What do you think?
Rate this book
The Star Machine
From one of our leading film authorities, a rich, penetrating, amusing plum pudding of a book about the golden age of movies, full of Hollywood lore, anecdotes, and analysis.
Jeanine Basinger gives us an immensely entertaining look into the “star machine,” examining how, at the height of the studio system, from the 1930s to the 1950s, the studios worked to manufacture star actors and actresses. With revelatory insights and delightful asides, she shows us how the machine worked when it worked, how it failed when it didn’t, and how irrelevant it could sometimes be. She gives us the “human factor,” case studies focusing on big stars groomed into the the “awesomely beautiful” (and disillusioned) Tyrone Power; the seductive, disobedient Lana Turner; and a dazzling cast of others—Loretta Young, Errol Flynn, Irene Dunne, Deanna Durbin. She anatomizes their careers, showing how their fame happened, and what happened to them as a result. (Both Lana Turner and Errol Flynn, for instance, were involved in notorious court cases.) In her trenchantly observed conclusion, she explains what has become of the star machine and why the studios’ practice of “making” stars is no longer relevant.
Deeply engrossing, full of energy, wit, and wisdom, The Star Machine is destined to become an invaluable part of the film canon.
Jeanine Basinger gives us an immensely entertaining look into the “star machine,” examining how, at the height of the studio system, from the 1930s to the 1950s, the studios worked to manufacture star actors and actresses. With revelatory insights and delightful asides, she shows us how the machine worked when it worked, how it failed when it didn’t, and how irrelevant it could sometimes be. She gives us the “human factor,” case studies focusing on big stars groomed into the the “awesomely beautiful” (and disillusioned) Tyrone Power; the seductive, disobedient Lana Turner; and a dazzling cast of others—Loretta Young, Errol Flynn, Irene Dunne, Deanna Durbin. She anatomizes their careers, showing how their fame happened, and what happened to them as a result. (Both Lana Turner and Errol Flynn, for instance, were involved in notorious court cases.) In her trenchantly observed conclusion, she explains what has become of the star machine and why the studios’ practice of “making” stars is no longer relevant.
Deeply engrossing, full of energy, wit, and wisdom, The Star Machine is destined to become an invaluable part of the film canon.
586 pages, Hardcover
First published October 23, 2007
About the author
Jeanine Basinger
18 books110 followersJeanine Basinger holds a BS and MS from South Dakota State University. She is a film historian, professor of Film Studies at Wesleyan University and curator and founder of The Cinema Archives at Wesleyan University. In addition, she is a trustee emeritus of the American Film Institute, a member of the Steering Committee of the National Center for Film and Video Preservation, and one of the Board of Advisors for the Association of Independent Video and Filmmakers.
She has appeared in several movie-related documentaries and completed audio commentaries on about a dozen classic films.
She has appeared in several movie-related documentaries and completed audio commentaries on about a dozen classic films.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews
March 25, 2019
Basinger's subject is the Classic Hollywood Star Machine, and the stars and near-stars who were transformed by the process.
I loved this book not so much for its insights into the workings of the Hollywood system (although Basinger has plenty) but for her loving and detailed portrait of individual stars and how they fought for their independence and integrity, subverted the machine to their advantage or were limited or damaged by it. She makes stars seem like heroes of their own lives, and therefore makes me see them in a new way.
Sure, she obviously still has the hots for Tyrone Power after all these years, but everybody has the right to their enthusiasms. Besides, she's a big Betty Hutton fan, like me, and anyone who validates my Hutton-love, guiltiest of pleasures, is okay in my book!
August 24, 2022
Fans of golden age Hollywood (30s to 50s) who can reel off names like Loretta Young, Irene Dunne, Charles Boyer and Jean Arthur AND name three movies each one starred in will probably already have a copy of this massive beast of a book. For those obsessives this will be like heaven. For less fixated film fans it will be TOO MUCH.
It begins with 100 (large) pages on the studio star-making machinery itself, the system which could take 13 year old Frances Gumm and turned her into Judy Garland. But then the great bulk of the book, 300 pages, is taken up with very detailed – some might say eyeglazingly so – investigations into the lives and careers of ten stars who didn’t conform to the system in one way or another, either because they got sick of their own stupid movies and quit (Deanna Durbin) or because they became ungovernable and wayward (Erroll Flynn, Lana Turner) or because they were never that jazzed with being a star in the first place (Charles Boyer). (The first one, all about Tyrone Power, makes it clear over the course of 40 (large) pages that Tyrone Power is Professor Basinger’s number one celebrity crush.)
These dense biographical essays are kind of interesting, to an extent, but seem to me to make a point that isn’t worth making. Sure, out of the galaxy of movie stars summoned up by the studios, some of them went off the rails, some of them were neurotic and diffident about the whole thing, and quite understandably because if ever there were human beings imprisoned in golden cages it was them, they had almost no time to enjoy all their dough. When they did get the odd hour to themselves they would immediately marry some dreadfully inappropriate person. And divorce them when they got the next free afternoon. Is this any kind of surprise? No, not at all.
Professor Basinger ends with a thirty page epilogue about stars without the machine, i.e. from the 1960s onward, when there weren’t any studios and they therefore had to manage their careers by themselves. Well, you know, they seem to have done all right. There were stars then and there are still stars now. There were scandals then (in 1958 Lana Turner’s 15 year old daughter stabbed her mother’s latest boyfriend to death) and scandals now (Kevin Spacey, Mel Gibson). Whoever’s running the store the merchandise is pretty much the same.
In conclusion : Even though I really liked the breezy non-hifalutin style, I thought this was gonna be more interesting than it actually was.
It begins with 100 (large) pages on the studio star-making machinery itself, the system which could take 13 year old Frances Gumm and turned her into Judy Garland. But then the great bulk of the book, 300 pages, is taken up with very detailed – some might say eyeglazingly so – investigations into the lives and careers of ten stars who didn’t conform to the system in one way or another, either because they got sick of their own stupid movies and quit (Deanna Durbin) or because they became ungovernable and wayward (Erroll Flynn, Lana Turner) or because they were never that jazzed with being a star in the first place (Charles Boyer). (The first one, all about Tyrone Power, makes it clear over the course of 40 (large) pages that Tyrone Power is Professor Basinger’s number one celebrity crush.)
These dense biographical essays are kind of interesting, to an extent, but seem to me to make a point that isn’t worth making. Sure, out of the galaxy of movie stars summoned up by the studios, some of them went off the rails, some of them were neurotic and diffident about the whole thing, and quite understandably because if ever there were human beings imprisoned in golden cages it was them, they had almost no time to enjoy all their dough. When they did get the odd hour to themselves they would immediately marry some dreadfully inappropriate person. And divorce them when they got the next free afternoon. Is this any kind of surprise? No, not at all.
Professor Basinger ends with a thirty page epilogue about stars without the machine, i.e. from the 1960s onward, when there weren’t any studios and they therefore had to manage their careers by themselves. Well, you know, they seem to have done all right. There were stars then and there are still stars now. There were scandals then (in 1958 Lana Turner’s 15 year old daughter stabbed her mother’s latest boyfriend to death) and scandals now (Kevin Spacey, Mel Gibson). Whoever’s running the store the merchandise is pretty much the same.
In conclusion : Even though I really liked the breezy non-hifalutin style, I thought this was gonna be more interesting than it actually was.
April 25, 2023
The making of a star and his-her duration. Since most dreary lives require Stars to exist, (a cinematic royal family), this is not - to coin a friend's phrase - "poop on the lawn." Poop, alas, seems to be Page One. The author upholds discretion and doesn't tell us the stratagems, usually sex, that got most into stardom. Author, instead, examines careers within the olde studio system, fr Tyrone Power to Jean Arthur, and leaves off the obvious names (Davis-Grant etc.) Her updates (2010) are feeble. She doesnt even suggest how Bob Fosse "used" wives to further his career. (Her student researcher fails her....LOL). She sloppily forgets that he was married to dancer Joan McCracken.
However, her sociology of the how to's and machinery to cast a Personality are good. Hitch said, "Casting is characterization." Author notes the Factory knew how to
build movies around a 'typed' Personality. For once a specific type was endorsed by the audience, you couldn't disappoint. Tyrone Power was "beautiful," she slobbers hornily, "not handsome -- beautiful." He finally got a chance to work it all in Wilder's "Witness for the Prosecution." His star presence
merged with serious acting. Had his role of villain (Vole), she points out, been played by a non- star, the audience would know Vole dunit. Similarly, in same pic, Wilder trumps w Dietrich as co-villain. "Audiences cannot say, well, Veda Ann Borg fooled us. Star power is star power. It overrules
acting every time." Author's understanding of stardom here is sharp.
