Movie musicals and rub a dub dubbing, and Audrey Hepburn
In yesterday’s thread about the undeserving poor, commenter IGotBupkis took aim at the musical “My Fair Lady” versus the movie version of the play “Pygmalion.” His comment was rather long (go here to read the whole thing), but I’ll excerpt a bit:
I’ve always been of the opinion that [“My Fair Lady”] sucks. BIG time.
a) It’s just horribly miscast. Hepburn as Eliza? Who the eph can possibly look at her and NOT see the beauty therein? It’s preposterous. And Harrison, well, Harrison played Higgins as a cold, emotionless fish…
(b) To take [playwright Shaw’s] words [in “Pygmalion”] and intersperse them with music and such is to destroy the inherent cadences and rhythms he set up. Just as there are some films which ought not to be colorized…as the directors were talented enough to USE the interplay of light and shadow that B&W gave a picture, so, too, is the notion of taking Shaw’s work and making a musical out of it.
In general, the hierarchy of preference in my mind goes like this, with only a few exceptions: books over movies, and stage productions over films. But straight plays over musical versions of the same thing, even when Shaw is the playwright? I’m divided on that because I see the genres as so different that each stands alone as a complete and satisfying work of art.
But not the movie of the musical “My Fair Lady.” I’m with IGotBupkis on that one. In fact, I’m hard-pressed to think of a film musical that holds a candle to its stage musical version (many of which I had the good fortune to see in the originals). In fact, most movie musicals are barely watchable to me, faint echoes of their glorious stage selves.
That’s true for MFL, too. Audrey Hepburn is too fragile and lovely to begin with, too much of a lady with a bit of dirt smeared charmingly on her face. And Harrison is a much colder and gruffer Higgins, far more repellent than Leslie Howard in the film (not to mention the huge age difference between Hepburn and Harrison, which goes further to unbalance the film), although I still think his performance works on a comic level if not a deeper one.
But the musical itself is a great one. I saw it as a small child, with Julie Andrews and Rex Harrison, and it was a delightful masterpiece. I saw it later in various excellent revivals, and it was different but always wonderful. Shaw’s dialogue comes shining through in all its wit and humor, and since it is a rather light theme the music fits right in, at least to me. What’s more, many of the lyrics were inspired by Shaw’s words in the play.
But movie musicals, as opposed to musicals on the stage, require a suspension of reality that just doesn’t work for me. With a proscenium arch, a curtain, and all the conventions of the theater which let the reader know we’re in another and different—and more magical—world, the fact that the characters break into song periodically is only minimally jarring. On the screen, there’s a different expectation, and although I’m not exactly sure why, it seems far more absurd that people are singing and dancing when they should be going about their ordinary business.
And then there’s the fact—as commenter “Susanamantha” points out—that Hepburn is lip-syncing in MFL. Why, oh why oh why, cast an actor or actress in a musical who can’t cut the mustard as a singer? Surely there are enough available who can. The dubbing adds an extra layer of artificiality to a situation already overburdened with it, and not in a good way.
Movie lip-syncing (which I wrote about before, here) used to be a lot more popular than it is today. Commonly, the actors and actresses involved (and this includes Audrey Hepburn in”MFL”) did sing while the film was being made, and then they were dubbed afterward, sometimes without their prior knowledge. In MFL, Hepburn was led to believe her vocals would be used in the movie, and she was singing every note for all she was worth. The directors used a technique whereby for most songs the entire thing was dubbed, but for others they inserted another singer only for the high parts, which gives those songs an odd effect as the voice shifts back and forth between Hepburn’s real voice and the dubber, Marnie Nixon.
Here is Hepburn singing “Wouldn’t It Be Loverly” herself (not very good, IMHO; I can see why she was dubbed):
And here’s the way it appeared in the movie (Marnie Nixon all the way):
And here’s a mixed song, as it appeared in the movie, with Hepburn doing the majority of the vocals and Nixon coming in for the higher notes (for example, you can hear Marni begin at around 1:20):
Here’s what Hepburn herself had to say about the process:
Although Hepburn had lip synced to her recorded tracks during filming, Nixon looped her vocals in post-production and was given multiple attempts to match Hepburn’s lip movements precisely. Overall, about 90% of her singing was dubbed despite being promised that most of her vocals would be used. Hepburn’s voice remains in one line in “I Could Have Danced All Night”, in the first verse of “Just You Wait”, and in the entirety of its reprise in addition to sing-talking in parts of “The Rain in Spain” in the finished film. When asked about the dubbing of an actress with such distinctive vocal tones, Hepburn frowned and said, “You could tell, couldn’t you? And there was Rex, recording all his songs as he acted … next time ””” She bit her lip to prevent her saying more. She later admitted that she would have never have accepted the role knowing that Warner intended to have nearly all of her singing dubbed.
Hepburn was an actress with exquisite taste, and she shows it there. But it was also true that her singing just wasn’t up to the demands of the role, and her charms were also unsuited to portraying the untutored Eliza of the beginning of the film.
But I love Audrey; there was nobody even remotely like her. And here she is, doing a better job of singing a song more suited to her skills:
Hmmmm…I agree about Audrey Hepburn. For me, she is the perfect example of a woman who had class in everything she did and down to every cell in her body.
