Things I wanna know before I kick the bucket!

[LizzieMaine]

I don't think very highly of backstabbing, ass-kissing red-baiters. Morley, a fine actress who lost more brains when she blew her nose than Taylor ever had in his whole pretty head, never worked again after 100 Percent American Bob got done with her.

 

[Fading Fast]

In a nutshell, according to Robert Osborne...he was a good egg.

Reading what Mr. Osborne wrote of Taylor reminded me of James Garner,
another very pleasant person which I met when I worked at Universal.

ROBERT TAYLOR PROFILE
by Robert Osborne
“ There's a spunky 1943 film we have in our TCM library called The Youngest Profession in which, at one point, the young heroine of the story has to compose a poem for a high school class. What she comes up with is: "Napoleon conquered Josephine, so he must have had his charms but personally I'd much rather be in Robert Taylor's arms." Nothing there to give pause to Edna St. Vincent Millay but it's a sentiment that was shared by many a breathless female during Mr. Taylor's long reign as a movie hero. (And for the record, few movie heroes reigned longer than our Star of the Month for September. His above-the-title career lasted over 30 years, a remarkable feat in a profession known for turning a cold shoulder to most actors after seven to ten years, tops.) Early on, Taylor had difficulty getting men to accept his work as enthusiastically as their girlfriends did, probably because his image was too Adonis-like, too good looking. Nor did it help that all those girls were swooning over him so rapturously; he was, in two words, unfair competition. But even the males finally came around, reluctantly but in force, because envy notwithstanding, Robert Taylor was almost impossible not to like. Give him a chance and one knew, instinctively, under that golden exterior he was a good egg, a rock-solid fellow, the kind of gent you'd be lucky to have for a brother, a pal or a fishing partner.

Around MGM, he was always known as a "regular Joe," the down-to-earth star who never put on airs or pretenses. A good illustration is what happened one day in the MGM commissary when he spotted Greta Garbo visiting for lunch, years after she and Taylor had costarred in the classic Camille. Friends urged him to go over and say hello but he didn't. "She was a woman whose privacy you always respected," he said. "Besides, I thought, why would she remember me?" Always a company player, Taylor never complained about the roles he was assigned, he never went on suspension, and didn't make waves. Conflict was not his style.

He also had the distinction of remaining under contract to a single studio (MGM) longer than all other above-the-title stars in Hollywood (24 years, from 1934-58). Only twice did he ever jolt his basic good ol' boy image: once was in the late 1940s when he testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee as a so-called "friendly witness" during an investigation into possible Communist messages being injected into film content; another time, a couple of years later, he was divorced by a reluctant Barbara Stanwyck after stories began to surface about extra-curricular dalliances Taylor had with costars such as Lana Turner, Ava Gardner and Eleanor Parker.

Still a good guy, the image basically remained intact and still does, thanks to his Ivanhoe, Quentin Durward, Roy in Waterloo Bridge, Marcus Vinicius in Quo Vadis?, Armand in Camille, Bob Merrick in Magnificent Obsession and even his less-than-virtuous Billy the Kid and Johnny Eager. As his friend Ronald Reagan said in the eulogy he delivered at Taylor's funeral in 1969, "Each one of us has his own different memory of Bob but somehow they all add up to "nice man." Well said. And I think you'll thoroughly enjoy spending time with this "nice man" throughout the month here on TCM."

Robert Osborne.

As a regular TCM viewer since it came on the air and as an old movie watcher for my entire life, I am quite familiar with Taylor, but (1) never think of him when I think of "big" stars and (2) there is not one movie of his that I have any real passion for or, for that matter, even associate with him (like Bogie - "Casablanca" or Crosby - "Going My Way," for examples).

I am regularly wrong and think I openly admit it (or, at least, I feel like a do a bunch of times here at FL), but when I read Taylor's TCM bio above and saw this:

...in the late 1940s when he testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee as a so-called "friendly witness" during an investigation into possible Communist messages being injected into film content...​

I knew immediately why (the pinball machine went full tilt, it was a red flag [tee-hee] worth of 4th-of-July fireworks) - amidst all the other reasons she listed - our Lizzie has such a passionate dislike for Taylor.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Hyperbole aside, what makes Taylor more distasteful to me than even his fellow name-namers is the crawling opportunism he brought with him when he testified before HUAC. He was first questioned about his role in "Song of Russia," a pro-Soviet wartime propaganda film, and when it was all about him he was indignant and defensive and questioned the legitimacy of the hearings. But as soon as the committtee assured him he was in the clear, he immediately became a "Friendly Witness," enthusiastic to rat out out all those "fellow travelers" that he'd "never work with again." That's not the work of a man of principle, that's the groveling of a yellow weasel.