A studio might work & work "to locate type." Bogart is perfect example. Throughout the 30s he played gangsters. He found his (heroic) image in "The Maltese Falcon." Here, the actor becomes the
character and the character becomes the actor. "He found his star type and grew to be a screen legend," she writes. ~~ Author can be utterly superficial. Lon McCallister was, briefly, a heart throb in the 40s. His career ended when he stepped out of the closet. Author refuses to tell you that.
Greer Garson had to keep her dignity - poor dear. Audiences accepted her in delicato comedy ("Pride & Prejudice") but not screwball ("Julia Misbehaves"), though she later did
"Auntie Mame" on Bwy. When she married her costar from "Mrs. Miniver," Louis Beezie Mayer gasped, "Maybe he'll be killed in the war and problems will be solved."
However, her sociology of the how to's and machinery to cast a Personality are good. Hitch said, "Casting is characterization." Author notes the Factory knew how to
build movies around a 'typed' Personality. For once a specific type was endorsed by the audience, you couldn't disappoint. Tyrone Power was "beautiful," she slobbers hornily, "not handsome -- beautiful." He finally got a chance to work it all in Wilder's "Witness for the Prosecution." His star presence
merged with serious acting. Had his role of villain (Vole), she points out, been played by a non- star, the audience would know Vole dunit. Similarly, in same pic, Wilder trumps w Dietrich as co-villain. "Audiences cannot say, well, Veda Ann Borg fooled us. Star power is star power. It overrules
acting every time." Author's understanding of stardom here is sharp.
A studio might work & work "to locate type." Bogart is perfect example. Throughout the 30s he played gangsters. He found his (heroic) image in "The Maltese Falcon." Here, the actor becomes the
character and the character becomes the actor. "He found his star type and grew to be a screen legend," she writes. ~~ Author can be utterly superficial. Lon McCallister was, briefly, a heart throb in the 40s. His career ended when he stepped out of the closet. Author refuses to tell you that.
Greer Garson had to keep her dignity - poor dear. Audiences accepted her in delicato comedy ("Pride & Prejudice") but not screwball ("Julia Misbehaves"), though she later did
"Auntie Mame" on Bwy. When she married her costar from "Mrs. Miniver," Louis Beezie Mayer gasped, "Maybe he'll be killed in the war and problems will be solved."
December 9, 2017
Stars werden nicht geboren, sondern fabriziert
Daß es rund um die Stars der Golden Era in Hollywood nicht wirklich wie in einem Märchen zugegangen ist - wer sonst als Hollywood sollte uns nicht auch schon mit dieser schnöden Wahrheit konfrontiert haben, in Form gutgemachter Unterhaltungsfilme?
Jeanine Basinger nimmt sich in ihrem Buch The Star Machine ebenfalls dieser Wahrheit an, wobei sie sich an namhaften Stars orientiert – vor allem an solchen, die zu ihrer Zeit einen hohen Bekanntheitsgrad hatten, mit den Jahren aber hinter solch klassischen Stars wie Bette Davis, Joan Crawford und Barbara Stanwyck oder Clark Gable, Gary Cooper und Humphrey Bogart zurücktreten mußten – und trotz der Authentizität ihrer Schilderungen immer noch – ihrem Schreibstil sei’s gedankt – ein Höchstmaß an Unterhaltung bietet.
Dabei gliedert sich The Star Machine in eine Einleitung, drei Hauptteile und einen Ausblick, in dem die Autorin kursorisch auf die Arbeitsbedingungen moderner Stars, die nicht mehr von der „Star Machine“ geschaffen worden sind, eingeht. Im ersten Teil, „Stars and the Factory System“, beschreibt Basinger idealtypisch den Prozeß, dem ein – meist junger – Mensch unterworfen wurde, wenn er in die Maschinerie Hollywoods geriet. Nicht nur das Äußere wurde einer Generalüberholung unterzogen [1], sondern auch Lebenslauf und nicht selten sogar der Name wurden geändert. Denn wer glaubt schon, jemand mit dem Namen Archibald Leach könnte auf so einladende Weise so souverän-distanziert wirken wie Cary Grant? So kann man dann etwa auf S.42 anhand zweier Photos sehen, wie aus Margarita Cansino Rita Hayworth geworden ist … wahrlich beeindruckend. Basinger beschreibt weiterhin, wie das Studio sein neues Starrohmaterial vorsichtig in eigens darauf angelegten Filmen lancierte und auch auf andere Art und Weise ins Gespräch brachte, was erklärt, warum etwa viele berühmte Stars der Golden Era in absolut albernen Photoposen zu sehen sind. All das war natürlich harte Arbeit, und war man erst zum Star avanciert, so ganz klar von Studios Gnaden. „The star system was a slave system“, befindet Basinger, „albeit a highly paid, glamorous slave system in which the slaves were more famous than their owners. “ (S.131). So hatten die Stars eine Sechs-Tage-Woche mit Arbeitstagen, die um 7 Uhr morgens begannen und nicht selten bis 8 oder 9 Uhr abends andauerten. Anschließend mußten natürlich auch noch die Texte gelernt werden. Zudem mußten die Stars auch in den Filmen spielen, die ihnen das Studio zuwies; weigerten sie sich, eine Rolle zu spielen, wurden sie, unbezahlt, für eine Weile auf Eis gelegt.
Des weiteren nimmt Basinger das Typecasting – womit allerdings nicht unbedingt die Einengung auf ganz bestimmte Rollen gemeint ist – als ein Instrument der „Star Machine“ in den Blick. Im letzten Kapitel dieses allgemeineren Teils wirft die Verfasserin dann einen Blick auf gescheiterte Star-Projekte der Studios – nicht nur auf die in dieser Hinsicht zu trauriger Quasi-Berühmtheit gelangte Anna Sten, die von MGM doch vollmundig – vielleicht war gerade das das Problem – als „the next Garbo“ angepriesen wurde. Auch die ironischen Wendungen des Schicksals bzw. Publikumgeschmacks – wer von den beiden Hauptdarstellern in Hughes‘ „The Outlaw“ ist denn heute noch in allgemeiner Erinnerung? Von Jack Beutel ist man sich ja nicht einmal sicher, wie sein Nachname denn nun geschrieben wird – werden von Basinger beleuchtet.
Im zweiten Teil, dem längsten des Buches, widmet sich Basinger unter dem Titel „Problems for the System: The Human Factor“ verschiedenen Stars, die auf unterschiedlichste Weisen, mal mehr, mal weniger erfolgreich mit der „Star Machine“ gearbeitet haben. Als Opfer der Maschinerie erscheinen zum einen Tyrone Power, dessen Ambitionen zum ernsthaften Schauspielern angesichts seines Aussehens und des damit verbundenen Typecasting vom Studio nur als störend gewertet wurden, sowie Lana Turner und Errol Flynn, die letzten Endes mit dem Image, das ihnen durch ihre Rollen auf der Leinwand erwuchs, nicht recht umzugehen verstanden und deren private Probleme noch gnadenlos von Hollywood ausgeschlachtet wurden. Mit Deanna Durbin und Jean Arthur nimmt Basinger zwei Frauen in den Blick, die sich – Durbin ungleich konsequenter – irgendwann ganz der Traumfabrik entzogen, während sie Loretta Young, Irene Dunne und Norma Shearer als verschiedene Beispiele für einen alles in allem souveränen Umgang mit der „Star Machine“ heranzieht: „One outsmarted it. One rose above it. And one married it.“ (S.320). Mit Charles Boyer und William Powell werden dann zwei männliche Stars betrachtet, die sich durch eine gewisse Unabhängigkeit gegenüber der Maschinerie auszeichneten.
Der letzte der drei Teile dann wirft einen Blick auf Stars, die eher nicht dem gängigen Alters- und Schönheitstyp entsprachen, deren Geldmachpotential aber von den Studios erkannt wurde. Hier berichtet Basinger auch darüber, wie Hollywood es schaffte, sich mit Nachwuchsstars durch die Zeit des Zweiten Weltkrieges zu retten.
