September 7, 2023 • 56 mins
GAY PURR-EE (1962) is a forgotten classic of 1960s animation. But the newly remastered Blu-ray release from the Warner Archive has restored the film to the rich, vibrant colors and sound that showcases the original artistry of Chuck Jones and Judy Garland.
Animation and film historian Jerry Beck, film historian and Judy Garland expert John Fricke, and Warner Bros' George Feltenstein join the podcast to discuss the production history of the film, how Judy Garland was brought on board, and why the film has struggled to attain the stature it rightly deserves. We also provide a full review of the stunning new Blu-ray remaster, all of the robust extras, and an explanation of the differences between the film sound and the previously released film soundtrack.
"Gay Purr-ee" was ahead of its time and poorly marketed by UPA and Warner Bros upon its initial release. While this new Warner Archive Blu-ray cannot rectifiy the past, it showcases the artistry and importance of the film for animation fans, Judy Garland devotees, and film collectors everywhere, and will hopefully lead to a newfound appreciation for the brilliance of the film.
Purchase on Amazon: GAY PURR-EE BLU-RAY
The Extras Facebook page
The Extras Twitter
Warner Archive & Warner Bros Catalog Group
As an Amazon Affiliate, The Extras may receive a commission for purchases through our purchase links. There is no additional cost to you, and every little bit helps us in the production of the podcast. Thanks in advance.
Otaku Media produces podcasts, behind-the-scenes extras, and media that connect creatives with their fans and businesses with their consumers. Contact us today to see how we can work together to achieve your goals. tim@theextras.tv
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Hello and welcome to the Extras, where we take you
behind the scenes of yourfavorite TV shows, movies and
animation and their release ondigital DVD, blu-ray and 4K or
your favorite streaming site.
I'm Tim Lager host.
Well, we often have terrificguests on the show, but once in
a while we're lucky enough tohave a pairing of guests we've
never had before.
That's exactly what we havetoday.
(00:26):
As animation and film historian, jerry Beck, and film historian
and the world's leadingauthority on Judy Garland, john
Fricky, join George Felntzienand I for a discussion of the
new Warner Archive Blu-rayrelease of Gay Hurry.
Well, hi, george, jerry, john,it's good to see everyone today.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Hello, hey, gentlemen .
Speaker 3 (00:49):
This is really special.
I'm so glad to have everybodyhere.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Yeah, I mean this is like a six degrees of separation
from George John.
Jerry, you're actually meetingfor the first time on this
podcast, which is pretty special.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
But in five minutes of pre-taping conversation we
already have Robert Osborne andTCM in common, so I think we're
good to go.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
Absolutely, not to mention our love of the Wizard
of Oz, but that's anothersubject.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
And we don't have seven hours, so no.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Well, george, this is kind of your idea to get your
two friends together for adiscussion on Gay Hurry.
How do you want to kind ofstart that discussion?
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Well, I proudly can say I've been friends with both
of these gentlemen, bothpersonally and professionally,
for a very long time and I willnot embark on anything regarding
any animated content withoutconsulting and speaking with
Jerry, and I would not embark onany project related to the
(01:53):
incredible Judy Garland withoutMr Fricky, and I am so proud to
be joining them for this uniquefusion of historical
conflagration if that's a wordwhere everything has come
together to celebrate therelease of this very unique
motion picture on Blu-ray from a4K scan off the camera negative
(02:17):
, and a glorious Blu-ray is theresult.
So we're very proud and I'mexcited to hear what the
gentleman have to say and tojoin in the conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Well, jerry, maybe we should start with you just to
give a little background on howthe film came together, because
this was one of the.
Was it one of the last or fewfilms from UPA, and it's an
interesting story.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Upa is pretty much forgotten today by the general
public, but in the 1950s theywere as well known as Disney.
They won three Oscars.
They created characters thateverybody knew back then, at
least Mr Magoo, geraldMcBoying-Boying UPA was the hot
studio in animation, hotter eventhan Disney and actually
(03:02):
influenced not only Disney andits animation but all the
animation studios in America andall the animation studios
around the world.
With their unique vision, withtheir unique you know, they gave
permission to the world ofanimation that an animation
didn't have to just be BugsBunny and Donald Duck, it could
be anyone's artistic vision, itcould be James Thurber, you know
(03:28):
.
It could be children's booksthat look like in the style of
that author, or just even theanimators personal thing.
So UPA was a verygroundbreaking studio and the
one thing they were trying to dothey were all, by the way, all
the artists there were made upof ex-Disney artists who had
worked on Snow White, pinocchio,fantasia and were most of them
(03:49):
were people who left the studioduring the great strike.
Disney had a picketing in 1941to create the union and all that
, and a lot of these artistsleft for a variety of reasons
World War II as well and aformed UPA to try some new ideas
and new things and theirbreakthrough film was in 1950
(04:10):
with Gerald McBoin-Boin, whichwon the Academy Award seemingly
out of nowhere.
At that time they were alwaystrying to do an animated feature
.
That was something they triedto do for 10 years.
They made a deal with ColumbiaPictures in 1948 that lasted
about 10 years or so and theywere again the toast of the town
during that decade andtheatrical shorts were still a
(04:33):
big deal during that time.
They finally broke through andit was very difficult because
Columbia Pictures at that timethey wanted, they didn't want a
feature, they certainly didn'twant one that looked like a UPA
movie.
They wouldn't know how to sellit.
They wouldn't know what to dowith it.
They had many, many proposals,many, many pitches.
The one that finally brokethrough was an Arabian night
(04:54):
story, but Columbia Picturesinsisted that Mr Magoo be in it
and that film came out in 1959and bombed entirely.
The studio changed hands in 1960.
A guy named Henry Sapersteintook over and really
commercialized the studio.
They suddenly made Mr Magoo TVcartoons and things like that.
(05:15):
But he had a big goal tocontinue what UPA had started by
trying to move into the featurearena.
They immediately came up with acouple of films in development,
both of which came out in 1962.
One of them, of course, is thatvery famous Mr Magoo Christmas
(05:35):
Carol.
The other one was Gay Paris.
Gay Paris was a story by ChuckJones and his wife.
I'm sure you know this.
I have a feeling John has alittle more detail on that story
than I do, but it was sototally up Chuck Jones' alley.
This is exactly the kind offilm he would make.
(05:56):
He was, of course, undercontract to make the Warner
Brothers Looney Tunes forWarners at that time, so he
didn't go any further thancreate the screenplay with his
wife.
I'm going to stop there, butthe film is wonderful.
We'll talk more about that aswe go along.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Jerry, just this is kind of the big question mark
hanging over this film.
I've had an opinion about itand I will speak responsibly on
behalf of our company, right,but it is my understanding, or
this has always been my gut.
This is not based on anythingfactual.
This is not based on anything Ihave researched.
(06:40):
My belief is that Chuckdirected the cartoon and a
Levitao.
That credit because of Chuck'scontractual obligation to Warner
Brothers, and I wonder if youagree with that or if you think
that Chuck wrote the screenplayand that was it.
(07:01):
He didn't direct it per se.
Speaker 4 (07:05):
Well, in trying to be respectful of the company you
work for, clearly Chuck designedthe characters.
Clearly this is so, chuck Jones, as you have on the bonus
material.
The Peppula Pew cartoon,particular Louvre, come back to
me, which was released the sameyear as GayPerry.
(07:26):
It's a very, very similarthemed animated short with the
Louvre Museum in Paris.
I mean, it's pretty amazing.
This was Chuck's thing and Ithink, possibly, maybe in the
way that Spielberg reallydirected Poltergeist.
I know.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
this thing we don't like to talk about it.
Speaker 4 (07:49):
It's a maybe.
Abe Levitao was Chuck'sassistant and co-director at
Warner Brothers for years beforethis and he returned to Chuck
during the period when Chuck wasdoing the Tom and Jerry
cartoons for MGM.
Abe Levitao gets a co-creditand I believe he even gets a.
I think he's a co-director onDot and Align and I think he
(08:10):
even directed a few of thosesolo.
Abe Levitao was a great artistas well, but clearly this looks
like a Chuck Jones production.
I also will say, whether youknew it or not, that Chuck got
in a little hot water for thisfilm with Warner Brothers.
The film, of course, wasreleased by Warner Brothers.
(08:31):
The UPA no longer had theirdeal with Columbia in the 1960s
so they shopped the film around.
Warner Brothers picked it up,but someone there in business
affairs realized that what'sthis Chuck Jones doing on this
other company's film?
And, as you may have heard,chuck was let go a little
(08:54):
earlier than the rest of thestaff and, as you also may know,
the classic Warner Brotherscartoons department, the one
that was started by LeonSchlesinger in 1930.
And at that time it was ChuckJones, robert McKimson and Fritz
Freeling.
They were let go at the end of1962.
(09:15):
Chuck preceded them being let goand the reason was he broke his
contract.
He wasn't supposed to write afilm for another company, even
though Warner's released it.
I find that so odd.
But they were letting everyonego anyway.
So I don't think it was asgreat of a disappointment for
Chuck.
By the time they let everybodygo most of his staff went to
(09:39):
join him at MGM on those Tom andJerry cartoons, you know.
But it all worked out foreverybody in the end.
But it was quite controversialin-house at that time.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
Well you know.
I should also clarify that thefilm was what we now call a
negative pickup, meaning thatWarner Brothers arranged with
Saperstein and UPA for perpetualworldwide distribution rights
and perpetuity.
My theory is Chuck worked onthe movie we don't know to what
(10:10):
extent before the movie wascompleted or released, warner
Brothers picked it up fordistribution, or Jerry, you may
know this.
Maybe it was completed and thenWarner Brothers looked at it
and said they'll pick it up fordistribution.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
I don't know that from.
I believe Warner's was involvedwhile the film was in
production.
But I would also say that Chuckmight not have directed much of
it, Because Abe was a trustedcolleague.
He was already working for UPA,he directed the Magoo's
Christmas Carol and Chuck wasinvolved when he was at Warner's
(10:45):
at that time.
As you know, George, he wasinvolved heavily with the Bugs
Bunny show and directing thoseinterstitials and that's why a
lot of the cartoons from theearly 60s, a lot of the shorts,
are either co-directed by someof the animators or even
directed by some of theanimators who only had their one
shot of directing during thisperiod.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Well, that makes sense.
Regardless, the net result wasa very unique motion picture,
and that's why all of us arehere to talk about it.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
I gotta tell you I watched it again with the
Blu-ray, with the release ofBlu-ray, and I haven't seen the
film for at least 15 or 20 years, so I decided to do it right
Now.
By the way, I had never, I onlywatched it on television.
I never saw it in a theaterbefore.
I decided you know what got abig screen TV.
(11:38):
Now we all have high death,turning off the lights, watching
it at night, cranking up thesound, and man, it was an
experience.
I really enjoyed watching thisfilm over again in a way that,
like I, because I hadn'tremembered certain scenes.
I hadn't remember how thingswould look.
Color is so vivid, the music isso wonderful.
(12:01):
It's.
I realize now the film was wayahead of its time.
It was way ahead of its time in1962.
It's a work of art and a greattribute to Paris.
It's just a great film.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
I think so too.
I've always felt it wascriminally underrated and a lot
of people don't understand itbecause there's a sophistication
to it that just goes over thehead of a lot of people.
Conversely, there are a lot ofpeople today who grew up
watching this on television aschildren.
Yes, like Jerry, you and I grewup in New York.
