

*AHHH THE TALKIE MYTH! There is a HUGE misconception out there that silent stars all faded when talkies came because they either had silly voices, or too heavy accents. A lot of stars had done stints on stage or were American born, thus that is completely ruled out. As for accents how do you explain Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, or Bela Lugosi? People like the talkie myth because it simplifies a change in industry, but in reality the reason most silent stars didn't transition is a lot more complicated and individualized. Many made a few talkies (and later radio appearances) with success. However many were old, had been popular for almost a decade, and had personal problems that began to interfere with their careers. I have asked the silent film community if there was ever a silent star they knew of who had a funny voice that would have ended their career. There was only ONE star with that problem: Raymond Griffith (who's vocal chords had been injured during service in WW1). And get this: he still made talkies (which were moderately successful, he was said to have a cold in the plot to explain his voice) and he found great success behind the scenes. No star failed because of a funny voice, not even John Gilbert or Clara Bow.

*Depending what your viewing yes there might be cringe worthy racism or funny outdated technology. Don't write a film off for those reasons alone though; if we don't learn from the past we're doomed to repeat it. And no watching Birth will not turn you into a racist...unless you were already secretly leaning that way (or have a Klan robe in your closet).

*Silent films are not museum pieces. A lot of people treat it like some odd experience they have no clue how to enjoy. Simple! Just treat it like a talkie! Go! Laugh! Cry! Whatever the film calls for. Contrary to popular belief its not a bunch of 'reading' (and out of question when did reading become so 'tiresome'?) The later silents especially mimic talkies, and are very easy to enjoy as a modern viewer. I can say from personal expierence most silents have less ''reading'' than a subtitled foreign film (I like French films what can I say?). In fact very early films used very minimal title cards (especially Griffith films). Later films used them in a much more...smooth way.

*DVD/VHS warning! A good chunk of silent films are in public domain, and those that are not are very rarely appreciated by the studios who own them. There are some very fantastic DVD releases out there, but there are also a lot of crappy ones. Sometimes they use the worst prints (bad picture quality) and sometimes they use edited prints (Birth of a Nation is a good example). Even WORSE is the music issue...a lot of releases don't bother to use good or appropriate scores and some literally put an inappropriate annoying music loop on it (like the Mary Pickford Signature Collection). There isn't one company or place to avoid, so my suggestion is to read online reviews as they can give you the best idea of if its a good release or not. And if you end up with a badly scored DVD...just mute it and play some modern music!

*How many silent films are lost? We don't know. The usual figure is between 70% and 90%. People like to make up a percentage that sounds shocking. However its kind of impossible to know. Why? Because film archives around the world are underfunded and many silent films sit in tins mislabelled or not labeled at all...just disintegrating away. Lost films can be ''found'' or partially found..."Beyond the Rocks" starring Gloria Swanson and Valentino was a good example of this. It was lost until 2005 when it was found in a private collection. That's another half of it: rich eccentric private collectors buy up rare prints and then refuse to share them because they want to be the only one to have these rarities. This technique is suspected to be behind some lost Theda Bara films.

*And why are the ones that are lost well...lost? Because film was printed on nitrate stock...which was and is extremely flammable. Even when its stored right it can explode just because it feels like it. In fact vault fires are responsible for the loss of Theda Bara, Raoul Walsh, and Miriam Cooper films amongst others. Also once the talkies came silents were seen as interesting as yesterdays newspaper...old and worthless. In fact that's how the Silent Movie Theatre got started: the theatre didn't have a sound system and the founder could get silents for free from distributors who wanted nothing to do with them in the 1940s. Preservation didn't really kick into till the 1950s and 60s...and even then they managed to botch the hell out of it (Library of Congress hired an idiot who transferred perfectly good 36 MM prints (the ideal size) to 16MM PAPER PRINTS killing the quality!!! AHHH!!!)

Debunking Hollywood Babylon 2: Part 2

Continuing from yesterday here is the rest of Hollywood Babylon 2: Debunked. Click here to read part 1. And to read the debunking of the original Hollywood Babylon click here.



The Magic of Self Murder

Ahhhh Anger's favorite made up topic. This chapter is nothing but a bunch of 'so and so died this way'. Let’s debunk the hell out of it.

Charles Butterworth: Anger concedes his official cause of death is accident by Anger claims it was indeed 'suicide'. He doesn't elaborate and the official story is Butterworth lost control of his car on sunset (not a hard feat). He also died on June 13th, 1946 not June 14th as Anger says. Anger claims he killed himself over the loss of his friend Robert Benchley. Benchley died after a long illness November 21st, 1945. Anger says it was a 'few months' between their deaths. It had almost been a year...possible but unlikely. A car accident wouldn’t be an assured death, and it'd be quite a painful way to try and go...

