MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > Not OT: George Maharis Passes at 94; s...

Not OT: George Maharis Passes at 94; star of Route 66 (Psycho Connections)

posted a year ago by roger1 (2394)
11 replies | jump to latest

George Maharis has died this week.

94 years old.

Made his name on the TV series Route 66, which ran from 1960 to 1963, but Maharis had to quit the show before the run ended due to hapatitis b (and yet he lived to 94.)

On the series, Maharis tooled around the United States as the driving buddy of Martin Milner, with episodes being filmed in as many states as the series could travel to, and major guest stars(and pretty women) waiting in each town(these guys were not gay). Once Maharis went down ill, Milner drove around alone for a few episodes and then picked up a NEW travel buddy in Glenn Corbett.

Maharis got a couple of movie leads after Route 66(Quick Before it Melts and especially the deadly virus thriller The Satan Bug), but stardom didn't take. It looks like he worked in TV guest shots for decades after Route 66 put him on the map.

In Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," TV actor Rick Dalton(Leo diCaprio) notes that before Steve McQueen got his lead in The Great Escape, Dalton was up against "the three Georges" for the role:

George Peppard
George Maharis
George Chakiris

...which really didn't fit. Around 1963, only George Peppard was leading man quality.

Still, to George Maharis: on the map in the 60's with Route 66; honored in a Tarantino film in 2019. 94 years.

---

Some irony: There are a few episodes of Route 66 on Youtube(I hope I don't get them pulled), and the guest stars in different episodes include: Martin Balsam, Vera Miles, and Simon Oakland.

I looked at those, of course. Its funny, these episodes are from around 1962 and 1963 and so all of these actors look and sound pretty much exactly like they did in Psycho (came the 70s and after, they would NOT.)

The series was/is impressive in how the two leads did their episodes in different states of the United. Balsam's episode was filmed in Corpus Christi, Texas, evidently in cold weather(Balsam wears an overcoat and you can see his breath when he talks.)

The show was usually scripted by a guy named Sterling Siliphant(a nice alliterative name) who on the one hand won an Oscar for "In the Heat of the Night" and on the other hand was dissed as a hack for The Poseidon Adventure and The Towering Inferno -- each of which, I think, actually have some pretty good technical dialogue, especially Inferno(the movie for which Silliphant had to write an EQUAL number of lines for Paul Newman and Steve McQueen -- at McQueen's request.)

Silliphant's dialogue for Martin Balsam in his Route 66 was just plain weird, an attempt at poetic whimsy that just didn't work for me. Example: Balsam plays a right handed man who is FAKING left handedness because "I'm too busy to go on a vacation so I'm taking two weeks in the world of the left handed." He plays a man named "Evan Borelli" and says to Marty Milner: "You can call me by either my first or last name, your pick." It all very florid and weird -- more "arty" dialogue than Balsam got as Arbogast, but Balsam sells it, and his final words are the title of the episode: "Somehow, it gets to be tomorrow."

One of the episodes I remember actually watching(with parental permission) as a kid when it was first broadcast in 1963, because it had "three monsters" in it: Peter Lorre, Lon Chaney Jr., and Boris Karloff. What a line-up! And Chaney wears his wolf man make-up, and Karloff even wears his Frankenstein make-up(as quite an old man.) Filmed at a hotel near Chicago and somehow our horror actors end up scaring a hotel full of lovely ladies -- its a "secretaries' convention" from which Milner and Maharis woo some chicks while the monsters make them faint in droves. Quaint.

And finally: Walter Matthau did one episode -- filmed in Reno -- where in his opening scene, he is talked at and says nothing and you can just SEE the star aborning: all the perfect little faces he makes, the eyebrow raises -- he's hilarious and intelligent at the same time, without saying a word. Then he opens his mouth and you hear the famous Matthau voice -- again, as with Balsam, not saying the best dialogue -- and you can just TELL he's going places.

Farewell, George Maharis and -- your show was pretty damn great for the locations and the guest stars -- and tried pretty hard for poetic dialogue and good stories. Cool theme song, too.

[–] swanstep (2624) a year ago

I just looked through Maharis's IMDb page to see what,if anything, I might have seen him in (not much as it happens, Exodus a long time ago mainly). Anyhow, a couple of his IMDB entries jumped out as things I might be inclined to track down.

