Did Louis B Mayer really sabotage John Gilbert's career?

[charliechaplinfan]

I wonder if anyone has an opinion on this, I vaguely remember thatwe might have discussed this before but where, I can't remember.

I've read and heard in numerous places the story that Louis B Mayer sabotaged John Gilbert's career, Mayer didn't like Gilbert, Mayer's daughter has said that the two shouldn't have inhabited the same planet such was their dislike of one another. It's meant to have stemmed from Mayer's reverence for mother's and Gilbert's reply that his had been a whore, he was speaking the truth I believe. I'd also heard about the 'double wedding' that was meant to take place when King Vidor married Eleanor Boardman, John Gilbert was meant to marry Garbo but she didn't show. Mayer was reputed to have said to Gilbert 'Why marry her when you can sleep with her?' Gilbert's reply was a punch in the face for Mayer. As a result of this slight, Mayer is meant to have had Gilbert's voice recordings tampered with.

I've always been skeptical because Mayer was a business man and Gilbert their biggest asset, MGM still had to pay $250,000 to Gilbert per film whether they were good or bad. Thalberg and Nick Schenk wouldn't have allowed it. So would/could he really tamper with the company's biggest asset?

In Mayer's biography the incident at the double wedding is disputed. Witnesses say it never happened and one said if Gilbert had of punched Mayer, Mayer would have knocked him out cold. It is Eleanor Boardman who says the incident took place but she apparantly claimed that Chaplin offered her £100,000 for her first child.

What puzzles me is that I don't think he did tamper with his voice but couldn't they have tampered with it to make it record better? Gilbert was meant to have had a fine speaking voice, there's nothing strange about it in Queen Christina but by then the seed was sown with the public.

[Lzcutter]

According to Scott Eyman's very well-written and equally well-researched bio on Mayer, The Lion of Hollywood, the story of LB Mayer sabotaging vocal recordings of John Gilbert is a myth.

Gilbert was one of the highest paid stars on the MGM lot, if not the highest, and he was having a hard time making the transition to talkies. His style of dramatic acting was better suited to silents. You can see many flourishes of that style in Queen Christina. He had a hard time reigning them in and needed a strong director to keep him from doing that.

Unfortunately for Gilbert, he didn't often have a strong director or good scripts.

His break-up with Garbo had sent him to the bottle and he was spiraling down quickly. The home office didn't like paying his high salary and neither did Mayer.

When his talkies failed at the box office, they saw their opportunity to cut him loose. He continued his downward spiral and died younger than he should have. There is some speculation that if he had lived he might have been able to recover and become a character actor. But would his ego have allowed him to?

Either way, I believe Eyman's version of the story. He spent years researching Mayer and his book reflects that effort. Besides, as you point out, it makes no sense for Mayer or MGM to sabotage Gilbert's career. Gilbert himself was doing a fine job of that on his own.

[charliechaplinfan]

Thanks Lynn, it's Scott Eyman's biography I'm reading now and hearing Mayer's side of the story it makes the rumours even more implausible. I'm sure some Gilbert fans will still believe that his voice was sabotaged. If it was possible to alter someone's voice to make them sound different, could the sound not have been tweaked to make him sound deeper? I don't belive Mayer sabotaged his career but to turn it on it's head, could MGM have made more of an effort to improve his voice.

[Ollie]

I've avoided Mayer and Warner Bros biographies because of the rumors of sabotaged careers. I hate it when stars screw up their own careers - "Do they really need help?!!" Apparently so.

[JackFavell]

I tend to agree with Lzcutter - Eleanor Boardman, though she could be the most reliable source in the world, is only one person, and I have doubts about the voracity of any unconfirmed account. According to Leatrice Joy Fountain, Mayer's daughters confirmed that there was an incident, but not the extent of it.

I think that Gilbert's voice was not what the public heard in their minds when they thought of him. He had started on the stage years before (1914-ish), and had learned a very flourishy way of speaking at that time, which he then pulled out when the talkies came around.

I would credit weak scripts, even weaker directors (Lionel Barrymore being one of them, apparently he was god-awful -I've seen one and can confirm it was terrible), and a rapidly changing public taste with Gilbert's downfall. His own nature certainly didn't help. He could have directed or written, everyone who ever knew him said he was a brilliant writer - but his determination not to break to his contract with MGM under the most awful of circumstances kept him tied to a studio that did not want him to succeed at anything, for whatever reason. He was another star whose salary eventually made him a liability to the studio rather than an asset. His publicity there was poorly done, and even derogatory after the coming of sound. Articles were placed by the studio that pointed up his deficiencies rather than playing up his strengths.