John Bowers: Died on November 17th, 1926, not 15th as Anger says. He began his career in 1914, not 1916. Some sources say his wife divorced him in 32, others say they were still married when he died. He never started a failed flying school, and his troubles stemmed from his lack of work. He did drown himself. Click here for more about John Bowers.

James Murray: Anger covered this in Hollywood Babylon 1. We already talked about it.

James Whale: Was born in 1889 not 1896. Whale came to Hollywood in 1929, not 1930. Ironically Anger gets the rest of the long story right...something he rarely ever does. Good for him.

Barbara Bates: For starters Albert Dekker did not kill himself (Anger mentions this right off the bat). She actually made her debut in Strange Holiday, not Salome when she danced. She indeed suffered from depression and personal troubles but only one known instance of an attempted suicide is known, right after her husband was diagnosed with cancer. She survived. Since Anger mentions it Ray McDonald also didn't kill himself, he choked on his food (how Lya De Putti!) However Anger is right, she succeeded in killing herself via carbon monoxide in 1969.

Claire Maynard: Was discovered at a party, not in a modeling shop. Stage work wasn't her downfall, it was her very very short movie career. Indeed she killed herself via gas. Supposedly it wasn't the first time. Click here for more info on her.

Ross Alexander: He already did this in Hollywood Babylon, we already debunked it.

Herman Bing: I question him killing himself based on he’s more elusive than Robert Ames. That being said at the least he died on January 9th, 1947, not January 10th, 1948 as Anger claims.

James Cardwell: Shot himself on January 31st, 1954 not February 4, 1954. He was 32 not 33. And his reason was depression over a lack of television work (Anger doesn’t mention this).

Arthur Edmund Carew (aka Arthur Edmund Carewe): Was born in Turkey, not Armenia. He died on April 22nd, 1937, not April 23.

Lester Cuneo: His first film was Sons of the Northwood, not Graustark. He was also 44, not 37.

Karl Dane: THIS is the book that started all this bullshit. So fine I'll debunk it once more cuz I love Karl. He arrived in America before WW1 broke out in Europe and he did extra work before his German roles. He married Helen Benson in 1921 and retired from the screen...Anger doesn’t mention this just saying his 'career didn’t amount to much until 1925'. Well that’s what tends to happen when you retire! Also his German films had been very popular so...it’s not like he fizzled out. He did play 'Ramadan' in Son of the Sheik (fantastically at that) but 'shifty' really wouldn’t be the word.

Dane's accent wasn't too bad, you can hear it here. It also wasn’t the reason behind his downfall...he'd been making talkies for 2 years before he lost his contract with MGM. Dane claimed to have a nervous breakdown and indeed had suffered health problems as well. During this time Dane & Arthur made shorts for Paramount and RKO plus embarked on a successful vaudeville tour. He wasn't a failure by any means. He did own a stake in a hot dog stand outside of MGM, but he wasn’t RUNNING it. Besides Anger leaves out the part about Dane lost his money in a failed mining deal.

On April 13th, 1934 Dane was robbed of all the money had had: $18. On the 14th indeed he shot himself. But Anger leaves ALL THAT OUT. AHHH! For more information on Dane please click here.

Tom Forman: Already covered.

Jonathan Hale: Died February 28th, 1966 not March 2nd, 1966

Bobby Harron: Was hired as a bit player, not film cutter. He shot himself on September 5th, 1920, not September 1st. Anger leaves out the interesting part: that the original claim was he had bought the gun off a bum (not believing in just GIVING money), put it in his coat, and forgot about it. His boyhood preacher even attested that this was indeed the cause of death. Believe it or not the press ate it up till many decades later. He likely shot himself over either loosing Griffith's favor or his rumored battle with his sexuality. However it’s hard to say he was gay. In fact he dated Dorothy Gish and another suicide reason might be she had broken up with him for another man (who she would marry). Either way his life wasn’t looking so good at that point.

George Hill: Already covered.
Wallace McCutcheon Jr: Anger leaves out the part about McCutcheon being gassed during WW1, which led to mental and health problems like poor Max Linder

George Reeves: Reeves actually yelled at his guest, but stayed down and enjoyed a drink with them instead of running upstairs and blowing his brains out as Anger says. The account Anger gives is one that has been oft repeated (but not factual) to the press. Indeed he went upstairs and shot himself, surprisingly Anger doesn’t mention the popular rumor that foul play was involved. However most people who have researched it reach the point that he indeed killed himself. Click here for more about that.