1. Look What's happened to Rosemary's Baby (1976): a tv-movie in which Maharis takes over from Cassavettes as Guy Woodhouse. It's evidently terrible (despite attracting back Ruth Gordon and being directed by R's B, Chinatown, The Graduate editor Sam O'Steen), but it's on youtube so I may take a peek there.
2. The Satan Bug (1965). A not-much-discussed biological war thriller directed by hot-at-the-time, usually reliable John Sturges. And... it's on youtube too. Will check out in honor of Mr Maharis.

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

2. The Satan Bug (1965). A not-much-discussed biological war thriller directed by hot-at-the-time, usually reliable John Sturges. And... it's on youtube too.

---

The movie is what you might call "handsome" (with much of the Panavision wide screen taking in images of the weird and beautiful Palm Springs desert area for the suspense and pursuit) and it has a great Jerry Goldsmith score of a certain type(buzzing electronic SciFi music, as with Fantastic Voyage and Planet of the Apes.)

But it is awfully spare, not a TV movie, but pretty small.

One of the better "practical" books I have on movies is by Walter Mirsch, and its called "I Thought We Were Making Movies, Not History."

Its a fun read, because Walter writes about the many,many, MANY movies that the Mirsch Brothers made(mainly at United Artists, then at Universal) and some of them were very big: Some Like It Hot, The Apartment(they were Billy Wilder's guys right up through The Front Page at Universal); West Side Story; The Magnificent Seven(and all its cheapjack sequels); The Pink Panther(and all its OK sequels)...Hawaii..In the Heat of the Night.

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

But Walter is honest about the ones that didn't work. Here he is on The Satan Bug:

"We were disappointed that we were not able to get a major star to play the leading role, but finally the idea of using a young actor named George Maharis was suggested. George had been in Route 66 and John (Sturges) pressured us to cast him. I felt that the subject required a major action-adventure star. George Maharis wasn't that, not did he ever become a major movie star."

Well, that's pretty direct. I wonder who turned them down? The story was too much of a pulp thriller, I suppose, to lure in Paul Newman; Sturges must have asked Steve McQueen(his star in The Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape), but must have gotten a no. How about James Garner from The Great Escape? Rock Hudson might have been star enough. Reliable second tier Rod Taylor? James Coburn wasn't ready yet. Were Bill Holden and Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas "too old?"

I take note of this because Walter Mirsch mentions that he "couldn't get a major star to play the role." I wonder why? The money? The script?(Hell, it was from Alastair MacLean under a pseudonym by heavyweights James Clavell and Edward Anhalt -- you could look THEM up.)

Walter Mirsch also writes this on The Satan Bug: "After shooting for about two weeks at a Palm Springs location, John (Sturges) called and told me that he was very dissatisfied with Joan Hackett, the leading lady he had chosen. He asked me to get in touch with Joan and to explain to her that we were going to replace her. I arranged to meet her for lunch, and it was a painful experience for both of us. We then chose Anne Francis, who had worked with John on "Bad Day at Black Rock."

So THAT's how Anne Francis got the female lead in "The Satan Bug." Sturges remembered her from Bad Day. Too bad for Joan Hackett..but that's showbiz. And Anne Francis was one hot number in 1965; she launched her "sexy karate private eye show" Honey West, the same year.

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

That's what I like about Mirsch's book. He has a pretty photographic memory for how ALL his movies came together, the deals made, etc. (And having to do "the dirty work": John Sturges made MIRSCH take Joan Hackett to lunch and fire her. Ah, the life of the producer.) You can sense, going in, that even with John Sturges as the director, The Satan Bug was not given a budget big enough to attract major stars and had to be made "on the cheap."

Noteable: the head villain(mad scientist) is Richard Basehart, he of the short stature and big voice(I guess James Mason was unaffordable). His two henchmen -- both stocky and middle-aged young -- were played by Frank Sutton(Gomer Pyle's DI) and Ed Asner(Lou Grant.) And there were roles for Psycho alums John Anderson and Simon Oakland.

One of Mirsch's other flops was a comedy called "Fitzwilly" about a butler(Dick Van Dyke) who organizes a crime ring to support the household of his no longer rich dowager boss. It was a nothing movie(with, noted Mirsch, a pretty good romantic theme song called "Make Me Rainbows" that even I remember) but what's interesting is that Mirsch first took a meeting with the retired Cary Grant to try to bring him back in the role. Grant accepted the meeting because....Walter Mirsch. But he didn't accept the role.

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

A bit more on Route 66:

I stumbled onto the episodes on YouTube some time ago and I was always thinking of writing about them here given the presence of Balsam and Oakland and Miles in the episodes. With Balsam and Oakland especially, the cadences and body language of both men were EXACTLY as they were in Psycho -- Balsam with his little nods while listening and his pursing of his lips and his deep voice; Oakland with his bombast and oversell. And Balsam wears a hat.