I also agree that stage productions of musicals are usually far better than movie versions. However, one exception for me is “The Sound of Music”. I really liked (and still like) that movie.
You really have some high standards there, Neo. I think Audry Hepburn sounds fine in “Wouldn’t It Be Loverly?” More “real,” in fact, than Marnie Nixon. I agree, though, that Hepburn was miscast–shoulda been Julie Andrews. Julie did get her revenge with “Mary Poppins.”
“Mary Poppins” brings up another point. I think a distinction should be made between filmed Broadway musicals and musicals developed for the screen. In my opinion “Singin’ in the Rain” is one of the best musicals ever produced. On the screen–I’ll pass on the Broadway adaptation. “Singin’ in the Rain” was meant to be seen with popcorn in a darkened movie theater.
My couple of pennies.
Dame Hiller was at her best in the little-known movie “I know Where I’m Going.” If you want a quirky, intelligent and thoroughly delightful move, look for it.
We have a boxed CD set of Astaire & Rogers that never gets old. And what about Singing in the Rain? Its a classic movie.
http://tinyurl.com/32759wh
Yes, I was speaking only of stage musicals vs. the filmed version of a stage musical.
Or what about An American in Paris? In her prime Leslie Caron was the very definition of souhaitable.
Don’t you think that Audrey Hepburn must have had a dialect coach to teach her to speak with a Cockney accent? Someone should make a movie (or perhaps a musical) about this process, and about the relationship between the two protagonists.
When my son was 6, he watched MFL so many times that he could sing each and every song, complete with accent. I would hear him in the shower singing, “Just you wait Henry Higgins.” I took him to see it live in Pittsburgh that fall. There he was in his little 3-piece suit, walking against the tide of the crowd headed across the bridge for the Steelers game. As a single mom, I had a moment of supreme self doubt that I was doing right by him. He’s now 11, and an athlete, and no longer interested in things like that. We’re both glad we did it, even if his favorite part was dinner afterwards.
Agree with Neo in the previous thread – Hepburn might have been miscast but Holloway was class, and could probably have played that role in his sleep. My father (a genuine Cockney) just loved him to bits, so I got a load of his stuff played around me when I was young. Cockney is one of those accents that sound just dreadful if you don’t nail it perfectly and I guess dialogue coaches weren’t around in those days (like “community organisers”, heh!)
Does seem slightly strange to see Jeremy Brett turn up a callow suitor, given his later TV fame as an uber-cool Sherlock Holmes too.
LisaM says, “I would hear him in the shower singing, “Just you wait Henry Higgins.” I took him to see it live in Pittsburgh that fall. There he was in his little 3-piece suit, walking against the tide of the crowd headed across the bridge for the Steelers game. As a single mom, I had a moment of supreme self doubt that I was doing right by him. He’s now 11, and an athlete, and no longer interested in things like that.”
Many years ago my first martial art master (Japanese) lectured me on what it meant to be a warrior. First and foremost a warrior must protect the innocent. In order to do so his knowledge has to extend far beyond martial skill and include appreciation of poetry, flower arranging, holding a baby with calm assurance, and appreciation of nature. I never mastered flower arranging but I understand the essence of his lecture. A man is soft and gentle on the outside and steel on the inside.
You have provided your son with a good tool box for manhood.
Thank you, Parker.
LTEC: Wendy Hiller was a sort of real-life Eliza, although she didn’t start out as Cockney or poor. But get a load of this:
Replacing Andrews with Hepburn was certainly a sin but Hollywood just can’t help itself. My childhood friend’s uncle, a Russian Jew named Will Kuluva, was always picked to play the Mexican grandee hacienda owner. When Bruce Lee brought the idea for Kung Fu to the studio it cast David Carradine in the lead and shaved his eyebrows. When they made a PSA about how much our littering was disturbing people who loved the land the guy picked to play the land-loving Indian was an Italian from Louisiana, and when they wanted someone to play a lady-killing stud they picked Rock Hudson.
Far from America one can enjoy musicals only in their movie version. MFL is a wonderful, exquisite piece of art where “suspension of reality” is quite welcome. By the way, Wise’s West Side Story is simply perfect. Of course, I never saw it on stage…
I’m with CharleySays as far as Hepburn’s version of “Loverly.” She may not look cockney or lower class but her version sounds rougher and more appropriate to the part. Of course, H’wood is only making a fantasy of a cockney girl, so Audrey Hepburn, dubbed, is what we get.
I see that Mary Poppins and My Fair Lady both came out in 1964. Was Julie Andrews busy working on the former and couldn’t also do the latter, or did she just get incredibly lucky to have another excellent vehicle available after her Eliza role was “stolen”?
Btw, I’m in total agreement with just about anything nice anyone wants to say about Hepburn. I’ve been a little in love with her ever since I saw Breakfast at Tiffany’s when I was a kid.
Audrey Hepburn did have a dialect coach, whose name was not given in the credits. Why not? Well it could have been shocking for some…. He was a young Cantonese man from Hong Kong,a gifted phonetician and teacher, Tony Hung. I knew him when we were colleagues in Singapore, but he’s back in Hong Kong now (and not so young!).