Welcome to Bob Birchard

Past chats with our guests.
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Welcome to Bob Birchard

Post by Bob Birchard »

Dear Silver Screen Oasians,

Just checking in a day early to say "Hi," and to say that I'm looking forward to a week in the hot seat. :wink:

My only complaint, and this is not unique with SSO, is that hitting the tab key (which we writers commonly do to start a new paragraph) jerks these forums into "do you want to send" mode instead of doing a simple tab to a paragraph indentation. So, if tou see a blank posting or an incomplete one, you'll know it's me cursing at my PC for hitting the wrong key at the wrong time.

So, to quote someone I'd prefer not to quote, "Bring 'em on!"

Best,

Bob
User avatar
Moraldo Rubini
Posts: 1094
Joined: April 19th, 2007, 11:37 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: It's Bobbeeee . . .

Post by Moraldo Rubini »

Bob Birchard wrote:Dear Silver Screen Oasians,
My only complaint, and this is not unique with SSO, is that hitting the tab key (which we writers commonly do to start a new paragraph) jerks these forums into "do you want to send" mode instead of doing a simple tab to a paragraph indentation. So, if tou see a blank posting or an incomplete one, you'll know it's me cursing at my PC for hitting the wrong key at the wrong time.
Welcome! Here's a tip: should you create a blank or incomplete posting -- if you act quickly -- you can delete it by pressing the "edit" key. Once in edit mode, see the choices at the bottom of the screen; one of them will be to delete the post. But if the denizens of the oasis get excited and respond too quickly, it'll be too late. You can't delete once there's been a response to a post.
And with that, we look forward to our week with you!
User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8024
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Welcome!

Post by moira finnie »

Welcome, Mr. Birchard!

I hope that you'll find the pretty user friendly software on our site increasingly easy to navigate in the next few days.

To get us started, may I please ask how you became a movie fan, and what led you into your profession as an editor and author? Thanks in advance for your insights.

moira
SSO Admins
Administrator
Posts: 810
Joined: April 5th, 2007, 7:27 pm
Contact:

Post by SSO Admins »

Welcome! I remember you from a.m.s. several years ago.

My question: What do you think were the reasons that Tom Mix never managed to make it in talkies? I've heard that his voice was ok, so was it just that, like Pickford, the public had grown tired of him and ready for someone new? Or were there other reasons?
User avatar
movieman1957
Administrator
Posts: 5522
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
Location: MD

Post by movieman1957 »

I'll follow Jon's question. Having never seen a Tom Mix film (and am embarassed about it) would would made him such a compelling figure? How does he compare to other western stars?

What is your thought on why westerns exploded in the 50's? I know they have always been with us but as many as were on TV and in the movies seems beyond normal.

Thanks for joining us and taking time to talk with us.
Chris

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
klondike

Post by klondike »

Welcome, Bob!
First off, do you pronounce your last name: " bur - CHARD", "BURR-churd" or "burr-SHAWR"?
Might seem silly to some, as this medium is entirely visual, but I want to know in particular 'cause I tend to mentally "verbalize" conversations as I compose them for submission, and I feel it helps to develope a sense of rapport if you're getting that other person's name right, as though you are actually "chatting".
Secondly, as the subject of Tom Mix has been run up the flagpole, and admittedly I know slightly more about him than the "man on the street", but certainly far less than many of my fellow SSO members, let me skirt the corral by asking this: assuming you saw the Blake Edwards film Sunset, and as we're all pretty savvy about how that script mixed fantasy and reality, how accurate do you think Bruce Willis' portrayal of Tom Mix therein was, allowing for some Hollywood mythologizing?
Again welcome aboard, make yourself cozy, and thanks for being so generous with your time!
:D
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Re: Welcome!

Post by Bob Birchard »

moirafinnie wrote:Welcome, Mr. Birchard!


