![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I think my heart had drowned
Just about eight weeks ago, Martin Jarvis crashed through the windshield of my interest with a beautiful guest turn on Mr. Palfrey of Westminster (1984–85), after which in the finest traditions of character actors everywhere he turned out to have been in view all along; with his wife Rosalind Ayres, he is one of the mainstays of L.A. Theatre Works whose radio plays my father has been pressing on me for more than a decade and finally this weekend just digitally threw in my direction in the form of a drive with an assorted ton of productions on it. One of them was a live recording from 2012 of Terence Rattigan's The Browning Version starring Martin Jarvis as Andrew Crocker-Harris. This afternoon while trapped under a cat on the couch, I obviously listened to it.
Allowing for the normal emendations for radio, the text is the original one-act play from 1948 rather than its expansion into the 1951 film which was my introduction to the story and until now my only point of comparison beyond the page as well as one of my favorite movies which I have never managed to write more about, meaning it's been in my head so lastingly and so long that the greater or lesser differences in interpretation kept flicking out at me as I listened to LATW, which was delightful. It might have been useful to annotate more of them, but there was one that caught me so effectively that it could stand for an entire compare-and-contrast. It's one of the script's most piercing moments, Andrew's bitter denial of the value of the gift from one of his pupils at end of term which had reduced him to scalding, hopeless tears only a few moments and a crucial interruption before:
"Exactly. It will mean a perpetual reminder to myself of the story with which Taplow is at this very moment regaling his friends in the House. 'I gave the Crock a book to buy him off, and he blubbed. The Crock blubbed. I tell you I was there. I saw it. The Crock blubbed.' My mimicry is not as good as his, I fear. Forgive me."
Redgrave delivers his version of this passage—the film uses the more closely alliterative "cried" instead of the more demeaning, schoolboyish "blubbed"—with a kind of deliberate, ironic amazement, as if burlesquing his own shock at his emotional response through the fantasy of an even more nonplussed Taplow. Especially in his high-wire reed of a voice, it sounds almost successfully dismissive, but the precision with which he enunciates the words gives their pain away: he is reasserting the mask of his own caricature into which he let himself fossilize over the eighteen years of his failure as a schoolmaster, emphasizing himself as the dead man whom nothing can hurt, to talk so blandly of his own humiliation; it convinces neither the audience, his interlocutor, nor himself, but it's a valiant try.
As rendered by Jarvis, this flight of ruined fancy is remarkable for its venom—a nasty, sneering, jeering little impersonation, far more contemptuous of himself than Taplow ever sounded in the moment of fatal levity when his imitation of the desiccated classics master whom he had actually admitted to liking offered a suburban Clytaemnestra the weapon with which to stab her Agamemnon to the soul. His voice in its accustomed cadences is so dry and resigned, the animation as much as the malice sticks out like a snapped bone, a kind of scrawled rage of mimicry that isn't even close to an impression of his pupil, but then it really isn't meant to be; it's Andrew's own self-lashing shame, his anger at himself for falling for the cheap trick of being vulnerable and human and still capable of crediting that one boy at the school might not regard him with fear and derision as "the Himmler of the Lower Fifth." It's almost as unguarded as his tears, though he catches himself faster this time. There's even something juvenile about it, as if he were a cruelly pranked new boy instead of a master on the verge of retirement who claims to have accepted his inadequacies long ago, but then he was young when he came to his post, straight off his three prizes at Oxford and the joy of composing his own translation in verse of the Agamemnon, and perhaps it's that sensitive, academically passionate, socially gauche Andrew Crocker-Harris who has uttered such an audacious speech, not so far beneath the calcified appearance as would make the total mess of his life easier to bear. Whoever's acting it, the entire play is about peeling back the husks of accumulated time to uncover a living tragedy, but I love how differently it can be done.
Curiously, it never occurred with Redgrave's, but when Jarvis' Andrew cold-shouldered a colleague's sincere effort at reassurance with a clipped, almost interjected "I am not particularly concerned about Taplow's views of my character: or about yours either, if it comes to that," I thought suddenly of Harry Fordyce in Cash on Demand (1961), perpetually not in the least interested in other people's opinions, especially of himself, especially when he's acutely afraid they might be right, and then I couldn't believe I hadn't made the connection before. Peter Cushing even played Andrew Crocker-Harris for the BBC in 1955 and all I got was this rehearsal photo.
