Frank Sinatra holding court between scenes on the set of 20th Century-Fox's very curious "Can-Can"No one would ever mistake Fox's loopy, misguided 1960 version of Cole Porter's "Can-Can" for a good movie, but it is not totally without its charms (most notably, Porter's score, or what's left with it) - or without a certain morbid curiosity. Namely, how did it end up so bad?
That's the first of several questions which have made this film unintentionally fascinating for five decades now. Of course, the most pressing questions connected with the film are (1) why was "I Love Paris," the pick of Porter's scored, scuttled at seemingly the 11th hour, and (2) who exactly made this dubious decision? The foolish excision of "I Love Paris" - and the apparent disappearance of the footage - pretty much defines "Can-Can's" sad, wavering road to the screen.
The play opened in 1953 with Lilo in the lead as La Môme Pistache; Fox's Darryl Zanuck purchased the film rights in August of 1954, with the intention of making it with French star Jeanmarie and Gwen Verdon (who appeared as Claudine in the Broadway production). Zanuck hired Nunnally Johnson to adapt Abe Burrows' wonderful stage book and direct.
Johnson's script, dated August 27, 1955 and available from Script City, is highly faithful to the Broadway production, retaining all of Porter's score.
When Johnson dropped out, the film languished at Fox, with both Claude Binyon and Henry Ephron taking turns dickering with the script, and with Dick Powell and Vincente Minnelli, among others, as potential directors who came and went. Then on April 22, 1958, Fox issued a press release, announcing that "Can-Can" was being put into production as a vehicle for Marilyn Monroe (her first film for the studio since 1956's "Bus Stop"), with Cary Grant and Maurice Chevalier named as possible co-stars.
This incarnation of "Can-Can" got only that far - as a press release sent to entertainment editors. The film was never made.
Enter Frank Sinatra, who acted in the film under a contractual obligation required by 20th Century Fox after walking off the set of Rodgers and Hammerstein's "Carousel" in 1954. Sinatra was apparently hesitant, not being exactly a good fit for the property, but Fox prevailed and lured him into the picture by having Charles Lederer (who nimbly adapted "The Front Page" into "His Girl Friday" for director Howard Hawks) create a new character for Frank to play - a lawyer/scamp named François Durnais - and by (1) paying him $200,000, along with a percentage of the film's profits and (2) making the actor a partner in the production.
His Suffolk Productions would oversee the film in tandem with Jack Cummings Productions. Sinatra took the hands-on approach, bringing in Dorothy Kingsley, who had tailored "Pal Joey" for him, to completely revamp the stage script. Kingsley not only cut most of the songs but also altered who would sing them. Songs that were sung by females on stage, were given to male characters in the film, and vice versa.
Sinatra also exhibited bad judgment by recruiting a seriously miscast Shirley MacLaine, his co-star in Minnelli's "Some Came Running," to play the female lead - renamed Simone Pistache for the film. So far, so ... bad.
Shirley is a trained dancer but is not exactly - how shall I put this? - light on her feet. Reviewing the film, New York Times movie critic Bosley Crowther, who genuinely disliked her in the film, diplomatically called her shrill performance "undignified" and remarked about her being "heavy-footed, groping and galluping" throughout the film's Garden of Eden ballet.
Anyway, her addition to the production meant the untimely departure of the second female lead, Barrie Chase, who was hired to play Claudine. Chase, who had a bit in Sinatra's "Pal Joey" (she was one of two ballerinas who helped undress Kim Novak during her strip routine), was a protégé of the film's choreographer, Hermès Pan.
Chase was Fred Astaire's dancing partner on his wonderful '50s TV specials which were choreographed by Pan.
Chase bolted the production when Sinatra handed most of her dance numbers over to MacLaine (La Môme/Simone was not a dancing role on stage), a detail confirmed both in the film's DVD liner notes and by Shirley MacLaine herself in a piece carrying her byline in Newsweek's special Sinatra Memorial tribute issue (28 May, 1998).
Speaking directly to Sinatra in the piece, she wrote: "You strong-armed Twentieth Century-Fox to make 'Can-Can' because you thought I should do a musical. And you had them combine the two female leads into a single character so people could see more of what I could do."
Most of this statement is untrue: Sinatra didn't strongarm Fox; it was the other way around. Also, the character of Claudine was watered-down but still very much exists in the film. It was eventually recast with Juliet Prowse, who replaced Chase - who made a wise decision in retrospect.
Pan's choreography is the film's most envaulable feature, hands-down. This was an especially productive time for Pan. In the space of about 15 years, he choreographed such high-profile film musicals as "Kiss Me, Kate," "Silk Stockings," "Pal Joey," "Porgy and Bess," "Flower Drum Song," "My Fair Lady," "Finian's Rainbow," "Lost Horizon," "Darling Lili" and, uncredited, the "Midas Touch" number from "Bells Are Ringing."
But wait!