To get us started, may I please ask how you became a movie fan, and what led you into your profession as an editor and author? Thanks in advance for your insights.

moira


I guess I can trace my serious interest in film to seeing the David Wolper TV special "Hollywood the Golden Years" in 1961 when I was 11 years old. I was aware of silent films from seeing silent comedies on early TV, and my parents were both old enough to have seen them in theaters. My mother thought there was enough cultural benefit to take me to see "When Comedy Was King" at the Vogue theater in Hollywood ca. 1960, but it was seeing clips from films like "The Birth of A Nation" and "Intolerance" and "The Big Parade" that got me hooked--the clips looked just like "real" movies to me, not just the highly stylized world of the short comedies.

I started clipping out stories on silent films, mostly obits, and putting them in scrapbooks. I managed to get the books "The Movies" by Richard Griffith and Arthur Mayer (still one of the best) and "Classics of the Silent Screen" by Joe Franklin (only years later did I come to realize it was ghost written by William K. Everson).

Film books were not as unbiquitous as they are today, and each new release was a special event (at least to me). "The Movies in the Age of Innocence" came out about 1963 (another great book) and I wrote a fan letter to author Edward Wagenknecht and he replied and mentioned that Blackhawk Films sold 8mm prints of many silents. So I started collecting films and it grew from there.

Because I was in Los Angeles I was fortunate to meet a number of people who worked in early pictures, cowboys Sid Jordan, Ted French, Art Manning, Tom Smith and others; directors like Irvin Willat and Al Rogell, Henry King and Allan Dwan; stars like George O'Brien and Harold Lloyd; cinematographers like Karl Struss, L. Guy Wilky, and Virgil Miller and many others. A number of them gave me still pictures from their early days in pictures and that's how it started.

The writing started almost by accident. I think my first short piece was for the "8mm Collector" (now "Classic Images") in 1966. It was about Sid Jordan, who had worked with Tom Mix. My first published piece for pay, however. I was introduced to former child actor and prolific film book author Raymond Lee. Ray was chrning out books and looking to partner with others in order to expand his areas of expertise. He was interested in collaborating with me on a book about Tom Mix.

Ray was a dear man, but to my taste not much of a writer, and pretty sloppy in his manuscript preparation. He showed me the proposal he'd sent out on Tom Mix and it was riddled with typos. I didn't like the way the package looked, but I was in no position to quibble. I was a freshman in college with no published work to speak of, and Raymond Lee had been publishing articles and books for years.

I wrote an essay about an old cowboy, whose widow I had interviewed, for a college English class; and with a couple of pictures I sent it off on a whim to "Frontier Times." They bought it for a princely $20, and now I had some "cred" to wave in Raymond's face in the preparation of the Tom Mix sales pitch. Unfortunately, at that Time Ray had about a dozen books under contract at A.S. Barnes, and they passed on buying any more from Ray until they'd published the backlog.

Ultimately, I think, it broke Raymond Lee's heart that he had sold a dozen books, at $300 advances, and really could not make a living from his writing. He passed away a rather dissillusioned man, and it would be years before I could resurrect the idea of doing a book on Tom Mix.

The editing I can also trace back to "Hollywood the Golden Years." Host Gene Kelly came out at the beginning of the show and said: "Hi, I'm Gene Kelly, and I work in the movies." That sounded neat. I later went to UCLA film school, managed to get a job with rbc films, which had nn-theatrical distribution rights to the Chaplin films, and through that connection met Russ Tinsley, who operated a post production service. The rest, as they say . . . [/code]
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Post by Bob Birchard »

jondaris wrote:Welcome! I remember you from a.m.s. several years ago.

My question: What do you think were the reasons that Tom Mix never managed to make it in talkies? I've heard that his voice was ok, so was it just that, like Pickford, the public had grown tired of him and ready for someone new? Or were there other reasons?

The answer is a bit nuanced. It would be a mistake to say that Mix didn't make it in talkies, but there were other factors.

Tom didn't like the idea of sound, he felt it would put an end to the type of action pictures he made. The earliest known recording of Mix's voice is from a Fox Movietone newsreel covering the opening of the new writers building at Fox in January 1928 at the very end of his contract with the studio, and he makes a crack to the effect that now, with the invention of Movietone, there was only job where it paid to be silent, and Calvin Coolidge had it. Mix's voice, btw, sounded fine.

