Did Rock really have a Mental Breakdown on the set? - Seconds (1966) Discussion

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tgs333 14 years ago

Acuatlly he is noted for saying Ice Station Zebra was his favorite performance.

"I'm a vehemently anti-nuclear, paranoid mess, harbouring a strange obsession with radioactive sheep."

reply

[–] babettegillette 14 years ago

Rock Hudson in a fetal position? Wow. Because of his Doris Day movies, I was totally unprepared for Rock's performance in Seconds. In addition to probably being the best looking actor in American movie history, he was a genuinely talented actor.

reply

[–] varrick5775 14 years ago

I watched the movie 2046 by Kar Wai Wong and read a post about opening scene in Seconds so naturally never hearing about this movie I watched the trailer on You Tube. In the trailer where Rock is kissing a woman it's so painfully difficult to watch given his being gay. That scene where he kisses her kind of ruins it for me so I think I'll take a pass on this one although John Frankenheimer is truly a gifted director this I know.

reply

[–] mikainen 14 years ago

You have to be kidding.

reply

[–] ocarol7 13 years ago

Re: "In the trailer where Rock is kissing a woman it's so painfully difficult to watch given his being gay. That scene where he kisses her kind of ruins it for me so I think I'll take a pass on this one although John Frankenheimer is truly a gifted director this I know."

That's why it's called "ACTING," instead of living one's real life!
You must realize that no one on the screen is actually playing themselves and that certainly includes Hudson-

We see the world, not as it is, but as we are.....

reply

[–] johnmiller (3390) 8 months ago

Another straight whose marriage is "threatened" by anyone on this planet being gay. Right wingers whine about how "fragile" the left is, then they prove themselves to be as fragile as can be. Ironic, isn't it?

reply

[–] hiker1966 14 years ago

I saw this movie for the first time at a special screening, with Frankenheimer talking afterward. He said that Rock was one of the nicest guys he ever worked with. I can't recall him mentioning anything about a problem on the set.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kerchable 13 years ago

Go on wikipedia and look this movie up and it will tell you that Brian Wilson of Beach Boy fame had a breakdown from this movie and thought Phil Spector conspired with a film company to bring this about. Honest, I'm not joking!

reply

[–] garp-26 13 years ago

There was an article on this remarkable film in one of the volumes of Danny Peary's "Cult Movies" (sorry I forget which one). Interviews with those connected with the making of Seconds report that on set Hudson was often very affected emotionally by strongly identifying with the predicament of his character.

It seems the story of a man who alters his body and changes his identity in the hope of some deeper satisfaction only to find himself even more confused and unfulfilled resonated with the torments felt by Hudson himself in having to publicly repress his sexuality, as well as continually stoking up his overtly hetero image on screen.

I know very little about Hudson the man, and not much more about the public figure, but watching Seconds there are several instances where the pain and distress of Arthur Hamilton/Tony Wilson seem to come from an authentically tortured place. I'm tempted to say that place was despair. There have been very few movie scenes I've seen that are more despairing than Hudson's wail of anguish when he learns the community he throws a party for are all counterfeits. Like himself.

Incidentally I can believe the portrayal of Frankenheimer as something of a yeller. I remember a documentary on the making of Grand Prix and he seemed to be something of a loudmouthed pain in the a***.

Great film nonetheless.

"I'm staring at the abyss.I don't like the look of the abyss"

reply

[–] Pacer88 (232) 3 years ago

I believe I saw real pain in his eyes, during a couple scenes, as well. Rock Hudson seemed to be a class act and I hate that he had to hide his true self for so many years.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

I agree, I think Hudson's performance was terrific, I think this was the only time that he ever let the camera see what he really felt. He was great at light material, he spent most of his career doing comedies and murder mysteries, because everything in his life helped him perfect the art of hiding his feelings, and presenting a charming and polished surface to the world.

This was the one role where he dropped the charming surface and let the real man, and the real pain show, and OF COURSE it was in a film about a man who is given a fabulous and glamorous life, and the only price he has to pay is to deny his true self and shun the people he loves. If he was ever going to have a sobbing breakdown on a set in his life, it would have been in this film.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

I wouldn't be surprised if he was experimenting with LSD. A lot of actors were at the time.

Curled up in despair in the fetal position is not an uncommon occurrence for new users of LSD.
Add in the issues of having to deny his true self as you put it for his career and I think this is a real possibility.

