--- JIM DOHERTY <
jimdohertyjr@yahoo.com> wrote:
> If it had been a franchise, Marlowe would have
just
> been one more character featured in a series
of
> comparatively low-budget "B's," like Charlie
Chan,
> Mike Shayne, Torchy Blaine, or Hildegard
Withers,
> with
> entries ultimately deteriorating over time
as
> Chandler
> material was used up and studio hacks turned
out
> origina scripts to order, until finally the
series
> hit
> Poverty Row (recall that Chan wound up at
Monogram
> and
> Shayne at PRC).
****************************************************** But if
the quality of the Hawks film had inspired the franchise we
might have had a Marlowe franchise before the James Bond
franchise. The Sherlock Holmes franchise was successful
despite taking the character out of his own time, due to the
interplay between Rathbone & Bruce. Neither was ideal for
the characters they portrayed, but they both redefined the
characters in their image. I don't think you can say that
about any Marlowe except Bogart. The fedora sit askew on
everyone else's head. Marlowe, even by Ian Fleming's own
statement, was the inspiration for James Bond. His glove
compartment arsenal for example, is the beginning of Q
Branch. A Marlowe franchise would not have held Bogart for
more than a few pictures. His best work was still in the
future at that time. But had he done say three of the book
and moved on, we might have a much broader base of hardboiled
films to compare. We can certainly have a hearty conversation
as to who was the best James Bond, can't we? And I don't
think the Fleming estate has been injured by one dollar by
that franchise today.
Patrick King
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with
Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 26 Mar 2008 EDT