(12:40):
We didn't have this, but herein Los Angeles you had Tom
Hatton hosting the family filmfestival on weekends, yep, and I
know a lot of people that sawthe film then.
Speaker 4 (12:53):
Yeah, yeah, you know, the thing that people forget
and we talk about it all thetime, george is that the show,
is that the short cartoons thatChuck comes out of, that you, pa
, made, were never aimed solelyat children.
Yes, children can watch them,children can enjoy them.
The characters are popular, butthey were aimed for the full
(13:13):
audience.
Jones in particular, his staff,the UPA people in general, they
played to the whole of anaudience and not just children's
matinees.
Now, by 1962, things hadchanged.
Animation being a kid's mediumbecame a thing by the late
fifties and into the sixties.
(13:34):
So it came out at a difficultperiod.
But the film is reallysophisticated, you know, even
though it's about animalcharacters, you know, and they
look like our classic cartooncharacters.
But it's quite a sophisticatedpiece.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
You're sure I just have to attend to what Jerry
said.
I remember Newsweek's, thefinal line of Newsweek's review.
They were pleasant about someaspects of it, but they said it
seems like they're trying to tapa hitherto unsuspected audience
, the fave four-year-old ofRachea taste and I think I'm
(14:12):
saying that right.
I took French in high school.
Yeah, and it's.
They didn't know quite how topromote it.
They didn't know quite how tosell it.
It was.
But what ties in with whatJerry just said about watching
it now and watching it projectedlarge and with good equipment
or in a theater.
That's the last time I thoughtit was about 10 years ago at a
theater here in New York.
(14:33):
It is such, if everybody whoworked on it is so classy, you
know it is all exquisitely,beautifully, conceptually, and
they're also committed to it tomake it what you know.
Chuck and Judy and Harold andYip and more Lindsay and the
animators and everybody.
(14:54):
It's really really, really goodpeople all working at the top
of their form.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Well, I know I watched it, you know, the other
night to Jerry, and my daughtersat down and watched it with me
and she's 10 years old and shewatches, of course, all of the
newest Disney animation, all theanimation, and it's totally
different because it's like art.
(15:21):
It really was to what you saidand the fact that she actually
understands, because she'slearning in school about that
period of time in French historyand art history, and she could,
as they were going through someof the different explanation in
the film of some of the artwork, she could point it out and she
was enthralled.
And then, when I said, hey,that's the voice of Judy Garland
(15:43):
, she of course knew who Judywas from the Wizard of Oz, which
endures amazingly right, thisfilm that just looks like it was
made five years ago, not 85years ago or whatever it is.
And she sat and she watched thewhole movie with me.
She didn't get bored, shedidn't grab her iPad, she didn't
want to text with her friendsor anything, and she was
(16:05):
delighted.
And, of course, one of thegreat things about animation and
animated movies is music andthe music of Judy Garland
throughout this.
John, that's why you're on, ofcourse.
How did Judy get involved inthis project and I'm assuming
she was involved from very earlyon because it's so integral to
(16:25):
the story.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
Well, the earliest reference I can find to her
being involved was in early June1961.
And at that point she had doneCarnegie Hall.
She'd been doing the concerts,the one woman shows, for about
10 months and the industrycertainly was aware of her
resurgence.
She was doing, she was healthyand she was touring and she was
knocking everybody sideways.
(16:47):
She had been out to Hollywoodto do judgment at Nuremberg.
That filming had been in March1961.
And Freddy Fields and DavidBeagle and her new agents and
they were really managing herand I don't know who approached
her.
But Mr Saperstein had such avision for this.
There's an interview with himin the December 61 New York
(17:09):
Times about if it had to be thisperiod of arts, it had to be,
you know, these artists that wehomage.
If it had to be art, it had tobe Paris.
If it had to be animals inParis, it had to be cats.
But at that point they had justfinished the recording.
Judy and the cast had done allthe vocal stuff in LA in the
month of November 1961.
(17:30):
So it was about five monthsbefore that that Eddahopper, of
all people, broke the story.
The Judy Garland was going to dothe voice of the leading
character in Gay Parade and theextraordinary thing too, and I
think, jerry, george, all of youcan correct me, I think
basically this is regarded, notthat Mary Costa didn't do
sleeping Gruty and Cliff Edwardsdidn't do Pinocchio, but I
(17:53):
think this is one of the veryfirst times, if not the first
time, that a major, major, majorstar and several major stars
came in to do the voices for afeature length cartoon.
And when it was announced byHeta, at that point they were
looking to get Jean Kelly to dothe voice of Jean Tom, the male
lead, and Marie Chevalier to bethe narrator.
(18:13):
But Harold Arlen and YipHarburg were already committed
to do the songs and I think,however it came together.
I wouldn't be a bit surprisedif they didn't use the idea of
we can try to get Harold and YipJudy if you'll agree to do it.
You can give using it as baitto get her, or maybe they used
her to get them, who knows?
But when you put those peopletogether it was kind of like
(18:35):
Star is Born.
When they announced that,warners announced that Once they
were doing a Star is Born, judyGarland I regress when and
Harold Arlen were on board,george Cooper, the director,
said to Sid Love, if it's forher I'll do it, whatever it is.
All those people come right inwhen you have that kind of
magnetism.
And, as I say, the word was outthat Judy was really in an
(18:58):
upswing and many of them hadalready seen her.
Harold Arlen was at theCarnegie Hall concert.
Mort Lindsay had been broughtin by Fielsen Beigelman to
conduct for her in January of 61and then convinced Mort to do
the tour and by summer of 61, hewas orchestrating songs for her
act and for a capital single.
(19:18):
So he was the logical choice to.
You know, judy will get Mort todo this with you and she loved
him and he loved her.
So it was kind of a coalescenceof getting everybody together
so that, as I say, by November1961, she had taken three weeks
off from the concert tour.
She was in LA.
There are pictures of her andLulee working together with Mort
(19:39):
in the recording studiorehearsing, and K Thompson,
judy's great good friend since1943 at MGM, was there vocally
coaching, uncredited, but shewas there.
Maury Amsterdam is not in thesepictures but he replaced the
idea of Marie Chevalier,obviously because the narrator
was not that big a part.
Maybe it would have been ifChevalier had agreed to do it.
(20:02):
But getting Goulay was a cool.
This again is Freddie and David.
They eventually had Goulay as aclient.
Whether they use this as baitto get him as a client or they
had him and they put him in thisbecause he was a client, I'm
not sure.
I don't know his careerbackwards and forwards, but I do
know that it was just anextraordinary grouping of people
(20:23):
and Freddie and David wantedJudy in there because then they
got part of her salary.
They would have wanted Goulayin there because they would have
gotten part of his salary.
You know they were packages andthey were working in that idiom
very early on and Hollywoodhistory Judy got a $50,000
upfront for Gay Puri and thenshe had a percentage of it.
(20:44):
George, look into that.
I want to know where the moneywent, if she's supposed to be
still getting a percentage ofGay Puri.
Anyway, that's how it allstarted.
And there are great quotes fromYip, harberg and Haralala about
the story about working withJudy again.
And Yip said when we sat downwith Judy to teach her the songs
(21:05):
and he said I was standing atthe corner, she was sitting next
to Harold and she was lookingover Harold's shoulder at the
score.
Now Judy could not read music.
She was very frightened aboutthat.
But he said Yip said she hadsuch a sense of melody and
lyrics.
He said she was almost a lineahead of Harold in realizing
where the song was going to goand how she was going to sing.
(21:26):
And when Harold Arlen laterheard the recording he said
everybody's fine.
But he said Judy alone shines.
She is a treasure and acomposer's work could not be in
better hands.
He also said that Little Dropsof Rain was a personal favorite
of his.
So that was making us fromearly 61 into summer of 62,
(21:49):
which is when the animation wascompleted.
Mr Saperstein was very carefulabout saying that.
Well, no, in no way doesMusette resemble Judy Garland in
appearance.
But if you look, judy's eyeswere brown, musette's eyes are
blue.
But the eyes, the wideness ofthe eyes, the expressiveness of
the eyes, the lashes, that's allvery much Judy Garland.
(22:11):
And one of the things that isfun, I think, for Judy fans to
listen to is that she said whenshe talked about Gabe Peri later
on she said I did a high pitch,my voice for the dialogue.
You know to sound young andfresh and naive, and she said it
way up here and very wondering,and all the rest.
(22:31):
And then Mort hits a chord andout comes 1961, judy Garland,
carnegie Hall voice.
So they were going forabsolutely every approach to it
that they thought would beappealing and, as you say now,
if your 10-year-old daughter in2023 can respond to it and I
have nieces who are respondingto it in the 1980s on home video
(22:52):
and I was 11 when Gabe Peripremiered and I was certainly
happy to it on all kinds oflevels, but it was just so many
good people doing so much goodwork and I think it all paid off
in the end result.
Maybe not at the box office,maybe not for the mass audience,
but, as I said earlier and aswe can get into later on as we
(23:14):
go on, it wasn't marketedespecially well.
I don't think Warner Brothersknew quite what to do with it
and they might have had a grudgeagainst Chuck Jones for being
so involved with it.
He would have been gone by thenand they might have been an
attitude of well, why should wepush a Chuck Jones product when
he reached his contract and isnow at Metro?
And, who knows, there arealways backstories.
Speaker 4 (23:37):
Well, I think Garland drove this project in many,
many ways, I think.
I wonder if it seems to me thatWarner Brothers may have picked
it up and the marketing seemsto be driven by it's Judy
Garland, judy Garland.
The trailer that's alsoincluded in the Blu-ray is very
interesting and very telling.
(23:58):
It's about 50%, maybe 70%,about it's Garland, it's Garland
in Robert Goulet, but thenanother 30% is a little bit of
clips from the film andpersonally I'd watch the trailer
afterward after seeing the filmand I'm surprised the clips
they showed in the trailerbecause they're not the best
(24:20):
clips.
You know they could have somany great visuals and beautiful
things they could have put inhere, but they didn't do that.
So very, very odd.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
You don't start a family animation.
Forgive me for jumping in, butyou do not start a trailer for a
family animation movie withJudy Garland singing Paris as a
lonely town and the voiceover isthe woman.
Is that who I think it is?
Why?
Yes, that's her, that's JudyGarland, and it's like start
with my hand Paris.
You do roses, red, violets,blue.
(24:48):
You put in the suicide numbertoward the end, when you kind of
already pre-sold the picture.
Very, very peculiar.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
But yeah, I mean I also want to say that Garland
you said you asked before about,was this the first kind of
celebrity or star to headline ananimated film?
I have to think about it, but Ipretty much say yes as far as a
feature film is concerned, andGarland's a superstar.
The only other ones that are inthe back of my mind are some of
(25:21):
those little shorts that Disneydid where he did compilation
movies and he would have BingCrosby doing Legend of Sleepy
Hollow and something like that.
Or the Andrews sisters andLittle Toot.
You know those are reallyshorts that are part of a
feature.
There's no, any of those bigDisney movies that really
(25:42):
highlights a superstar.
Again, I'll just make a littlecut out because we don't want to
talk about Disney, but I guessthe only comparison would be
something like Peggy Lee beinginvolved with Lady and the Tramp
.
Yeah, but other than that thiswas unique at the time.
Anything when we think aboutcelebrities' voices and animated
(26:03):
features, it's pretty muchafter this movie, including
Disney movies.