Aufgrund des ersten Teils ist The Star Machine mehr als nur eine Sammlung von Einzelbiographien, denn es gelingt Basinger hier, immer wiederkehrende Muster bei der Erschaffung und Vermarktung von Filmstars aus Hollywoods Goldener Zeit schlüssig herauszuarbeiten. Gleichzeitig ist das Buch aber auch eine Fundgrube für allerlei mehr oder minder kuriose Informationen und eröffnet dadurch manch neuen Blickwinkel – Lauren Bacall als „look-alike“ für Veronica Lake (S.290) –, und wenn Basinger auch abwechslungsreich, flüssig und äußerst unterhaltsam schreibt, so gleitet sie doch niemals in billige Sensationslust ab – eine Gefahr, die im Falle Flynns oder Lana Turners durchaus bestanden hätte.
Was das Buch ferner so dicht und gehaltvoll macht, sind ausführliche Fußnoten, die allerdings nicht wissenschaftlichen Ansprüchen genügen, indem sie etwa Verweise und Quellenbelege böten, sondern eher Zusatzinformationen liefern, ein klar gegliedertes Register, das das Wiederfinden bestimmter Informationen sehr erleichtert, und eine Vielzahl von Bildern.
Für jeden Liebhaber des alten amerikanischen Kinos dürfte The Star Machine damit wohl eine sehr unterhaltsame Lektüre sein.
[1] In einer launigen Fußnote auf S.26 zitiert Basinger beispielsweise die Selbstbeschreibung der Maske bei MGM, daß diese es nämlich schaffte „‘to make any plain-looking woman beautiful in one hour and any beautiful woman hideous in four minutes‘“, und kommt zu der Schlußfolgerung „There w e r e the wizards in the land of Oz.“ Dies nur zum kurzweiligen Schreibstil der Verfasserin!
Daß es rund um die Stars der Golden Era in Hollywood nicht wirklich wie in einem Märchen zugegangen ist - wer sonst als Hollywood sollte uns nicht auch schon mit dieser schnöden Wahrheit konfrontiert haben, in Form gutgemachter Unterhaltungsfilme?
Jeanine Basinger nimmt sich in ihrem Buch The Star Machine ebenfalls dieser Wahrheit an, wobei sie sich an namhaften Stars orientiert – vor allem an solchen, die zu ihrer Zeit einen hohen Bekanntheitsgrad hatten, mit den Jahren aber hinter solch klassischen Stars wie Bette Davis, Joan Crawford und Barbara Stanwyck oder Clark Gable, Gary Cooper und Humphrey Bogart zurücktreten mußten – und trotz der Authentizität ihrer Schilderungen immer noch – ihrem Schreibstil sei’s gedankt – ein Höchstmaß an Unterhaltung bietet.
Dabei gliedert sich The Star Machine in eine Einleitung, drei Hauptteile und einen Ausblick, in dem die Autorin kursorisch auf die Arbeitsbedingungen moderner Stars, die nicht mehr von der „Star Machine“ geschaffen worden sind, eingeht. Im ersten Teil, „Stars and the Factory System“, beschreibt Basinger idealtypisch den Prozeß, dem ein – meist junger – Mensch unterworfen wurde, wenn er in die Maschinerie Hollywoods geriet. Nicht nur das Äußere wurde einer Generalüberholung unterzogen [1], sondern auch Lebenslauf und nicht selten sogar der Name wurden geändert. Denn wer glaubt schon, jemand mit dem Namen Archibald Leach könnte auf so einladende Weise so souverän-distanziert wirken wie Cary Grant? So kann man dann etwa auf S.42 anhand zweier Photos sehen, wie aus Margarita Cansino Rita Hayworth geworden ist … wahrlich beeindruckend. Basinger beschreibt weiterhin, wie das Studio sein neues Starrohmaterial vorsichtig in eigens darauf angelegten Filmen lancierte und auch auf andere Art und Weise ins Gespräch brachte, was erklärt, warum etwa viele berühmte Stars der Golden Era in absolut albernen Photoposen zu sehen sind. All das war natürlich harte Arbeit, und war man erst zum Star avanciert, so ganz klar von Studios Gnaden. „The star system was a slave system“, befindet Basinger, „albeit a highly paid, glamorous slave system in which the slaves were more famous than their owners. “ (S.131). So hatten die Stars eine Sechs-Tage-Woche mit Arbeitstagen, die um 7 Uhr morgens begannen und nicht selten bis 8 oder 9 Uhr abends andauerten. Anschließend mußten natürlich auch noch die Texte gelernt werden. Zudem mußten die Stars auch in den Filmen spielen, die ihnen das Studio zuwies; weigerten sie sich, eine Rolle zu spielen, wurden sie, unbezahlt, für eine Weile auf Eis gelegt.
Des weiteren nimmt Basinger das Typecasting – womit allerdings nicht unbedingt die Einengung auf ganz bestimmte Rollen gemeint ist – als ein Instrument der „Star Machine“ in den Blick. Im letzten Kapitel dieses allgemeineren Teils wirft die Verfasserin dann einen Blick auf gescheiterte Star-Projekte der Studios – nicht nur auf die in dieser Hinsicht zu trauriger Quasi-Berühmtheit gelangte Anna Sten, die von MGM doch vollmundig – vielleicht war gerade das das Problem – als „the next Garbo“ angepriesen wurde. Auch die ironischen Wendungen des Schicksals bzw. Publikumgeschmacks – wer von den beiden Hauptdarstellern in Hughes‘ „The Outlaw“ ist denn heute noch in allgemeiner Erinnerung? Von Jack Beutel ist man sich ja nicht einmal sicher, wie sein Nachname denn nun geschrieben wird – werden von Basinger beleuchtet.
Im zweiten Teil, dem längsten des Buches, widmet sich Basinger unter dem Titel „Problems for the System: The Human Factor“ verschiedenen Stars, die auf unterschiedlichste Weisen, mal mehr, mal weniger erfolgreich mit der „Star Machine“ gearbeitet haben. Als Opfer der Maschinerie erscheinen zum einen Tyrone Power, dessen Ambitionen zum ernsthaften Schauspielern angesichts seines Aussehens und des damit verbundenen Typecasting vom Studio nur als störend gewertet wurden, sowie Lana Turner und Errol Flynn, die letzten Endes mit dem Image, das ihnen durch ihre Rollen auf der Leinwand erwuchs, nicht recht umzugehen verstanden und deren private Probleme noch gnadenlos von Hollywood ausgeschlachtet wurden. Mit Deanna Durbin und Jean Arthur nimmt Basinger zwei Frauen in den Blick, die sich – Durbin ungleich konsequenter – irgendwann ganz der Traumfabrik entzogen, während sie Loretta Young, Irene Dunne und Norma Shearer als verschiedene Beispiele für einen alles in allem souveränen Umgang mit der „Star Machine“ heranzieht: „One outsmarted it. One rose above it. And one married it.“ (S.320). Mit Charles Boyer und William Powell werden dann zwei männliche Stars betrachtet, die sich durch eine gewisse Unabhängigkeit gegenüber der Maschinerie auszeichneten.
Der letzte der drei Teile dann wirft einen Blick auf Stars, die eher nicht dem gängigen Alters- und Schönheitstyp entsprachen, deren Geldmachpotential aber von den Studios erkannt wurde. Hier berichtet Basinger auch darüber, wie Hollywood es schaffte, sich mit Nachwuchsstars durch die Zeit des Zweiten Weltkrieges zu retten.
Aufgrund des ersten Teils ist The Star Machine mehr als nur eine Sammlung von Einzelbiographien, denn es gelingt Basinger hier, immer wiederkehrende Muster bei der Erschaffung und Vermarktung von Filmstars aus Hollywoods Goldener Zeit schlüssig herauszuarbeiten. Gleichzeitig ist das Buch aber auch eine Fundgrube für allerlei mehr oder minder kuriose Informationen und eröffnet dadurch manch neuen Blickwinkel – Lauren Bacall als „look-alike“ für Veronica Lake (S.290) –, und wenn Basinger auch abwechslungsreich, flüssig und äußerst unterhaltsam schreibt, so gleitet sie doch niemals in billige Sensationslust ab – eine Gefahr, die im Falle Flynns oder Lana Turners durchaus bestanden hätte.
Was das Buch ferner so dicht und gehaltvoll macht, sind ausführliche Fußnoten, die allerdings nicht wissenschaftlichen Ansprüchen genügen, indem sie etwa Verweise und Quellenbelege böten, sondern eher Zusatzinformationen liefern, ein klar gegliedertes Register, das das Wiederfinden bestimmter Informationen sehr erleichtert, und eine Vielzahl von Bildern.
