Widmark, for real.

One of the great cross-cultural misunderstandings of our time...well, of my time, although I wasn't there...occurred at the 19823 Telluride Film Festival, where one night a dyspeptic Andrei Tarkovsky was honored. Via his de facto translator, the Polish director Krystof Zanussi, Tarkovsky denounced the cinema as a whore. "When she learns to give it away, she will be free."

The next night's honoree was Richard Widmark, then in his mid-sixties. "I want to name you some pimps," he said in the drollest tone he could muster, which Widmark fans know was very droll. "Hitchcock...Fellini...Bergman...Orson Welles..." (Here's Roger Ebert's account, from which I crib.)

Tarkovsky was a genius who was capable of being a real, well, jerk; Widmark was a largely more gracious and relaxed fellow. They ought not have been at odds. After all, hadn't Tarkovsky's first film, as a student, been a tentative adaptation of Hemingway's short story The Killers, in which Tarkovsky himself appeared, as an assassin, whistling the tune "Lullaby of Birdland"? That's a part that would have been just up Widmark's alley back in the day. And didn't Widmark have the kind of face, the kind of classically sculpted, stoic face, that could weather it through any and every thing a Tarkovsky vision could throw at it? Think of Tarkovsky's greatest leading men: Anatoli Solonitsyn, Aleksandr Kajdanovsky, Erland Josephson. Great, great actors all. But they have not got anything that Richard Widmark did not. Tarkovsky and Widmark should have been allies. They really did stand for the same thing, finally.

Oh, well. A commenter below believes Widmark's portrayal of the Dauphin in Preminger's Saint Joan is homophobic. I never saw it that way. The Dauphin is silly, frivolous, uninformed; he has an epicene quality. Widmark's performance and Preminger's camera take his ignorance for what it is; what torments him in later life is his coming to terms with that ignorance.

Oh well, again. What we have to look back on is his lifetime of wonderful performances, and that unforgettable visage...a one-man rejoinder to Norma Desmond's line about having faces then...

As the desperate Harry Fabian, coming to the end of the line in Jules Dassin's 1950 Night and the City...

As slick pickpocket Skip McCoy, dipping into Jean Peters' purse in Samuel Fuller's 1953 Pickup on South Street...

Finally, breaking his back chasing the goddamn hood who took off with his gun, in Don Siegel's 1968 Madigan...

Each of these pictures is well worth seeking out and watching. Tonight. Don't even get me started. And if you can find Hell and High Water or Warlock, so much the better for you. Widmark never gave a false performance. Not even in The Swarm. Not that I'm recommending you watch that.

Comments

[Griff]

Glenn, Widmark and Tarkovsky were honored at the _1983_ Telluride Festival. [I know this because I was there; I didn't attend the '82 Telluride Festival.]

[Glenn Kenny]

Um, indeed. Further digging reveals Ebert's account to be in error—said digging being into J. Hoberman's terrific "Tarkovsky Arrives" from "Vulgar Modernism." What can I say except, "Ooops"? And that I wish you'd add something, Griff, to your revelation that you were THERE—who did you see? What was it like? Why didn't I go? (Well, I know the answer to the last question at least...)

[Andrew]

Pickup on South Street was my first exposure to both Widmark and Fuller. I bought it on a whim, thinking it sounded interesting, and I was blown away by both of these men. Widmark has a certain intimidating charm that is so appealing. I'll definitely check out your suggestions. On that note, any suggestions for more Fuller?

[D Cairns]

I think there's a tradition of playing the Dauphin as effeminite, or whatever. Carry On star Kenneth Williams, who took camp into a whole new universe, had a great success in the role. I can't imagine his version was subtler or less gay that Widmark's. I suspect Shaw gives some kind of indication somewhere that the character is to be interpreted that way.

[Campaspe]

Admittedly I was not as sensitive to such things when I saw Saint Joan a long time ago, but my recollection is closer to yours -- that it's meant to be a dandyish, decadent characterization and not a slap at gays. As I recall the historical Charles VII wasn't gay anyway.

I love your choice of pictures. He will be missed.

[Griff]

At Telluride in '83, Tarkovsky seemed terribly inscrutable; if you've seen interview footage of the filmmaker, perhaps you can understand what I mean. He clearly felt his work could stand on its own merit and didn't require explanation or annotation. He was willing to discuss -- in a limited, perhaps guarded way -- his philosophy of cinema. I found it interesting that he felt that language barriers tend to almost completely separate the cultures of the world in ways that can never be properly addressed. [I think I have that right, anyway.] He seemed dour, almost humorless -- not quite what I expected from the man who made ANDREI RUBLEV.

By contrast, Richard Widmark was utterly accessible, and friendlier and more outgoing than I would have ever imagined. Over the years I've attended numerous parties and functions honoring stars and filmmakers; a lot of greats have behaved very cordially and kindly when I've met them. But Richard Widmark actually came over to me and introduced himself, asked me my name and how I was. I was (and remain) mostly nobody in particular. He was simply a thoughtful, friendly man, interested in people. Even me. I've never forgotten that.

I did ask him whether any friendly rivalry developed with his pal Henry Fonda on the set of MADIGAN. [MADIGAN was based on the Richard Dougherty novel "The Commissioner," which focuses to an extent on the character played by Fonda. Universal may have led Fonda to believe that his hard-nosed Commissioner would be more important in the picture than would ultimately be the case.] Widmark seemed reticent to talk very specifically about the matter, but grinned and said something about the two actors competing "a little" -- to do the best that each of them could do. I also asked him about working with Fuller, whom he predictably praised -- though he (politely) couldn't quite bring himself to mention Bella Darvi's name when discussing problems with the making of HELL AND HIGH WATER. I believe he used the phrase "...not a labor of love" to describe the picture.

Widmark's riposte to Tarkovsky's remarks were the talk of the festival, but as Joe Leydon has mentioned, many thoughts at Telluride that year were on the Korean airliner (Flight 007) shot down over Soviet airspace that weekend. The cold war was still going strong, and many legitimately had the jitters.

[gorilla Bob]

Widmark always delivered the goods. There's a class of actors who always are a pleasure to watch, regardless of how bad the film is. I can't think of a bad performance by Widmark. Robert Ryan falls into this category as well. Joel McCrea as well. They rarely get awards (did Widmark ever win an Oscar?) I can't think of any modern actors who deliver the same level of professionalism and pleasure. And anynoe who pushes an old lady in a wheelchair down a flight of stairs is ok in my book.

[gorilla Bob]

PS: Tarkovsky may be a genius, but I can't stand his films, except for Solaris. I actually like my films, no matter how rigorous, to have a modicum of entertainment.