Walter Slezak: Killed himself after suffering from a long illness, which Anger doesn’t mention.

Mary Wiggins: Killed herself on December 19, 1945, not December 10th.

Gig Young: He and his new wife were indeed found dead but Angers assertion that he had murdered his wife than himself in a suicide pact wasn’t right. Young did not plan the act and the reason for it was never clear. He had suffered from mental problems and was currently being administered LSD. Anger mentions none of this.

Albert Dekker: As said once already Dekker did not kill himself. He was born Albert Van Ecke, not Alvert Van Dekker. Anger is a bit insane...he says Dekker killed himself and everything that had happened to him he had done to himself. Dekker was found handcuffed, blinded, kneeling in the bathtub with a noose around his neck (that had been tied to the curtain rod). Anger only mentions bits of this and says he was hanging from the rod...which was slightly impossible. He had been dead at least 2 days (Anger doesn’t mention this) and surely it would have come undone by then. In addition to all this there were sexually explicit words scrawled in lipstick on his body. There were no signs of forced entry but camera equipment and money were missing. Anger doesn’t mention any of this.

The coroner theorized it was autoerotic asphyxiation gone wrong. If indeed he got himself in that bind he must have been very skilled at it! Either something was a foul, or it was likely an accident...not a suicide (though that would be a hell of a grand finale!)

Jenny Dolly: Jenny married Harry Fox in 1914, divorcing in 1921. Anger doesn’t mention this. Whether she really was with a Max Constant or Gordon Selfridge is unknown. However her car accident occurred in 1933 with a fiancé named Tony. If Selfridge had really offered her $10 million it would have had to have been long before this...the Great Depression was on you know. Anger says she was in a great depression and never got over it. In reality she married a Bernard Vinissky in 1935...I think she was over it. She was 49 when she killed herself, not 48.

Rosie Dolly: She married several times, Anger only mentions once. Interestingly enough he doesn’t mention how she tried to kill herself in 1962, but she failed and died of a heart attack in 1970.

Trent Lehman: He wasn’t addicted to cocaine, and he moved back to LA for a girlfriend. He worked odd jobs, contrary to what Anger says. He was robbed shortly before his death, something Anger doesn’t mention. His friend returned home at 2AM not 1:30AM.

Peg Entwistle: Was born in Wales, not London. The HollywoodLand sign was created by Woodruff and Shoults, not Mack Sennett. Whether she actually received an ironic offer to star in a play about suicide the day after she actually committed it is unknown. People cite it a lot with no proof.

Russell Gleason: Accidentally fell, didn't kill himself. Died on December 26th 1945, not the 25th.

Irene Gibbons: She was a bit actress in the 20s, Anger doesn't mention that. She was a fashion success before celebrities, and she began designing for films in 1933, not 1938.

Linda Christian: She divorced Tyrone Power in the 1956, so their marriage didn't end with his death in 1958 as Anger claims. Then Anger apparently sipped a little too much pink champagne as he turns the story into that of her DOG COMMITTING SUICIDE!!! Holy Christ...this man needs help.

Art Acord: Was born in Utah, not Oklahoma. His parents were both Mormon, not Ute. I sincerely doubt he killed Germans with his bare hands. Acord wasn't the only Western actor who didn't do talkies, William S. Hart didnt either. And indeed he poisoned himself, but he was suffering from hepatitis as well. Anger doesn't mention that.

Abigail Adams: She annulled her marriage to Lyle Talbot at age 20, not divorced at age 27 as Anger claims. Also they were barely married a few months which is odd that he didn't mention that. I'm not sure if she ingested the drugs Anger specifically mentions but she did OD on a mix of booze and pills.

Nick Adams: Likely accidentally OD'd, didn't kill himself.

Pier Angeli: Died on September 10th, 1971, not September 11th.

Lynne Baggett: She claimed to be trapped for 6 days under a sleeper bed, not 2. She did attempt suicide but called the operator for help before the pills kicked in. And indeed OD'd on sleeping pills, but Anger leaves out how she asked her nurse to stay away for 2 days because she 'needed her rest'.

Scotty Beckett: Poor kid. Anger leaves out the part about how on May 8th Scotty checked into a nursing home for injuries caused by a beating. He was found dead 2 days later. His death was ruled 'inconclusive' though sleeping pills were by his bedside. This seems like it could have gone either way...but its not for sure a suicide.

Clara Blandick: She went out for Palm Sunday Mass, not just to 'get her hair done'. Once she returned home she did her hair and dress, took some pills, spread a blanket over herself (Anger forgot that part), tied a plastic bag over her head, and died. She left a note explaining it was due to her severe pain and oncoming blindness. I'd call this more 'selected euthanasia' than suicide. She was 81 after all!