There are name-namers I feel compassion for. Clifford Odets went to his grave haunted by what he'd done. Edward G. Robinson at least had the courage to name no one who hadn't already been named. Bud Collyer acted out of sincerity, not opportunistic malice, and tried in a small way, once the frenzy was over, to atone for some of the harm he caused. But Taylor acted purely out of his own cravenness, and I have no respect for that at all.

 

[Fading Fast]

Hyperbole aside, what makes Taylor more distasteful to me than even his fellow name-namers is the crawling opportunism he brought with him when he testified before HUAC. He was first questioned about his role in "Song of Russia," a pro-Soviet wartime propaganda film, and when it was all about him he was indignant and defensive and questioned the legitimacy of the hearings. But as soon as the committtee assured him he was in the clear, he immediately became a "Friendly Witness," enthusiastic to rat out out all those "fellow travelers" that he'd "never work with again." That's not the work of a man of principle, that's the groveling of a yellow weasel.

There are name-namers I feel compassion for. Clifford Odets went to his grave haunted by what he'd done. Edward G. Robinson at least had the courage to name no one who hadn't already been named. Bud Collyer acted out of sincerity, not opportunistic malice, and tried in a small way, once the frenzy was over, to atone for some of the harm he caused. But Taylor acted purely out of his own cravenness, and I have no respect for that at all.

I'm 99% sure you know this, but I wasn't challenging your opinion of him nor his behavior when he testified - I am not at all up on the specifics of that (I carry a "high-level" understanding of what happened there in my head, but that's it), but know you know every ball and strike. I was just having good-spirit fun at the fact that I saw a clear trigger when I read the bio 2Jakes had posted and, honestly, I hadn't even read your subsequent posts when I knew at least one big reasons you would loath him.

Away from that, it is interesting that for what clearly was a successful star, I don't think of him that way and, as noted, don't associate him with any movie or, for that matter, I'd probably struggle to name five Taylor movies.

 

[vitanola]

Hyperbole aside, what makes Taylor more distasteful to me than even his fellow name-namers is the crawling opportunism he brought with him when he testified before HUAC. He was first questioned about his role in "Song of Russia," a pro-Soviet wartime propaganda film, and when it was all about him he was indignant and defensive and questioned the legitimacy of the hearings. But as soon as the committtee assured him he was in the clear, he immediately became a "Friendly Witness," enthusiastic to rat out out all those "fellow travelers" that he'd "never work with again." That's not the work of a man of principle, that's the groveling of a yellow weasel.

There are name-namers I feel compassion for. Clifford Odets went to his grave haunted by what he'd done. Edward G. Robinson at least had the courage to name no one who hadn't already been named. Bud Collyer acted out of sincerity, not opportunistic malice, and tried in a small way, once the frenzy was over, to atone for some of the harm he caused. But Taylor acted purely out of his own cravenness, and I have no respect for that at all.

So, 'Tain't what he did, 'Twas the way what he did it, I suppose. That is certainly understandable. The entire reaction against the previous administration damaged our national institutions in ways which have not yet been remedied.

Only a very few acquitted themselves well in the whole sordid episode.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think the essential blandness of Taylor's movie career is testimony to his lack of any real star persona other than his pretty-boy looks. I happened to be listening to a radio show last night where he was doing a completely inconsequential job as the MC, which brought him to my attention -- and I had to really struggle to think of any role he'd ever done that had any real lasting value, and yet if you read the fan rags of the late thirties, he was Absolutely Definitely It.

Taylor was, to me, the textbook example of the kind of "star" that showed the main weakness of the studio system: its need for marketable "stars" over performers of real substance. Some substantial performers *were* stars -- but there were plenty of "stars" in the Era who were utterly and completely forgettable chunks of air-puffed nothingness beyond a smile, a shrug, and a carefully-groomed public image. As the most thoroughly manufactured of the studios, MGM seemed to have more than the Lion's Share, if you will, of these John Squarejaw and June Jejune type of pasteurized-process performers.

 

[LizzieMaine]

So, 'Tain't what he did, 'Twas the way what he did it, I suppose. That is certainly understandable. The entire reaction against the previous administration damaged our national institutions in ways which have not yet been remedied.

Only a very few acquitted themselves well in the whole sordid episode.

There are two performers who really stand out for me. Character actor Lionel Stander not only refused to name names, he turned the questioning against the committee itself and challenged its legitimacy with a boldness matched by no other star. And radio actress Jody Gilbert showed her utter contempt for the proceedings by turning her entire appearance into a slapstick comedy routine full of fat jokes directed at herself. They don't count for much in the big picture, but Stander and Gilbert show that at least some people in the period had the courage of their convictions regardless of the personal cost.

"I am not a dupe, or a dope, or a moe, or a schmoe...I was absolutely conscious of what I was doing, and I am not ashamed of anything I said in public or private."

"I'm not hiding behind the Fifth Amendment -- I'm standing right in front of it!"