Für jeden Liebhaber des alten amerikanischen Kinos dürfte The Star Machine damit wohl eine sehr unterhaltsame Lektüre sein.
[1] In einer launigen Fußnote auf S.26 zitiert Basinger beispielsweise die Selbstbeschreibung der Maske bei MGM, daß diese es nämlich schaffte „‘to make any plain-looking woman beautiful in one hour and any beautiful woman hideous in four minutes‘“, und kommt zu der Schlußfolgerung „There w e r e the wizards in the land of Oz.“ Dies nur zum kurzweiligen Schreibstil der Verfasserin!
August 24, 2012
Actually, I think the NYT review of this is rather snide. But no matter, Basinger is by far my favorite film historian and she hits this one out of the park, shedding light on the studio process of manufacturing stars that I'd never considered. She also uses the star system construct to bring some performers who probably will never rate a full-blown biography back into the spotlight, like Irene Dunne, Jean Arthur, Van Johnson, and Loretta Young.
Basinger writes in a confiding and upbeat way, drawing you in to her conclusions, even as she flatly asserts that others have got it wrong. I could not agree more with her assessment (and Mick Lasalle's) that Norma Shearer is unfairly forgotten today. Shearer's type has fallen out of favor and doesn't translate well to modern audiences, but Shearer herself was very gifted. (Basinger and I part company on Betty Hutton, whom I consider mostly to be a migraine on the hoof.)
I find it rather alarming that, in Basinger's assessment, so many stars are completely unknown to younger audiences, but she'd know as a film studies professor.
I'd give this one 10 stars if they were available. Not just a must-read but a must-own.
Basinger writes in a confiding and upbeat way, drawing you in to her conclusions, even as she flatly asserts that others have got it wrong. I could not agree more with her assessment (and Mick Lasalle's) that Norma Shearer is unfairly forgotten today. Shearer's type has fallen out of favor and doesn't translate well to modern audiences, but Shearer herself was very gifted. (Basinger and I part company on Betty Hutton, whom I consider mostly to be a migraine on the hoof.)
I find it rather alarming that, in Basinger's assessment, so many stars are completely unknown to younger audiences, but she'd know as a film studies professor.
I'd give this one 10 stars if they were available. Not just a must-read but a must-own.
April 23, 2012
"The idea of a star being born is bushwah. A star is created, carefully and coldbloodedly, built up from nothing, from nobody...Age, beauty, talent - least of all talent - has nothing to do with it...We could make silk purses out of sow's ears every day in the week."
During the Golden Age of movies the studio system controlled and manufactured the lives of their actors, having final say over everything from haircuts to spouses and covering up the seedier side of Hollywood. Basinger brings to light the lives of lesser known actors and shows us from the inside out how they were created and kept in line. It's an intimate look at a way of life that has since disappeared, accompanied by a great set of archival photos.
My love of classic movies runs deep so this book was right up my alley. The great part about this book is it introduces the reader to actors they may not know as well. It doesn't cover the John Wayne's and Judy Garland's of the era. Instead it introduces readers to other amazing actors like Jean Arthur and William Powell, stars who were famous more than 50 years ago but have since been mostly forgotten. For me, it was nice to read more about a group of actors I'd watched on screen but knew little about. For example, Eleanor Powell was almost singlehandedly responsible for saving Warner Brothers Studios during the Depression. "Her powerful, low-to-the-ground tap dancing tended to blow any male partner out of the water. She was physically stronger than most of the men available to play opposite her, and she certainly could out-tap everyone."
The reader is told the old studio system is no longer in existence but in its hey day was extremely impressive. MGM could complete a film every nine days. 'In 1950 alone they completed 16 cartoons, 12 "Travelogues", 9 "Pete Smith specialties", 8 "People on Parades", 104 "News of the Day" and 41 feature films.' I tried not to let my jaw hit the floor. The amount of complex coordination it would have taken is mindboggling.
Basinger references a huge stack of movies and provides a variety of stock and candid photos that help put names to faces and also reveal the variety of talent at the studios. I only wish the book had included more actors or had been longer. It was nice to see how things worked but I almost wanted a more chronological approach to see how things started and follow through to when the system broke down. If you love classic movies then I would highly recommend this book. It's a great addition to any library and now has a home in mine.
During the Golden Age of movies the studio system controlled and manufactured the lives of their actors, having final say over everything from haircuts to spouses and covering up the seedier side of Hollywood. Basinger brings to light the lives of lesser known actors and shows us from the inside out how they were created and kept in line. It's an intimate look at a way of life that has since disappeared, accompanied by a great set of archival photos.
My love of classic movies runs deep so this book was right up my alley. The great part about this book is it introduces the reader to actors they may not know as well. It doesn't cover the John Wayne's and Judy Garland's of the era. Instead it introduces readers to other amazing actors like Jean Arthur and William Powell, stars who were famous more than 50 years ago but have since been mostly forgotten. For me, it was nice to read more about a group of actors I'd watched on screen but knew little about. For example, Eleanor Powell was almost singlehandedly responsible for saving Warner Brothers Studios during the Depression. "Her powerful, low-to-the-ground tap dancing tended to blow any male partner out of the water. She was physically stronger than most of the men available to play opposite her, and she certainly could out-tap everyone."
The reader is told the old studio system is no longer in existence but in its hey day was extremely impressive. MGM could complete a film every nine days. 'In 1950 alone they completed 16 cartoons, 12 "Travelogues", 9 "Pete Smith specialties", 8 "People on Parades", 104 "News of the Day" and 41 feature films.' I tried not to let my jaw hit the floor. The amount of complex coordination it would have taken is mindboggling.
Basinger references a huge stack of movies and provides a variety of stock and candid photos that help put names to faces and also reveal the variety of talent at the studios. I only wish the book had included more actors or had been longer. It was nice to see how things worked but I almost wanted a more chronological approach to see how things started and follow through to when the system broke down. If you love classic movies then I would highly recommend this book. It's a great addition to any library and now has a home in mine.
November 13, 2014
Old Hollywood was a terrible place to be in the business of being a movie "star". The studios were in charge of your look, your personal life, your image, your everything. Players had no private life and the studio could make you or break you on a whim. This book explores that world and traces the lives of several stars, character actors, oddities, and second leads......and how they made it or faded away when the studio was done with them.
We learn, for example how a man who was truly ugly and a ham besides became so popular (Wallace Beery); how the girl with the odd voice and who was not beautiful became a star (Jean Arthur), and why Betty Hutton was tossed aside as the public's taste changed. All the great players are here and their story is not particularly pretty. It makes one wonder why anyone would want to be a star in that dog-eat-dog world. A very interesting and informative book which holds a few surprises and makes us look at the studios in a different light. Recommended for the film buff.
We learn, for example how a man who was truly ugly and a ham besides became so popular (Wallace Beery); how the girl with the odd voice and who was not beautiful became a star (Jean Arthur), and why Betty Hutton was tossed aside as the public's taste changed. All the great players are here and their story is not particularly pretty. It makes one wonder why anyone would want to be a star in that dog-eat-dog world. A very interesting and informative book which holds a few surprises and makes us look at the studios in a different light. Recommended for the film buff.
January 20, 2009
Basinger is a well-known movie historian and this is one of her most enjoyable works. Her knowledge is of course formidable, but so is her passion, and the combination works wonders. This book is mostly an analysis of how the studio system created stars during it's golden age, and it describes the manufacturing of gods and goddesses for the big screen with a wealth of details that is astounding and illuminating. Basinger is at her best when she shows how the machine works in inhuman (yet highly successful) ways and how the human factor (those stars are, after all, human beings) can create problems or unexpected situations. Her views on the careers of actors like Tyrone Power, Loretta Young, Lana Turner, Errol Flynn, Deanna Durbin and many more is brilliant and makes sense - it's also a must-read for anyone who wants to understand how the system functioned, succeeded - and failed at the same time.
October 9, 2015
Film historian Jeanine Basinger’s 2007 book The Star Machine is a thorough examination of how the studio system operated during Hollywood’s Golden Age. Basinger is the chair of film studies at Wesleyan University, and it’s very clear that movies have been a life-long passion for her. The Star Machine is 550 pages of details about film stars and movies that might not be familiar to modern audiences.