In any case, psychedelically inspired or not his performance in Seconds is excellent.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 8 months ago

That's possible, trying LSD was fashionable at the time, although usually people who did try it did it at home with friends around and a clear schedule. But then, I've heard the stuff can cause flashbacks later, which is one reason I've never experimented with it myself.

It's odd, but there are a certain number of "urban legends" about Hudson, like his fake marriage announcements, and a supposed narrow escape from a serial killer who was haunting the gay bars of San Francisco, so this sounds like another one. Funny how strange rumors swirl around the man, I have no idea if any are true. All I know is that he was outstanding in this movie, and I suspect it's the one time he let the film camera see his real feelings.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

I've done it hundreds of times mostly low doses though, which I would assume you would do if you were trying to act on it. It's not all about breaking on through to the other side.

Never had a problem with "flashbacks", that's mostly fear propaganda. It's not for everyone though.

It's not an "urban legend", it's just my observation. I think the movie is an early example of psychedelic influence in cinema. Rock Hudson's performance in it is so intense and passionate I suspect he may have been under the influence, and this tale of him having a "breakdown" in fetal position fits right in with that observation imo.

Cary Grant acted on low doses of LSD and talked openly about his use of it. Others did as well but didn't talk about it. Early on, before the "hippies" it was touted as a cure for alcoholism (the creator of AA stopped using with it's help), and even a beauty / youth elixir. An actors performance would certainly be different, and probably more intense / passionate / charismatic under it's influence (results may vary lol).

Also, it was perfectly legal at the time and didn't have the stigma that it does today with most people.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 8 months ago

If Hudson did indeed take LSD in the.mid 60s, it wouldn't necessarily have been in small doses, under a doctor's supervision, or legal. Five seconds of research tells me that LSD was criminalized in the US in 1965, and I'm old enough to know that in those days lots of people took it for recreational purposes, with no idea what the dosage was, because the entire market for the drug was illegal, and they didn't care about safety anyway.

As for whether Hudson was using it when the breakdown scene was shot, neither of us knows and neither will ever know. I believe you when you say he looks like he was having an LDS experience, but that doesn't mean he was. Actors get paid to fake emotions, and remember this a guy who spent most of his career looking like he was madly in love with some woman,when he actually felt zero attraction to them. He wasn't a terrible actor.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

I clearly can't take you at face value. Probably a studio shill with 23,638 posts?

For one thing LSD was first made illegal in California on 10/6/66 (date did not go unnoticed by the "hippies") five seconds of research told me that.

Also, easy to control dose if you know what you have. It could be blotter paper that you could split into halves, quarters or even eighths. It could be liquid that you knew was 100mic a drop that you could dilute by half, or 10x so you could microdose with one drop low dose with three to five drops etc. Most people that used it were not stupid.

Anyway, we both agree his performance was excellent.
I happen to think he was probably experimenting with LSD.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 8 months ago

Okay, you're calling me a "studio shill", because I didn't implicitly believe everything you said, but nstead suggested that what we were seeing was, you know, an actor ACTING??? And you think that some "studio" is still paying some publicist to protect the long-dead Hudson from drug rumors in the middle of the night???????

That's crazy and that's stupid, so fuck off. I am done with you.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

I don't care if you believe me or not. It was just my observations and suspicion.

Why did you post BS about the date it was first made illegal?
"Five seconds of research tells me that LSD was criminalized in the US in 1965"

Thirty seconds of research would have told you that's not true.
It was made illegal well after the filming of Seconds.

That's the point I realized you were being disingenuous, so I figure you have an agenda.
Hence the comment that you may be a studio shill.

Have a nice night :)

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 8 months ago

Hundreds of doses of LSD and you think that long-dead movie stars still employee "studio shills".

You're not exactly being a good advertisement for the safety of the drug, you know.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

I'm not advertising it, or even advocating it. Like I said, it's not for everyone.

Long dead stars obviously don't employ shills. But studios today sure do. They are often transparent and disingenuous, like you.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 8 months ago

You're not paranoid, the studio plants really ARE out to get you!

Seriously, if you think I have an "agenda", feel free to check my posting history, and see if I've been fangirling or fanboying anyone, or pushing new movies, or trying to stifle noxious rumors, or doing any of the other things that a real studio plant would do. But as you won't find any of those things, and tell you that at this point in the conversation, my only agenda is to snark at the crazy man.

reply

[–] funkychicken (607) 8 months ago

Well, you were pretty touchy about my suggestion that you might be a shill. First telling me to fuck off, and then a couple attempts to insult me. None of which bother me in the least.

You must be lots of fun IRL lol.

Bye

reply