You know that would later havePhil Harris or whatever, the
Beatles and Yellow Submarine,you know, things like that.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
all of that's later and this was definitely a first
and again I'm going to playdevil's advocate here about the
trailer because of course, bythe time he gave Harry was
released in November 1962, judyhad been Oscar nominated for
judgment.
Nuremberg, carnegie Hall hadbeen on the charts for something
like 75.
Right Grammy Album of the Year,petitian Spectacular Frank
(26:36):
Sinatra and Martin, which wasthe biggest star in the industry
at that point.
Speaker 4 (26:40):
Right, and that's a really important.
People forget the context ofthe release and what was going
on at that time.
In fact, let me ask you, john,remind me about Robert Goulay.
Was Camelot?
Was he in Camelot at that point?
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Camelot in 1960 had put him on a map and he was
doing a lot of TV variety.
But it's interesting, he waswith Camelot for a good long
time and then he did Gay Perri.
He got a recording contract andwhen Gay Perri opened he was
also opening simultaneously whatI believe was his first big
nightclub act at Blinstrobes inBoston.
(27:15):
So he was just starting todiversify and he was starting to
appear in non-animated films.
But that was really just comingon the map at that point by the
time the picture opened.
He was a great catch for thepart and again, looking ahead, I
think everybody kind of knew hehad a future, but he wasn't yet
(27:37):
.
Robert Goulay when he recordedGay Perri he was, but I'm.
The film opened and Rhett saidwon an Academy Award.
Hermione Gingold had just madea big hit in the Music man.
So these were all names thatcould be punched.
Paul Freeze everybody knew thevoice.
I don't think they did any kindof real promotion with him, but
(27:57):
they could have if they'd saidthis is the same guy whose voice
is here, there and everywhere.
But it was all about Judy.
I didn't complain, mind you,but it was all about Judy.
Speaker 4 (28:10):
It's also a great performance.
What I love about it is inlater years, when there would be
a celebrity, you can kind offeel they're coming in and doing
the least in order to fulfillwhatever the contract is.
I didn't feel that way at allwatching this film.
She gives a performance.
That's the cool thing about it.
To me, it all feels very, veryright.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
Well, and here's Tim.
If you ever want to run atrivia contest with this YouTube
installment, you can ask thequestion.
At what moment in gay paris isMusette's voice not the voice of
Judy Garland?
Tell us?
It's the first frames of thefilm when she and Jean-Tom are
in the carriage and they'relaughing at Robespierre and his
(28:53):
little pussy cat.
That's not Judy Garlandlaughing.
Judy Garland had anidentifiable laugh in the world
and they probably didn't knowthey needed it at that point.
You know it was an afterthoughtwith the animation, but it
ain't her.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Well, back to your point, Jerry.
When I watched this movie thenew Blu-ray coming out or
actually it's already out fromthe Warner Archive, when I put
that in, I definitely wanted towatch it on my 4K monitor with
my surround sound, and so it'sthe best of the best, of which
I'm gonna watch.
You know which?
I watch all of the newestmovies and it holds up visually,
(29:29):
the brightness of the colors,the artistry of the colors, and
then the sound of Judy singingcoming through my surround sound
.
I mean it was quite anexperience.
It really to what you said, itwas a performance against art.
I mean, that's just kind of howI have to view it, and my
daughter was totally enthralled.
I think anybody who hasn't seenthis since it was been on
(29:52):
television or, you know, sinceit's been remastered, obviously
it's gonna be really, reallysurprised and shocked at how
great it looks and sounds.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
Well, this is the first time people are getting to
see it as it was shown in thetheaters in the 185 aspect ratio
.
Further, this is a 4K scan offthe camera negative, so you
don't have any intermediateelements getting in the way.
And I really wanna talk aboutthe sound for a second, because
this is very important.
(30:21):
The film's music sessions wererecorded stereophonically and of
course there was a CDsoundtrack which basically was
the more modern iteration ofwhat was the LP soundtrack.
Let me do my math.
Well, 40 years earlier and Iproduced the CD soundtrack using
(30:46):
the Multitrack Album Master,there were no recording sessions
to go back to.
They were not turned over toWarner Brothers.
No one knows what happened tothem.
But the soundtrack album hasappropriate for the time reverb.
(31:07):
It doesn't sonically sound likethe movie at all, so people
will sometimes just assume well,why isn't the film in stereo,
like the album?
Now, when I was a little kid Iused to think that way.
I was like what's going on here?
The film was released minorally.
(31:29):
We used the Mineral MagneticPrint Master source for the
audio and it is mono as releasedto theater.
If we had put the music asrecorded for the, as you find on
the soundtrack album.
If we had gone back to thatmaster for the songs it would
(31:50):
have sounded completelydifferent.
Everybody would have soundedlike they're in an echo chamber
because they put reverb bakedinto those album tracks.
And we ran into the sameproblem with Lucio Ball's main.
Maybe not surprisingly orsurprisingly that film was
(32:10):
released minorally and thereason why mono movies with
music in them were if theyweren't a huge road show
presentation going up to 70millimeter or filmed in with a
65 millimeter negative with thesix track sound.
It was in the early fiftieswith stereophonic, magnetic kind
(32:34):
of descended upon the scenethat stereo is more common.
Then there became a period oftime, really for about 15, maybe
20 years, where localneighborhood theaters did not
have stereophonic capabilities.
So many films were releasedmono, even if they were music
heavy.
It really wasn't until theintroduction of Dolby's stereo
(32:58):
optical, which really was led byStar Wars in 1977, that made it
more commonplace that you couldhave stereophonic audio
reproduction in theaters inneighborhoods and even that took
10 to 12 years to become very,very commonplace.
(33:18):
So I really want people to knowthat we were unable.
Just the same thing happened tous with Cabaret, where Cabaret
was strangely released only witha menorah soundtrack or we can
find no evidence otherwise, andthe recording sessions for that
film don't exist and thereforewe had to synthesize something
(33:41):
for the Blu-ray that came out.
But the album of Cabaret haseven more reverb than the album
of Gay-Paree.
So, as in like, we missed anopportunity.
We could not do it because itwould have sounded completely
different from the rest of thefilm and actually been
distracted.
It's a shame, because thestereo sounds wonderful but it
(34:05):
doesn't sound like the film.
It sounds like an album.
So I just had to clarify thatfor those who are interested.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
And complaining.
They're always complaining.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
People are.
Yeah, I'll leave it at that andjust concur with your
assessment, John.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
So John was the album that came out of this fairly
popular.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
I don't think so.
I think George wrote about it alittle bit in the CD liner
notes because the film came andwent so quickly.
It premiered in Chicago inNovember of 1962.
A big world premiere.
Judy was there doing a concertbesides and plugging the songs.
She had been for thepre-stating concerts in Las
(34:51):
Vegas for six weeks and inChicago and talking about Gay
Paris and she was supposed to begetting a percentage.
She was in there plugging forit.
She did a bus tour of theatersin New York like Betty Davis did
for Baby Jane around that sametime.
Or she went by bus withreporters to.
You know, judy will be at thistheater in the Bronx at seven
(35:13):
o'clock, she'll be at thistheater in the Bronx at seven
thirty.
And she went place to place.
Goulet was with her on a coupleof the three nights.
They had a 14 man police escortto get them in enough because
the people were jammed up to seeJudy Garland in person and at
first she just went in andtalked and she got the sense
(35:33):
that it wasn't enough.
So on the bus she coached the 14policemen and Robert Goulet
into a chorus of there's nobusiness like show business,
which they then acapella at allthe other theaters which she did
, that she and Goulet were on ajack car program here an hour on
Friday time time and that was ahuge event to have Judy Garland
(35:55):
on the talk show.
It had never happened beforeand so she was singing, she was
saying little drops and Paris isthe only town on that show.
She and Goulet dueted me set.
But the thing is I was waitingfor it to come in Milwaukee and
to appear.
I think it happened overThanksgiving weekend and because
it was Thanksgiving weekendevery family was already
(36:18):
committed to doing this, thatand the other thing and within
five days, six days, it was goneand it seemed like that
happened.
I don't remember Print ads inthe paper.
It was all very, very, veryquick and clandestine and out
and they put the problem out,you know good four months before
the movie opened.
I remember getting it in thesummer of 1962 because even at
(36:41):
11, I was buying Judy Garlandalbums as soon as they came on
the market and it's a shamebecause you knew I played the
album a lot because I loveMortland's stuff.
I love what he was charting forJudy, what he was the Carnegie
Hall album, which he didn't doany arrangements but he was
conducting brilliantly and it'sjust, he knew how to showcase
(37:03):
her.
And I remember Ed Gibbonski,who was a good friend of the
Irish, irish wins.
He was a good friend of HaroldArland.
He wrote in fact twobiographies on Harold, one while
Harold was still alive and onethat could be a little bit more
direct about some of theproblems that Harold had after
Harold passed.
And he was also a main reviewerfor American Record Guide,
(37:25):
which was one of the classiestof the monthly magazines about
new records, pop, classical,both.
And he writes very, veryfluently and very well about gay
paris and his cutoff is thatthis is a score that would not
be out of place on a Broadwaystage.
You know, it is that caliber ofmusic and lyrics and the album
(37:48):
is wonderful and so iseverything about gay paris.
Again, no, I don't rememberthere being ads in Billboard or
Variety or anything.
It was just kind of flush.
And a lot of this is thinkingout loud for me.
And the point again my mind isgoing back to is maybe one of
the brothers was just didn'twant to do anything for Chuck
(38:09):
Jones but they envisioned as aChuck Brown production.
I don't want to say that, youknow, as if it's concrete
because, as George said, I'vedone no research at it, but boy,
it just disappeared veryquickly.
It didn't even play theneighborhood theaters because,
believe me, I wanted to go andsee it again.
Speaker 4 (38:28):
I wanted to ask you, John, where did it open in New
York?
Did it open like in one theaterin Manhattan?
Speaker 2 (38:36):
It opened wide.
It opened wide.
That's why Judy and Bob Gouletdid all those theaters on the
bus.
So probably like 14, 15, 20theaters all over the question
area.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
Well, you know, I mean I'm a bit of a, in addition
to my being an animationhistorian, I'm a bit of a nut on
how the films were distributedbecause, like George, I used to
be in film distribution and Idon't know about the whole Chuck
Jones aspect of it.
When you've got Judy Garland Ireally don't think Chuck Jones
(39:11):
is that important from amarketing perspective.
I think that none of thestudios and this went on for
decades, until literally thiscentury none of the studios
really understood how todistribute an animated film,
good or bad the film may beoutside of Disney.
Disney was set up to do thatand most studios, you know, even
(39:35):
handed a great film.
And again, george knows, youknow Iron Giant is a classic
animated feature.
Warner Brothers did not know howto sell that movie.
If a film is good, it'llultimately will out.
You know people will find it onphysical media, thank goodness.
But back in those days,unfortunately, a lot of feeling
(39:56):
by the front end distributionpeople, based on what I know was
a cartoon at that time was acartoon that meant Saturday
matinees they sort of prethought it wouldn't work.
You know in advance, and I seethat all the time when I look at
the box office totals for thenon Disney films throughout the
years.
And there's good films, thereare bad films, but sometimes
(40:19):
they would dump a film, a greatfilm.
In fact.
Chuck Jones's next feature wasthe Phantom Toll booth.
That was not released for liketwo or three years George, you
may know about that and then itwas sold as one of those
children matinees, those MGM.
Yeah, remember that.
Speaker 3 (40:36):
It was part of the first group of MGM children's
matinees.