If this article is correct that Joanne Whalley was originally penciled in for this production, then I assume she would have reprised her part from this broadcast the previous year, directed by Jarvis for BBC Radio 4; Ian Ogilvy seems to have. Anyone who's heard that version, please give me an opinion of Michael York and/or a line on a recording. The reason I have never really written about The Browning Version, of course, is that it's important to me.
Allowing for the normal emendations for radio, the text is the original one-act play from 1948 rather than its expansion into the 1951 film which was my introduction to the story and until now my only point of comparison beyond the page as well as one of my favorite movies which I have never managed to write more about, meaning it's been in my head so lastingly and so long that the greater or lesser differences in interpretation kept flicking out at me as I listened to LATW, which was delightful. It might have been useful to annotate more of them, but there was one that caught me so effectively that it could stand for an entire compare-and-contrast. It's one of the script's most piercing moments, Andrew's bitter denial of the value of the gift from one of his pupils at end of term which had reduced him to scalding, hopeless tears only a few moments and a crucial interruption before:
"Exactly. It will mean a perpetual reminder to myself of the story with which Taplow is at this very moment regaling his friends in the House. 'I gave the Crock a book to buy him off, and he blubbed. The Crock blubbed. I tell you I was there. I saw it. The Crock blubbed.' My mimicry is not as good as his, I fear. Forgive me."
Redgrave delivers his version of this passage—the film uses the more closely alliterative "cried" instead of the more demeaning, schoolboyish "blubbed"—with a kind of deliberate, ironic amazement, as if burlesquing his own shock at his emotional response through the fantasy of an even more nonplussed Taplow. Especially in his high-wire reed of a voice, it sounds almost successfully dismissive, but the precision with which he enunciates the words gives their pain away: he is reasserting the mask of his own caricature into which he let himself fossilize over the eighteen years of his failure as a schoolmaster, emphasizing himself as the dead man whom nothing can hurt, to talk so blandly of his own humiliation; it convinces neither the audience, his interlocutor, nor himself, but it's a valiant try.
As rendered by Jarvis, this flight of ruined fancy is remarkable for its venom—a nasty, sneering, jeering little impersonation, far more contemptuous of himself than Taplow ever sounded in the moment of fatal levity when his imitation of the desiccated classics master whom he had actually admitted to liking offered a suburban Clytaemnestra the weapon with which to stab her Agamemnon to the soul. His voice in its accustomed cadences is so dry and resigned, the animation as much as the malice sticks out like a snapped bone, a kind of scrawled rage of mimicry that isn't even close to an impression of his pupil, but then it really isn't meant to be; it's Andrew's own self-lashing shame, his anger at himself for falling for the cheap trick of being vulnerable and human and still capable of crediting that one boy at the school might not regard him with fear and derision as "the Himmler of the Lower Fifth." It's almost as unguarded as his tears, though he catches himself faster this time. There's even something juvenile about it, as if he were a cruelly pranked new boy instead of a master on the verge of retirement who claims to have accepted his inadequacies long ago, but then he was young when he came to his post, straight off his three prizes at Oxford and the joy of composing his own translation in verse of the Agamemnon, and perhaps it's that sensitive, academically passionate, socially gauche Andrew Crocker-Harris who has uttered such an audacious speech, not so far beneath the calcified appearance as would make the total mess of his life easier to bear. Whoever's acting it, the entire play is about peeling back the husks of accumulated time to uncover a living tragedy, but I love how differently it can be done.
Curiously, it never occurred with Redgrave's, but when Jarvis' Andrew cold-shouldered a colleague's sincere effort at reassurance with a clipped, almost interjected "I am not particularly concerned about Taplow's views of my character: or about yours either, if it comes to that," I thought suddenly of Harry Fordyce in Cash on Demand (1961), perpetually not in the least interested in other people's opinions, especially of himself, especially when he's acutely afraid they might be right, and then I couldn't believe I hadn't made the connection before. Peter Cushing even played Andrew Crocker-Harris for the BBC in 1955 and all I got was this rehearsal photo.
If this article is correct that Joanne Whalley was originally penciled in for this production, then I assume she would have reprised her part from this broadcast the previous year, directed by Jarvis for BBC Radio 4; Ian Ogilvy seems to have. Anyone who's heard that version, please give me an opinion of Michael York and/or a line on a recording. The reason I have never really written about The Browning Version, of course, is that it's important to me.
no subject
And his complete loose end of a plot resolution, too! (Paul, are you just going to let your friend be hanged for a murder you should damn well be able to guess he committed under vampiric influence? You just reconsecrated a church in a rather ritually handwavy but enjoyably Stone Tape-ish fashion! Go break him out of jail or something already!) The fim wraps up so fast it suggests that someone dropped a scene or two in the cutting room even without Martin Jarvis, but otherwise I continued to think it was great. I am not sleeping enough to write about things, which is driving me nuts now that I am watching them again, but I kind of want to write about this one.