The Star Machine’s biggest strength is also its biggest problem: Basinger is a huge fan. And while that means that she’s actually taken the time to watch all of these obscure movies, it sometimes gets in the way of her writing. Sometimes her writing just gets too fan girly, like when she’s gushing (repeatedly) about how good-looking Tyrone Power was: “Power was beautiful. Not handsome. Beautiful. Solid, substantial, and with great masculine dignity, but with the kind of physical looks that can only be labeled ‘beautiful.’” (p.143) Basinger thinks that Power was the best-looking man ever, and, tellingly, the section in the index with the most entries for Power is “physical beauty of.” Basinger also is driven to hyperbole when writing about Deanna Durbin, a very popular child star of the 1930’s and 1940’s. When summing up Durbin’s career, Basinger writes, “No matter how many imitators Hollywood might develop, there was only one Deanna Durbin, and there will never be another one.” (p.294) I’ll admit I might be guilty of these same crimes in my writing, as when on occasion I might be overly effusive when describing the attractiveness of my favorite actresses, like Kim Novak or Natalie Wood. And there’s nothing wrong with being a big fan of someone and showing it, I just think there’s perhaps more of it in this book than is necessary.
The most interesting part of The Star Machine is the beginning, as Basinger tells us how the studios discovered future stars, groomed them, and tried to find suitable roles for them. It’s a fascinating look behind the scenes of the powerful studios. Basinger is an insightful critic who is able to easily explain the appeal that these movie stars had. That being said, her criticism is mainly about the movie stars themselves. She does not dive deeply into the technical side of filmmaking, as she is more interested in the effect that these movie stars have on us in the audience.
In the middle section of the book Basinger details the careers of several movie stars. Rather than focusing on huge legends like Cary Grant, John Wayne, and Katherine Hepburn, she writes about the careers of actors like Irene Dunne, Loretta Young, William Powell and other stars of the 1930’s and 1940’s. I think that Basinger’s point is that stars like Grant, Wayne, and Hepburn have been thoroughly analyzed elsewhere, and she wants to shed light on some stars who aren’t as well known today. I understand that, but I think it might also have been instructive to profile some huge stars like Gary Cooper and Joan Crawford to see how they succeeded in Hollywood for so long.
The Star Machine is saddled with an awkward conclusion, “Stardom without the Machine” that is a shallow look at current movie stars, and really doesn’t add anything to the book.
One gripe I have about The Star Machine is that I’m a little annoyed at how few sources Basinger cites. Her bibliography is just three pages long. For a 550 page non-fiction book! She also doesn’t cite quotations. It really puzzles me as to why Basinger’s publisher didn’t make her do this. When Alice Faye said of Tyrone Power, “Ty was the victim of the Hollywood system that grinds actors and actresses down, makes them give their blood and their souls to the movies” as she’s quoted as saying on page 179 of The Star Machine, when did she say it? To whom did she say it? I have no idea, because Basinger does not cite the source for this quote. It drives me batty that her publisher let her get away with this. If I’m reading a non-fiction book, I want to know where the author is getting their information from. The ultimate goal behind citing a source for a quotation is so the reader could theoretically find that same quote, so they know that the author got it right. I believe that Basinger has done the research and that she knows her stuff, I just want her to show her work.
If you want to learn about Hollywood during the studio system, The Star Machine is a great reference. But you really need to be a fan of pre-World War II Hollywood, as Basinger doesn’t cover the career of anyone who started making movies after 1940. If you still remember Ann Sheridan, then this is the book for you. You know, Ann Sheridan, “the oomph girl,” star of The Footloose Heiress, She Loved a Fireman, and Appointment in Honduras. You remember her, right? Good, I’m glad I’m not the only one.
The Star Machine’s biggest strength is also its biggest problem: Basinger is a huge fan. And while that means that she’s actually taken the time to watch all of these obscure movies, it sometimes gets in the way of her writing. Sometimes her writing just gets too fan girly, like when she’s gushing (repeatedly) about how good-looking Tyrone Power was: “Power was beautiful. Not handsome. Beautiful. Solid, substantial, and with great masculine dignity, but with the kind of physical looks that can only be labeled ‘beautiful.’” (p.143) Basinger thinks that Power was the best-looking man ever, and, tellingly, the section in the index with the most entries for Power is “physical beauty of.” Basinger also is driven to hyperbole when writing about Deanna Durbin, a very popular child star of the 1930’s and 1940’s. When summing up Durbin’s career, Basinger writes, “No matter how many imitators Hollywood might develop, there was only one Deanna Durbin, and there will never be another one.” (p.294) I’ll admit I might be guilty of these same crimes in my writing, as when on occasion I might be overly effusive when describing the attractiveness of my favorite actresses, like Kim Novak or Natalie Wood. And there’s nothing wrong with being a big fan of someone and showing it, I just think there’s perhaps more of it in this book than is necessary.
The most interesting part of The Star Machine is the beginning, as Basinger tells us how the studios discovered future stars, groomed them, and tried to find suitable roles for them. It’s a fascinating look behind the scenes of the powerful studios. Basinger is an insightful critic who is able to easily explain the appeal that these movie stars had. That being said, her criticism is mainly about the movie stars themselves. She does not dive deeply into the technical side of filmmaking, as she is more interested in the effect that these movie stars have on us in the audience.
In the middle section of the book Basinger details the careers of several movie stars. Rather than focusing on huge legends like Cary Grant, John Wayne, and Katherine Hepburn, she writes about the careers of actors like Irene Dunne, Loretta Young, William Powell and other stars of the 1930’s and 1940’s. I think that Basinger’s point is that stars like Grant, Wayne, and Hepburn have been thoroughly analyzed elsewhere, and she wants to shed light on some stars who aren’t as well known today. I understand that, but I think it might also have been instructive to profile some huge stars like Gary Cooper and Joan Crawford to see how they succeeded in Hollywood for so long.
The Star Machine is saddled with an awkward conclusion, “Stardom without the Machine” that is a shallow look at current movie stars, and really doesn’t add anything to the book.
One gripe I have about The Star Machine is that I’m a little annoyed at how few sources Basinger cites. Her bibliography is just three pages long. For a 550 page non-fiction book! She also doesn’t cite quotations. It really puzzles me as to why Basinger’s publisher didn’t make her do this. When Alice Faye said of Tyrone Power, “Ty was the victim of the Hollywood system that grinds actors and actresses down, makes them give their blood and their souls to the movies” as she’s quoted as saying on page 179 of The Star Machine, when did she say it? To whom did she say it? I have no idea, because Basinger does not cite the source for this quote. It drives me batty that her publisher let her get away with this. If I’m reading a non-fiction book, I want to know where the author is getting their information from. The ultimate goal behind citing a source for a quotation is so the reader could theoretically find that same quote, so they know that the author got it right. I believe that Basinger has done the research and that she knows her stuff, I just want her to show her work.
If you want to learn about Hollywood during the studio system, The Star Machine is a great reference. But you really need to be a fan of pre-World War II Hollywood, as Basinger doesn’t cover the career of anyone who started making movies after 1940. If you still remember Ann Sheridan, then this is the book for you. You know, Ann Sheridan, “the oomph girl,” star of The Footloose Heiress, She Loved a Fireman, and Appointment in Honduras. You remember her, right? Good, I’m glad I’m not the only one.
November 5, 2021
I did really like it—she's easy to read, she knows her stuff, it's well-researched, etc., and I enjoy the subject matter. It made me realise that despite the vast number of old movies I've seen, there's an even vaster number of older movies I haven't seen, and maybe I should, so I'm seeking them out.
The take-it-with-a-grain-of-salt for this book is that a lot of what she says is 100% absolutely subjective and opinionated, rather like if I were writing a book about why Luxembourg is the world's best country. There's absolutely no science behind it. The vast majority of the book endeavours to explain how various people become (or stopped being) stars, because of (or despite) the system, because of (or despite) their looks, because of (or despite) their talent, etc., until you end up (as I did) thinking "well, this is pointless, let's just enjoy it as a series of biographies, and some hints about movies I might like." Apparently Van Johnson became a star because unlike most stars he's ordinary looking. My uncle was ordinary looking, why wasn't he a star? Why aren't most people stars, then?
What I thought I'd be getting--a detailed look at the process whereby the studios discovered, groomed, and created stars (e.g. the opening scenes of Garland's A Star is Born)--is whipped through in an early chapter, and then only mentioned again in passing as she works through the biographies. She deliberately chooses slightly less famous people (at least, less famous now) who don't already have reams of text devoted to them, so if you think of this book as "Some Lesser-Known Hollywood Stars," that's essentially the book.
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s.)