Mix left Fox to go on a vaudeville tour over the Orpheum circuit, and he was a huge box-office attraction, which led to his signing with FBO for six silent Westerns. Only five were made as sound was taking over.

Mix signed with the Sells-Floto Circus for a salary of $10,000 a week (about $2,500 a week more than he'd been making at Fox), and he liked touring and making personal appearances. The depression hit the circus hard, and Universal, who had gotten rid of Hoot Gibson and Ken Maynard, signed Mix for a series of six talkies in 1931.

Mix was hit with a severe case of appendicitis and nearly died, and was not able to start on the Universal series until early 1932. He was paid $30,000 per picture (compare this to the $2,500 per picture John Wayne received for the Monogram-Lone Stars in 1933-'34). The first six were successful enough for Universal to renew for another six.

Mix's delivery of lines was a little awkward at first, but he got better. His voice was a little gravelly and his speaking was hampered somewhat by his store-bought teeth. But he was also 52 years old and well worn. He had an accident on location making his fifth Universal in the second season and he and the studio mutually agreed to end the contract.

Mix retutrned to circus life with the Sam B. Dill show. When Dill died, Mix took over the circus. His last film, "The Miracle Rider," a fifteen episode serial for Mascot was made to raise added money to refit the circus. Mis was paid $40,000 for four weeks work. The serial was a tremendous hit, and producer Nat Levine latere said the $40,000 he paid Mix was one of the best investments he ever made.

So, Mix was successful in talkies, but his age, injuries, desire to play before live audiences, and his high salary all conspired to make his talkie career more abbreviated than it might have been.
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Post by Bob Birchard »

movieman1957 wrote:I'll follow Jon's question. Having never seen a Tom Mix film (and am embarassed about it) would would made him such a compelling figure? How does he compare to other western stars?

What is your thought on why westerns exploded in the 50's? I know they have always been with us but as many as were on TV and in the movies seems beyond normal.

Thanks for joining us and taking time to talk with us.

I think the best way to understand why Tom Mix was so special is to see some of his best surviving Fox films like "Sky High" (1922), "Just Tony" (1922), "The Great K&A Train Robbery (1926) or "The Last Trail" (1927). There was simply no one else like him. His films were filled with wild stunts, clearly performed by Mix himself. The element of romance was also more pronounced in the Mix films, making him more popular with female fans than some of the other cowboy stars.

Fox obviously thought Mix was a major attraction. They spent about $150,000 on his films and they grossed in the neighborhood of $350,000 in film rentals. By comparison, Fred Thomson's films cost about $100,000, but only brought in about $150,000 in rentals, and the Buck Jones pictures cost about $50,000 and also brought in rentals of about $150,000.

As for the explosion of Westerns in TV in the 1950s. Several factors: They were relatively cheap to make, the "adult" Western added the element of a lot of serious talk, making them even cheaper because action was no longer a key element, and the success of "Gunsmoke" spurred imitations. You have the same thing today, but instead of 20 different shows in the same genre, networks seem to prefer spinning off the same show over and over again. Can "CSI: Pacoima" be that far off after the WGA goes back to work?
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Post by Bob Birchard »

JohnM wrote:Hello Mr. Birchard, and thanks for joining us!

My question to you is from the technical side of film making. I believe you have worked as an editor of both animation and live action. What are the main differences (challenges) of the two? Thanks.

There is a popular conception that animation editors merely cut off the slates and stick the shots together and it isn't really editing. Many live action editors have taken a whack at animation thinking it would be easy only to gain respect for the work.

In animation much of the editing is done in the pre-production phase building a "Leica reel" or story reel from storyboards and the recorded dialogue.

Once the footage comes back it often needs to be "massaged," invisibly trimming frames in the middle of shots to snap up action, rearranging scenes to make the story flow better, etc.

This can be especially challenging in TV where schedules often require that a show hit the air before retakes come in, and it just won't do for a character to lose his head or a background volcano shift postion and there's no time for retakes to arrive before air date. You have to figure out a way to "cut around" such problems and still maintain an understandable continuity.

Live action offers a different set chalenges. For the most part, barring occasional reshoots, you've got what you've got to work with--you can't simply order up a new angle in the storyboarding process as you can in animation.