Dorothy Dandridge: Was born in 1922, not 1923. Her screen debut was a bit part in a 1935 Our Gang short, not the Marx Brothers (that was her second film). In 1959, not 1963, Dandridge discovered the people handling her finances had swindled her and she owed a huge amount of back taxes. No oil scheme involved. For 2 years she had barely any work, and suffered a nervous break down. Anger mentions none of this. She was 42, not 41 when she died. She died over an accidental overdose of Imipramine, a tricyclic antidepressant not sleeping pills. So nope not a suicide. Ugh Anger.

Alan Ladd: Suffered alcoholism and depression, which ran in his family. Anger doesn't mention that part. He was actually an extremely wealthy man up to the end of his life, another thing Anger doesn't mention. As for the suspected robbery incident I cant find anything on it.

Carole Landis: Anger fails to mention how she tried to kill herself in 1944 and 1946. When she finally succeeded Rex Harrison was the last to see her alive and the first to discover her body. As for a jewel box and clutched envelope with one pill left in it...those seem to be Angerisims. Interestingly enough Anger doesn't mention how her family thought Harrison had something to do with her death (beyond motivation) but could never prove it. To this day its still ruled suicide.

Marilyn Monroe: Accident people not suicide.

Ona Munson: Was suffering from ill health when she killed herself, Anger fails to mention it.

Gail Russell: Was found dead in her Brentwood apartment, not West Hollywood (Beverly Hills separates the two). However she didn't kill herself. She died of a heart attack brought on by her alcohol problems (ala Lottie Pickford). She was also suffering malnutrition when she died. Anger mentions none of this.

George Sanders: Anger waves his fake sex pen by saying Sanders went to Argentina to work for a tobacco advertising company after he graduated. There Anger claims he frequented brothels. Sanders actually worked for an advertising agency in England where Greer Garson suggested he break into acting.

Jean Seberg: Iowans are crazy everyone knows it. I kinda like her though. She was found dead in August 1979 after missing for 11 days. Anger gets it wrong saying she was found on September 6th, 1979. Her death was considered suspicious, but she had been suffering from depression so it very well could have been a suicide.

Everett Sloane: Killed himself on August 6th, 1965 not July 11th, 1965.

Inger Stevens: Moved to NY with her father at age 9. She made her stage debut in NY after running away at age 16; not in a 'sleazy Kansas burlesque house'. Anger then claims she returned to NY making it pointless. She killed herself on April 30th, 1970; not May 1st. She did it with tedral, not sleeping pills. She was found dead, and the person who found her was not her girlfriend as Anger claims.

Lupe Velez: We already did this one.

Grant Withers: Was born in 1905, not 1904. He was found March 27th, 1959 not 28th. Anger also fails to mention he was suffering from health problems.

Paul McCullogh: Had suffered from severe depression and had a stay in a sanatorium. Anger mentions none of this. He then indeed went in for a shave but actually finished the shave, then slit his wrist and throat. Anger says he just came in and slit his throat nothing else.


Hollywood Hospital

Marilyn Monroe: Indeed she did end up in the nuthouse...but Anger has it ass backwards as usual. After divorcing Arthur Miller she voluntarily entered Payne Whitney Psychiatric Clinic. However they held her against her will (for her own good) and she described the whole thing as a 'nightmare'. Joe Di Maggio had to help her and had her transferred to Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center where she remained for 3 weeks. The clinic name, the claim her mother was in the same nut house, and that no one saved Marilyn from the place are all wrong in Anger's version.

Rita Hayworth: This book was written 2 years before her death. Anger says she was in diapers and being spoon fed. While neither of those things were ever proven true she did indeed suffer from Alzheimer's (which he mentions). But still that's a pretty low blow.

George Zucco: Anger claims he went crazy and died in a mental house. Actually he was in a retirement home and died of pneumonia.


Hollywood Drugstore

Barbara LaMarr: Already done.

Carmen Miranda: People have asked about the 'Carmen Miranda story in Hollywood Babylon 2'. There doesn't appear to be one. There are two pictures of her, one of her dancing with a harmless caption. The second one claims she hid cocaine in her plats. I again doubt that and to back up my doubt some of her shoes are on display at her museum...surely someone could find such a compartment?

Nita Naldi: There is a HELL of a bad picture of Nita Naldi in this section. She didn't seem like the cocaine type but apparently vamps don't age well. Personally I think alcohol was more her problem at the end of her life.  I think Miss Naldi may come back in zombie form just to smack Anger for that photo...poor dear.

