MovieChat Forums > Cuban Rebel Girls (1959) Discussion > So awful it's not even 'good'

So awful it's not even 'good'

posted 15 years ago by hobnob53
29 replies | jump to latest

Oh, Errol! I finally saw this film and while I expected it to be bad it was even worse than I had imagined...and unfortunately, not in a campy or fun way, as with so many poor but enjoyable films.

Cuban Rebel Girls commits the one unforgivable sin of any movie -- it's dull...one of the dullest films I've ever seen. The director, Barry Mahon, is the least talented individual ever to have stepped behind a camera -- he makes Coleman Francis look inspired (Francis did a Cuba movie too, Red Zone Cuba, and even that terrible piece of inane junk wasn't as bad as this). Mahon just points the camera and lets it shoot the scene, on and on and on...no movement, no timing, and God forbid that he should have a scene of people marching -- and there are lots of those -- without making sure his stationery camera films every single person filing by from beginning to end.

Not to mention that all the "Cubans" speak American-accented English, with about nine scattered words of Spanish throughout. And this garbage was filmed on location...in the midst of the heaviest fighting of the Revolution!!! Uh-huh. I've seen more Cubans fighting on I Love Lucy.

Errol Flynn insisted on top-casting his 16-year-old girlfriend, Beverly Aadland, in this mess, and her looks and talents were about appropriate for a travesty such as this. She was not especially good-looking, and her acting was on a much lower par than that of one of her teenage contemporaries in a high school play. She is unpleasant, whiny, incompetent, unappealing, not sexy and as dumb as a box of rocks. Errol liked young girls, but whatever attracted him to this paralyzingly stupid girl with no talent and few brains is beyond comprehension, unless it was her prepubescent attempts at sluttiness.

But worst of all is poor Errol, in the last months of his life, looking as though he were about to expire at any moment. He is completely dissipated, heavy, suddenly looking much older than his years, and appears so out of it that he can scarcely seem to stand up in his few scattered scenes. He actually has very little dialogue as such, instead narrating the bulk of the film off-screen, rounded off by a shot of him addressing the audience in his hotel room at the end about how wonderful it is that with Castro's victory the yoke of oppression was about to be lifted from all Latin America. (Would that he could have lived just another three years, to see what Castro's revolution really brought.) In that final scene of his career he can't even focus on where the camera is, looks even worse than he had previously, and his speech borders on the incoherent. Yet even at this sad end, a small spark of that charm, that roguish, bad-boy persona everyone secretly loved and admired, peers through in brief flashes -- testament to the inherent dynamism of his personality, which even all the physical abuse he had subjected himself to could never quite extinguish. But it's inescapable that even "Errol Flynn", movie star, is flickering out fast, as his life soon would once and for all.

Cheap, excruciatingly slow-moving, badly photographed and with perhaps the worst sound of any semi-"major" film, ineptly directed by an incompetent clod, woodenly acted, poorly written and confusingly staged, exploitative without being the least bit interesting or entertaining, just plain lousy without even the redeeming feature of being fun to watch for its badness...Cuban Rebel Girls is, in every possible way, a sorry, sorry film from its one-time "wicked, wicked" star. There is no joy here, not even derisive laughter, just a dull, unpleasant time watching a once-vital, exuberant, urbane man throwing his life away through personal excess while in the uninspiring company of a throng of untalented fools.

Don't bother with this one -- really.

[–] JuanMacready 15 years ago

I don't ever want to see this film.

It's ironic that Flynn died only a year after his "The Sun Also Rises" co-star Tyrone Power.

[–] hobnob53 15 years ago

Flynn gave arguably the best performance of his career in The Sun Also Rises. He should have received a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination. Amazingly, he was billed fourth in that film.

But at least Errol made it to 50. Ty died at 44. Sun was the only joint screen appearance of these two one-time romantic/swashbuckling standard bearers for their respective former studios, WB and Fox.

[–] JuanMacready 15 years ago

He was the only one who even seemed bothered in that film. I was shocked that Power was only 42, he looked more like 55.