I should stop here and confess that, for me, Sinatra always exhibited exquisite good taste, particularly musically. I'm a fan. But in the case of "Can-Can," both his decisions and motivation were fuzzy at best. One questionable decision was bringing on board his house orchestrator Nelson Riddle to arrange the musical numbers; Somehow, Sinatra and Riddle managed to insert the anachronistic "ring-a-ding-ding-ding" into the lyric of Porter's "C'est Magnifique." Which brings us to "I Love Paris"...
Reviewed prior to its release by Variety on Friday, 1 January, 1960, "Can-Can" ran 134 minutes - a scant running time for a roadshow musical, not including either the film's Overture or its Entr'acte - but it did include the song, "I Love Paris," as a duet which offered the iconic pairing Sinatra and Chevalier (a holdover from the film's original conception).
By the time the film opened in New York on 9 March, 1960, its running time was reduced to 131 minutes. (An apt Howard Thompson wrote the New York Times capsule that the film seemed "more like Hoboken than Paris.")
Those missing three minutes contained the "I Love Paris" number.
The song is heard fleetingly over the main credits, but the sequence in which it was sung by Sinatra and Chevalier was dropped immediately prior to the film's release without any explanation. Why?
The length of the film shouldn't have been a problem. It's a relatively short movie. But that seems to be the reason, as irrational as that seems.
The only known still in existence of Frank Sinatra and Maurice Chevalier in the excised "I Love Paris" number from "Can-Can"Greg M. Pasqua writes on Amazon.com: "It was sung in the club just before the engagement party scene on the boat in Act Two. It was sung as a performed song with Sinatra singing from the stage. Fox determined it slowed the film down, so they cut it before the film was released. You can spot the change in continuity where the song would have occurred."
Prior to the film's New York opening, the magazine section of The New York Times published an advancer on "Can-Can" in its 21 February, 1960 edition, which included the above still from the number.
Given the importance of both the song to the show and Sinatra to the production, is it unfair to conclude that Frank had something to do with the song's deletion? Exacerbating matters is the implication that the footage, which has been missing since 1960, no longer exists.
The duet, of course, can be heard on the Capitol soundtrack album (and there's a slightly longer track of it on the "Frank Sinatra in Hollywood" CD set). Ah, yes, that whacky soundtrack album...
For some bizarre reason, the songs are not listed in chronological order on the soundtrack but, for lack of a better expression, are scrambled, with the Entr'acte listed as the first track (!)
Back on Amazon.com, Mark Andrew Lawrence took the trouble to put the songs in their proper order, so that as Lawrence puts it, "the program flows beautifully from one track to the next." Below is his rearrangement to parallel the order in which each song is performed in the film (the paranthetical numbers indicate how they actually appear on the Capitol soundtrack); the Overture, the fade-out "I Love Paris" choral and exit music (as well as the music for the "Apache" dance and the "Garden of Eden" ballet), incidentally, were never included on the soundtrack.
The whole thing has the aroma of satogage. But why?
1. Main Title/"I Love Paris"/"Montmart" (#7)
2. "Maidens Typical of France" (#9)
3. "C'est Magnifique" (#8)
4. "Live and Let Live" (#4)
5. "You Do Something to Me" (#5)
6. "Let's Do It" (#6)
7. "It's All Right with Me" (#2)
8. Entr'acte (#1)
9. "I Love Paris" (#11)
10. "Come Along with Me" (#3)
11. "Just One of Those Things" (#10)
12. "Can-Can" (#12)
One observation/correction: I took the liberty of adjusting Lawrence's listing of songs because it has Sinatra's "It's All Right with Me" coming after the Entr'acte, when in actuality, it leads directly into the intermission. Also, if what Pasqua says about the placement of "I Love Paris" in the film is accurate, it opened the second act of the film, coming before both MacLaine's comic "Come Along with Me" routine and the arty "Garden of Eden" ballet that was staged at the Bal De Paradis' Four Arts Ball.
Speaking of Porter's songs, for the movie version, the makers seriously tampered with the score, adding "Let's Do It," "Just One of Those Things" and "You Do Something to Me," from other Cole Porter shows.
Eliminated were seven titles, including "Never Give Anything Away," "I Am in Love," "If You Loved Me Truly," "Never, Never Be an Artist," the lyric to "Can-Can" and the most regrettable, the haunting "Allez-Vous-En," although its melody is used behind the film's apache dance routine.
Oh, yes, and at the risk of repeating myself, "I Love Paris" was deleted.
Did you know that?
Note in Passing: At the outset here, I mention that the film is not without its charms, chief of which is the obvious fun that Sinatra and MacLaine are having. If only that fun were contagious. But more to the point, there's Tom Keogh's superb titles design - ome of the movie's most laudable feature. Done in dazzling primary colors and with a deep bow to Henri Marie Raymond de Toulouse-Lutrec, Keogh's titles promise a great film that never really follows. All of this only makes one wish that "Can-Can" was a better movie, truly worthy of the treatment that Fox lavished on it.
13 comments:
FASCINATING! I never knew most of this about "Can-Can".
I saw the film for the first time last year and really was excited for it! The cast was so talented, and there was Cole Porter (my most favorite composer)!
But, sadly, besides a few good parts, it was quite underwhelming (to say the least)!