Debunking Hollywood Babylon 2: Part 1

So we finally begin the debunking of Hollywood Babylon 2! For those who don’t know in the 1960s or so a jerk named Kenneth Anger wrote a book called Hollywood Babylon. It was a little trashy piece of tabloid junk and for many years it sold very well and was taken as fact...mainly because there are a lot of sick people in the world (ask Hedda Hopper and TMZ.com how they make their money). Many of the ''facts'' Anger made up in that book became de facto in the stories of the long dead celebs he told of. Never mind that it didn’t sync up one bit with documents or press...Anger had written it in a published book it must be true!

When I first started this site I mentioned my favorite thing was restoring legacies. In other words gathering what was out there, getting it right, and putting it in one google accessible place. As I discussed this with someone I said I felt with the internet that information on silent stars had become much more accessible. They asked what about books? I mentioned Anger. In fairness many of the books pre 1995 are inaccurate as hell...but at least those authors TRIED. Anger just sat down, got hot over a Valentino picture, probably drank a bottle of pink champagne, and made up what he felt like. No fact checking necessary!

So we debunked Hollywood Babylon the first. Hollywood Babylon 3 is too new to really sit and debunk (though it wouldn’t be hard). We set the Valentino part straight though (literally): click here. That left Hollywood Babylon 2.

Hollywood Babylon 2 was released in the early 80s, was much bigger than the first one, and flopped a lot harder. That first stupid piece of trash can still be found in stores or online quite easily, but this book is a lot less available. Thankfully it’s as cheap and it too is going in the garbage the minute this debunking is done (I don’t believe in reselling junk).

I did skip a few talkie chapters again, mainly because Anger hurts my brain and it’s not my arena so I’m not responsible for it. However some good stuff is below. I think the saddest thing is that many of these little names are so long forgotten that their only claim is being in Anger's stupid book. VERY SAD.

I will give Anger some credit as he deserves it. Compared to the first Hollywood Babylon this one is MUCH closer to accurate. He gets the 'jist' of things right. However he likes to embellish or fudge important details, ya know his trademark. He still is terribly bad with dates and ages, and he likes to say everyone was gay and throwing orgies. Thankfully this one is a little more merciful to debunk...he must have forgotten the pink champagne this time.



Getting Gloria's Goat

Anger claims that when Gloria Swanson died in 1982 not one person would miss her; literally chanting 'ding dong the wicked witch is dead'. Every now and then I will hear from some person or another how they've heard (again from some person or another) how Gloria was a mean old hag. Yet despite that I've never found any proof she was.  In fact what they don't seem to know is Anger spent her final years harassing the hell out of her.

No one ever spoke ill of her, and no other silent biographies mention feuding with her (beyond Pola Negri; they had a diva battle before Valentino died). Her own autobio doesn't really diss anyone. In fact she speaks fondly of many celebs she had been close with. Rumor has it she feuded with Mary Pickford, but her own story says how much she enjoyed Mary. If anything I think she liked getting Mary's goat...teasing her in a friendly way.

Her children all stayed close to her to the end of her life, and Swanson fan sites and biographers mention a granddaughter who still likes to speak of her Grandmother. Many fans mention she was nice to meet well into old life, and was a very busy and charitable woman right to the end.

If anything Gloria wasn't 'difficult' or 'bitchy'. She was a modern woman who still to this day would probably catch hell for it. She knew what she wanted, and she went for it. She knew what her role in Hollywood was and she played it. She was extremely independent and opinionated (as can be seen in an awesome Dick Cavet interview with her and freakin Janis Joplin!).

But to fully debunk this one I googled and googled every term I could think. Only one result came back, and for what it’s claiming it sounds exaggerated. Dr. X tells a tale of working in a hotel and encountering Gloria in the 1970s. She seems quite fine in all her appearances from that era and she acted in Airplane 75 as well...I question if she really needed a walker then. And if she never left her room how would they know she was nothing but cranky? Whatever the case that is the only thing online I could find saying she was a bitter old woman. Either which way I don't think Gloria was as mean as a rumor from a rumor (possibly Anger or Rose Kennedy) claims. Either way Anger isn't done with Gloria yet...



Killer Kelly

Well this is a mighty interesting one! Anger tells the story of Paul Kelly a mostly stage actor sometimes silent actor who beat the hell out of Ray Raymond. Beat him to death! Then to make things even more interesting Kelly MARRIED Dottie Mackaye...Raymond's widow. But as usual there are some 'Angerisims' present. To his credit he got most of it right, just when he embellished details did he go wrong.

Thankfully the crime library helps out here. The crime happened on April 15th, 1927, not the 16th as Anger says. Paul Kelly was born in 1899, not 1901. Raymond was 39 not 33. Raymond met Dot in 1921, not 1920. Dot was 21, not 17. Jesus Anger...what is it with him and numbers? Dot also could not have toured the British Isles at age 4 as her parents moved to the US when she was a toddler. They lived in Denver. Interestingly enough Anger doesn't mention how Raymond left his first wife for her, and managed to commit bigamy while he did it (he never bothered with a divorce). They had a daughter Mimi in 1920 making her 7, not 4, as Anger claims.

Dot did leave Raymond claiming she was going 'Easter egg' shopping, but instead she went to see Kelly. Anger leaves that part out but it is crucial. Kelly had been drinking and he was bitching about how their affair was the talk of the town (because Raymond had been complaining). Kelly called Raymond and threatened him, Raymond said 'Come on over' and well...indeed he did. So far Anger gets that much right.

Anger goes on to list a list of celebs that supposedly held lots of wild parties. Call me cynical but I can’t imagine Lila Lee was throwing the wildest liquor parties known to man as claimed. I find it odd he didn't even list REAL known celebs and drinky, like Mabel Normand or Raoul Walsh (both would have been proud of that honor).

Anger leaves out how Kelly urged Raymond to come outside, but Raymond's maid convinced him to come in and sit down and talk. Anger does mention the maid, but claims she was more concerned about the furniture. Anger claims a child Valerie 'Mimi' Raymond was present (and four years old, not seven), but the crime library doesn't support that claim. He also claims a peg legged dog was present and that gay men dyed their dogs purple...I find both claims a little much even for Anger. There is a picture with Dottie and her dogs, neither appear to have a peg leg.

Anger makes it out like Kelly came in and just started beating the hell out of him. While that was probably his intent court records say else wise. The two men sat and talked and put their complaints out on the table. Kelly claims he began slapping Raymond and that's when it escalated. The LA Times points out there was a vast size difference between the men; Raymond never stood a chance.

Kelly went home to Dottie and admitted what he did (he hadn't realized he'd killed the guy yet). Apparently Dottie 'bawled him out' and the two kept drinking. Anger gets it wrong here. He doesn't mention that part at all. He then says Dottie and the maid found Raymond the next day and Dottie called a doctor friend to see if word had gotten out. In actuality Dottie went home that night and found her husband alive and wearing dark sunglasses. They joked about the fight and Raymond said he felt fine. It was the next day the maid found him on the bedroom floor in a stupor. Dottie did call her doctor friend, but to quietly admit Raymond to the hospital.

Anger makes it out like Raymond passed out the night of the fight (Dottie arriving from Easter egg shopping) and died. He actually was in a coma for 3 and a half days before he actually died. Dottie wasn't concerned; she was with Kelly when he died.

Anger is a little odd here. He says Raymond died and that the Doctor claimed it was of natural causes (this is true) but then jumps to 'the maid backed him up but didn't hold under police questioning'. Why was she being questioned by the police? What really happened was the hospital staff was concerned and as Raymond laid about to be embalmed and buried (evidence destroyed) they called the press who got wind of the mysterious death. The press called the undertaker, who pulled the body back for an autopsy. It took until this moment for a death by beating to be determined. NOW the police were involved. Anger mentions absolutely NONE of this.

Anger says it was the maid's confession that got the police after Kelly. Actually it was the rumors the press sent their way. Anger says Kelly admitted he was in love with Dottie, but it was unrequited. Actually he admitted the whole ordeal, said he hoped to marry her one day, and that the duel had been 'fair'. THEN the police spoke to the maid, who gave the account that for the most part matches Angers blow for blow of the actual fight. The police then tried to question Dottie who had taken so ill over her husband's death she couldn't speak for a week.

Anger then skips straight to Dottie's trial, forgetting to mention her questioning. She actually died admit to the affair (unlike what Anger claims) but said she promised her husband she would stay away from Kelly. After this Kelly was charged with murder, and Dottie and the doctor were charged with conspiracy to cover up the case. Anger got this mostly right, only he said manslaughter which is way different then actual murder charge wise.

Anger gets most of the trial testimony right. The Kelly's young Japanese servant, "Jungle" claimed he had served breakfast in bed to both of them (whether aspirins were included or not as Anger claims seems to be false). And indeed mushy love notes came out, though if pig Latin was involved that's not mentioned either.