Along with this is, of course,John's territory, the first
theatrical engagements of theWizard of Oz in over 15 years,
as the original agreement withCBS for broadcast did not allow
for theatrical exhibition.
So the MGM children's matineeswere where the Phantom Toll
(40:59):
booth finally was seen intheaters after being on the
shelf for two years.
Speaker 4 (41:03):
Right.
I mean there was a weirdfeeling about what animation was
in that in the whole of the1960s.
Walt Disney passed away in 1966.
Animation on the whole did nothave a leader and the studios
left to their own devices.
Really kind of let it all go iswhat happened from the
(41:26):
animation history perspective.
That's why it's great thatwe're able to showcase and
highlight this film, because itreally is a work of art and
really, as you said, underratedit would be the right word for
its reception in the past.
I think this might be the bestever release of it.
I'm pretty positive it is andhopefully it'll get more people
(41:49):
to rediscover it for the firsttime.
Speaker 3 (41:53):
And looking back at the history, I think it is
interesting to note that thefilm made its television debut
not as afternoon kittyprogramming, but it was on the
CBS either Thursday or FridayNight Network movie.
I can't remember if it wasThursday Night movie or Friday
Night movie, I don't rememberthat, but it was, you know, 9 pm
(42:14):
.
When was that, george?
What year?
I can't tell you exactly, but Iwould assume 1966 or 67
somewhere around there.
But they didn't make it.
They didn't say, oh, we can'tput this film on our nighttime
primetime movie slot becauseit's for kids.
(42:36):
They didn't do that.
They put it in the evening slotbecause there were some people
that recognized it as a work ofart that would appeal to adults.
And of course, jerry, you and Iare always dumping the
bandwagon that the classiccartoons that were created for
theatrical release by all thestudios, particularly Warner
(42:58):
Brothers and MGM, were very muchaimed at adults and fine for
children, but they were notcreated as kitty babysitters,
like the Saturday morningcartoons later came to be in the
70s and 80s.
Speaker 4 (43:15):
Well, you know, chuck was very much a proponent of
that, meaning he never really henever ever made the cartoons
any of the ones he did forchildren.
He was able to survive thatperiod by getting that gig with
MGM theatrical cartoons as hehad been doing, and of course he
augmented that by doing littlefilms like the Dot and the Line,
(43:37):
which then won an Oscar, notaimed at and the Grinch and of
course the Grinch I mean, andother TV specials.
He was able to maintain acertain level and probably I'd
love to know what year that wason the TV broadcast, because
that sort of fits in with, whenyou know, kind of the golden age
of Chuck as a making TVspecials, because I think Grinch
(43:58):
was 66, I think it was December66.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
If my brain isn't failing me, I'm pretty sure this
was like fall of 1967.
Speaker 4 (44:09):
Yeah, that sounds right.
Speaker 3 (44:10):
But yet I have not researched it.
Speaker 4 (44:12):
Yeah, and you know I got to say one more trivial or
not trivial thing about Chuckand UPA and this, relating to
this film, is this was reallythe last hurrah of animation in
the way that UPA was establishedin the first place, making this
film in 62.
This and Magoo's ChristmasCarol, same year, same directors
(44:33):
.
After this they only did abunch of Magoo specials for NBC
and they were out of animation.
As you know, they weredistributing Godzilla movies and
things like that.
I think they produced what's Up, tiger Lily with Woody Allen,
so they were in a differentuniverse after this movie.
What's interesting is that mostpeople don't know that Chuck
(44:57):
Jones directed the very firstUPA animated film.
That was in 1942.
And it was the first thing theygot paid to do a commissioned
film to reelect FDR called HellBent for Election, very famous
film.
You can find it online.
It's the first UPA cartoon andit was done by Chuck
Moonlighting because it was donefor political reasons.
(45:20):
He wanted to work on this, hewanted to help those guys and he
designed and directed thisshort to help FDR.
So I find that very interestingand Chuck was involved in the
first and the last of the UPAepic animations.
Speaker 2 (45:36):
Those are both good bookends though.
Speaker 4 (45:39):
Yes, well, in between , of course, he worked in Warner
Brothers.
Speaker 2 (45:44):
Again, just to go back to their marketing.
The other thing that botheredme well, not bothered me, yeah,
bothered me that again, nocampaigning at Oscar time for
either the score or any of thesongs.
Another writer and I wish Icould remember where I read this
, I don't, but he said that partof the problem is that in 1962,
(46:04):
there were not that manyoriginal musicals being written
for the screen.
Everything was Broadway orElvis Presley, but music.
Back then you had just had WestSide Story and of course you
had Mary Poppins upcoming, andSound of Music, of course, was
again Broadway.
But again, musicals were notwhat they had been, unless they
came with a pedigree built in.
(46:24):
Disney made Mary Poppins, sothere was the pedigree.
But Sound of Music, music man,west Side Story, they were all
pretty much pre-sold successes.
Yeah, so again it.
As you say, it is a muchdelayed sort of respect and
(46:45):
response to Gay Peri that thisrelease can give it and that I
think a lot of people will bedelighted to find out what
they've been missing for these60 years.
Speaker 4 (46:57):
You know, let me repeat that this film was
pioneering.
We did have a superstar in JudyGarland in it.
It was a UPA production but, asyou're saying, animation back
then was not regarded the way itis today.
Today we have 30 theatricalreleases.
They have a category of bestanimated feature.
None of that existed back then.
(47:19):
Animation was kind of off thetable.
They were on the, in the, inthe kiddie table, you know, at
Thanksgiving over here, andthere really weren't that many
original animated features thatwere pure.
What I mean by that is even theprevious UPA feature, which was
the first American animatedfeature in about 13 years.
(47:39):
Preceding one was that wasn'tDisney, was was the Fleischer
films, like Mr Bug Goes to Town.
Only Disney made animatedfeatures, period.
So finally, magoo they put MrMagoo in their first one.
The other animated features ofthis time that were made in
America were films that Warnersis distributing, like hey there
(48:03):
at Yogi Bear and the man calledFlintstone, films that are based
off of TV properties or famousnamed cartoon characters.
An original, an absoluteoriginal story with characters
nobody knew that was a.
That was.
This was very, very unique inits day.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
I just reminded me of the Snow Queen, which I think
was a European thing.
That was Russian, yeah,redubbed, here I got.
I've got to say one thing youhave revived in my heart not
that it's ever far from there atall is Mr Magoo's Christmas
Carol, because that has been athrilling thing to me since I
was 11, 12 years old and thereare so many backgrounds to Mr
(48:44):
Magoo's Christmas Carol,especially during winter was
warm that looked likebackgrounds from Gay Paris.
The same style, the same classyapproach, and winter was warm
has got to be one of my top fivefavorite songs of all time.
So it is nice to realize or putin perspective for me how much
that is a UPA demonstration,because it is as it gets.
Speaker 1 (49:10):
George Jerry mentioned a little bit earlier
some of the classic cartoonextras on here and the trailer,
which are part of the extras.
I watched them and again I'mwatching with my daughter.
We loved them and they lookterrific.
Maybe you could tell us alittle bit about the choices
that went into that.
Speaker 3 (49:29):
Well, I thought it was a perfect opportunity, given
the subject matter, to take twoof Chuck's Pebby Le Pew
cartoons for sentimental reasons, which won the Oscar, and
Louvre come back to me, whichhappens to be of the same year
that Gay Paris was released, andusually when we put cartoons on
(49:51):
as a bonus to feature films,it's either because of thematic
or relation, which is theapplication for sentimental
reasons, or year of release.
Louvre come back to me, but italso violated the Chuck Jones
equivalency theory.
(50:12):
I want to make a Big BangTheory kind of title for that by
including the Robert McKimsoncartoon, french Rare Bit, which
is one of my personal favoriteBugs Bunny cartoons and is so
Oolala French.
And Gay Paris is Oolala Frenchand it's thematics and very
(50:34):
differently but hysterically, sois French Rare Bit.
And we also added five demos,performed by the composer,
harold Arlen, of Key Songs fromthe Film, and he's joined on two
of them by the lyricist EY YipBarberg, and I'm sure that this
(50:56):
has probably already beenmentioned, but again, these are
the gentlemen that created allthe songs and the song score for
the Wizard of Oz, for JudyGarland, including Over the
Rainbow, so that pedigree comingto this motion picture can't be
underscored, hence thesongwriter demo.
So it's really a full disc interms of immersing one in the
(51:20):
Gay Paris experience and theFrench animation experience and
the let's Make a Judy Garlandmovie experience.
So it's all things rolled intoone, plus red buttons.
Speaker 4 (51:34):
And you art teachers out there between the Louvre
come back to me and the sectionin Gay Paris.
Literally you can get an arteducation in this film that I
don't think you can get anywhereelse.
You know it's pretty cool.
I love it.
Speaker 1 (51:50):
Yeah, and I was mentioning that earlier that my
daughter is at that age whereshe's being taught a lot of that
, and she caught right onto thatand she jumped ahead.
I know that, I know that artist, I know that style.
And she was saying, oh, that'smy favorite, you know the
go-gone.
And I was just shocked to hearher just jumping in to talk
about that.
I mean, you don't hear that ona current animation.
(52:12):
Well, actually that's wrong.
It's usually, oh, I know thatsinger, but I just thought this
was a terrific film.
I really appreciate you guyscoming on because I think we
just need to kind of spread theword on how great this looks and
sounds.
And of course, there, you know,there's already Judy Garland
fans and there's already ChuckJones fans Melding hey, two of
(52:35):
your favorites, possibly indifferent worlds.
They came together.
But I think that if peoplearen't kind of shown the images
and we don't talk about it, thatthis could just once again kind
of slip under the radar andlose its place in animation
history, film history.
Speaker 4 (52:52):
We got to, we got to spread the word.
I guess we got to get theAcademy Museum or something to
do a display.
I wonder if any of theanimation cells exist.
I seriously don't know.
Speaker 3 (53:03):
Have you ever seen?
Speaker 4 (53:04):
one, and you know, I don't think I ever have, but I'm
going to look into it.
I'm going to look into it.
I can't think of seeing one.
Speaker 1 (53:11):
It really does feel like something that should be
shown at the Academy with alittle exhibit.
It really does.
That's that kind of quality.
Well, George, was thereanything else you wanted to talk
about?
Speaker 3 (53:22):
Well, I just think it is a cause for celebration to
be here with all three of you,gentlemen, and to salute this
very, very special release.
I'm hoping that theavailability of this film, as it
was meant to be seen, withunparalleled quality, will
(53:42):
garner it a new group of fansand the appreciation I feel it
deserves and has not been givenhitherto.
Speaker 2 (53:51):
Well, I know a lot of fans garland fans are already
posting on Facebook that theyhave it and they're loving it.
They must have preordered,because they started getting it
in the mail at the top of thisweek and it's like it looks
great, it sounds great.
I've never seen it like this,all of that kind of stuff.
So the drums are being beatenand we tried to do our part
(54:12):
today anyway.
Speaker 1 (54:13):
Well, along those notes, thank you, jerry.
Thank you, john, george.
As always, it's terrific tohave you on the podcast, and I
just want to thank you guys forcoming on and sharing all of
your amazing knowledge with thelisteners of the extras.
So thank you.
Speaker 3 (54:30):
Thanks Tim.
Speaker 1 (54:37):
I hope you enjoyed this discussion as much as I did
.
I know there's terrific hearingfrom John Frickie, who just
knows so much about Judy Garland, and, of course, jerry Beck,
who has all of that animationbackground.