The take-it-with-a-grain-of-salt for this book is that a lot of what she says is 100% absolutely subjective and opinionated, rather like if I were writing a book about why Luxembourg is the world's best country. There's absolutely no science behind it. The vast majority of the book endeavours to explain how various people become (or stopped being) stars, because of (or despite) the system, because of (or despite) their looks, because of (or despite) their talent, etc., until you end up (as I did) thinking "well, this is pointless, let's just enjoy it as a series of biographies, and some hints about movies I might like." Apparently Van Johnson became a star because unlike most stars he's ordinary looking. My uncle was ordinary looking, why wasn't he a star? Why aren't most people stars, then?
What I thought I'd be getting--a detailed look at the process whereby the studios discovered, groomed, and created stars (e.g. the opening scenes of Garland's A Star is Born)--is whipped through in an early chapter, and then only mentioned again in passing as she works through the biographies. She deliberately chooses slightly less famous people (at least, less famous now) who don't already have reams of text devoted to them, so if you think of this book as "Some Lesser-Known Hollywood Stars," that's essentially the book.
(Note: 5 stars = amazing, wonderful, 4 = very good book, 3 = decent read, 2 = disappointing, 1 = awful, just awful. I'm fairly good at picking for myself so end up with a lot of 4s.)
July 31, 2009
LOVED THIS BOOK! what's great is basinger is obviously a scholar but even more so, she is also a devoted movie fan. the insight she has about the stars is illuminating not just in the academic sense but also the intimate personal knowledge basinger imbues in all her analysis as she grew up watching these movies WHEN THEY WERE ACTUALLY OUT.
the greatest compliment i can give is that the book made me want to see movies of people i was not fans of (tyrone power, loretta young, etc) and re-inspired/ignited my love for the stars i already adored (jean arthur, ERROL FLYNN!!!, etc). not only that...her footnotes are completely hilarious and full of good info.
it's a lengthy book but it moves quickly esp if you love the subject manner.
the greatest compliment i can give is that the book made me want to see movies of people i was not fans of (tyrone power, loretta young, etc) and re-inspired/ignited my love for the stars i already adored (jean arthur, ERROL FLYNN!!!, etc). not only that...her footnotes are completely hilarious and full of good info.
it's a lengthy book but it moves quickly esp if you love the subject manner.
September 22, 2009
Wow. Cannot believe I made it to the end of this book. Okay, so that's a lie. I actually skimmed the last 50 or so pages because I just couldn't take it any more.
I loved the vignettes about different actors, but throughout the book I felt a bit lost. I wish the author had outlined the very specific steps of the star machine process from the beginning. I think she did, but her further chapters were so extensive I never found them to recall and support her main thesis. And, what's the big deal about the star machine? Why should we care?
I suppose that is what the final 50 pages were about: how the "star machine" is dead and the new Hollywood is totally different. Pages go by listing the modern stars and how they would fit the certain "types" of the old Hollywood, but why work so hard to try to justify them like this? Perhaps a definitive date should have been given, or a timeline of when the "star machine" developed and why, and when its effectiveness and use ended in common Hollywood practice.
I also thought it would have been more effective to have a few additional Annex pages (other than a simple Index) that drew connections between the different studios, actors, producers, and films. It all just got SO immensely confusing...and I'm a film buff!
Overall, I was REALLY looking forward to diving into this book. I had it on my shelf for ages and I finally go to it just recently. Unfortunately, it was a bit of a disappointment. Fun anecdotes, but not a lot of cohesion.
I loved the vignettes about different actors, but throughout the book I felt a bit lost. I wish the author had outlined the very specific steps of the star machine process from the beginning. I think she did, but her further chapters were so extensive I never found them to recall and support her main thesis. And, what's the big deal about the star machine? Why should we care?
I suppose that is what the final 50 pages were about: how the "star machine" is dead and the new Hollywood is totally different. Pages go by listing the modern stars and how they would fit the certain "types" of the old Hollywood, but why work so hard to try to justify them like this? Perhaps a definitive date should have been given, or a timeline of when the "star machine" developed and why, and when its effectiveness and use ended in common Hollywood practice.
I also thought it would have been more effective to have a few additional Annex pages (other than a simple Index) that drew connections between the different studios, actors, producers, and films. It all just got SO immensely confusing...and I'm a film buff!
Overall, I was REALLY looking forward to diving into this book. I had it on my shelf for ages and I finally go to it just recently. Unfortunately, it was a bit of a disappointment. Fun anecdotes, but not a lot of cohesion.
July 22, 2017
DNF
What I read of this book was really informative, but instead of coming off as interesting, it was just dull. The first few chapters were good, but then the book just got tedious to read. I think the major problem for me was that whenever the author would bring up an actor to illustrate her point she would end up summarizing their career, and that simply wasn't necessary to get her point across a lot of the time. I read the first part, which was good on the whole, and skimmed most of the second, which were actor biographies and rather dull. I didn't read any of the third which looked like it could have been more interesting and looked at some other trends and issues instead of main stream movie stars, but honestly I just couldn't bring myself to waste any more time with this book. Maybe someday I'll pick it up again, but I doubt it.
What I read of this book was really informative, but instead of coming off as interesting, it was just dull. The first few chapters were good, but then the book just got tedious to read. I think the major problem for me was that whenever the author would bring up an actor to illustrate her point she would end up summarizing their career, and that simply wasn't necessary to get her point across a lot of the time. I read the first part, which was good on the whole, and skimmed most of the second, which were actor biographies and rather dull. I didn't read any of the third which looked like it could have been more interesting and looked at some other trends and issues instead of main stream movie stars, but honestly I just couldn't bring myself to waste any more time with this book. Maybe someday I'll pick it up again, but I doubt it.
March 20, 2013
Originally bought this just for the Deanna Durbin chapter, but got caught up and read the whole thing. It's mostly about the star system in Hollywood and specifically, stars who didn't quite fit the mold. Most of the subjects featured are actors I've always liked, but don't have biographies of their own as yet so I enjoyed learning more about them. Basinger spouts her own opinions liberally and I mostly agreed with them - not always. Gives one much to ponder and I sought out several movies she covered. The only part I didn't care for was the Conclusion about modern actors. It's out of date already and not in my field of interest. Still, much to enjoy.
May 25, 2009
I thoroughly enjoyed the content as well as the structure of this book. I think I partly liked it so much because she articulates the qualities of classic Hollywood that I love most, which I may have otherwise had a hard time verbalizing. It was a quick read at over 500 pages. Some film literature can be too elementary or too scholarly (in a pretentious kind of way), but I found this to be perfectly sharp and digestible.
April 27, 2023
After 3+ years, I have finished the book! A mostly fascinating read of the studio system and the star machine that begins to fall down towards the end when the author is buzzing through multiple stars and doing profiles of current stars. Of course this author couldn't have predicted the future, and some of her predictions weren't that far off, but still I skimmed, skipped most of the end of the book.
November 3, 2014
Fun, well written, and engaging read about the early Hollywood Studio system. Basinger has a lot of strong opinions and her personality comes through in her work, if this is something that generally bothers you as a reader you will likely be turned off but I found her to be charming and funny. Her use of footnotes is odd, but it didn't drive me as batty as some of the other reviewers.
March 22, 2018
3.5 Over all this was quite enjoyable. There is a vast amount of interesting information here. Unfortunately it isn't really cohesive, it wanders kind of all over the place. Also, the author is infected with a bad case of footnote disease, there are millions of them, almost every page in the beginning, and most of them could have easily been absorbed into the text. (Fortunately she does this less and less as it goes along) I did appreciate how she highlights actors that are deserving but over looked in most books of this sort. (Margaret O'Brien, for example) Worth reading.
February 20, 2022
A fun read full of wonderful anecdotes and classic pictures I need to see. A little on the long side but when the writing consists mostly of hyperbolic descriptions of larger-than-life stars and their larger-than-life exploits and archaic catch-phrases like "clotheshorse", who really cares?
November 11, 2017
On the one hand, Basinger did an amazing job detailing the studio system and how it produced stars, and why it worked. On the other hand, Basinger got repetitive, boring, and longwinded. And also does not seem to understand slapstick comedy as an art form.
I do think the mini-biography format worked, but I wanted more detail on what kinds of tutelage and shaping MGM and the other studios gave their stars, not detailed biographical notes about how Lana Turner worked the system to her benefit. I think I wanted more explanations as to "Why did this work for this star but not that one, why did that star end up famous bucking the system and why did this one do everything they told them to and never make it?" Instead Basinger cherry-picks stars to make her points. This is, I think a difference of preferred format, and not necessarily a bad choice on the author's part. I wanted something more technical, where she was definitely going for a broader, more accessible approach.