What courage looks like.

 

[Fading Fast]

I think the essential blandness of Taylor's movie career is testimony to his lack of any real star persona other than his pretty-boy looks. I happened to be listening to a radio show last night where he was doing a completely inconsequential job as the MC, which brought him to my attention -- and I had to really struggle to think of any role he'd ever done that had any real lasting value, and yet if you read the fan rags of the late thirties, he was Absolutely Definitely It.

Taylor was, to me, the textbook example of the kind of "star" that showed the main weakness of the studio system: its need for marketable "stars" over performers of real substance. Some substantial performers *were* stars -- but there were plenty of "stars" in the Era who were utterly and completely forgettable chunks of air-puffed nothingness beyond a smile, a shrug, and a carefully-groomed public image. As the most thoroughly manufactured of the studios, MGM seemed to have more than the Lion's Share, if you will, of these John Squarejaw and June Jejune type of pasteurized-process performers.

Even today - with no studio system - you can see attempts by Hollywood to "sell" us a star because he or she fits some model (probably massively fed data algorithm) of what a star should look, sound, act like.

He/she will have either a movie or two - or sometimes a brief moment of success - before he/she disappears as he/she doesn't have "it -" the talent or the star power.

Probably, to your point, after the investment made, the studio system would keep shilling for the "doesn't have it" star, but today, there's no-one to do that, so the fake star fades away quickly.

 

[scottyrocks]

If Jude Law and Lucy Lawless co-starred in a movie, would they cancel each other out?

If they got married she'd be Lucy Lawless-Law.

 

[GHT]

Why did so many women in the Era swoon over Robert Taylor

Now there's a question that I would like answered. When I came along in 1946, my mother was a huge fan of Robert Taylor.
Our family name is, Taylor, and when I was born there was only going to be one name for me. Dad however, wanted to call me Herbert, after his father. Grandfather was a civilian victim of WW2. Mother pouted at the idea of Herbert claiming it to be so Victorian. So when Dad asked her what she had in mind Mother suggested Robin.

"Robin!" my Father said, he'll get teased. At that time UK television was starting to gain popularity, one of the BBC presenters was a lady whose first name was Robyn.
Mother pretended to look disappointed, so Dad said: "Look, why don't we compromise and go for the hybrid between Herbert and Robin? Let's call him Robert.
"What a good idea," said my rather smug Mother.

 

[GHT]

Why are local authorities run by the inmates of the asylum?


Now there are some really witty ones too.

 

[Edward]

I wanna know why we have just two people to choose for President and 50 for Miss America?

I think it best we avoid this one!

Why did Kamakazi pilots wear helmets
and parachutes?

I'm sure someone will tell you because they hated freedom and had helmet laws... HD is bang on, though: I have a rusty memory of reading that a surprising number of them survived or had to abandon particular attacks and so were required to return to base. Part of the psychological conditioning for those "volunteered" to sacrifice themselves in this way was that they were required to keep themselves in peak physical condition. I guess that made them more of a sacrifice too rather than had they been seen as 'rejects'.

Why is there Braille keypads on drive- thru ATM machines?

Easy one - it's a standard set of buttons that they put on all these things, and it's cheaper to make one design than a separate set just for drive-thrus.

How much gas is wasted while waiting for red lights when there is no - zero - cross traffic.

I note that the newer Cadillacs have an ECO setting that seems to shut the engine off after a few seconds and restarts when you touch the gas. Having grown up in the carburetor era, it was even money that the engine would die - you never shut it off till you get to your destination.

Interesting idea. I remember visiting Switzerland in 1991, and they had a law already at that time which forbade idling at junctions; if you have to stop at lights there, you have to switch the engine off. I gather it was very quickly normalised.

In the Old Testament, why was Lots wife turned to a pillar of salt?

Why salt?

There are a number of theories on this. Jewish writings suggest that Lott was unusually hospitable - in Sodom and Gomorrah, it was forbidden to offer hospitality, but Lott, being an outsider who settled there, did so anyhow. His wife, a native, displayed her objection to this by withholding salt for their foot from her husband's guests, and so when she disobeyed the instruction not to look back, she was punished by being turned into a pillar of salt. Other versions suggest that it was symbolic of the preservation of the righteous (Lott and those who followed the angel's instructions) and preservation of God's truth through the destruction of the evil cities. Other theories come from the natural world. Some will tell you that the story is wholly mythical, designed to explain away human-looking salt-pillar formations that occurred naturally in the area. Others contribute Mrs Lott's death to a result of natural phenomenon, or natural phenomenon being used by the supernatural. Under this one, naturally erupting tarpits in the area destroyed the city; some of this pulled up salt from the earth which, when the burning brimstone covered Mrs Lott, put out the fire by forming a non-porous outer crust that encased her, much like the lava-encased bodies in Pompei. With this theory, some believe that 'God' was invoked to explain the gaps in contemporary scientific knowledge, while others consider that God used the natural phenomenon to destroy the city, and Lott's wife's fate was not a punishment per se but rather the inevitable result of her failing to listen to the angel's instructions, instead stalling and leaving herself vulnerable.