It actually took me three nights to get through because I kept falling asleep watching it!
It really was just disappointing. I adore Frank and Cole Porter! It's just a pity the film turned out like it did!
Anyway, really interesting post!
Your comments are better than the movie! I always thought it sucked.
Bad film, yes. But I still love it. I guess that indeed makes it a guilty pleasure.
I've just finished watching the DVD release of "Can-Can" and was so disappointed that I got onto Google to see if anyone else felt the same way. Your comments touched on every one of my issues - especially the missing "I Love Paris". I'd also like to know whether or not the unedited version of "Just One of Those Things" is in a warehouse somewhere. In addition, it has always seemed a shame to me that, at the end, the Can-Can dance does not start from the beginning. It seems we've been waiting for two hours for this moment to arrive and when it does we join it "in progress". This has always looked like a cut to me. The print is gorgeous, the orchestrations are magnificent, the sound is beautiful, the color (especially in the credits) is stunning - it's a movie you just really want to love but can't. And does anyone know if Fox is going to fix the problem of the last 10 seconds missing from the Entr'acte? Also - regarding a 131 minute movie needing an intermission - I'll bet the running time was more like 150 minutes before the cuts ("I Love Paris", "Just One of Those Things", etc.) were made.
Another interesting note: at 149:35 on the isolated score track there is a section of music lasting about two minutes prior to beginning of the "Bal des Quat'z' Arts" sequence of the film. It's almost as though this music accompanied scenes (perhaps at the ball) that occurred prior to the start of the ball scenes in the edited film.
Thanks for the terrific comments. I'll have to check out that isolated score. I'd love to know who made the decision to keep the film short - especially the decision to cut the show's most-well-known song, "I Love Paris." Makes no sense. On the one hand, I can't imagine Sinatra putting up with that, but then he had the power to approve it.
As for the film being longer, perhaps it was. Perhaps it was truly awful in longer form. I mean, this is a film that I've always wanted to like. But I have to admit, aside from the songs, it's pretty bad. The unfortunate thing is that, if it was longer, that footage is probably long gone. Unlike Disney and MGM, Fox saved nothing in those days
You never know - some pretty amazing out-takes surface from time to time. Have you ever seen the "Hidden Hollywood 1" and "Hidden Hollywood 2" dvds? Fox didn't throw everything away. As far as Sinatra approving the cuts - nobody can argue about Sinatra in the recording studio. He was the king - and he had an unmatched ability to assemble the best talent for the purpose of producing unforgettable material. As the leader of a film project, however, he was really not as good. His best film work was done when he was under the control of someone else. When he was in charge, it was just for fun - or to do favors for friends. I think "Can-Can" was the start of this - and it's a pity because with all of the talent assembled for this film, they completely failed to preserve the Broadway show or produce a classic. Sure, they could attempt to do it today - but the talent (Riddle, Lang, Chaplin, Cummings, Kingsley, Lederer, Tucker, Pan, Sharaff, Daniels, Wheeler) and the technology (Todd-AO 70mm, true stereo recording, true color photography) - not to mention the idea of showmanship and the reserved seat engagement are history now. I was really looking forward to the isolated score track on this release because I thought that I would finally be able to create a decent "Can-Can" soundtrack album. The Capitol release HORRIBLY sequenced and doesn't include a lot of the score. I was disappointed to find that the music tracks don't include the chorus. I was really hoping to be able to get the finale - which is a gorgeous arrangement - from this track. Oh well - maybe another day.
Andrew. You are so right about the soundtrack album. For a major film - one starring the singer of the generation - the soundtrack for "Can-Can" seems to have been put together in a really slipshod fashion, as if no one cared. Perhaps they knew they had a major turkey on their hands. That would explain the truncated running time and the sloppy soundtrack album. Fox initially thought it would have a major hit on its hand and, on that basis, was able to command big demands of the exhibitors who played the film. I believe it locked its Hollywood run in for a year. To the best of my knowledge, the film never ran that long. It was D.O.A. Too bad. A missed opportunity, plus a waste of great material and, as you say, talent.
BTW, the interviews on the 2007 DVD are mostly with historians and a few specialty dancers in the film. Shirley MacLaine is conspicuously by her absence. No one bothers to even mention the name of the film's director - Walter Lang (who also directed the film version of "The King and I") - and one of the historians here even goes so far to say that "Can-Can" was well-received by the press. Not so. It certainly wasn't well-reviewed by the major press.
I like Sinatra but he was known to hold a grudge. Maybe he resented being finessed into doing the film. Or it all could be hooey - the problem being that the film wasn't meant to be.
You mention that "Can-Can" runs 130 intermission, without its overture or exit music. What's its running time with those two additions?
The added musical elements brings its running time to 142 minutes.
I can't imagine the studio cutting a song of the stature of "I Love Paris" without running it by Sinatra first.
I can't believe that the makers of this awful film thought that "I Love Paris" was ruining it! By the way, no one interviewed on the DVD bonus disc bothers to mention the name of the film's director - no one.
Post a Comment