What I did learn about the studio system was excellent. The publicity machine that kept scandals from being too scandalous, the star schools that turned ingenues into actresses, the self-sustaining miniature cities that were the major studios, all of this was gone into in more detail than I've encountered before. I liked that a lot. I didn't like that Basinger chose very few of the major stars we know today to cover. The book might have been a lot better served talking more about Judy Garland, Esther Williams, Cary Grant, and Clark Gable than about Lana Turner, Tyrone Power, and William Powell. But again, that is, I think a difference in approach, not necessarily a point of contention.
Overall, the thing that made this book drag on for me was the repetitive style choices. In the beginning of the book, Basinger talks more about the "star machine" and it's effect and affect on various personalities. I thought this was a much better fit to the topic, but then, after giving a brief run-down of the various parts of the star machine, she switches to talking about specific stars and how the studio system made them great or broke them down. This got extremely boring after a while, because she didn't vary her story at all, and she covered the whole process of becoming a movie star and falling from grace for every actor or actress she chose, instead of focusing in on the really relevant parts of that particular star's career.
I can't say I'd recommend this book for casual fans of Hollywood history, but for people who are interested in a much deeper look at how the studio system worked, it might be worth picking up. I do think it would work better as a reference volume, for information on certain stars and their relationship with the studios, but again, I think there are better books out there if that's what you're looking for.
I do think the mini-biography format worked, but I wanted more detail on what kinds of tutelage and shaping MGM and the other studios gave their stars, not detailed biographical notes about how Lana Turner worked the system to her benefit. I think I wanted more explanations as to "Why did this work for this star but not that one, why did that star end up famous bucking the system and why did this one do everything they told them to and never make it?" Instead Basinger cherry-picks stars to make her points. This is, I think a difference of preferred format, and not necessarily a bad choice on the author's part. I wanted something more technical, where she was definitely going for a broader, more accessible approach.
What I did learn about the studio system was excellent. The publicity machine that kept scandals from being too scandalous, the star schools that turned ingenues into actresses, the self-sustaining miniature cities that were the major studios, all of this was gone into in more detail than I've encountered before. I liked that a lot. I didn't like that Basinger chose very few of the major stars we know today to cover. The book might have been a lot better served talking more about Judy Garland, Esther Williams, Cary Grant, and Clark Gable than about Lana Turner, Tyrone Power, and William Powell. But again, that is, I think a difference in approach, not necessarily a point of contention.
Overall, the thing that made this book drag on for me was the repetitive style choices. In the beginning of the book, Basinger talks more about the "star machine" and it's effect and affect on various personalities. I thought this was a much better fit to the topic, but then, after giving a brief run-down of the various parts of the star machine, she switches to talking about specific stars and how the studio system made them great or broke them down. This got extremely boring after a while, because she didn't vary her story at all, and she covered the whole process of becoming a movie star and falling from grace for every actor or actress she chose, instead of focusing in on the really relevant parts of that particular star's career.
I can't say I'd recommend this book for casual fans of Hollywood history, but for people who are interested in a much deeper look at how the studio system worked, it might be worth picking up. I do think it would work better as a reference volume, for information on certain stars and their relationship with the studios, but again, I think there are better books out there if that's what you're looking for.
May 11, 2017
This is more than 2.5 stars but not quite a full 3.
The parts that talk just about the "star machine" in general are the best but unfortunately they don't last long, roughly 140 pages out of a 550+ page book. The second section starts going into examples of how the star system broke down or misfired but it's more like mini-bios than real critical reads of the problems of the star system (it also has the chapter titles all starting with words that begin with "D"...for some reason. This at times feels a bit forced, like in the chapter on Lana Turner and Errol Flynn which is entitled "Disobedience" yet Basinger, doesn't really explain how they were disobedient; sure they were high living but if anything the chapter seems to suggest that rather than "disobedient", they were more examples of what happened when the "star machine" worked too well and a star's offscreen persona was felt to also be their onscreen persona instead of the more likely reverse situation). Also, strangely, even though Bette Davis, James Cagney, and Olivia de Havilland all had lawsuits to get out of their contracts -- Davis perhaps most famously but that may be because she lost while Cagney and de Havilland won and de Havilland even had a legal act named after her -- they don't get their own chapters. Nor do such famous studio "disasters" as Judy Garland or Marilyn Monroe. In fact, many of the people who do get chapters might not be known to a "casual" Old Hollywood fan...or if their name is recognized, their films might not be. It's not clear if Basinger was only writing about the one's she likes (she doesn't really attempt to hide her dislike for Shirley Temple) or if she felt there had already been too much written about the big name cases or if there were legal troubles and she wasn't given permission by the estates of the big name cases to write about them. Olivia de Havilland, at least, was still alive at the time this book was published (and the time this review was written) and would gone on to receive the National Medal of Arts the year after the book's printing so her exclusion (and seriously, Davis's and Garland's) is especially perplexing.
The parts that talk just about the "star machine" in general are the best but unfortunately they don't last long, roughly 140 pages out of a 550+ page book. The second section starts going into examples of how the star system broke down or misfired but it's more like mini-bios than real critical reads of the problems of the star system (it also has the chapter titles all starting with words that begin with "D"...for some reason. This at times feels a bit forced, like in the chapter on Lana Turner and Errol Flynn which is entitled "Disobedience" yet Basinger, doesn't really explain how they were disobedient; sure they were high living but if anything the chapter seems to suggest that rather than "disobedient", they were more examples of what happened when the "star machine" worked too well and a star's offscreen persona was felt to also be their onscreen persona instead of the more likely reverse situation). Also, strangely, even though Bette Davis, James Cagney, and Olivia de Havilland all had lawsuits to get out of their contracts -- Davis perhaps most famously but that may be because she lost while Cagney and de Havilland won and de Havilland even had a legal act named after her -- they don't get their own chapters. Nor do such famous studio "disasters" as Judy Garland or Marilyn Monroe. In fact, many of the people who do get chapters might not be known to a "casual" Old Hollywood fan...or if their name is recognized, their films might not be. It's not clear if Basinger was only writing about the one's she likes (she doesn't really attempt to hide her dislike for Shirley Temple) or if she felt there had already been too much written about the big name cases or if there were legal troubles and she wasn't given permission by the estates of the big name cases to write about them. Olivia de Havilland, at least, was still alive at the time this book was published (and the time this review was written) and would gone on to receive the National Medal of Arts the year after the book's printing so her exclusion (and seriously, Davis's and Garland's) is especially perplexing.
January 19, 2019
Professor Jeanine Basinger offers analysis of Hollywood's Golden Age film studios. The focus is on the machinations used to create, mold, and retain star contract actors, and the effects on the contract talent. Some thrived (Clark Gable, Lana Turner, Joan Blondell) , some rebelled (Errol Flynn, Bette Davis, Loretta Young) some dropped out (Deanna Durbin, Alice Faye), and others were worn down by the stringent demands and sadly burned out (Judy Garland, Gail Russell).
The focus here is on less-remembered stars like actors Tyrone Power, Lana Turner, Young, Van Johnson, etc. One recurring theme with many stars is the limited roles they were given year after year when their acting range was expanding. For example, Power was a handsome guy but he yearned to break out from costume dramas and slight romances.
Those who enjoy Hollywood history will likely find this engrossing
The focus here is on less-remembered stars like actors Tyrone Power, Lana Turner, Young, Van Johnson, etc. One recurring theme with many stars is the limited roles they were given year after year when their acting range was expanding. For example, Power was a handsome guy but he yearned to break out from costume dramas and slight romances.
Those who enjoy Hollywood history will likely find this engrossing
September 12, 2020
It started strong, but petered out as it went along. It felt like the author proved her thesis within the first couple chapters, and then just randomly decided to write about whatever classic Hollywood stars struck her fancy. She often comes across as a fan, rather than a serious writer or historian.
I also have two random but specific complaints. One, her report of Errol Flynn's trial for statutory rape was remarkably unsympathetic to the young victims. Two, the last chapter, about modern Hollywood stars, comes across as somewhat dated and out of touch, even for a book written in 2007.
It had its moments, but it wasn't the book I wanted it to be.
I also have two random but specific complaints. One, her report of Errol Flynn's trial for statutory rape was remarkably unsympathetic to the young victims. Two, the last chapter, about modern Hollywood stars, comes across as somewhat dated and out of touch, even for a book written in 2007.