But watching several episodes back to back(or skimming them, with fast forward) I was impressed by the mood and look of the show. The instrumental "Route 66" theme song by Nelson Riddle is not to be confused with the jazz tune with lyrics ("Get your kicks on route 66") that came before it. No, the TV theme song was at once more cool and more ...melancholy in a weird way. These two guys drive into these desolate towns and big cities and the music sets a mood of "ennui on the road." VERY moody.

And the location work is just great -- famous cities, UNfamous cities -- all across America.. (The YouTube comments are filled with people saying: "I was there when they filmed that episode in 1962, that's my house 20 minutes into the show." "I used to work at that marina; its still there.") A national shared event.

Sterling Siliphant had a big reputation as a TV dramatist, his scripts ALMOST reach good movie-level writing. Balsam's lines are just plain weird in "Somehow It Gets to Be Tomorrow" but that title is very sad at the end: Balsam is a social worker trying to help two wayward orphans on the run....he's hoping that tomorrow will be good for both kids.

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

There was one called "Mon Petit Chou" with Lee Marvin as the brutish piano player boyfriend of a French singer...in Pittsburgh. Noteable: Sam Peckinpah directed it. Noteable: star Martin Milner has quite the fist fight with Marvin at the end -- and wins -- but the show ends with the French singer continuing on with the abusive Marvin as Milner must leave town. Marvin has a propensity to slap the French singer around and the show doesn't punish him...downer ending.

And back to that Lorre/Chaney Jr./Karloff episode.

Again, that's the only one I remember from its broadcast. I was big on the Universal movie monsters as a kid, and TV Guide played up these guys coming together for a "Halloween episode" of Route 66...so suddenly, I was interested in a show that otherwise for "adults." I asked to get to stay up late to watch it. The episode opens with the three actors on a "conference call"(actually called that) and uses split screens for Lorre in Chicago, Chaney in Los Angeles, Karloff in London...very ahead of its time for 1962. David Thomson has called Lon Chaney Jr "that saddest of actors" and he always seemed so...getting small roles but looking sad and terrible(alcohol?) He is sympathetic in this episode but the sadness comes through. (Lorre wasn't doing great, either - only Karloff was really in OK professional shape at the time.)

Despite the restrictions of contrivance and sometimes subpar writing of 60''s TV, those Route 66 episodes are a nice time capsule of America in the early 60's -- "on location," with the requisite lineups of top guest star actors. Worth a look.

And George Maharis was the cooler of the two guys and the show DID crash and burn after he left.

[–] telegonus (727) a year ago

Wonderful to see you back in the saddle on Moviechat, EC (I hope my use of the initials of your old screen name, and I hope once again some day current) is agreeable. You'll never be a Roger to me, unless, that is, you are one. Still, even my best film board friend, and basically Internet, too, the late Charles Lore, shall always be Clore to me, as I shall be Telly, Tel or Telegonus, to him. This is no disrespect to anyone, nor desire to make more of a friend, albeit on-line, than they are; and yet they, and you, too, are people I regard as real friends all the same; and the passing of any one of them, and I've known a few, diminishes me. I'll pass on any reference to John Donne here, as only a few people know of him or his work aside from inspiring Ernest Hemingway to give a title to his novel, For Whom The Bell Tolls. The older I get, now well into senior citizen status, the more mortal I feel, and while I accept it, as there's no comfort space to take one away from one's intimations of mortality, there's no need to dwell on it obsessively.

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

Wonderful to see you back in the saddle on Moviechat, EC (I hope my use of the initials of your old screen name, and I hope once again some day current) is agreeable.

---

Very agreeable, telegonus. I've enjoyed BEING called EC by you, and its who I feel that I really am(EC's history is long here.) I'm hoping to fix the technical glitch eventually. Its happened to me elsewhere in other places -- you try to get back in as ecarle and the computer tells you "there is already an ecarle"...which is yourself.

But I do like to post, and there are reasons for me to try to to post when the opportunity arises...which isn't as often as you'd think, due to things going on out here. In short, I can't always post, so "roger1" became my vehicle.

---

You'll never be a Roger to me, unless, that is, you are one.

---

Ha. No I'm not, and I find myself confused looking up my own posts and wondering who "roger1" is . When you think about it, it is all a bit Hitchcockian -- switched identities and all.