[–] hobnob53 15 years ago

Power (who turned 43 in 1957) was a very heavy smoker with an essentially undiagnosed heart condition. He suddenly seemed to age very rapidly in the last year or two of his life. He was far too old for the role he was playing in Sun anyway (the character in the book would have been in his late 20s), but even so, he did look older than 43. He also looked older (and was again too old in reality for the part) in his last film, Witness for the Prosecution, released late in 1957.

Oddly, he looked a bit better in the film he started shooting next, Solomon and Sheba, in the fall of 1958. But in most of that he had a beard and slightly thicker hair, which masked his aging; in the scenes where he didn't have a beard he didn't look as good, though still better than the year before. But that was the film on which he collapsed and died of a massive heart attack while shooting an exhausting duelling scene with George Sanders. After he collapsed, one of the last things he did in life was pull out a pack of cigarettes from underneath his costume and light one up. That, plus the ignorant decision to give him a tot of brandy as a stimulant -- one of the absolute worst things you can give to a heart attack victim -- helped kill him within minutes. Yul Brynner replaced him in the movie, but according to the director, King Vidor, Power was much better.

Interestingly, Errol suffered a mild heart attack on the set of a movie too -- Gentleman Jim in 1942 -- but recovered and resumed shooting. But he was only 33 at the time. Power was 44 when he suffered his fatal heart attack on the set -- more weirdly, exactly what had happened to his father, actor Tyrone Power (Sr.), who died of a heart attack on a film set near the end of 1931. But he was 62.

With Errol Flynn, his life was sort of a long-term suicide. He just did whatever he wanted, enjoyed himself, knew he'd pay for it at the end, and eventually that end did arrive. His health was much worse than Power's -- Flynn was kept out of the armed forces in WWII due to a heart condition and several other serious maladies, including a malarial condition. Given his heavy substance abuse, which included smoking, drinking and, later, drug use, on top of a poor physical condition, it's astonishing he lasted to 50. Reportedly Flynn's doctor told him in 1958 that he had less than a year to live, which to Errol wasn't an inducement to slow down but rather to speed up, enjoy everything he could to even more excess, before the end.

Like Power, Flynn didn't look too bad until the last year or so of his life. In The Sun Also Rises he seemed appropriately soused, which he undoubtedly really was, but basically looked like the character he was playing, an aristocrat now broke and drinking too much out of sadness. He still looked, if not healthy, then certainly not ragged and clearly dying. The same with his next one or two films, where he also played drunks, including a portrayal of his old drinking pal John Barrymore. But by Cuban Rebel Girls, however he'd been holding himself together before, he looked dreadful -- his entire countenace wasted away, his flesh sagging, hair thinning, speech slurred, eyes glazed -- terrible as well as sad. At least he had the good sense not to cast himself as an heroic or romantic figure in the movie, in which he actually appeared only sporadically. But that made the whole thing that much sadder.

Incidentally, Errol was a pretty good writer, as his two books attest, so it's amazing how shoddy, how truly awful, his script was for CRG. Just plain stupid where it wasn't confused. Curiously, he doesn't get any screen credit as an actor in this movie, just as the person who "presents" the film, and as screenwriter. Also somewhat strangely, although he plays himself in this movie, never once does anyone call him "Errol" or "Mr. Flynn" or anything. His real-life girlfriend (playing someone else's girl in the movie) thinks he looks familiar, but that's as far as it gets. Only once, in his narration, does Flynn himself make a remark about "the Flynn charm" or something. I think this near-anonymity might have been a sign of Errol's own fatalism, his own cynical summing up of his career -- the onetime star who was even now fading into obscurity. Perhaps that's the saddest thing of all in this film.

[–] JuanMacready 15 years ago

Thanks for the information!

Was Power a heavy drinker as well?

[–] hobnob53 15 years ago

You're most welcome -- sorry I went on a bit long!

Power did drink but nothing like Flynn. Errol was certainly an alcoholic, but Ty was not, nor did he use drugs as Flynn did. Power might have been a slightly heavier smoker, but all in all as I think about it it really is surprising Flynn lived longer and was older than Power when he died, eleven months after Power. People were shocked when Ty died, while no one was really surprised when Errol checked out. You never can tell how such things will play out.

I believe Errol's last public appearance was a guest shot on The Red Skelton Show two days before his death. He and Red played hoboes...Flynn, an elegant hobo, of course. He was clearly drunk at the time, too. But funny!

[–] JuanMacready 15 years ago

Since you're a fan of Gregory Peck, do yo know what his problem was with William Wyler when they made "The Big Country" in 1957?

[–] hobnob53 15 years ago

Yes, it arose over the "buckboard scene", as it came to be known. (Where Peck and Carroll Baker are in the buckboard and are besieged by Chuck Connors and company.) Wyler wanted Peck to play it one way, Peck another. They argued about it, and Wyler agreed to shoot it both ways and see which worked better. He filmed it the way he wanted it, but then refused to reshoot it Peck's way, only vaguely saying he'd do it later -- which, given the expense of setting up the scene again, was preposterous. The production moved on, but it was a source of friction between the two. As they were also co-producing the film there were fights there too. Peck wanted to rent a lot of cattle to dot the landscape behind his and Heston's fight scene, while Wyler insisted this was an extravagance and that only a few cattle were necessary. (Wyler got his way.) With one thing and another, eventually the two exploded and Wyler left as soon as he could. The film's somewhat hurried and disjointed end reflects his abrupt departure.

Neither Peck nor Wyler (who had worked very well together on Roman Holiday five years before) spoke again for two years. The ice was finally broken at the Academy Awards ceremony for 1959 (held in April 1960). Wyler was coming off stage after just having received the Oscar for directing Ben-Hur. Peck was in the wings waiting to go out and present the next award. As Wyler passed him, Peck held out his hand and said, "Congratulations, Willy, you deserved it." Wyler took Peck's hand and said, "Thanks, but I'm still not going to reshoot that goddamned buckboard scene!" With that, both men laughed, the feud was over, and they were once again good friends.

The Big Country co-star Charlton Heston, who owed a lot -- including his casting in, and subsequent Oscar for, Ben-Hur to Wyler -- nevertheless always sided with Peck on the buckboard issue, saying Wyler had given his word and then reneged. Whether Peck's interpretation would have been better than Wyler's is another matter, and since we'll never know exactly what it was, there's little room even for conjecture.

How did you know I was a Greg Peck fan?

[–] JuanMacready 15 years ago

OK thanks.

I read the thread about whether Peck should have played Bond and you described yourself as a major fan of his there.

[–] hobnob53 15 years ago

Ah! Yes, people get all over these boards, I guess.

Nice talking with you, hope to catch up elsewhere.

[–] phillindholm 14 years ago

Sounds like ''Cuban Rebel Girls'' was Flynn's ''Flesh Feast''. And, according to her biography, he tried to make a move on Veronica Lake.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hobnob53 14 years ago

Thank you very much, sitedecinema. It's very kind of you to say so.

[–] four-eyed-scorpion 14 years ago

it's really too bad I didn't see your review before i watched this
boring snorefest...

But worst of all is poor Errol, in the last months of his life, looking as though he were about to expire at any moment. He is completely dissipated, heavy, suddenly looking much older than his years, and appears so out of it that he can scarcely seem to stand up in his few scattered scenes.

drugs and young women will do that to the elderly.

"Pleasedon'ttry2checkmewhenitcomes2MY OPINIONit’llbeawasteofurtime&energy Thanks"

[–] hobnob53 14 years ago

Yes, drugs and young women can do that to the "elderly", but the terrible part was that Errol Flynn was by no stretch of the imagination "elderly"...even by 50's standards. He was just 50 when this film came out, probably 49 while actually shooting. I hope you were using the term sardonically, not seriously.

A "proper" DVD of CRG is being released by VCI later this month, on a double bill-disc with the laughable 1952 sci-fi adventure Untamed Women, a film which bears no relation whatsoever to Cuban Rebel Girls...except that they both take place on islands and have women in them. That one, at least, is a worthwhile monstrosity -- dreadful, but fun in a thoroughly idiotic sort of way.

[–] four-eyed-scorpion 14 years ago

but the terrible part was that Errol Flynn was by no stretch of the imagination "elderly"...even by 50's standards. He was just 50 when this film came out, probably 49 while actually shooting. I hope you were using the term sardonically, not seriously.

Yes elderly.....when a late 40's--50 year old chases after females barely out of puberty they appear much older than what that are, sleazy and pedophilish..

"Pleasedon'ttry2checkmewhenitcomes2MY OPINIONit’llbeawasteofurtime&energy Thanks"

[–] hobnob53 14 years ago

Since when is being sleazy and/or a pedophile equate with being "elderly"? People like that come in all ages. A 16-year-old can be a pedophile if he likes little kids, but that doesn't make him "elderly", for God's sake. Being sick, perverted or just shameless or indiscriminate in one's passions has nothing to do with age, either one's actual age or what someone "appears" to be.

In any case, different generations seem to have different criteria for what age constitutes being deemed elderly, but while there's no hard and fast number, clearly 50 isn't it, and hasn't been for centuries at least. Whatever else Flynn may or may not have been, "elderly" wasn't one of them -- he didn't live long enough. (Nor do I think it fair to call him a pedophile, though "sleazy" might be apt in this instance.) Besides, his teenage girlfriend obviously loved him and didn't consider him "elderly", though her overall judgment on their relationship was clearly questionable.

[–] four-eyed-scorpion 14 years ago

of course i don't actually believe that anyone who has reached age 50 is knocking at deaths door....oops that was the case for flynn though wasn't it? haha..... but i do believe the phrase dirty old man applies or should apply
to a man who had a predeliction for underage girls......

I am also aware that anyone regardless of age or gender can be a pedophile but we were discussing Errol Flynn's perverted ass... and even though technically he may not be classified as a pedophile he was supposedly charged with statutory rape.....

Flynn was a sick and perverted dope fiend..... and again this is my opinion just like the above is yours....

"Pleasedon'ttry2checkmewhenitcomes2MY OPINIONit’llbeawasteofurtime&energy Thanks"

[–] hobnob53 14 years ago

After my previous post I thought about the expression "dirty old man" and I suppose someone could accuse Flynn of that in this case, taking liberties with the term "old". I just take exception to calling someone who's 50 "elderly". (And yes, I'm past 50!)

I'm not so sure Flynn had a predilection for underage girls. His 16-year-old here notwithstanding (and he was really losing it by 1959, indeed at death's door), Flynn was a womanizer, but not normally with very young girls. Quite the opposite, most of his paramours were in their 20s or 30s, or at least "legal".

Flynn was indeed charged with statutory rape in 1942 (when he was 33) for allegedly having sex with an underage girl. But the girl was exposed in court as a liar and it was also proved that Flynn was elsewhere when the supposed rape took place. Flynn was acquitted and the girl subsequently admitted she had made it up. But the trial gave us the phrase "In like Flynn", though I doubt Errol appreciated the tribute.

Overall, I think you're being very hard on Flynn. Just calling him a "sick and perverted dope fiend" is at best misleading and cruel. Yes, he had a drug problem (and booze), but does that make him a "fiend"? "Sick and perverted" presupposes he was a pedophile, or a rough approximation thereof, but even if you can criticize him for his fling with this teenager (and I find this reprehensible too), to simply smear him with a broad brush as sick and perverted is pretty unfair. Besides, there's a lot more to most people, including Flynn, than just a few sides, good or bad. He had many good points, too, but unfortunately too many of his bad habits gradually overcame him. I find him more sad than sick, even when he behaved badly or in ways I find distasteful.

[–] four-eyed-scorpion 14 years ago

but does that make him a "fiend"?

Yes it does. he was a junkie why pretty it up?

He was on heroin,morphine and who knows what else.. what makes him any different than the average dope fiend on the street.... besides status , fame and dope at your disposal?

"Pleasedon'ttry2checkmewhenitcomes2MY OPINIONit’llbeawasteofurtime&energy Thanks"

[–] hobnob53 14 years ago

Well, I guess I'm a little more discriminating in which terms I apply to people. To me, a "dope fiend" implies some guy who's not only an addict but a dealer, or a thief who robs to feed his habit; in other words, it refers to more base types of behavior than just addiction. I just don't believe the word "fiend" can be fairly applied to Flynn. I certainly don't defend his drug habit (or much of his other behavior), but he wasn't out there killing or stealing from people, or selling to others, the way a true "fiend" (by my lights) would do.

As far as I know Flynn never blamed his addictions on anybody else, the way many drug addicts do. On one level I feel sorry for anyone who falls prey to drugs but on another there has to be a point where you get some sense and take responsibility for cleaning up your life. Flynn took responsibility for his actions but as time went on never found the strength to shuck them, despite all the advantages he had. To me this makes him more of a tragic figure than a fiend. The person he hurt most was himself.

[–] pcgambler2002 13 years ago

Well said...truly a sad, sad waste of a talent and a personality.

[–] pitcairn89 13 years ago

Hi, I saw your list of movie threads, including this review of "Cuban Rebel Girls." I applaud your writing here, and agree with everything you say about the film, Flynn, and his sad end. Ditto your later postings on this same film. We all wonder how a guy as gifted as Flynn could have done himself in so completely, but I guess he was one of those people who has to touch the flame. And he seemed to enjoy getting burned, so perhaps we shouldn't feel too terrible about his end. He also seemed to enjoy the ride the whole way, including the not-so-surprising ending. Anyway, your writing is great!

Just a word of warning. The "Juan Macready" character who tag-teamed with you on the postings is a notorious YouTube troll, who has a number of aliases, and who has totally slandered and badmouthed Errol Flynn, as well as Jimmy Stewart, Tyrone Power, and some other stars. This troll says really terrible things, apparently with the intent of stirring things up, and antagonizing people. I was surprised to see that YouTube handle here on imdb. Anyway, a heads up if you see that name again.

[–] hobnob53 13 years ago

Hey, thanks pitcairn89 (great handle, BTW), for the compliments and the warning. One does run into such people hereabouts, and Heaven knows I've engaged in my share of intemperately-voiced arguments, but on the whole I find most people are civil, even in disagreement.

(You'll have seen that I made a [typically long-winded] response to your reply on the Advise & Consent board. I hope that however we may disagree we can keep things honest and, again, civil -- and civilized -- so if I gave any offense it was certainly not intended. I do get carried away at times, one of my chief flaws.)

Anyway, as you know, Errol wasn't the only star to let drugs and alcohol get the better of him, but he didn't go the way of most of them by dying of an overdose or something, nor was he a hypocrite about such things or did he blame others for his woes. He went in his sleep, of a heart attack, at 50. You're absolutely right, he had fun doing what he did and as I say, apparently hurt no one but himself (though I'm sure his friends and family were disappointed in him). No wonder he titled his posthumously published autobiography My Wicked, Wicked Ways!

I remember reading that on the set of his last movie, River Phoenix lit into a co-star who was drinking a Diet Coke, attacking her vociferously for 'putting that stuff into her body'. This, while he was doing enough drugs to kill a horse -- or a horse's...well, de morituri nil nisi bonum, or whatever they say in my non-existent Latin. But can you imagine Errol Flynn telling someone not to drink a Coke while he was doing coke? He would have roared with laughter at that idea!

[–] pitcairn89 13 years ago

Hi, Hobnob53. Thanks for your messages! I enjoy your insights on politics and movies. I have similar interests, as I lived in D.C. for some years, and worked at the Library of Congress there. I worked with film, and was also able to indulge my interest in politics by having some geographical proximity to Capitol Hill, and in being able to observe the political scene there. A good friend of mine referred to D.C. as "Hollywood East," so perhaps our dual interests do intertwine. I in fact agree with most of what you said about "Advise and Consent," and no offense taken at anything you wrote. You explained yourself very well. I tend to think both parties are equally to blame for the lack of civility, and the lack of accountability, but that is a point that can be honestly debated. That is something my friends and I do endlessly.

I agree with you too, about Flynn's drug use. He was definitely over the top in his substance abuse, but you're right- he never blamed anyone else for his failings. In today's world, he could be on every TV show, blaming his neglectful parents, the studio, the "unfair press," etc., for his problems. As you say, he would have laughed at the idea. I think he was too busy having a good time. And even having a good time when he wasn't having a good time- as in drinking on yet another hangover, etc. I think one of the keys to Flynn's high-living lifestyle, and lack of concern over his own health, is his rugged youth spent in New Guinea. I think he realized, early on, how brutal and short life can be, and just decided to make the best of it, roll with the punches, and have a good time. He knew he had some health issues, but decided not to let them get in the way of his fun. He really was a throwback to an earlier time. Definitely not a PC celebrity. I in fact DO blame his parents for some of his failings. They really did cut him loose, and he had to fend for himself, in some pretty formative years, and in a wild part of the world. It's no wonder he picked up some rather bad habits. Some of this was no doubt due to his own liking of the high-life, and his tendency to take short cuts. He sure knew how to have a good time, though for us mere mortals, it would have been so exhausting. It is nice to just feel good, without having hangovers and such. As someone once said, they really don't make movie stars like him anymore. Today's stars are mostly nice folks, I think, but they are so dominated by PC, and by those tendencies like the one you mentioned with River Phoenix. A little smug and humorless. Those old stars, like Flynn, Bogart, Gable and Tracy, drank and smoked too much, and consequently had fairly short lives, but they seemed to have a good time. And they never lectured anyone on foreign policy or their lifestyles. They just did what they did.

As for my handle, it is inspired by the Bounty trilogy. 'Pitcairn' as in Pitcairn Island, 89 for 1789, when the mutiny took place. This has always been one of my favorite stories. I also once applied for a job teaching on Pitcairn Island, for a volunteer organization. It never came through, but it was an intriguing idea. I don't know what the reality would have been like, as it is such a small place. I now live and work in Tokyo, and travel around a lot. Maybe a big city is a more suitable place, after all. Take care.

[–] hobnob53 13 years ago

Hi pitcairn -- I figured that your IMDb name referred to the mutiny. Of course, EF's first film was an obscure Australian movie called In the Wake of the Bounty, in 1933, where he starred as Fletcher Christian. A couple of years ago they were planning to run the film on Turner Classic Movies but in the end never showed it. I guess it's pretty difficult to track down...much as were the mutineers themselves!

Interestingly, just last night on Amazon I ran across Errol's autobiography, which is still in print, and intend to order it. I saw also there's a new biography of him due out in April, and a recent book about him and his frequent co-star Olivia deHavilland, which has gotten good reviews, both of which I may also purchase. Talk about an overdose.

For the rest, I think I may shoot you a private message in the next day or so on a few subjects of mutual interest, but too far off this site's topics. Until then, best regards.

P.S. Tokyo! Aren't you concerned about marauding kaiju?

[–] pitcairn89 13 years ago

Hi, hobnob. Thanks for the nice message. You probably know this, but "In the Wake of the Bounty" can be seen at www.archive.org They have lots of public domain films, and this is one of them. I have watched it a couple of times. It's not bad for what it is. The documentary stuff on Pitcairn Island is really interesting- you can see it as it was in the early 1930s. The dramatic sections are kind of awful, but also fascinating, as an insight into a facet of early-1930s Australian filmmaking (with apologies to Australian filmmakers- who were/are generally pretty great). Flynn does his best for a young guy with absolutely no acting experience- but he's still pretty bad, as are the other actors. Most of us probably couldn't do any better, with that same amount of acting experience (or lack thereof). It's amazing that this was only two years before "Captain Blood." Things sure changed fast. In some ways, it seems Flynn's career went full circle. He started out with a semi-independent, somewhat lower-budget film, and ended up the same way. Though "In the Wake of the Bounty" is a better film than "Cuban Rebel Girls," I think. It aimed a lot higher, and its rough edges were probably due more to the lack of sophisticated production equipment in an early 1930s Australia. They were still getting a handle on sound films, etc. And Charles Chauvel, a pioneer of Australian cinema, was much more talented than the staff of the later film. And, to be fair, many big stars started and ended their careers in less-than-stellar films.

As you say, there is a real glut of Flynn books right now. Some of them are good, some terrible. We all know about the trashy books. I recently read the one about him and deHavilland. It gets good reviews on Amazon, but I think it is a little too judgmental. The author does a great job with the studio memos and film production stuff, but he seems a little snarky when it comes to his leading players. I think he's kind of unfair to them. They come across as being shallow and overly-ambitious. That might be partly true, but there was a lot more depth to both of them. For example, I think they were much kinder people than he implies. That's my take on it, anyway. It's worth reading, though.

I do want to amend some of my previous comments on Flynn. I stated that I thought he enjoyed his life right to the end, and had a good ride. Maybe that is a little too simplistic. Many people have said they think he really enjoyed it up until his rape trial in 1942-43, and that after that, things became a lot more strained. I would actually agree with this. His "fun" seemed a lot more forced after the trial. And he became much more self-destructive. In his autobiography, he admits to contemplating suicide while in the depths of depression- to the extent where he held a gun in his mouth. I know that some people theorize he was really committing a slow form of suicide in his last 15 years. That would explain a lot, as his behavior became much more unruly, and he seemed depressed a lot. We've all seen those photos of him from the 1950s, where he looks so haggard and low in spirits, with those ever-present cigarettes and drinks in hand. So maybe that fast ride wasn't really so wonderful after all. As many have also said, his end mirrored that of his idol, John Barrymore. Flynn did say he felt like a failure in his last years, so I think we CAN have some sympathy for him, as he went on that downward slide. Anyway, I should have stated that before. You can envy him in his younger years, but who would want to end up like that?

[–] hobnob53 13 years ago

Pitcairn -- Thanks for the tip about In the Wake of.... I know of the site but have never visited it, for some reason. My not having seen it notwithstanding, I would be almost certain it'd be better than CRG, for precisely the reasons you cite. At least the people involved in ITWOTB were trying to do something honorable, to do their best, with their professional and equipment limitations. CRG is just a waste done by people who clearly don't give a damn.

This may dovetail with your amended remarks about Flynn, post-rape trial. I agree that that ordeal took a lot out of him, the lies and false prosecution, and he found it difficult to trust many people after that. This, the slow decline in his top ranking in Hollywood in the years after WWII, his insecurities about himself (having been rejected as 4F by the armed services during the war because of various all-too-real ailments) and his acting ability, and his problems with his wives and so on, drove him to seek solace in drink and drugs -- sadly, hardly a unique story. I think he simply allowed himself to spiral down over the years, not so much having a grand time as just doing what it took to keep things marginally together so he could make his way through life as quickly and painlessly as possible. But I still feel that, whatever his personal demons and the problems he heaped upon himself as he tried to cope (or escape), he still basically hurt no one but himself (apart from the emotional grief he caused his family and friends), and certainly never blamed anybody else for his problems -- as I'm beginning to believe he could have (some, anyway).

I suppose you know the story about his aborted 1954 film project, William Tell, which was eventually terminated when the funding fell through? According to Flynn's close friend David Niven, actor Bruce Cabot (of King Kong fame), supposedly another of Errol's pals, who was working in Europe in the 50s and had been hired for the picture, subsequently sued the utterly bankrupt Errol for some huge amount of money for breach of contract or something. Niven justifiably reserved a great deal of venom for Cabot in telling the tale in his first autobography.

I'll keep in mind your comments on the Flynn/deHavilland book before getting it -- maybe browse through it in a book store or something first. I've run into the sort of author smarm and snark you refer to in other books and it is as off-putting as it is idiotic. That sort of thing says a lot more about the author's incompetence and shortcomings than it does about his subjects. Just now I'm reading a book about George Reeves, Speeding Bullet, which got some good reader reviews on Amazon. It turns out to be one of the most ineptly organized and incompetently written books I've ever read, and I do know something about good writing (and bad!). It has a few tidbits of information and good photos, but it's so difficult to wade through its boring prose, inept reporting and grammatical lapses that getting through it is something of a chore.

Haven't gotten to any PMs as yet, but will do so in due course. Meanwhile, hope to see you again soon!

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]