It had its moments, but it wasn't the book I wanted it to be.
October 3, 2019
This book was okay. It started off well, like with the story of Eleanor Powell’s rise at MGM. But then the author got caught up in the minutiae and her overall point became muddled. I could have also done without her personal, snarky commentary, like in the Errol Flynn and Lana Turner chapters. The author isn’t as clever as she thinks she is.
April 21, 2014
Jeanine Basinger KILLED it as far as film knowledge and scholarship.
January 19, 2019
This is a BIG read for all of you who are fascinated by the "Golden Age of Movies" an era, the 30s, 40s and 50s, that goes hand-in-hand with the Studio System.
In the Studio System, Columbia, MGM etc are manufacturing entertainment for the consumption of a ravenous American public. For a handful of studios to turn out 400 or so high-quality films in a single year takes planning and careful calculation. Each studio had their own brand, but within that brand they produced several lines of product. The product line might be built around a producer, or around an individual star, or a genre of film (Republic was known for Westerns, Warner Brothers was know for their gangster films, etc.) Those studios, and their thousands of employees, were making something.
While they were making films the studios were also creating the gorgeous creatures who starred in their films, nurturing and plotting out careers. Developing Producers and Directors, finding material for screenplays, employing writers, employing composers and orchestras, working with unions and craftsmen. A huge part of their work was public relations: stirring up excitement for their next film, hyping the next star, and manufacturing a glamorous reality.
To develop her themes the author takes a closer look at a career or at a pair of careers, and shows you the role the studio played in that career. For example, her chapters on two "Disobedient" stars: Lana Turner and Errol Flynn. Both had private lives that were chock-full of scandal and challenged their studios over privacy and independence. But Flynn's career stumbled along, while Turner's flourished. In Flynn's case the studio decided to simply try and make a few more dollars off an investment. They stuck him in another swashbuckler - knowing there was still an audience for that. Flynn, in need of money, had to go along. Turner was a bigger headache - for all the trouble she caused she was always forgiven by her fans (created by the PR Wing of the studio!), so the Studio heads were always forced to forgive her, and she knew it. Far from rejecting Turner, her fans identified with her heart-break and loved to see her rising above it, just like in her movies! Her fan-base aged with her, and loved her for keeping her head up and her glamour quotient high even when it got to be a little corny.
The focus of books about the film industry is usually on the career of a single person. Here the Studio System, or "Star Machine" gets a deeper treatment. Anyone who loves the Golden Age will appreciate this scholarly analysis. I read this book a couple of years ago and have given copies away twice. I just bought my third copy...which I think I'll hold on to this time.
In the Studio System, Columbia, MGM etc are manufacturing entertainment for the consumption of a ravenous American public. For a handful of studios to turn out 400 or so high-quality films in a single year takes planning and careful calculation. Each studio had their own brand, but within that brand they produced several lines of product. The product line might be built around a producer, or around an individual star, or a genre of film (Republic was known for Westerns, Warner Brothers was know for their gangster films, etc.) Those studios, and their thousands of employees, were making something.
While they were making films the studios were also creating the gorgeous creatures who starred in their films, nurturing and plotting out careers. Developing Producers and Directors, finding material for screenplays, employing writers, employing composers and orchestras, working with unions and craftsmen. A huge part of their work was public relations: stirring up excitement for their next film, hyping the next star, and manufacturing a glamorous reality.
To develop her themes the author takes a closer look at a career or at a pair of careers, and shows you the role the studio played in that career. For example, her chapters on two "Disobedient" stars: Lana Turner and Errol Flynn. Both had private lives that were chock-full of scandal and challenged their studios over privacy and independence. But Flynn's career stumbled along, while Turner's flourished. In Flynn's case the studio decided to simply try and make a few more dollars off an investment. They stuck him in another swashbuckler - knowing there was still an audience for that. Flynn, in need of money, had to go along. Turner was a bigger headache - for all the trouble she caused she was always forgiven by her fans (created by the PR Wing of the studio!), so the Studio heads were always forced to forgive her, and she knew it. Far from rejecting Turner, her fans identified with her heart-break and loved to see her rising above it, just like in her movies! Her fan-base aged with her, and loved her for keeping her head up and her glamour quotient high even when it got to be a little corny.
The focus of books about the film industry is usually on the career of a single person. Here the Studio System, or "Star Machine" gets a deeper treatment. Anyone who loves the Golden Age will appreciate this scholarly analysis. I read this book a couple of years ago and have given copies away twice. I just bought my third copy...which I think I'll hold on to this time.
July 18, 2018
A fascinating read for the most part, and a hefty tome that features everything you wanted to know about the Star Machine during the Hollywood Studio Era of the '30s and '40s. The first half of the book is the strongest, in which Basinger goes into detail about the nature of the stars and the nature of the business that depended on them and exploited them in equal measure. The second half concentrates on individual stars and their unique places in the system, and profiles of Tyrone Power and Lana Turner are the strongest there. The book does run out of stream as she runs through a seemingly endless number of case studies, and the final chapter, looking at stardom "now," dates badly (the book was published in 2007), but that's little to blame for Basinger. Curiously, the weakest part of the book is a copy-editing note. There are plenty of contradictions and errors having to do with dates. One page says a film was released in 1939, and then on the next page it's stated the film was released in 1937. This happened far too often not to be something amiss with the editing process.
Still, a fascinating look at a fascinating and unique time in cinema history, one that - as it moves further and further into the past - retreats further back into collective memory, making this book all the more essential as time goes by.
I'm glad I finally read it.
Still, a fascinating look at a fascinating and unique time in cinema history, one that - as it moves further and further into the past - retreats further back into collective memory, making this book all the more essential as time goes by.
I'm glad I finally read it.
June 19, 2022
Finally finished! This took me so long to read because Basinger could not hold my attention. I rolled my eyes so many times at her gross comments about women. She has a clear preference for men, and her section about Errol Flynn disgusted me. She engages in gross rhetoric about victims. I understand she can’t comment on everything especially when simply writing about the star system, but she decided to leave a disgusting comment about Lana Turner said by Robert Taylor without comment, and then made gross comments about Flynn’s accusers, it really showed to me how she feels about other women. She also constantly talks about weight for women and growing older but (shocker!!!) she doesn’t have the same comments towards men. I understand this was something that the system was very critical at the time, but the way she phrases it just comes across as insulting women.
With all that said, she did really interest me in the beginning. Some of her chapters really are great, and other just feel like short biographies. I wish she had just written about the star system and kept her gross comments about women out. I learned a decent amount, and am glad I read this book, but probably will only reference the early chapters if needed.
With all that said, she did really interest me in the beginning. Some of her chapters really are great, and other just feel like short biographies. I wish she had just written about the star system and kept her gross comments about women out. I learned a decent amount, and am glad I read this book, but probably will only reference the early chapters if needed.
February 11, 2024
I've been interested in movies, and movie history, all my life. I'm also someone who is very interested in the process by which something I care about gets made.So this deeply researched story of now the studio system worked to create stars from the pre-sound era to the 1950s, when the studio system fell apart. I have seen many of the films - and the stars in them - that Basinger discusses which I suspect makes me a good reader for this book, and the depth of understanding about how film acting works and how chemistry is created gave me a whole new level of understanding. The contrast in attitudes between the "film factory" era and what has come after, when everyone is a free lancer was particularly interesting. The final section, which discusses the stars of the era when the book was written (it was published in 2005), shows both how rapidly the film industry continues to change, and how unpredictable is the nature of stardom. Many of the actors she discusses circa mid-oughts, and the conclusions she draws about them, look very different at present. Proving that, as William Goldman famously wrote about the movie business, Nobody knows anything.
April 29, 2020
A frequently fascinating look at how the studios during the Golden Age of Hollywood tried to put a business framework of inputs and outputs to the purely human capital of their star actors. While things could go wrong, they had a framework for how to best mold their actors into stars with longevity. The framework was the same for everyone but could be tweaked and adapted (up to a point) to get more from a star. The book goes into great detail about how the studios defined star personas and how they were maintained over the course of their careers. It starts to lose steam by the end when it discusses how WWII impacted the star system: a fascinating topic that felt long winded here. And the end, where Basinger compares modern celebs to those of the past is plain tedious (although, that might be because this book was written in 2007 and some of her examples are outdated). Still, a valuable resource about a fascinating period of time.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews