Gable et Lombard

Struggling in the mid-seventies just before the blockbuster era settled in, Hollywood looked back to its history for material, and this was one of the results. Based on a pretty good book by Warren G. Harris, the problem with "Gable & Lombard" isn't so much the acting (Brolin does what he can in a no-win situation, and Clayburgh's halfway decent, though it's nearly impossible to suspend disbelief and believe she's Lombard), but the script. It's awful, and worse, historically inaccurate in so many ways (unlike the book).

First of all, Clark and Carole initially met filming "No Man Of Her Own" when Gable was loaned to Paramount in late 1932, while Lombard was married to William Powell; they got along well on the set, but no sparks flew and from all accounts they didn't keep in touch.

Second, Lombard was never a bigger star than Gable (although at the peak of her career, she was the highest-salaried star in the industry thanks to her shrewd business sense). Both elevated their rank in 1934, ironically through films at Columbia -- "It Happened One Night" for Clark, "Twentieth Century" for Carole. Her only film at MGM also came that year, but it wasn't with Gable; it was a gangster comedy called "The Gay Bride," sort of a thirties "Married To The Mob" (in fact, that phrase is actually used in the film). Carole always called it the worst film of her career (although, personally, I deem it far superior to her lone foray at Warners, "Fools For Scandal" in 1938).

Third, and perhaps most inexcusable to me, was having Gable in uniform at the time of Carole's death in a 1942 plane crash returning from a war bond rally in her native Indiana. Lombard was far more interested in world affairs than Gable, and many believe Clark enlisted out of guilt for what had happened to his wife -- something that would have been far more poignant than what was shown on screen. (There's also been conjecture that Gable and Lana Turner, who were making "Somewhere I'll Find You," were having an affair at the time of Carole's death, and that Lombard decided to fly home because of her suspicions. Since Turner was alive in 1976, one can understand why the script didn't touch this issue.) All in all, a mediocre film about two personalities who deserve far better treatment, especially since both were, by all accounts, generally good people and acknowledged as such by those who worked with them. Lombard in particular deserves a decent biopic, as her timeless, iconoclastic qualities still resonate today.

Slammed by critics in 1976 for playing loosely with the Hollywood facts (to put it mildly), this expensive, handsome-looking bio-pic regarding the romance between 1930s screen idols Clark Gable and Carole Lombard actually doesn't take the facts into consideration at all. Perhaps starting with the presumption that nobody knows the real dish, screenwriter Barry Sandler concocts a movie star yarn around personalities we mostly remember today through their pictures. Of course, film-historians were quick to point out all the inaccuracies, but I don't think Sandler nor director Sidney J. Furie was preoccupied with the truth. Sandler's Gable and Lombard appear to be based solely on his (and our) movie memories of them both, and leads James Brolin and Jill Clayburgh approach their roles in this precise spirit (particularly Clayburgh, who models her performance on Lombard's performance in "My Man Godfrey"). In a way, this was a novel concept considering that 1930s reality has now been permanently blurred via time and celluloid. Now for the bad news: Sandler's 'plot' spends far too much time on the loving couple having to sneak around since Gable was already married, and their meetings with Louis B. Mayer (Allen Garfield, playing Father Confessor) are pointless. In actuality, Clark and Carole brazenly showed up everywhere together, and the public ate it up. Sticking to the truth in this instance might've served Sandler better than the silly melodrama on display, which mitigates the screwball humor Furie stages at the beginning. This picture is a real mess from a narrative standpoint, and the acting isn't dynamic enough to hold interest. There's a terrible, shapeless sequence wherein Lombard barges into a Women's Press decency meeting yelling, "Cock-a-doodle-do!" and a limp bit in the courtroom with Carole getting blue on the stand (much to everyone's delight). Brolin has Gable's squint, mouth movements and vocal inflection down pat, yet his King is made to be so downtrodden that it comes as a surprise when Lombard expresses rapture over his bedroom prowess (again, in reality, the comedienne once famously confessed she adored 'Pa' but that their sex life was lacking). Had Sandler gone full-throttle with a high-comedy approach, the movie may have been a hoot. However, the phony dramatics overshadow everything in the end--and since the film is useless as a biography, a good portion of "Gable and Lombard" is utterly without purpose. ** from ****

In the 70s after MGM compiled their wonderful THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT docos highlighting their musical treasure trove, other equally stocked companies decided not to do the same but actually make feature films about the same Hollywood history. So, instead of getting That's Fox or That's Paramount or Universal or Columbia (like the pubic actually wanted...and still do...) we were served new movies about old Hollywood. Enter GABLE AND LOMBARD (and WC Fields and Me, and Day Of The Locust...and Won Ton Ton The Dog That Saved Hollywood...and Hearts Of the West...and The Last Tycoon etc). Not as ominous as the proposed remake of Casablanca starring Tom Selleck and Jane Seymour, and nowhere near as 'bad' or 'wrong' as critics of the time cruelly labeled it, GABLE AND LOMBARD is a lush valentine to a fan mag style and memory of a period in time...rather like the production design of The Talented Mr Ripley is actually reflective of what Hollywood thought the jet set Mediterranean 50s were like as opposed to its fishing boat reality. As with At long Last Love, GABLE AND LOMBARD was slammed by crits and left to drown when without the bile and guffaw, there is a very entertaining biography with quite good casting and sensational visuals. Unfortunately for the producers, it was made when most everyone from the 30s were still alive and could spew on this film. Had it been made today, it would play 3000 multiplexes to a docile audience who struggle to know anything about 'the past' and be a $50million hit in week one by default of the TV ads and shopping center cinema location. I am sad not to see Jill Clayburg in films much past the 70s, like the superb Lee Grant she too can make an ordinary film watchable. In this case we have a great actress in a lavish (slavish) biography with sturdy James Brolin doing his damnedest not to be a dumb-Clark. As with WC Fields And Me this film deserves a better reception and a lush DVD transfer to be re discovered and appreciated. It's quite good.

Might not be the best movie, but most of the incidents in this film really took place (read the book by Warren G. Harris)! Some of the character's are fictionalized, but the story about the romance is not. James Brolin IS Clark Gable. Brolin has Gable's personality and mannerisms down to a "T" and plays Gable with dignity and grace(unlike Edward Winter did in Moviola:The Scarlett O'Hara War. Winter played him as down home, backwoods, stupid hick, which Gable was FAR from!) I don't know if Brolin did any research for his role but he's sure got Gable down pat!! Jill Clayburgh, on the other hand, overplays her role a bit, but maybe that was the way Lombard really was! All in all, Gable and Lombard is an excellent movie for film buffs, fans of Gable and/or Lombard, or suckers for old fashioned romances. Unfortunately, the only way to see this film is on cable in a heavily edited TV version. Put it out on DVD!!

Have you ever heard a lie so supremely unbelievable (based upon what you know), you feel insulted and wish the teller were a better liar? That's how I felt suffering through the first 30 minutes of "Gable and Lombard". Historical inaccuracy upon historical inaccuracy tarnishes this telling of the love between two of Hollywood's brightest stars. There' nothing histrionically bad here (despite Clayburgh's terrible miscasting), production values are exceptional; yet movies such as "Gable and Lombard" can be career killers, and the producers deserved to lose every penny they invested. While no one's career was completely killed, James Brolin (who actually does a pretty good job) was never offered another major film role. Sidney J. Furie, who impressed so much with "The Ipcress File," "The Appaloosa" and "Lady Sings the Blues" found himself directing "Superman 4: The Quest for Peace" and the "Iron Eagle" series. Ironically, Jill Clayburgh, given her near inept performance as Carole Lombard, fared the best, snatching up hit roles in "Silver Streak," and Oscar nominations for "An Unmarried Woman" and "Starting Over." Clayburgh's problems playing Lombard are not entirely her fault; Clayburgh is simply not classy enough or pretty enough to play Lombard. Much of Lombard's appeal was her ability to handle vulgar material in a classy way. Coarse language can seem almost charming, depending upon how it's delivered. Lombard could pull it off for the same reasons Katherine Hepburn could do it, because she had the refinement.

Since I didn't finish the movie, I won't rate it. "Gable and Lombard" is okay as fiction, but I would have greatly preferred it had the writer stayed as closely as dramatically possible to the true story.