sign in sign up
<<
Home , Alan Bennett, Hugh Hudson, John Gielgud

here is a scene in to play it well over fi ve hundred was as legendary as his proclivity ) times. It exists on disc so that one for verbal gaffes – and he remem- (, can hear the mastery of the verse, bers turning down the Hollywood 1981) in which with Gielgud giving the meaning offer to play to Norma Lindsay Ander- and the poetry both full weight. Shearer’s . After a couple of sonT and stand at He couldn’t play some roles, false starts in the ‘20s, he starred in an upper-storey window of their notably that of , which ’s affectionate version Oxford college making supercili- calls for a physicality that was of (1933) ous comments on athletes engaged simply not part of his equipment. and Hitchcock’s The Secret Agent in a ritual race around the quad- Indeed, after his fi rst appearance (1935), on the latter of which he rangle below. It is a good moment as Romeo, critic Ivor Brown remembers ’s habit of to fi x John Gielgud in the mind described him as having ‘the most disappearing to the studio roof to now that, at well over ninety-six, meaningless legs imaginable’. But indulge his morphine habit. he has died. He was for many he did establish himself, as the But he is not really very inter- people pre-eminently a man of critic Kenneth Tynan once wrote, esting in these fi lms. As a leading the theatre; not just an actor who as the best living actor ‘from the man, he is too stiff, lacking the had been around for a long time, neck up’. His kind of Shakespear- romantic charisma of his contem- but one who had hurdled the ean delivery went out of fashion porary Ivor Novello, also fl irting obstacles raised by the hungry to some extent, and his co-rival, with the cinema at this time. Apart generations which had trodden , provided a more from playing Disraeli in Thorold down lesser colleagues. And he vigorous reading, but no one Dickinson’s The Prime Minister

‒ always credited style of performance can ever be (1941), a stylish and sometimes with taking him into the modern other than a major chapter in an touching performance, he made theatre of the latter half of the ongoing story. no more feature fi lms until 1953 twentieth century. It is also good He was slower than Olivier to when he went to Hollywood to remember that, glorious as his embrace the new drama ushered to steal the notices in Joseph theatrical history was, he was also, in by Look Back in Anger (Tony Manckiewicz’ , in his last decades, a consummate Richardson, 1958), but when he with Brando as Antony. He has film actor as well. Most of the did, it was with tremendous éclat. no problem in adjusting to the obituaries – and it was interesting He marked time for a few years, camera’s intimacy here – and to see how widely his death was in the late ‘50s and early ‘60s, he never would again. In 1955, reported in Australia where he polishing his Ages of Man, a he was an affecting Clarence in must be known chiefl y from fi lm one-man recital which drew on Olivier’s knight-studded Richard – concentrated on the theatrical Shakespearean characters, and III, and his career as a screen achievements and tacked on a bit which he toured extensively. He character actor had begun to about the Oscar for Arthur (Steve then appeared in plays by Edward gather the momentum that would Gordon, 1981) as a coda. Albee, and David carry him through until his death. To call him the actor of the Storey. It was the latter’s Home He hinted darkly at the incestuous century is not to designate him its (1970), directed by Anderson and undertones in the choleric Edward greatest, though no doubt a case co-starring , Moulton-Barrett’s devotion to his for this could be mounted, but which showed conclusively his sickly daughter in The Barretts of rather to indicate that he, more mastery of the modern idiom, and Wimpole Street (Sidney Franklin, perhaps than any other, has accom- which was fi lmed for American 1956), though he told me, ‘I didn’t modated to its shifts. On stage TV in 1971. think I could touch Laughton from 1921 after training at the So, what about fi lms? When [in the 1934 version directed by Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, I interviewed him in 1994, just Sidney Frnklin] as old Barrett’. he was well established in the seventy years after his fi lm debut, He could, and did. theatre by 1930, embrac- he recalled that he, along with It was in the 1960s that his ing with equal facility classic roles most of his theatre colleagues, screen career took off in earnest and modern leads, twice succeed- ‘rather looked down on fi lms in – and with no abatement of thea- ing his friend Noel Coward in those days, the 1920s. Although it tre commitments or television popular hits: Coward’s own The was better paid than the theatre, appearances. The riches of the last Vortex (1925) and The Constant people thought of it as a sideline’. several decades demand selectivity Nymph (1926). He joined the Old Given the state of British cinema here in the interests of space. Vic company in 1929 and played at the time, this was probably There is some obvious junk: think a string of major Shakespearean an understandable attitude. He of Lost Horizon (Charles Jarrott, roles, and his was defi ni- remembered his early fi lms quite 1973), Caligula (Tinto Brass,