---

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

Still, even my best film board friend, and basically Internet, too, the late Charles Lore, shall always be Clore to me,

---

I remember that monicker! Sad to learn sometimes that people leave these boards permanently. But they do live on in memory...and posts too?

---

as I shall be Telly, Tel or Telegonus, to him. This is no disrespect to anyone, nor desire to make more of a friend, albeit on-line, than they are; and yet they, and you, too, are people I regard as real friends all the same;

---

Thank you!

---

and the passing of any one of them, and I've known a few, diminishes me.

---

A very fine thought.

---

---

The older I get, now well into senior citizen status, the more mortal I feel, and while I accept it, as there's no comfort space to take one away from one's intimations of mortality, there's no need to dwell on it obsessively.

---

I know it is a given here at moviechat that people announce that they were born in, say, 1987 or 1995 and well, I was certainly born well before those years, and I remember them AS years in which I was with certain people, doing certain things, seeing certain movies and marking them my personal favorites of the year (The Untouchables; Casino...hmm, both with DeNiro I realize. ) What was just "a step along the way " for me is where these other moviechat posters BEGAN their lives. And that can be a daunting thought. I feel older reading of those birthdates that came long after mine, and yet I feel at home posting opinions and finding at least SOME age peers "who were there, too." As for those who came after -- hey, take a look at how things used to be. Why not?

CONT

[–] roger1 (2394) a year ago

In the "movie critic" world, Roger Ebert lived to 70(which I now consider too young to die of course; Stanley Kubrick only made it that far, too) but wrote reviews pretty much up to his death and interacted with a younger generation(and their movies) in his 50s and 60s. Another film critic named Stanley Kauffmann wrote into his 80's, I think he managed to review Psycho in 1960(hated it) and GoodFellas in 1990.

My point: writing may be one fine way for the "older to keep pace with the younger" and to watch the world evolve as long as possible, even as the body itself may age and decline.

Personally, I am delighted that, while most of my favorite movies are from "the olden days" (heh, the 60s and 70s) a NEW movie like Licorice Pizza in 2021 could still capture my "movie love" with almost exactly the heart-soaring affection as the favorites from my past. (I suppose the movie's being set in 1973 made that a part of the deal, but it had a 2021 sensibilty and stars.)

Anyway, watching old movies(like Psycho, which is a special case of the most terrifying movie of youth becoming kinda cuddly and resassuring in older age) is massively comforting nostalgia, but the fact that a new movie like "Licorice Pizza" can still grab me is...very satisifying. (And included is that THAT movie may have ONLY connected with ME that way, which is OK.)

In short, telegonus: those of us of an older age should keep seeing films, or remembering films, or even THINKING about films, to keep the emotions "up" and the mind sharp.

Future hopes: the return of ecarle, more posts from telegonus, and everybody writing about the movies. (I do love the brutal flame wars of the younger generation to read, but no way would I fit in there...)

PS. Telegonus, I usually don't "make requests," but I was thinking of you a bit when I wrote on Route 66...seems to come from an era where you had a trove of information on the actors of the time. Any thoughts on that show?

[–] telegonus (727) a year ago

I only really "discovered" Route 66 over the last ten or twelve years, when MeTV was showing it regularly, I think nightly, and did so for two or three years, so I caught all the seasons, including the post-Maharis one, and in many cases more than once or twice (MeTV was so good at that, so responsible, for want of a better word), and they're still good, with the Noirish Twilight Zone and Hitchcock series, but their black and white shows seem to be diminishing, the westerns somewhat excepted. Also, their scheduling of anything retro is generally dreadful, the aforementioned series aside. Their Svengoolie horror showcase is an exception, and he's a fun guy to watch; very civil and likeable.

Thanks for responding, EC. Always a pleasure. Your manners are impeccable, and if you don't believe me, just do some casual "trolling" of these Moviechat boards, way better than most, but still. Give Gone With The Wind a whirl; or dive into (but don't, for sanity's sake, respond) Politics to see the low level (way below sea level, and then some) of discourse in parts of this site. It's heartbreaking to see even the "norms conscious" film sites slipping in quality. If you want to know why, read the daily obituary pages. Boomers and Gen X and Y folk are dying off, and the younger ones are either in charge or on the cusp, and while there are many fine and responsible people in those age groups, the sense of history, in our culture, let alone on-line and in films, is fading slowly but surely into near oblivion.

It's probably best to drop this hot brick of a topic before we both get burned. I'm generalizing, for sure, but there's truth in what I say, even if somewhat melodramatic in presentation.