It is also believed that, which ever version of the story you buy into, it is connected to the ancient Middle-Eastern practice of salting the earth around defeated territories.

I wanna know why we have never had a female President?

I think it best we just say because none such gendered candidate has yet won a presidential election and leave it right there!

Why are there no female airline pilots?

There are quite a few these days. Still a minority, but they do exist.

 

[Fading Fast]

Now there's a question that I would like answered. When I came along in 1946, my mother was a huge fan of Robert Taylor.
Our family name is, Taylor, and when I was born there was only going to be one name for me. Dad however, wanted to call me Herbert, after his father. Grandfather was a civilian victim of WW2. Mother pouted at the idea of Herbert claiming it to be so Victorian. So when Dad asked her what she had in mind Mother suggested Robin.

"Robin!" my Father said, he'll get teased. At that time UK television was starting to gain popularity, one of the BBC presenters was a lady whose first name was Robyn.
Mother pretended to look disappointed, so Dad said: "Look, why don't we compromise and go for the hybrid between Herbert and Robin? Let's call him Robert.
"What a good idea," said my rather smug Mother.

View attachment 114318 View attachment 114319

She played your dad like a fiddle - wonderful.

 

[Fading Fast]

...There are quite a few these days. Still a minority, but they do exist.

Promisingly, the last two flights I were on had a female pilot.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

A few things I would like to know before I shuffle off this mortal coil;
How did our universe really come to be & how & when the human race will cease to be. Unfortunately I will never know either.......my only consolation is that no one ever will .

 

[LizzieMaine]

The last surviving human might know at least the end of it.

 

[tonyb]

A few things I would like to know before I shuffle off this mortal coil;
How did our universe really come to be & how & when the human race will cease to be. Unfortunately I will never know either.......my only consolation is that no one ever will .

But some profess to know the answers with dead certainty.

 

[1mach1]

I think it best we avoid this one!



I'm sure someone will tell you because they hated freedom and had helmet laws... HD is bang on, though: I have a rusty memory of reading that a surprising number of them survived or had to abandon particular attacks and so were required to return to base. Part of the psychological conditioning for those "volunteered" to sacrifice themselves in this way was that they were required to keep themselves in peak physical condition. I guess that made them more of a sacrifice too rather than had they been seen as 'rejects'.



Easy one - it's a standard set of buttons that they put on all these things, and it's cheaper to make one design than a separate set just for drive-thrus.



Interesting idea. I remember visiting Switzerland in 1991, and they had a law already at that time which forbade idling at junctions; if you have to stop at lights there, you have to switch the engine off. I gather it was very quickly normalised.



There are a number of theories on this. Jewish writings suggest that Lott was unusually hospitable - in Sodom and Gomorrah, it was forbidden to offer hospitality, but Lott, being an outsider who settled there, did so anyhow. His wife, a native, displayed her objection to this by withholding salt for their foot from her husband's guests, and so when she disobeyed the instruction not to look back, she was punished by being turned into a pillar of salt. Other versions suggest that it was symbolic of the preservation of the righteous (Lott and those who followed the angel's instructions) and preservation of God's truth through the destruction of the evil cities. Other theories come from the natural world. Some will tell you that the story is wholly mythical, designed to explain away human-looking salt-pillar formations that occurred naturally in the area. Others contribute Mrs Lott's death to a result of natural phenomenon, or natural phenomenon being used by the supernatural. Under this one, naturally erupting tarpits in the area destroyed the city; some of this pulled up salt from the earth which, when the burning brimstone covered Mrs Lott, put out the fire by forming a non-porous outer crust that encased her, much like the lava-encased bodies in Pompei. With this theory, some believe that 'God' was invoked to explain the gaps in contemporary scientific knowledge, while others consider that God used the natural phenomenon to destroy the city, and Lott's wife's fate was not a punishment per se but rather the inevitable result of her failing to listen to the angel's instructions, instead stalling and leaving herself vulnerable.

It is also believed that, which ever version of the story you buy into, it is connected to the ancient Middle-Eastern practice of salting the earth around defeated territories.



I think it best we just say because none such gendered candidate has yet won a presidential election and leave it right there!



There are quite a few these days. Still a minority, but they do exist.

Thats some damn fine information Edward. Thanks for the insight.

 

[Bugguy]

The last surviving human might know at least the end of it.

Ahhh... ask Arthur Dent. He can at least speak to the end of the Earth when the Vogon constructor fleet comes through.

 

[Zombie_61]

Why do cowboys wear two spurs? If one side of the horse goes, so does the other.