Brian McFarlane tive for his generation. He went on vividly – the clarity of his memory 1980), Appointment With Death Sir John Gielgud ( Gielgud Sir John

108 • Metro Magazine No. 124/125 Actor of the Century Americans in their place – that is likely to be awarded an Oscar, when the real greatness of, say,

Prospero’s Books ’s his Henry IV wouldn’t come within a bull’s roar of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. For the record, he also ran theatre companies and directed

Sir John Gielgud in opera, as well as numerous plays, famously demanding the Covent Garden Orchestra stop ‘that dread- ful noise’ while he went forward to sort out a staging problem. He recorded a great deal of poetry; he wrote several volumes of chatty autobiography (Early Stages, 1939; Stage Directions, 1963; An Actor Remembers, 1977; Acting Shakespeare, 1991); and he did some highly enjoyable televi- sion, following his debut in the medium in 1959 in N.C. Hunter’s , and including (Michael Winner, 1988), and remembering painful family mat- (1981) and you marvel at what actors, even ters while he sits on the loo with the star-laden Time After Time great and famous ones, will do his trousers round his ankles. In (1986). to keep working. But there are the same year, in Portrait of the He was heaped with honours also performances which it is Artist As A Young Man (Joseph for his work in all the acting hard to believe are less than equal Strick), he appeared as a thin- media: inter alia, he was knighted to anything he achieved in the lipped but hellfire-breathing in the Birthday Honours in 1953, theatre. His Henry IV, in Orson priest. For this role he memorised received honorary doctorates Welles’ sublime Chimes at Mid- pages and pages of James Joyce’s from prestigious universities, and night (1966), chilled with age, sermon, only to find it cut to was made Chevalier of the Légion illness and disappointment, weary a little over five minutes. But d’Honneur. The list is awesome. of strife and wary of trusting what a fi ve! Who would not take He may well have missed out his son’s ‘repentance’, is one of advantage of such a voice to lift a on a peerage, surely more than the screen’s great Shakespearean decent if unremarkable fi lm into deserved, as a result of an early performances. So, too, a quarter momentary brilliance? In Fred brush with the authorities of a century later, is his wise, Schepisi’s (1985) he is a when he was accused of soliciting. suspicious, witty and ultimately svelte diplomat who startles a It says much for the esteem with compassionate Prospero, in Peter polite gathering by uttering the which he was regarded by the Greenaway’s dazzling reworking word ‘fuck’ with no little aplomb. theatre- and film-going public of as Prospero’s He is a touchingly zealous envi- that this was not held against Books (1991). Eighty-seven at the ronmentalist in Alan Bridges’ him, even if it did forfeit him the time, Gielgud not only allowed underrated The Shooting Party highest accolade. himself to appear naked but actu- (1984). At ninety-two, his Mr Just before he died, he was ally spoke all the verse, Greena- Touchett is one of the truest notes very annoyed at not being asked way’s strategy for rendering Pros- struck in Jane Campion’s The to be in a TV production of pero’s wish to control the entire Portrait Of A Lady (1996), and he David Copperfi eld (1999): ‘There scene. Gielgud had played Pros- has a few luminous moments as were plenty of roles I could have pero four times on the stage, but David Helfgott’s mentor in Shine played’, he said peevishly, and did not allow this to interfere with (Scott Hicks, 1996). added, ‘I changed my agent as a doing what Greenaway wanted of And, yes, he is funny as Dudley result’. A man who changes his him, fi nding the director ‘extraor- Moore’s manservant in Arthur, agent at ninety-six, when he’s still dinarily generous and helpful’. uttering snooty putdowns in in the running for parts, can lay Away from Shakespeare, there response to Moore’s irresponsible some claim to being ‘the actor of are things to treasure. There is the idiocies. But it is the sort of easy the Century’, and not just because dying writer in ’ ‘turn’ – Brit with beautiful vowels he outlived most of his peers. ! Providence (1977), acidulous, and superior mien keeping crude

Metro Magazine No. 124/125 • 109