But whatever the reason, I doubt it was The Lady Vanishes related, as she and Michael Redgrave had already played a rather more negative relationship (and much more unfair to her character, too) in The Stars Look Down, which was made before that.
I've seen it! It came handily around on TCM when I was in a phase of Michael Redgrave. I wasn't thinking of The Lady Vanishes as the driving force in trying to pair them in The Browning Version, but I did assume most audiences would have thought of the earlier film. If anything at the time, I would imagine it was her history in the Gainsborough melodramas that made her a suitable frontrunner for a modern Clytaemnestra. The article I've seen with the announcement of her casting makes a Wicked Lady reference.
(I have seen the comedy-thriller written by Eric Ambler also referred to. It's called Highly Dangerous (1950), co-stars Dane Clark, and is an extremely slight Ruritanian adventure which I nonetheless found a lot of fun, not least because the heroine is an entomologist and despairs of ever finding a man who isn't squicked by bugs. It has a ludicrous premise and a great supporting cast.)
no subject
Aw, cool, I'm so glad! And, honestly, it would somehow feel apt for TtBoD to write about it with half a brain, but I can understand that might feel a lot less sensible/satisfactory on your part. <3
ETA: Now I can say that I think Alice with the shovel was just gloriously iconic and is my no#1 fave Hammer moment. I do enjoy what Hammer I've seen, but I would love it even more if more things like that happened.
The article I've seen with the announcement of her casting makes a Wicked Lady reference.
But, of course. XD
I have seen the comedy-thriller written by Eric Ambler also referred to. It's called Highly Dangerous (1950), co-stars Dane Clark, and is an extremely slight Ruritanian adventure which I nonetheless found a lot of fun,
I also enjoyed it! I think it was the last film on the ML boxset I ordered after seeing Justice and then The Lady Vanishes and realising that it was a necessity in my life suddenly.
no subject
It's much less satisfactory. I'll see what I can do, though.
ETA: Now I can say that I think Alice with the shovel was just gloriously iconic and is my no#1 fave Hammer moment. I do enjoy what Hammer I've seen, but I would love it even more if more things like that happened.
Alice with the shovel was unexpected and great and we thought wholly justified without any intervention from Dracula.
(Aside from Martin Jarvis, the other reason it would have been nice to have more screen time for Jeremy is the pattern of the three fathers being taken out by their children—we get the least idea of the preexisting relationship between Jeremy and his father, which is structurally peculiar since Secker is the last of the three and his death technically precipitates the final confrontation with Dracula, but it also happens so fast there's almost no time for it to register except as an accelerant of the plot; maybe if Jeremy had been demi-vampirized earlier, it wouldn't have felt so sudden and done with. It is probably futile for me to try to figure out the rules of vampirism in this film, but it does seem to have them and they're odd. Alice is enthralled without ever being bitten and Dracula's hold over her breaks when he loses interest in her and is foolish enough to tell her so. Lucy is bitten and fully turned and apparently capable of passing on some form of vampirism to Jeremy, enough to make him a conduit for Dracula's revenge, but not so much that we see him with fangs or any other alterations beyond the marks on his throat which his father touches in horror. I understand why you wrote him the Whumptober end that you did, but I'm genuinely not sure he would have died if hanged—since Lucy was already dead for real by the time of Dracula's destruction and Alice was never actually vampirized to begin with, we have no data in this version on what happens to any subsidiary vampires on the death of their master. I can't tell if it should be a factor that he was turned by Lucy rather than Dracula directly. I'm not sure he has a good outcome no matter what, but the film really does leave him in a weird position.)
I also enjoyed it!
Nice!
The radio theater hangover is what it is, but I really love that the heroine's nephew who listens to adventure serials has total faith in her as an international adventurer herself: "I mean, you're just as clever, aren't you?"
I think it was the last film on the ML boxset I ordered after seeing Justice and then The Lady Vanishes and realising that it was a necessity in my life suddenly.
Apologies if I have asked this before, but have you seen her in Bedelia (1946)? I've wanted to see it for years on general principles of women in noir as well as more specifically Lockwood and Ian Hunter, but it has never made itself available to me—it played once at the Film Forum in New York, but not at a time when I could afford to travel to see it.
no subject
This is what I was saying a few weeks ago! And my ficlet has him being unsure he can be hanged, as well, so I covered my bases, heh. (I do lean towards him being more at the Alice end of things, because even Lucy still had to be killed like a human by Dracula and she was by far the furthest gone, but honestly, what the rules are for it in this film is hard to fathom. I assume that, given what Dracula wants being revenge on the fathers and the lack of any transformation, means the human-enough-to-be-killed is therefore the most likely, because it's also the most vicious revenge as well, but we can't be certain. And neither can he... ;-p)
no subject
I remember, but I had no opinions of my own at the time! Now, like everyone else who watches this movie, it seems, I have opinions and even more questions.
I assume that, given what Dracula wants being revenge on the fathers and the lack of any transformation, means the human-enough-to-be-killed is therefore the most likely, because it's also the most vicious revenge as well, but we can't be certain.
I wasn't sure that Dracula cared even that much about the children. He kills Lucy because she's fulfilled her function and her need for his approval is annoying him, but he doesn't bother with trying to dispose of Alice, he just casts her off at a particularly inopportune moment. I doubt he gave a thought to Jeremy one way or the other after he'd dropped the knife.
(Your fic is very nicely, open-endedly bleak. Having exhorted Paul to break his friend out of jail, it appears my personal take on this discourse is that what he'd get is a Jeremy in more or less his right mind but still vampirized, meaning it would probably all in end in a staking—consented to, perhaps, but not, you know, a fun night out.)
[edit] Just to further confuse the issue, you were aware that in the Japanese cut of Taste the Blood of Dracula, Jeremy does develop fangs when bitten? (I can get like five pages out of that interview, but that was one!)
no subject
Ambiguously vamped Jeremy is an eternal conundrum!
it appears my personal take on this discourse is that what he'd get is a Jeremy in more or less his right mind but still vampirized, meaning it would probably all in end in a staking—consented to, perhaps, but not, you know, a fun night out.
Perfectly valid. As I said, back then, a honeymoon staking for Paul and Alice, what could be better? Dig up your not-so-hanged friend's body and finish him off properly!
Just to further confuse the issue, you were aware that in the Japanese cut of Taste the Blood of Dracula, Jeremy does develop fangs when bitten? (I can get like five pages out of that interview, but that was one!)
I had no idea! I was worried enough by John Carson touching his face (in case that meant to indicate he was cold, and therefore dead/fully vamped), so if I'd read that, I wouldn't have typed up the ficlet.
But that was interesting, even just part of it. I wondered the first time I'd saw it why they just threw away Martin Jarvis like that, given that he was still super famous off the Forsyte Saga at the time, and now I know. And Hammer really did go out of their way to vamp him. Ambiguously, unless you're in Japan. XD
no subject
I appreciated knowing that even Martin Jarvis wasn't sure what happened to him.
I was worried enough by John Carson touching his face (in case that meant to indicate he was cold, and therefore dead/fully vamped), so if I'd read that, I wouldn't have typed up the ficlet.
Then I'm just as glad you didn't read it. Besides, you didn't see the film in Japan. Your version is regionally legit.
(I was trying to find out whether the filmmakers had any opinion on the Jeremy discourse and the answer looks kind of like . . . emoji shrug?)
no subject
I liked reading through what bits of the interviews were visible, btw, so thanks for that. And Martin Jarvis, despite having only been in it less still knew what it was about more than the others seemed to, rather like David Collings with RoD. (He can be allowed to be a fave, that's twice now. XD)
ETA: Oh, I only skimmed backwards not forwards earlier for some reason, and missed bonus John Carson and even a little bit with Ralph Bates they fished out from somewhere else, and, lol, they said to him his performance overshadowed Lee's and he was: "Nonsense! ... He's much taller than I am." <3
I do like it when fictional media leaves me unsure whether my fave is alive or dead. XD
(The Saint one time declined to be at all clear whether or not James Maxwell survived being shot at the end. Mariocki and I think he probably did, because it was in the shoulder and people were still looking after him when the Saint callously dashed off without looking back, but the finished product doesn't care. Ironically, given that the Saint has been trying to stop him from accidentally convicting himself all episode. And even David Collings got left with Silver's fate unknown, thanks to Mr McCallum's last minute script changing.)
Then I'm just as glad you didn't read it. Besides, you didn't see the film in Japan. Your version is regionally legit.
I have no real firm headcanon myself, but that was the version that ficced best for Whumptober! I like that we can choose, depending on mood. (I mean, I kind of imagine that they assumed: he's vamped, therefore once Dracula's dusted, he's either dusted too or depowered enough to be finished off by hanging, the way what remains of Lucy is finished off by blood draining and drowning and that's why it got left, but er. *shrugs*)
no subject
You're welcome! The entire thing looks like a republication of a fanzine from 1996 which I'm just really charmed by, especially since the 'zine is still publishing and their website barely appears to have been redesigned since then.
And Martin Jarvis, despite having only been in it less still knew what it was about more than the others seemed to, rather like David Collings with RoD. (He can be allowed to be a fave, that's twice now.
It's a good trait!
(If you have a link to David Collings talking about Robots of Death, I will cheerfully follow it. I don't think I actually have read his opinions on the subject.)
and even a little bit with Ralph Bates they fished out from somewhere else, and, lol, they said to him his performance overshadowed Lee's and he was: "Nonsense! ... He's much taller than I am."
My selection of pages on Google Books did not include that exchange! That's delightful. (I could see the bits where more than one person said nice things about Peter Sallis and Martin Jarvis did his James Mason impression.)
Mariocki and I think he probably did, because it was in the shoulder and people were still looking after him when the Saint callously dashed off without looking back, but the finished product doesn't care. Ironically, given that the Saint has been trying to stop him from accidentally convicting himself all episode.
Oh, no. It just takes one line, people! Just establish he survived not to have accidentally sent himself to jail!
And even David Collings got left with Silver's fate unknown, thanks to Mr McCallum's last minute script changing.
What was originally supposed to be clearer about Silver?
I like that we can choose, depending on mood.
Agreed. Someone will even write a version that isn't totally a downer and it will be fun, too.
no subject
LOL, that website really hasn't been updated since the late 90s! XD
(If you have a link to David Collings talking about Robots of Death, I will cheerfully follow it. I don't think I actually have read his opinions on the subject.)
I think you have seen it? It's this one, which was originally from a DWM that I own: https://www.kaldorcity.com/people/dcinterview.html (In context, one of the other DWM numbers from around the same time had an interview with Russell Hunter who didn't have a clue what the costumes were in aid of. Not that that stopped him being awesome, but I do enjoy an actor who also Gets It, when it comes to the story as well.)
My selection of pages on Google Books did not include that exchange! That's delightful.
Oh, I didn't think of us having separate preview pages!
It just takes one line, people! Just establish he survived not to have accidentally sent himself to jail!
I know! *sighs over it* It's one of those episodes where clearly all TPTB were worrying about was plot, to the point that characterisation had become ridiculously incomprehensible in JM's case. (JM is a retired cop, now head of security at a top gov't secret weapons research centre in Scotland. He is very sensitive, doesn't go hunting, and a pacifist opposed to weapons research, and also so clueless at his job that he not only immediately accidentally incriminates himself on discovering a murder, it takes Simon pointing that fact out to him hours later before he even notices. He can't get the fact that he's a suspect through his head, but he is very obliging about helping Simon, even after Simon thwacks him unconscious one time because he's being too conscientious about his job to let Simon investigate further in the cause of clearing his name. Also he's called Jock, so he was clearly meant to be Scottish, (he's not Scottish) and he's so nervy, he's essentially this week's damsel in distress. Solve the mystery, Simon, or JM will have himself done up for murder through sheer well-meaning incompetence! Anyway, the result of watching an extremely intelligent actor do his best with that collection of character traits while collapsing twice in the attempt is 100% delightful as far as I'm concerned. But I would like to know that he survived. XD)
What was originally supposed to be clearer about Silver?
They were all three trapped in the cafe together! But then when it became clear it was being cancelled, David McCallum pushed for excluding Silver from that final scene, which PJ Hammond was opposed to, although he said on the commentary that he now thinks David M was probably right. Which is fair, but I still wish Hammond had won that fight!
Someone will even write a version that isn't totally a downer and it will be fun, too.
They could! XD
no subject
Yes! Sorry; for some reason I assumed you were talking about an interview with David Collings specifically about Robots of Death in the same way that Martin Jarvis had been interviewed specifically about Taste the Blood of Dracula. That's the one I read directly after seeing Robots of Death for the first time and thereby discovered that Kaldor City was produced by
(In context, one of the other DWM numbers from around the same time had an interview with Russell Hunter who didn't have a clue what the costumes were in aid of. Not that that stopped him being awesome, but I do enjoy an actor who also Gets It, when it comes to the story as well.)
Check. I can see why the contrast stood out. (And David Collings claims that he didn't understand a word of the script for Assignment 3 of Sapphire & Steel, which doesn't seem to have stopped him from knowing exactly what Silver was supposed to be like.)
Oh, I didn't think of us having separate preview pages!
I find the interior workings of Google Books to be mysterious and annoying. I can usually get the page I link to to show up for other people—or vice versa—and then after that it seems to be a crapshoot. If I look at the same book on a different computer, I get different pages in the preview. I have no idea why.
He is very sensitive, doesn't go hunting, and a pacifist opposed to weapons research, and also so clueless at his job that he not only immediately accidentally incriminates himself on discovering a murder, it takes Simon pointing that fact out to him hours later before he even notices.
. . . I assume he retired from being a cop because he was also an absolute sweetheart disaster at it?
and he's so nervy, he's essentially this week's damsel in distress.
I have seen almost no James Maxwell and yet from all accounts this sounds right on brand.
Anyway, the result of watching an extremely intelligent actor do his best with that collection of character traits while collapsing twice in the attempt is 100% delightful as far as I'm concerned. But I would like to know that he survived.
Understood on both fronts.
They were all three trapped in the cafe together! But then when it became clear it was being cancelled, David McCallum pushed for excluding Silver from that final scene, which PJ Hammond was opposed to, although he said on the commentary that he now thinks David M was probably right. Which is fair, but I still wish Hammond had won that fight!
That's really interesting! That would have changed the tone of the final scene. Even though I feel there's a better chance of Sapphire and Steel getting out with Silver on the outside.
no subject
He seems, or so he has said on several occasions, to have made the character pretty much himself, adding in and working out a lot of the little tricks with shiny objects as well as the flirting. (I mean, I believe him; there is or there was a clip of him rehearsing for Cymbeline out there somewhere and he does flirt like Silver for real.)
. . . I assume he retired from being a cop because he was also an absolute sweetheart disaster at it?
Which would make sense if he hadn't immediately gone and got a job at a top secret government research station in the wilds of Scotland in order to disapprove of everything the scientists there are doing. XD
Even though I feel there's a better chance of Sapphire and Steel getting out with Silver on the outside.
According to PJ Hammond, it was about the reverse - Silver would have provided them with a means of escape from the inside, leading into Assignment 7. When it was cancelled, Hammond seems to have wanted to have kept that, maybe hoping for a reprieve (it had already happened at least once), but David McCallum (who seems to have been getting understandably tired of commuting from New York for it) wanted it changed, leaving out Silver and therefore drawing a final line under it.
no subject
Wow.
Silver would have provided them with a means of escape from the inside, leading into Assignment 7.
We discussed this years ago—I am clearly not firing on all cylinders right now. As soon as you said this, I remembered my father reaching this point in the commentary he was watching and immediately calling me to complain that we didn't get this ending. (With apologies to Word of God, I think I still felt the odds were better with Silver not himself part of the trap.)
no subject
no subject
It's one of the things that makes me feel that other people must barely tolerate my existence, so that's good to hear.
[edit] I realize this was probably an extremely rude response to you; I'm sorry. My ability to assume that I do not merely wear other people out unsurprisingly worsens when my physical health does and I am fed up with myself. I shouldn't have spilled it over onto you.
no subject
My ability to assume that I do not merely wear other people out unsurprisingly worsens when my physical health does and I am fed up with myself.
And much the same thing happens to me. It's very hard to believe anyone else wants to put up with me when I can barely do it myself! I live in almost pernament frustration some times. <3<3<3
I hope things let up a little soon!
no subject
Thank you.
*hugs*
no subject
\o/
Apologies if I have asked this before, but have you seen her in Bedelia (1946)?
No, it's been really hard to get other films that weren't in that boxset, save for before-she-was-famous things that turned up in the Ealing Rarities sets. I've only seen Jassy because Talking Pictures showed it. I can't remember looking for that one particularly, but I went through her imbd at the time, and so much was R1 only, or not available.
no subject
I'm sorry to hear it. I would have expected the regional availability to go the other way. From my perspective, she doesn't turn up all that often—Highly Dangerous ran on TCM because someone on their programming staff has a penchant for British B-noirs and thrillers with one random American, but I got A Girl Must Live off YouTube. It would be nice if she were easier to find.
no subject