Kelly was indeed sentenced to manslaughter, apparently having his charges lowered. And indeed was he sentenced to 1-10 years in San Quentin. Whether Dottie actually went to see Kelly before he was sent away as Anger claims is not mentioned, but indeed she too was sentenced to 1-3 years as well. The charges against the doctor were dropped.

Anger embellishes their prison sentences. Dottie didn't wait 7 months in LA jail appealing her sentence, in fact she served less than 2 months total. Anger claims 'less than a year'. He was right thought: Kelly was out of prison just after 2 years. The pair did indeed marry in 1931, and it indeed lasted until Dottie's unexpected death (car crash) in 1940. Anger gets it wrong though: he says she crashed on January 5th, she actually crashed on the 2nd (and died on the 5th). And again she was 40, not 37.



Why Be Good?

On August 9th, 1929 a crazy young woman named Eunice Irene Pringle ran screaming out of Alexander Pantage's office, claiming he had raped her. Again Anger gets the jist while missing the details (kudos on doing better with dates this chapter).

Eunice actually had an appointment with Pantage, and she entered a side street office instead of some big grand theatre. She indeed ran through a theatre and into the street causing a scene, but probably a little less dramatic then Anger claims. She was indeed affiliated with a variously spelled Nicolas Dunaev but unlike Anger claims it’s unlikely he had much to do with it. Also she didn't just buy a ticket and go accost Pantage, she had an appointment.

Anger is close to right with the first trial as well. Indeed she appeared dressed up as a sweet little Dutch school girl, seen as a sweet innocent latter day Virginia Rappe. She was ordered to appear in what she had worn the night she was allegedly raped and it was said to be a red slinky number. Anger leaves out the details (a first for him) but the overall part is right. Indeed Pantages was still convicted.

And indeed a second trial was scored by claiming though a minor her conduct and sexual prowess should be allowed in court (ironically this has long been overruled in this day and age). The lawyers successfully argued their case and Pantages was ruled not guilty.

Anger then goes on to say it was actually Joseph P Kennedy who was behind it, bribing Eunice so he could ruin Pantages and take over the theatre circuit. Anger says on Eunice's death bed she confessed this. The trouble with this story was that Eunice died in 1996...and Anger wrote this book in 1984...so...impossible. It's true the trial did indeed destroy Pantages and indeed it was sold to RKO for less than face value...but if indeed Kennedy was behind it there was never proof or a confession. Also this book being written in the 80s mentions Pantages as a rundown little theatre. It's been revived and does great business these days (I can personally attest as the stupid pedestrians make driving around there IMPOSSIBLE!)



Bootlegger Joe

Not satisfied with having a go at Joe and Gloria separately, Anger now needs a whole chapter on the pair. With credit to Anger he gets most of Joseph's history right. However he is wrong, when the movie moguls spoke at Harvard their lectures were printed in a book. Kennedy showed it to Gloria proudly during their first meeting. Gloria thought he was sexist for not including any women...in her (and many folks) opinion there was no one shrewder than Ma Pickford, Peg Talmadge, or even Mary herself.

Anger is extremely wrong about Swanson and Kennedy's first meeting. He says it occurred on her return from France (filming Madame Sans Gene) during an 'ovation', or a big press event. True Gloria did hold ovations, but that was not how or where they met. When Gloria began planning 'Rain' (aka Sadie Thompson) Joe's signature was one of the MPAA's, and she had no clue who he was. As she fought to make her film she met with Kennedy, and they hit it off. No press involved. Also to my knowledge Gloria never 'cooed' "Joe you're the best actor in Hollywood". Also an affair didn't begin right away, and they weren't exactly 'secret' about the affair (Gloria stayed with his children on a few occasions though she found it distasteful).

Many people think that Gloria only became independent because of Joe. Is this freakin book the source of that rumor!??!!?!? Untrue. Greatly untrue. She created Gloria Swanson Productions in 1926, mostly tired with the studio moguls and wanting more control and freedom. However she wasn't very good with the business side of things proving disastrous. Her first independent film was "The Love of Sunya" which flopped, and occurred long before she met Kennedy. Anger mentions none of this. He claims Kennedy created her company and that she would 'learn the price of hubris'. Jerk.

He also claims "The Swamp" (later to be known as Queen Kelly) was her first indie. She had already made 2 Indies before Kennedy. Anger claims that mess was their ending, but even as he notes Kennedy was around for 2 more Swanson pictures. The relationship soured when Gloria found out all the gifts Kennedy had been giving her were charged to her account...a very odd thing for a very wealthy man. Anger claims this is when Kennedy began his Eunice ploy, but that occurred in 1929...he and Gloria were still good then. And I have no clue why Anger goes on to repeat the whole thing...we just read about it a chapter ago!