What a treat that was foranimation fans and film fans.
So I hope you really enjoyedthat.
If you're interested inordering Gay Pari, we will have
(54:58):
a link to that here in thepodcast show notes, so look for
that.
And if you're on social media,be sure and follow the show to
stay up to date on our upcomingguests and to be a part of our
community.
And you're always invited toour Facebook group for fans of
Warner Archive films, called theWarner Archive and the Warner
Brothers Catalog Group, so lookfor that link on the Facebook
(55:20):
page or in the podcast shownotes as well.
And for our long-term listeners, please don't forget to follow
and leave us a review at iTunes,spotify or your favorite
podcast provider.
Until next time you've beenlistening to Tim Mallard, stay
slightly obsessed.
Hello and welcome to the Extras, where we take you
behind the scenes of yourfavorite TV shows, movies and
animation and their release ondigital DVD, blu-ray and 4K or
your favorite streaming site.
I'm Tim Lager host.
Well, we often have terrificguests on the show, but once in
a while we're lucky enough tohave a pairing of guests we've
never had before.
That's exactly what we havetoday.
(00:26):
As animation and film historian, jerry Beck, and film historian
and the world's leadingauthority on Judy Garland, john
Fricky, join George Felntzienand I for a discussion of the
new Warner Archive Blu-rayrelease of Gay Hurry.
Well, hi, george, jerry, john,it's good to see everyone today.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Hello, hey, gentlemen .
Speaker 3 (00:49):
This is really special.
I'm so glad to have everybodyhere.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Yeah, I mean this is like a six degrees of separation
from George John.
Jerry, you're actually meetingfor the first time on this
podcast, which is pretty special.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
But in five minutes of pre-taping conversation we
already have Robert Osborne andTCM in common, so I think we're
good to go.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
Absolutely, not to mention our love of the Wizard
of Oz, but that's anothersubject.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
And we don't have seven hours, so no.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Well, george, this is kind of your idea to get your
two friends together for adiscussion on Gay Hurry.
How do you want to kind ofstart that discussion?
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Well, I proudly can say I've been friends with both
of these gentlemen, bothpersonally and professionally,
for a very long time and I willnot embark on anything regarding
any animated content withoutconsulting and speaking with
Jerry, and I would not embark onany project related to the
(01:53):
incredible Judy Garland withoutMr Fricky, and I am so proud to
be joining them for this uniquefusion of historical
conflagration if that's a wordwhere everything has come
together to celebrate therelease of this very unique
motion picture on Blu-ray from a4K scan off the camera negative
(02:17):
, and a glorious Blu-ray is theresult.
So we're very proud and I'mexcited to hear what the
gentleman have to say and tojoin in the conversation.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Well, jerry, maybe we should start with you just to
give a little background on howthe film came together, because
this was one of the.
Was it one of the last or fewfilms from UPA, and it's an
interesting story.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Upa is pretty much forgotten today by the general
public, but in the 1950s theywere as well known as Disney.
They won three Oscars.
They created characters thateverybody knew back then, at
least Mr Magoo, geraldMcBoying-Boying UPA was the hot
studio in animation, hotter eventhan Disney and actually
(03:02):
influenced not only Disney andits animation but all the
animation studios in America andall the animation studios
around the world.
With their unique vision, withtheir unique you know, they gave
permission to the world ofanimation that an animation
didn't have to just be BugsBunny and Donald Duck, it could
be anyone's artistic vision, itcould be James Thurber, you know
(03:28):
.
It could be children's booksthat look like in the style of
that author, or just even theanimators personal thing.
So UPA was a verygroundbreaking studio and the
one thing they were trying to dothey were all, by the way, all
the artists there were made upof ex-Disney artists who had
worked on Snow White, pinocchio,fantasia and were most of them
(03:49):
were people who left the studioduring the great strike.
Disney had a picketing in 1941to create the union and all that
, and a lot of these artistsleft for a variety of reasons
World War II as well and aformed UPA to try some new ideas
and new things and theirbreakthrough film was in 1950
(04:10):
with Gerald McBoin-Boin, whichwon the Academy Award seemingly
out of nowhere.
At that time they were alwaystrying to do an animated feature
.
That was something they triedto do for 10 years.
They made a deal with ColumbiaPictures in 1948 that lasted
about 10 years or so and theywere again the toast of the town
during that decade andtheatrical shorts were still a
(04:33):
big deal during that time.
They finally broke through andit was very difficult because
Columbia Pictures at that timethey wanted, they didn't want a
feature, they certainly didn'twant one that looked like a UPA
movie.
They wouldn't know how to sellit.
They wouldn't know what to dowith it.
They had many, many proposals,many, many pitches.
The one that finally brokethrough was an Arabian night
(04:54):
story, but Columbia Picturesinsisted that Mr Magoo be in it
and that film came out in 1959and bombed entirely.
The studio changed hands in 1960.
A guy named Henry Sapersteintook over and really
commercialized the studio.
They suddenly made Mr Magoo TVcartoons and things like that.
(05:15):
But he had a big goal tocontinue what UPA had started by
trying to move into the featurearena.
They immediately came up with acouple of films in development,
both of which came out in 1962.
One of them, of course, is thatvery famous Mr Magoo Christmas
(05:35):
Carol.
The other one was Gay Paris.
Gay Paris was a story by ChuckJones and his wife.
I'm sure you know this.
I have a feeling John has alittle more detail on that story
than I do, but it was sototally up Chuck Jones' alley.
This is exactly the kind offilm he would make.
(05:56):
He was, of course, undercontract to make the Warner
Brothers Looney Tunes forWarners at that time, so he
didn't go any further thancreate the screenplay with his
wife.
I'm going to stop there, butthe film is wonderful.
We'll talk more about that aswe go along.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Jerry, just this is kind of the big question mark
hanging over this film.
I've had an opinion about itand I will speak responsibly on
behalf of our company, right,but it is my understanding, or
this has always been my gut.
This is not based on anythingfactual.
This is not based on anything Ihave researched.
(06:40):
My belief is that Chuckdirected the cartoon and a
Levitao.
That credit because of Chuck'scontractual obligation to Warner
Brothers, and I wonder if youagree with that or if you think
that Chuck wrote the screenplayand that was it.
(07:01):
He didn't direct it per se.
Speaker 4 (07:05):
Well, in trying to be respectful of the company you
work for, clearly Chuck designedthe characters.
Clearly this is so, chuck Jones, as you have on the bonus
material.
The Peppula Pew cartoon,particular Louvre, come back to
me, which was released the sameyear as GayPerry.
(07:26):
It's a very, very similarthemed animated short with the
Louvre Museum in Paris.
I mean, it's pretty amazing.
This was Chuck's thing and Ithink, possibly, maybe in the
way that Spielberg reallydirected Poltergeist.
I know.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
this thing we don't like to talk about it.
Speaker 4 (07:49):
It's a maybe.
Abe Levitao was Chuck'sassistant and co-director at
Warner Brothers for years beforethis and he returned to Chuck
during the period when Chuck wasdoing the Tom and Jerry
cartoons for MGM.
Abe Levitao gets a co-creditand I believe he even gets a.
I think he's a co-director onDot and Align and I think he
(08:10):
even directed a few of thosesolo.
Abe Levitao was a great artistas well, but clearly this looks
like a Chuck Jones production.
I also will say, whether youknew it or not, that Chuck got
in a little hot water for thisfilm with Warner Brothers.
The film, of course, wasreleased by Warner Brothers.
(08:31):
The UPA no longer had theirdeal with Columbia in the 1960s
so they shopped the film around.
Warner Brothers picked it up,but someone there in business
affairs realized that what'sthis Chuck Jones doing on this
other company's film?
And, as you may have heard,chuck was let go a little
(08:54):
earlier than the rest of thestaff and, as you also may know,
the classic Warner Brotherscartoons department, the one
that was started by LeonSchlesinger in 1930.
And at that time it was ChuckJones, robert McKimson and Fritz
Freeling.
They were let go at the end of1962.
(09:15):
Chuck preceded them being let goand the reason was he broke his
contract.
He wasn't supposed to write afilm for another company, even
though Warner's released it.
I find that so odd.
But they were letting everyonego anyway.
So I don't think it was asgreat of a disappointment for
Chuck.
By the time they let everybodygo most of his staff went to
(09:39):
join him at MGM on those Tom andJerry cartoons, you know.
But it all worked out foreverybody in the end.
But it was quite controversialin-house at that time.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
Well you know.
I should also clarify that thefilm was what we now call a
negative pickup, meaning thatWarner Brothers arranged with
Saperstein and UPA for perpetualworldwide distribution rights
and perpetuity.
My theory is Chuck worked onthe movie we don't know to what
(10:10):
extent before the movie wascompleted or released, warner
Brothers picked it up fordistribution, or Jerry, you may
know this.
Maybe it was completed and thenWarner Brothers looked at it
and said they'll pick it up fordistribution.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
I don't know that from.
I believe Warner's was involvedwhile the film was in
production.
But I would also say that Chuckmight not have directed much of
it, Because Abe was a trustedcolleague.
He was already working for UPA,he directed the Magoo's
Christmas Carol and Chuck wasinvolved when he was at Warner's
(10:45):
at that time.
As you know, George, he wasinvolved heavily with the Bugs
Bunny show and directing thoseinterstitials and that's why a
lot of the cartoons from theearly 60s, a lot of the shorts,
are either co-directed by someof the animators or even
directed by some of theanimators who only had their one
shot of directing during thisperiod.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Well, that makes sense.
Regardless, the net result wasa very unique motion picture,
and that's why all of us arehere to talk about it.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
I gotta tell you I watched it again with the
Blu-ray, with the release ofBlu-ray, and I haven't seen the
film for at least 15 or 20 years, so I decided to do it right
Now.
By the way, I had never, I onlywatched it on television.
I never saw it in a theaterbefore.
I decided you know what got abig screen TV.
(11:38):
Now we all have high death,turning off the lights, watching
it at night, cranking up thesound, and man, it was an
experience.
I really enjoyed watching thisfilm over again in a way that,
like I, because I hadn'tremembered certain scenes.
I hadn't remember how thingswould look.
Color is so vivid, the music isso wonderful.
(12:01):
It's.
I realize now the film was wayahead of its time.
It was way ahead of its time in1962.
It's a work of art and a greattribute to Paris.
It's just a great film.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
I think so too.
I've always felt it wascriminally underrated and a lot
of people don't understand itbecause there's a sophistication
to it that just goes over thehead of a lot of people.
Conversely, there are a lot ofpeople today who grew up
watching this on television aschildren.
Yes, like Jerry, you and I grewup in New York.
(12:40):
We didn't have this, but herein Los Angeles you had Tom
Hatton hosting the family filmfestival on weekends, yep, and I
know a lot of people that sawthe film then.
Speaker 4 (12:53):
Yeah, yeah, you know, the thing that people forget
and we talk about it all thetime, george is that the show,
is that the short cartoons thatChuck comes out of, that you, pa
, made, were never aimed solelyat children.
Yes, children can watch them,children can enjoy them.
The characters are popular, butthey were aimed for the full
(13:13):
audience.
Jones in particular, his staff,the UPA people in general, they
played to the whole of anaudience and not just children's
matinees.
Now, by 1962, things hadchanged.
Animation being a kid's mediumbecame a thing by the late
fifties and into the sixties.
(13:34):
So it came out at a difficultperiod.
But the film is reallysophisticated, you know, even
though it's about animalcharacters, you know, and they
look like our classic cartooncharacters.