In both animation and live action, however, the goal is the same: to make the story play as well as possible, to bring it in at the contractual length (even features usually have maximum length clauses in their contracts), to make the performances play as well as possible, not only be selecting the best takes, but by trimming pauses and dead space to make scenes play better, etc.
User avatar
cinemalover
Posts: 1594
Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:57 am
Location: Seattle, Washington

Post by cinemalover »

Hello Mr. Birchard,
What is that best Tom MIx picture that we will never be able to see since it has been long since lost or destroyed and about what percentage of his films exist in watchable condition?

Thank you.
Chris

The only bad movie is no movie at all.
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Post by Bob Birchard »

klondike wrote:Welcome, Bob!
First off, do you pronounce your last name: " bur - CHARD", "BURR-churd" or "burr-SHAWR"?
Might seem silly to some, as this medium is entirely visual, but I want to know in particular 'cause I tend to mentally "verbalize" conversations as I compose them for submission, and I feel it helps to develope a sense of rapport if you're getting that other person's name right, as though you are actually "chatting".
Secondly, as the subject of Tom Mix has been run up the flagpole, and admittedly I know slightly more about him than the "man on the street", but certainly far less than many of my fellow SSO members, let me skirt the corral by asking this: assuming you saw the Blake Edwards film Sunset, and as we're all pretty savvy about how that script mixed fantasy and reality, how accurate do you think Bruce Willis' portrayal of Tom Mix therein was, allowing for some Hollywood mythologizing?
Again welcome aboard, make yourself cozy, and thanks for being so generous with your time!
:D
It's "Burr-cherd" (English by way of Normandie by way of Rome, where it was Burchardus). All the Birchards are related, both the Bi's and the Bu's--spelling variation being the result of family disputes over the proper spelling. The family can trace itself back to Massachusetts in 1635 in this country.

I'd say that Willis's portrayal of Mix was not unlike Robert Downey, Jr.'s portrayal of Chaplin--both looked enough like the historical figures they were portraying, but they really didn't capture the personalities of either. Chaplin alswyas had a beaming smile, Downey was reather dour throughout. Same with Mix.

The only silent star impersonation I've really cared for is Kevin Klein as Douglas Fairbanks. He looked nothing like Fairbanks, of course, but he captured the Fairbanks spirit admirably.
Bob Birchard
Posts: 35
Joined: November 7th, 2007, 9:52 pm

Post by Bob Birchard »

cinemalover wrote:Hello Mr. Birchard,
What is that best Tom MIx picture that we will never be able to see since it has been long since lost or destroyed and about what percentage of his films exist in watchable condition?

Thank you.
Hard to even guess about what you haven't seen. The best surviving Fox silent is probably "The Great K&A Train Robbery."

Off the top of my head the surviving Fox silents are:

Hearts and Saddles (1917) two reel short, incomplete
Whose Your Father? (1918) two reel short, foreign titles
Fighting For Gold (1919) two of five reels survive
The Untamed (1920)
The Night Horsemen (1920)
The Texan (1921) Danish titles
The Road Demon (1921) only one reel survives in Czech archive
Trailin' (1922)
Just Tony (1922)
Sky High (1922) both original release and 1929 reissue version
Soft Boiled (1923)
The Last of the Duanes (1924) incomplete, Czech titles
Teeth (1925) incomplete, Czech titles
The Best Bad Man (1925) Czech titles, missing some footage
Riders of the Purple Sage (1925)
The Rainbow Trail (1925)
Dick Turpin (1925)
The Yankee Senor (1926) Czech titles, condition and state unknown
The Great K&A Train Robbery (1926)
The Last Trail (1927)

This would give a survival rate of approximately 23% which is in keeping with the overall American silent feature film survival rate of about 22%
User avatar
cinemalover
Posts: 1594
Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:57 am
Location: Seattle, Washington

Post by cinemalover »

Thank you for the answer. My question was actually intended for your knowledge of Mix's films that no longer exist. What would be considered his best film that is not on the list of survivors. A film that is forever lost but that you may have knowledge of, even if you never had the chance to see it.
Chris

The only bad movie is no movie at all.
Locked