I always wondered why no celebs sued Anger.  Clara Bow's sons thought about it.  But Gloria Swanson actually did it for the first book.  God bless her!



Interlude

Y'all will have to forgive me, as I just can’t make it through the talkie portions. Not because I have anything against them, but because the more Anger I read the more brain cells I loose. So small notes from these skipped chapters. In The Two Faces of Tinsel town Anger claims Valentino had orgies when Natacha left him. Yeaaaah no. I'm pretty sure Rudy was too busy crying and as one fan put it, "Being emo" to be enjoying orgies. He had his fun (and ladies), but he greatly missed Natacha. Jesus Christ how could you even come up with things like that let alone claim them as fact?!

In Stumpfinger Anger claims Bill Tilden ''played'' with Valentino, Louise Brooks, Ramon Novarro, Clara Bow, and Chaplin. Tilden was a gay tennis player...if Anger meant a double entendre he should be shot. Half that list is proven straight and the other half Tilden wouldn't touch: he reportedly never had sex with a woman and was almost virginal until the 40s. In Nightflowers Nightmares I definitely don't feel like dealing with his Black Dahlia story, but I'm sure it’s inaccurate. This link can clear it up.

In The Trouble with Jimmy Anger takes an already interesting claim and sensationalizes it. James Dean very well might have been bisexual, possibly gay for pay. It is absolutely impossible to prove so I'm hesitant to declare it, but most of his biographers agree on it. Anger jazzes it up: claiming Dean had crabs and suffered incest! JESUS CHRIST. Somebody just punch this man right now please. In Odd Couples he is mostly right about Clara Bow and Bela Lugosi likely had an affair. He's once again off by a year and interestingly enough doesn't mention Clara was cited as the reason for his divorce...after being married to a woman for 3 days!

He also mentions Hearst and Davies. However Davies was 20 when she met Hearst, not 'barely sweet sixteen'. She also had long been done with the follies, and had already entered pictures. Thus it was impossible for them to meet as she performed AT the follies. Interestingly enough Anger then debunks his own myth; the one that Marion Davies is Susan Alexander in Citizen Kane. 1 drop of good karma in his deep deep shit bucket. He then goes on to the spread the 'rosebud=clit' rumor...something we'll never be able to prove.

In Lost Boy he speaks of Bobby Driscoll. I like Bobby, he was adorable. For his real story please click here. And no Frances Farmer never had a lobotomy...he mentions that in this chapter.

Click here to go to part 2

The Avalon Ball: Get your tickets now!

I've been kinda drawn to the 'culture' side of all things 1910s/1920s lately. There may be a spin off site soon since I know a majority of readers here are men and older...they're not really interested in making Pickford curls. No worries though: FTT will continue unabated!

That being said there's a really cool Los Angeles event I cant believe I haven't heard of before now. Every year the Art Deco Society of Los Angeles throws The Avalon Ball on Catalina Island. The ball strongly suggests you dress up in 20s and 30s finery and dance the dances of the day. A big band and dance floor are featured.

This year the ball will be held on May 16th with tickets as low as $25. Click here for more information. And if you need an outfit for the ball (or just in general vintage celebration) please take a look at ReVamp Vintage. Seriously those are some of the coolest outfits I have ever seen in my life (both male and female). Especially these ones. If only I were a richer blogger...someday.

San Jose: Birth of a Nation Screening

My apologies for continuing the early month posting lag. For once its not laziness. Its busy-ness. One project I'm really excited about but cant say yet. Hopefully I can soon. Either which way probably no articles for a week...though I'm thinking of taking on Hollywood Babylon 2 to make up for it.

I don't usually post about random screenings but this one is so awesome it had to be announced. Cinequest is presenting two Griffith screenings at their California Theatre (call (408) 295-3378 for tickets). On March 6th they'll screen Intolerance but even more awesome on February 27th they'll screen freakin BIRTH OF A NATION! AHH!!! Awesome.

This film doesn't get screened much, for obvious reasons. But I hear there is no better way to experience it. If it is that amazing on a little TV or computer screen imagine how it is on the big one! Miriam Cooper would be pleased (by the way she now has a wiki article click here to read).

I really hope more venues take to screening this and other Griffith films. His birthday passed without ONE film playing on TCM...let alone Birth. Its controversial but its historic. Common sense says play it for a crowd who can appreciate that. I hope there's a Los Angeles screening soon.

Well if you can't make San Jose then there is a little consolation. Both Intolerance (click here) and Birth (click here) are viewable for free, legally, at the internet archive.