But it's quite a sophisticatedpiece.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
You're sure I just have to attend to what Jerry
said.
I remember Newsweek's, thefinal line of Newsweek's review.
They were pleasant about someaspects of it, but they said it
seems like they're trying to tapa hitherto unsuspected audience
, the fave four-year-old ofRachea taste and I think I'm
(14:12):
saying that right.
I took French in high school.
Yeah, and it's.
They didn't know quite how topromote it.
They didn't know quite how tosell it.
It was.
But what ties in with whatJerry just said about watching
it now and watching it projectedlarge and with good equipment
or in a theater.
That's the last time I thoughtit was about 10 years ago at a
theater here in New York.
(14:33):
It is such, if everybody whoworked on it is so classy, you
know it is all exquisitely,beautifully, conceptually, and
they're also committed to it tomake it what you know.
Chuck and Judy and Harold andYip and more Lindsay and the
animators and everybody.
(14:54):
It's really really, really goodpeople all working at the top
of their form.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
Well, I know I watched it, you know, the other
night to Jerry, and my daughtersat down and watched it with me
and she's 10 years old and shewatches, of course, all of the
newest Disney animation, all theanimation, and it's totally
different because it's like art.
(15:21):
It really was to what you saidand the fact that she actually
understands, because she'slearning in school about that
period of time in French historyand art history, and she could,
as they were going through someof the different explanation in
the film of some of the artwork, she could point it out and she
was enthralled.
And then, when I said, hey,that's the voice of Judy Garland
(15:43):
, she of course knew who Judywas from the Wizard of Oz, which
endures amazingly right, thisfilm that just looks like it was
made five years ago, not 85years ago or whatever it is.
And she sat and she watched thewhole movie with me.
She didn't get bored, shedidn't grab her iPad, she didn't
want to text with her friendsor anything, and she was
(16:05):
delighted.
And, of course, one of thegreat things about animation and
animated movies is music andthe music of Judy Garland
throughout this.
John, that's why you're on, ofcourse.
How did Judy get involved inthis project and I'm assuming
she was involved from very earlyon because it's so integral to
(16:25):
the story.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
Well, the earliest reference I can find to her
being involved was in early June1961.
And at that point she had doneCarnegie Hall.
She'd been doing the concerts,the one woman shows, for about
10 months and the industrycertainly was aware of her
resurgence.
She was doing, she was healthyand she was touring and she was
knocking everybody sideways.
(16:47):
She had been out to Hollywoodto do judgment at Nuremberg.
That filming had been in March1961.
And Freddy Fields and DavidBeagle and her new agents and
they were really managing herand I don't know who approached
her.
But Mr Saperstein had such avision for this.
There's an interview with himin the December 61 New York
(17:09):
Times about if it had to be thisperiod of arts, it had to be,
you know, these artists that wehomage.
If it had to be art, it had tobe Paris.
If it had to be animals inParis, it had to be cats.
But at that point they had justfinished the recording.
Judy and the cast had done allthe vocal stuff in LA in the
month of November 1961.
(17:30):
So it was about five monthsbefore that that Eddahopper, of
all people, broke the story.
The Judy Garland was going to dothe voice of the leading
character in Gay Parade and theextraordinary thing too, and I
think, jerry, george, all of youcan correct me, I think
basically this is regarded, notthat Mary Costa didn't do
sleeping Gruty and Cliff Edwardsdidn't do Pinocchio, but I
(17:53):
think this is one of the veryfirst times, if not the first
time, that a major, major, majorstar and several major stars
came in to do the voices for afeature length cartoon.
And when it was announced byHeta, at that point they were
looking to get Jean Kelly to dothe voice of Jean Tom, the male
lead, and Marie Chevalier to bethe narrator.
(18:13):
But Harold Arlen and YipHarburg were already committed
to do the songs and I think,however it came together.
I wouldn't be a bit surprisedif they didn't use the idea of
we can try to get Harold and YipJudy if you'll agree to do it.
You can give using it as baitto get her, or maybe they used
her to get them, who knows?
But when you put those peopletogether it was kind of like
(18:35):
Star is Born.
When they announced that,warners announced that Once they
were doing a Star is Born, judyGarland I regress when and
Harold Arlen were on board,george Cooper, the director,
said to Sid Love, if it's forher I'll do it, whatever it is.
All those people come right inwhen you have that kind of
magnetism.
And, as I say, the word was outthat Judy was really in an
(18:58):
upswing and many of them hadalready seen her.
Harold Arlen was at theCarnegie Hall concert.
Mort Lindsay had been broughtin by Fielsen Beigelman to
conduct for her in January of 61and then convinced Mort to do
the tour and by summer of 61, hewas orchestrating songs for her
act and for a capital single.
(19:18):
So he was the logical choice to.
You know, judy will get Mort todo this with you and she loved
him and he loved her.
So it was kind of a coalescenceof getting everybody together
so that, as I say, by November1961, she had taken three weeks
off from the concert tour.
She was in LA.
There are pictures of her andLulee working together with Mort
(19:39):
in the recording studiorehearsing, and K Thompson,
judy's great good friend since1943 at MGM, was there vocally
coaching, uncredited, but shewas there.
Maury Amsterdam is not in thesepictures but he replaced the
idea of Marie Chevalier,obviously because the narrator
was not that big a part.
Maybe it would have been ifChevalier had agreed to do it.
(20:02):
But getting Goulay was a cool.
This again is Freddie and David.
They eventually had Goulay as aclient.
Whether they use this as baitto get him as a client or they
had him and they put him in thisbecause he was a client, I'm
not sure.
I don't know his careerbackwards and forwards, but I do
know that it was just anextraordinary grouping of people
(20:23):
and Freddie and David wantedJudy in there because then they
got part of her salary.
They would have wanted Goulayin there because they would have
gotten part of his salary.
You know they were packages andthey were working in that idiom
very early on and Hollywoodhistory Judy got a $50,000
upfront for Gay Puri and thenshe had a percentage of it.
(20:44):
George, look into that.
I want to know where the moneywent, if she's supposed to be
still getting a percentage ofGay Puri.
Anyway, that's how it allstarted.
And there are great quotes fromYip, harberg and Haralala about
the story about working withJudy again.
And Yip said when we sat downwith Judy to teach her the songs
(21:05):
and he said I was standing atthe corner, she was sitting next
to Harold and she was lookingover Harold's shoulder at the
score.
Now Judy could not read music.
She was very frightened aboutthat.
But he said Yip said she hadsuch a sense of melody and
lyrics.
He said she was almost a lineahead of Harold in realizing
where the song was going to goand how she was going to sing.
(21:26):
And when Harold Arlen laterheard the recording he said
everybody's fine.
But he said Judy alone shines.
She is a treasure and acomposer's work could not be in
better hands.
He also said that Little Dropsof Rain was a personal favorite
of his.
So that was making us fromearly 61 into summer of 62,
(21:49):
which is when the animation wascompleted.
Mr Saperstein was very carefulabout saying that.
Well, no, in no way doesMusette resemble Judy Garland in
appearance.
But if you look, judy's eyeswere brown, musette's eyes are
blue.
But the eyes, the wideness ofthe eyes, the expressiveness of
the eyes, the lashes, that's allvery much Judy Garland.
(22:11):
And one of the things that isfun, I think, for Judy fans to
listen to is that she said whenshe talked about Gabe Peri later
on she said I did a high pitch,my voice for the dialogue.
You know to sound young andfresh and naive, and she said it
way up here and very wondering,and all the rest.
(22:31):
And then Mort hits a chord andout comes 1961, judy Garland,
carnegie Hall voice.
So they were going forabsolutely every approach to it
that they thought would beappealing and, as you say now,
if your 10-year-old daughter in2023 can respond to it and I
have nieces who are respondingto it in the 1980s on home video
(22:52):
and I was 11 when Gabe Peripremiered and I was certainly
happy to it on all kinds oflevels, but it was just so many
good people doing so much goodwork and I think it all paid off
in the end result.
Maybe not at the box office,maybe not for the mass audience,
but, as I said earlier and aswe can get into later on as we
(23:14):
go on, it wasn't marketedespecially well.
I don't think Warner Brothersknew quite what to do with it
and they might have had a grudgeagainst Chuck Jones for being
so involved with it.
He would have been gone by thenand they might have been an
attitude of well, why should wepush a Chuck Jones product when
he reached his contract and isnow at Metro?
And, who knows, there arealways backstories.
Speaker 4 (23:37):
Well, I think Garland drove this project in many,
many ways, I think.
I wonder if it seems to me thatWarner Brothers may have picked
it up and the marketing seemsto be driven by it's Judy
Garland, judy Garland.
The trailer that's alsoincluded in the Blu-ray is very
interesting and very telling.
(23:58):
It's about 50%, maybe 70%,about it's Garland, it's Garland
in Robert Goulet, but thenanother 30% is a little bit of
clips from the film andpersonally I'd watch the trailer
afterward after seeing the filmand I'm surprised the clips
they showed in the trailerbecause they're not the best
(24:20):
clips.
You know they could have somany great visuals and beautiful
things they could have put inhere, but they didn't do that.
So very, very odd.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
You don't start a family animation.
Forgive me for jumping in, butyou do not start a trailer for a
family animation movie withJudy Garland singing Paris as a
lonely town and the voiceover isthe woman.
Is that who I think it is?
Why?
Yes, that's her, that's JudyGarland, and it's like start
with my hand Paris.
You do roses, red, violets,blue.
(24:48):
You put in the suicide numbertoward the end, when you kind of
already pre-sold the picture.
Very, very peculiar.
Speaker 4 (24:57):
But yeah, I mean I also want to say that Garland
you said you asked before about,was this the first kind of
celebrity or star to headline ananimated film?
I have to think about it, but Ipretty much say yes as far as a
feature film is concerned, andGarland's a superstar.
The only other ones that are inthe back of my mind are some of
(25:21):
those little shorts that Disneydid where he did compilation
movies and he would have BingCrosby doing Legend of Sleepy
Hollow and something like that.
Or the Andrews sisters andLittle Toot.
You know those are reallyshorts that are part of a
feature.
There's no, any of those bigDisney movies that really
(25:42):
highlights a superstar.
Again, I'll just make a littlecut out because we don't want to
talk about Disney, but I guessthe only comparison would be
something like Peggy Lee beinginvolved with Lady and the Tramp
.
Yeah, but other than that thiswas unique at the time.
Anything when we think aboutcelebrities' voices and animated
(26:03):
features, it's pretty muchafter this movie, including
Disney movies.
You know that would later havePhil Harris or whatever, the
Beatles and Yellow Submarine,you know, things like that.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
all of that's later and this was definitely a first
and again I'm going to playdevil's advocate here about the
trailer because of course, bythe time he gave Harry was
released in November 1962, judyhad been Oscar nominated for
judgment.
Nuremberg, carnegie Hall hadbeen on the charts for something
like 75.
Right Grammy Album of the Year,petitian Spectacular Frank
(26:36):
Sinatra and Martin, which wasthe biggest star in the industry
at that point.
Speaker 4 (26:40):
Right, and that's a really important.
People forget the context ofthe release and what was going
on at that time.
In fact, let me ask you, john,remind me about Robert Goulay.
Was Camelot?
Was he in Camelot at that point?
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Camelot in 1960 had put him on a map and he was
doing a lot of TV variety.
But it's interesting, he waswith Camelot for a good long
time and then he did Gay Perri.
