Some things never change: Movies, art, and commerce
So writer and GITS reader Mike Montgomery sent me this priceless item: A 1930 memo from David Selznick, then a story editor at Paramount Studios before moving on to become a successful producer at MGM.
In this memo, Selznick provides his comments about a screenplay written by the famous Russian writer-director Sergei Eisenstein.
Memo from David O. Selznick
To: Mr. B. P. Schulberg (General Manager, Paramount)
October 8, 1930
I have just finished reading the Eisenstein adaptation of [Theodore Dreiser’s novel] An American Tragedy. It was for me a memorable experience; the most moving script I have ever read [emphasis added].
Wow. The most “moving” script Selznick had ever read! We can expect great things from this project, right? Read on:
It was so effective, it was positively torturing. When I had finished reading it, I was so depressed that I wanted to reach for the bourbon bottle. As entertainment, I don’t think it has one chance in a hundred
. … Is it too late to persuade the enthusiasts of the picture from making it? Even if the dialogue rights have been purchased, even if Dreiser’s services have been arranged for, I think it an unexcusable gamble on the part of this department to put into a subject as depressing as this one, anything like the cost that an Eisenstein production must necessarily entail.
If we want to make An American Tragedy as a glorious experiment, and purely for the advancement of the art (which I certainly do not think is the business of this organization), then let’s do it with a [John] Cromwell directing, and chop three or four hundred thousand dollars off the loss. If the cry of “Courage!” be raised against this protest, I should like to suggest that we have the courage not to make the picture, but to take whatever rap is coming to us for not supporting Eisenstein the artist (as he proves himself to be with this script), with a million or more of the stockholders’ cash.
Let’s try new things, by all means. But let’s keep these gambles within the bounds of those that would be indulged by rational businessmen; and let’s not put more money than we have into any one picture for years into a subject that will appeal to our vanity through the critical acclaim that must necessarily attach to its production, but that cannot possibly offer anything but a most miserable two hours to millions of happy-minded young Americans. [emphasis added]
David O. Selznick
Two things:
* Here we see first-hand the fundamental issue about Hollywood: The problem with movies as art is they are commerce. There is always a bottom line and that bottom line is always tied to the perception of profitability. Of course, this is the same Eisenstein who received this note from Hollywood mogul Samuel Goldwyn: “Please tell Mr. Eisenstein that I have seen his film Potemkin and admire it very much. What we should like would be for him to do something of the same kind, but rather cheaper, for Ronald Colman.” That may be the greatest single quote in the history of Hollywood!
* “…millions of happy-minded young Americans.” I find this quite a revelation. Conventional wisdom is that Hollywood didn’t really ‘discover’ young people until 50s [The Wild Bunch, East of Eden] and especially 60s [Easy Rider, The Graduate]. But evidently Hollywood’s obsession with youth stretches back decades earlier.
You can read a text version of Eisenstein’s script adaptation here.
Background on the proposed “American Tragedy” project here.
Comment Archive