He got a recording contract andwhen Gay Perri opened he was
also opening simultaneously whatI believe was his first big
nightclub act at Blinstrobes inBoston.
(27:15):
So he was just starting todiversify and he was starting to
appear in non-animated films.
But that was really just comingon the map at that point by the
time the picture opened.
He was a great catch for thepart and again, looking ahead, I
think everybody kind of knew hehad a future, but he wasn't yet
(27:37):
.
Robert Goulay when he recordedGay Perri he was, but I'm.
The film opened and Rhett saidwon an Academy Award.
Hermione Gingold had just madea big hit in the Music man.
So these were all names thatcould be punched.
Paul Freeze everybody knew thevoice.
I don't think they did any kindof real promotion with him, but
(27:57):
they could have if they'd saidthis is the same guy whose voice
is here, there and everywhere.
But it was all about Judy.
I didn't complain, mind you,but it was all about Judy.
Speaker 4 (28:10):
It's also a great performance.
What I love about it is inlater years, when there would be
a celebrity, you can kind offeel they're coming in and doing
the least in order to fulfillwhatever the contract is.
I didn't feel that way at allwatching this film.
She gives a performance.
That's the cool thing about it.
To me, it all feels very, veryright.
Speaker 2 (28:32):
Well, and here's Tim.
If you ever want to run atrivia contest with this YouTube
installment, you can ask thequestion.
At what moment in gay paris isMusette's voice not the voice of
Judy Garland?
Tell us?
It's the first frames of thefilm when she and Jean-Tom are
in the carriage and they'relaughing at Robespierre and his
(28:53):
little pussy cat.
That's not Judy Garlandlaughing.
Judy Garland had anidentifiable laugh in the world
and they probably didn't knowthey needed it at that point.
You know it was an afterthoughtwith the animation, but it
ain't her.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Well, back to your point, Jerry.
When I watched this movie thenew Blu-ray coming out or
actually it's already out fromthe Warner Archive, when I put
that in, I definitely wanted towatch it on my 4K monitor with
my surround sound, and so it'sthe best of the best, of which
I'm gonna watch.
You know which?
I watch all of the newestmovies and it holds up visually,
(29:29):
the brightness of the colors,the artistry of the colors, and
then the sound of Judy singingcoming through my surround sound
.
I mean it was quite anexperience.
It really to what you said, itwas a performance against art.
I mean, that's just kind of howI have to view it, and my
daughter was totally enthralled.
I think anybody who hasn't seenthis since it was been on
(29:52):
television or, you know, sinceit's been remastered, obviously
it's gonna be really, reallysurprised and shocked at how
great it looks and sounds.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
Well, this is the first time people are getting to
see it as it was shown in thetheaters in the 185 aspect ratio
.
Further, this is a 4K scan offthe camera negative, so you
don't have any intermediateelements getting in the way.
And I really wanna talk aboutthe sound for a second, because
this is very important.
(30:21):
The film's music sessions wererecorded stereophonically and of
course there was a CDsoundtrack which basically was
the more modern iteration ofwhat was the LP soundtrack.
Let me do my math.
Well, 40 years earlier and Iproduced the CD soundtrack using
(30:46):
the Multitrack Album Master,there were no recording sessions
to go back to.
They were not turned over toWarner Brothers.
No one knows what happened tothem.
But the soundtrack album hasappropriate for the time reverb.
(31:07):
It doesn't sonically sound likethe movie at all, so people
will sometimes just assume well,why isn't the film in stereo,
like the album?
Now, when I was a little kid Iused to think that way.
I was like what's going on here?
The film was released minorally.
(31:29):
We used the Mineral MagneticPrint Master source for the
audio and it is mono as releasedto theater.
If we had put the music asrecorded for the, as you find on
the soundtrack album.
If we had gone back to thatmaster for the songs it would
(31:50):
have sounded completelydifferent.
Everybody would have soundedlike they're in an echo chamber
because they put reverb bakedinto those album tracks.
And we ran into the sameproblem with Lucio Ball's main.
Maybe not surprisingly orsurprisingly that film was
(32:10):
released minorally and thereason why mono movies with
music in them were if theyweren't a huge road show
presentation going up to 70millimeter or filmed in with a
65 millimeter negative with thesix track sound.
It was in the early fiftieswith stereophonic, magnetic kind
(32:34):
of descended upon the scenethat stereo is more common.
Then there became a period oftime, really for about 15, maybe
20 years, where localneighborhood theaters did not
have stereophonic capabilities.
So many films were releasedmono, even if they were music
heavy.
It really wasn't until theintroduction of Dolby's stereo
(32:58):
optical, which really was led byStar Wars in 1977, that made it
more commonplace that you couldhave stereophonic audio
reproduction in theaters inneighborhoods and even that took
10 to 12 years to become very,very commonplace.
(33:18):
So I really want people to knowthat we were unable.
Just the same thing happened tous with Cabaret, where Cabaret
was strangely released only witha menorah soundtrack or we can
find no evidence otherwise, andthe recording sessions for that
film don't exist and thereforewe had to synthesize something
(33:41):
for the Blu-ray that came out.
But the album of Cabaret haseven more reverb than the album
of Gay-Paree.
So, as in like, we missed anopportunity.
We could not do it because itwould have sounded completely
different from the rest of thefilm and actually been
distracted.
It's a shame, because thestereo sounds wonderful but it
(34:05):
doesn't sound like the film.
It sounds like an album.
So I just had to clarify thatfor those who are interested.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
And complaining.
They're always complaining.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
People are.
Yeah, I'll leave it at that andjust concur with your
assessment, John.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
So John was the album that came out of this fairly
popular.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
I don't think so.
I think George wrote about it alittle bit in the CD liner
notes because the film came andwent so quickly.
It premiered in Chicago inNovember of 1962.
A big world premiere.
Judy was there doing a concertbesides and plugging the songs.
She had been for thepre-stating concerts in Las
(34:51):
Vegas for six weeks and inChicago and talking about Gay
Paris and she was supposed to begetting a percentage.
She was in there plugging forit.
She did a bus tour of theatersin New York like Betty Davis did
for Baby Jane around that sametime.
Or she went by bus withreporters to.
You know, judy will be at thistheater in the Bronx at seven
(35:13):
o'clock, she'll be at thistheater in the Bronx at seven
thirty.
And she went place to place.
Goulet was with her on a coupleof the three nights.
They had a 14 man police escortto get them in enough because
the people were jammed up to seeJudy Garland in person and at
first she just went in andtalked and she got the sense
(35:33):
that it wasn't enough.
So on the bus she coached the 14policemen and Robert Goulet
into a chorus of there's nobusiness like show business,
which they then acapella at allthe other theaters which she did
, that she and Goulet were on ajack car program here an hour on
Friday time time and that was ahuge event to have Judy Garland
(35:55):
on the talk show.
It had never happened beforeand so she was singing, she was
saying little drops and Paris isthe only town on that show.
She and Goulet dueted me set.
But the thing is I was waitingfor it to come in Milwaukee and
to appear.
I think it happened overThanksgiving weekend and because
it was Thanksgiving weekendevery family was already
(36:18):
committed to doing this, thatand the other thing and within
five days, six days, it was goneand it seemed like that
happened.
I don't remember Print ads inthe paper.
It was all very, very, veryquick and clandestine and out
and they put the problem out,you know good four months before
the movie opened.
I remember getting it in thesummer of 1962 because even at
(36:41):
11, I was buying Judy Garlandalbums as soon as they came on
the market and it's a shamebecause you knew I played the
album a lot because I loveMortland's stuff.
I love what he was charting forJudy, what he was the Carnegie
Hall album, which he didn't doany arrangements but he was
conducting brilliantly and it'sjust, he knew how to showcase
(37:03):
her.
And I remember Ed Gibbonski,who was a good friend of the
Irish, irish wins.
He was a good friend of HaroldArland.
He wrote in fact twobiographies on Harold, one while
Harold was still alive and onethat could be a little bit more
direct about some of theproblems that Harold had after
Harold passed.
And he was also a main reviewerfor American Record Guide,
(37:25):
which was one of the classiestof the monthly magazines about
new records, pop, classical,both.
And he writes very, veryfluently and very well about gay
paris and his cutoff is thatthis is a score that would not
be out of place on a Broadwaystage.
You know, it is that caliber ofmusic and lyrics and the album
(37:48):
is wonderful and so iseverything about gay paris.
Again, no, I don't rememberthere being ads in Billboard or
Variety or anything.
It was just kind of flush.
And a lot of this is thinkingout loud for me.
And the point again my mind isgoing back to is maybe one of
the brothers was just didn'twant to do anything for Chuck
(38:09):
Jones but they envisioned as aChuck Brown production.
I don't want to say that, youknow, as if it's concrete
because, as George said, I'vedone no research at it, but boy,
it just disappeared veryquickly.
It didn't even play theneighborhood theaters because,
believe me, I wanted to go andsee it again.
Speaker 4 (38:28):
I wanted to ask you, John, where did it open in New
York?
Did it open like in one theaterin Manhattan?
Speaker 2 (38:36):
It opened wide.
It opened wide.
That's why Judy and Bob Gouletdid all those theaters on the
bus.
So probably like 14, 15, 20theaters all over the question
area.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
Well, you know, I mean I'm a bit of a, in addition
to my being an animationhistorian, I'm a bit of a nut on
how the films were distributedbecause, like George, I used to
be in film distribution and Idon't know about the whole Chuck
Jones aspect of it.
When you've got Judy Garland Ireally don't think Chuck Jones
(39:11):
is that important from amarketing perspective.
I think that none of thestudios and this went on for
decades, until literally thiscentury none of the studios
really understood how todistribute an animated film,
good or bad the film may beoutside of Disney.
Disney was set up to do thatand most studios, you know, even
(39:35):
handed a great film.
And again, george knows, youknow Iron Giant is a classic
animated feature.
Warner Brothers did not know howto sell that movie.
If a film is good, it'llultimately will out.
You know people will find it onphysical media, thank goodness.
But back in those days,unfortunately, a lot of feeling
(39:56):
by the front end distributionpeople, based on what I know was
a cartoon at that time was acartoon that meant Saturday
matinees they sort of prethought it wouldn't work.
You know in advance, and I seethat all the time when I look at
the box office totals for thenon Disney films throughout the
years.
And there's good films, thereare bad films, but sometimes
(40:19):
they would dump a film, a greatfilm.
In fact.
Chuck Jones's next feature wasthe Phantom Toll booth.
That was not released for liketwo or three years George, you
may know about that and then itwas sold as one of those
children matinees, those MGM.
Yeah, remember that.
Speaker 3 (40:36):
It was part of the first group of MGM children's
matinees.
Along with this is, of course,John's territory, the first
theatrical engagements of theWizard of Oz in over 15 years,
as the original agreement withCBS for broadcast did not allow
for theatrical exhibition.
So the MGM children's matineeswere where the Phantom Toll
(40:59):
booth finally was seen intheaters after being on the
shelf for two years.
Speaker 4 (41:03):
Right.
I mean there was a weirdfeeling about what animation was
in that in the whole of the1960s.
Walt Disney passed away in 1966.
Animation on the whole did nothave a leader and the studios
left to their own devices.
Really kind of let it all go iswhat happened from the
(41:26):
animation history perspective.
That's why it's great thatwe're able to showcase and
highlight this film, because itreally is a work of art and
really, as you said, underratedit would be the right word for
its reception in the past.
I think this might be the bestever release of it.
I'm pretty positive it is andhopefully it'll get more people
(41:49):
to rediscover it for the firsttime.
Speaker 3 (41:53):
And looking back at the history, I think it is
interesting to note that thefilm made its television debut
not as afternoon kittyprogramming, but it was on the
CBS either Thursday or FridayNight Network movie.
I can't remember if it wasThursday Night movie or Friday
Night movie, I don't rememberthat, but it was, you know, 9 pm
(42:14):
.
When was that, george?
What year?
I can't tell you exactly, but Iwould assume 1966 or 67
somewhere around there.
But they didn't make it.
They didn't say, oh, we can'tput this film on our nighttime
primetime movie slot becauseit's for kids.
(42:36):
They didn't do that.
They put it in the evening slotbecause there were some people
that recognized it as a work ofart that would appeal to adults.
And of course, jerry, you and Iare always dumping the
bandwagon that the classiccartoons that were created for
theatrical release by all thestudios, particularly Warner
(42:58):
Brothers and MGM, were very muchaimed at adults and fine for
children, but they were notcreated as kitty babysitters,
like the Saturday morningcartoons later came to be in the
70s and 80s.
Speaker 4 (43:15):
Well, you know, chuck was very much a proponent of
that, meaning he never really henever ever made the cartoons
any of the ones he did forchildren.
He was able to survive thatperiod by getting that gig with
MGM theatrical cartoons as hehad been doing, and of course he
augmented that by doing littlefilms like the Dot and the Line,
(43:37):
which then won an Oscar, notaimed at and the Grinch and of
course the Grinch I mean, andother TV specials.
He was able to maintain acertain level and probably I'd
love to know what year that wason the TV broadcast, because
that sort of fits in with, whenyou know, kind of the golden age
of Chuck as a making TVspecials, because I think Grinch
(43:58):
was 66, I think it was December66.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
If my brain isn't failing me, I'm pretty sure this
was like fall of 1967.
Speaker 4 (44:09):
Yeah, that sounds right.
Speaker 3 (44:10):
But yet I have not researched it.
Speaker 4 (44:12):
Yeah, and you know I got to say one more trivial or
not trivial thing about Chuckand UPA and this, relating to
this film, is this was reallythe last hurrah of animation in
the way that UPA was establishedin the first place, making this
film in 62.
This and Magoo's ChristmasCarol, same year, same directors
(44:33):
.
After this they only did abunch of Magoo specials for NBC
and they were out of animation.
As you know, they weredistributing Godzilla movies and
things like that.
I think they produced what's Up, tiger Lily with Woody Allen,
so they were in a differentuniverse after this movie.
What's interesting is that mostpeople don't know that Chuck
(44:57):
Jones directed the very firstUPA animated film.
That was in 1942.
And it was the first thing theygot paid to do a commissioned
film to reelect FDR called HellBent for Election, very famous
film.
You can find it online.
It's the first UPA cartoon andit was done by Chuck
Moonlighting because it was donefor political reasons.
(45:20):
He wanted to work on this, hewanted to help those guys and he
designed and directed thisshort to help FDR.
So I find that very interestingand Chuck was involved in the
first and the last of the UPAepic animations.
Speaker 2 (45:36):
Those are both good bookends though.
Speaker 4 (45:39):
Yes, well, in between , of course, he worked in Warner
Brothers.
Speaker 2 (45:44):
Again, just to go back to their marketing.
The other thing that botheredme well, not bothered me, yeah,
bothered me that again, nocampaigning at Oscar time for
either the score or any of thesongs.
Another writer and I wish Icould remember where I read this
, I don't, but he said that partof the problem is that in 1962,
(46:04):
there were not that manyoriginal musicals being written
for the screen.
Everything was Broadway orElvis Presley, but music.
Back then you had just had WestSide Story and of course you
had Mary Poppins upcoming, andSound of Music, of course, was
again Broadway.
But again, musicals were notwhat they had been, unless they
came with a pedigree built in.
(46:24):
Disney made Mary Poppins, sothere was the pedigree.
But Sound of Music, music man,west Side Story, they were all
pretty much pre-sold successes.
Yeah, so again it.
As you say, it is a muchdelayed sort of respect and
(46:45):
response to Gay Peri that thisrelease can give it and that I
think a lot of people will bedelighted to find out what
they've been missing for these60 years.
Speaker 4 (46:57):
You know, let me repeat that this film was
pioneering.
We did have a superstar in JudyGarland in it.
It was a UPA production but, asyou're saying, animation back
then was not regarded the way itis today.
Today we have 30 theatricalreleases.
They have a category of bestanimated feature.
None of that existed back then.
(47:19):
Animation was kind of off thetable.
They were on the, in the, inthe kiddie table, you know, at
Thanksgiving over here, andthere really weren't that many
original animated features thatwere pure.
What I mean by that is even theprevious UPA feature, which was
the first American animatedfeature in about 13 years.
(47:39):
Preceding one was that wasn'tDisney, was was the Fleischer
films, like Mr Bug Goes to Town.
Only Disney made animatedfeatures, period.
So finally, magoo they put MrMagoo in their first one.
The other animated features ofthis time that were made in
America were films that Warnersis distributing, like hey there
(48:03):
at Yogi Bear and the man calledFlintstone, films that are based
off of TV properties or famousnamed cartoon characters.
An original, an absoluteoriginal story with characters
nobody knew that was a.
That was.
This was very, very unique inits day.
Speaker 2 (48:20):
I just reminded me of the Snow Queen, which I think
was a European thing.
That was Russian, yeah,redubbed, here I got.
I've got to say one thing youhave revived in my heart not
that it's ever far from there atall is Mr Magoo's Christmas
Carol, because that has been athrilling thing to me since I
was 11, 12 years old and thereare so many backgrounds to Mr
(48:44):
Magoo's Christmas Carol,especially during winter was
warm that looked likebackgrounds from Gay Paris.
The same style, the same classyapproach, and winter was warm
has got to be one of my top fivefavorite songs of all time.
So it is nice to realize or putin perspective for me how much
that is a UPA demonstration,because it is as it gets.
Speaker 1 (49:10):
George Jerry mentioned a little bit earlier
some of the classic cartoonextras on here and the trailer,
which are part of the extras.
I watched them and again I'mwatching with my daughter.
We loved them and they lookterrific.
Maybe you could tell us alittle bit about the choices
that went into that.
Speaker 3 (49:29):
Well, I thought it was a perfect opportunity, given
the subject matter, to take twoof Chuck's Pebby Le Pew
cartoons for sentimental reasons, which won the Oscar, and
Louvre come back to me, whichhappens to be of the same year
that Gay Paris was released, andusually when we put cartoons on
(49:51):
as a bonus to feature films,it's either because of thematic
or relation, which is theapplication for sentimental
reasons, or year of release.
Louvre come back to me, but italso violated the Chuck Jones
equivalency theory.
(50:12):
I want to make a Big BangTheory kind of title for that by
including the Robert McKimsoncartoon, french Rare Bit, which
is one of my personal favoriteBugs Bunny cartoons and is so
Oolala French.
And Gay Paris is Oolala Frenchand it's thematics and very
(50:34):
differently but hysterically, sois French Rare Bit.
And we also added five demos,performed by the composer,
harold Arlen, of Key Songs fromthe Film, and he's joined on two
of them by the lyricist EY YipBarberg, and I'm sure that this
(50:56):
has probably already beenmentioned, but again, these are
the gentlemen that created allthe songs and the song score for
the Wizard of Oz, for JudyGarland, including Over the
Rainbow, so that pedigree comingto this motion picture can't be
underscored, hence thesongwriter demo.
So it's really a full disc interms of immersing one in the
(51:20):
Gay Paris experience and theFrench animation experience and
the let's Make a Judy Garlandmovie experience.
So it's all things rolled intoone, plus red buttons.
Speaker 4 (51:34):
And you art teachers out there between the Louvre
come back to me and the sectionin Gay Paris.
Literally you can get an arteducation in this film that I
don't think you can get anywhereelse.
You know it's pretty cool.
I love it.
Speaker 1 (51:50):
Yeah, and I was mentioning that earlier that my
daughter is at that age whereshe's being taught a lot of that
, and she caught right onto thatand she jumped ahead.
I know that, I know that artist, I know that style.
And she was saying, oh, that'smy favorite, you know the
go-gone.
And I was just shocked to hearher just jumping in to talk
about that.
I mean, you don't hear that ona current animation.
(52:12):
Well, actually that's wrong.
It's usually, oh, I know thatsinger, but I just thought this
was a terrific film.
I really appreciate you guyscoming on because I think we
just need to kind of spread theword on how great this looks and
sounds.
And of course, there, you know,there's already Judy Garland
fans and there's already ChuckJones fans Melding hey, two of
(52:35):
your favorites, possibly indifferent worlds.
They came together.
But I think that if peoplearen't kind of shown the images
and we don't talk about it, thatthis could just once again kind
of slip under the radar andlose its place in animation
history, film history.
Speaker 4 (52:52):
We got to, we got to spread the word.
I guess we got to get theAcademy Museum or something to
do a display.
I wonder if any of theanimation cells exist.
I seriously don't know.
Speaker 3 (53:03):
Have you ever seen?
Speaker 4 (53:04):
one, and you know, I don't think I ever have, but I'm
going to look into it.
I'm going to look into it.
I can't think of seeing one.
Speaker 1 (53:11):
It really does feel like something that should be
shown at the Academy with alittle exhibit.
It really does.
That's that kind of quality.
Well, George, was thereanything else you wanted to talk
about?
Speaker 3 (53:22):
Well, I just think it is a cause for celebration to
be here with all three of you,gentlemen, and to salute this
very, very special release.
I'm hoping that theavailability of this film, as it
was meant to be seen, withunparalleled quality, will
(53:42):
garner it a new group of fansand the appreciation I feel it
deserves and has not been givenhitherto.
Speaker 2 (53:51):
Well, I know a lot of fans garland fans are already
posting on Facebook that theyhave it and they're loving it.
They must have preordered,because they started getting it
in the mail at the top of thisweek and it's like it looks
great, it sounds great.
I've never seen it like this,all of that kind of stuff.
So the drums are being beatenand we tried to do our part
(54:12):
today anyway.
Speaker 1 (54:13):
Well, along those notes, thank you, jerry.
Thank you, john, george.
As always, it's terrific tohave you on the podcast, and I
just want to thank you guys forcoming on and sharing all of
your amazing knowledge with thelisteners of the extras.
So thank you.
Speaker 3 (54:30):
Thanks Tim.
Speaker 1 (54:37):
I hope you enjoyed this discussion as much as I did
.
I know there's terrific hearingfrom John Frickie, who just
knows so much about Judy Garland, and, of course, jerry Beck,
who has all of that animationbackground.
What a treat that was foranimation fans and film fans.
So I hope you really enjoyedthat.
If you're interested inordering Gay Pari, we will have
(54:58):
a link to that here in thepodcast show notes, so look for
that.
And if you're on social media,be sure and follow the show to
stay up to date on our upcomingguests and to be a part of our
community.
And you're always invited toour Facebook group for fans of
Warner Archive films, called theWarner Archive and the Warner
Brothers Catalog Group, so lookfor that link on the Facebook
(55:20):
page or in the podcast shownotes as well.
And for our long-term listeners, please don't forget to follow
and leave us a review at iTunes,spotify or your favorite
podcast provider.
Until next time you've beenlistening to Tim Mallard, stay
slightly obsessed.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!