Most of all, public taste was changing - the depression made those effete college boys and romantic idols seem comical - Americans needed new heroes who were tough and could take it - Richard Dix illustrates the transition to heavier, tougher actors like Spencer Tracy, and Clark Gable. When an actor was more on the slick side, like Fredric March, it helped if he had a good sense of humor about it and could make fun of himself. Gilbert most certainly had that humor, as the film Downstairs (which he wrote) aptly shows. But somehow, it was too little too late, and he was unable to break free of the "Great Lover" mold. His main audience had been women, and they could not get a handle on his persona anymore. He tried to shop his own scripts, which might have saved him, but failed. I think it was just too hard for Gilbert to be his own promoter and he sank like a stone under the weight of that contract.

[Lzcutter]

For the record, as mentioned in CCfan's original post, Eleanor Broadman made the statement about the fight at the wedding to Kevin Brownlow during his interviewing of silent stars back in the 1960s-1970s.

She is the only source as far as I know for the story about the fight. No other collaboration has been found.

That is why many historians don't fully believe her account.

[JackFavell]

I think I was not clear in my previous post - LZ is right, and I think in the Leatrice Joy Fountain book, it is clear that all the information about this "event" was given by Boardman alone. Although LJF spoke to Mayer's daughter, she was unable to clarify what actually happened, since the daughter was not physically present at the moment the remarks were made and the sock on the jaw supposedly took place.

[charliechaplinfan]

That was a well worded reply JF. We've got to doubt the veracity of Eleanor Boardman's version particularly as it was only mentioned years afterwards.

I still can't get my head around why MGM didn't do more to help Gilbert. They had so much money invested in him, yet didn't issue much publicity to help his cause, it does sound like they wrote him off as a bad investment and gave up trying to save him. Downstairs is a good film, Fastworkers isn't bad either. His fall from popularity was so swift it made Gilbert vulnerable which in turn made him drink more. Perhaps he was past saving or MGM didn't know how to save him.

I'm finding the book on Mayer really engrossing, I read a book about Thalberg about 6 months ago, he's usually hailed as the boy wonder who could do no wrong and Mayer is the bad cop. Eyman's book redresses the balance somewhat, Thalberg was very money orientated and now I can see the disputes between the two of them much more clearly. I've still plenty more to read but I'm feeling more positive about Mayer, whether that feeling will last throughout the book, I don't know. One blackspot has been his treatment of Marie Dressler but it's only one person's word against Mayer's and doesn't fit in with Mayer's treatment of other people.

[Lzcutter]

CCfan,

I really enjoyed Eyman's book. Mayer has been painted as the Evil Hollywood Mogul in the past. Judy Garland, a wonderful raconteur, was a frequent late-night TV guest and regaled audiences with stories about Mayer that were often exaggerated to fit her needs.

I think part of the problem with Gilbert was that he had been type-cast in the romantic hero role and women loved him in that role in silents. But, the talkies and the Depression, as Jacks so artfully stated, changed not only America but our movie habits as well. Out were the romantic heroes of old and into that void stepped a new hero, fast-talking, strong and able to deal with the problems many in the audience felt an affinity to.

Seventy some odd years later, many actors still find it almost impossible to break from being type-cast.

As for Marie Dressler, I think the comment about Mayer's treatment of her is a myth. It doesn't jibe with the rest of the story. I would love for TCM to get Eyman to participate in the Film Festival and to be a guest programmer on the channel.

[charliechaplinfan]

I would have liked to have had more background about Mayer's beginnings, I find people fascinating who heave themselves up from the slums by their own talents, like Chaplin, like Mayer, they didn't have fancy education or family connections, they had something else. Hollywood in itself is so interesting because it is so mixed, especially in it's infancy when the ones with talent, or a bit of gumption, or a willingness to take a risk obtained power and position that was probably beyond their wildest dreams.

I've read to the part where Thalberg dies, it's interesting to hear that dispute from the other side and Eyman doesn't try to demolish Thalberg's reputation, he simply states the facts about both Thalberg and Mayer and their contribution to MGM and invites the reader to make their own mind up. The sign of a good author.

[drednm]

I'll play devil's advocate. Everything I have every read about Mayer has shown him to be a vicious and vindictive person. From what I've read, his dealings with John Gilbert were poisonous, and he vowed to ruin Gilbert's career (and he did). He tried everything to make Gilbert break his control and that included forcing him into B projects like WAY FOR A SAILOR in which Gilbert is still good. Mayer released Gilbert's first all talkie, REDEMPTION, which had been shelved because of lousy sound. Mayer released this film after HIS GLORIOUS NIGHT (which actually made money) supposedly ruined Gilbert's talkie career. Mayer wanted to break Gilbert but he also wanted to ensure no other studio would want him.

Mayer's treatment of other stars like Buster Keaton, Lillian Gish, Conrad Nagel, Marie Dressler, Anita Page, and the forgotten Bert Lytell wasn't much better. Ultimately he would also turn on Joan Crawford and Jeanette MacDonald.

[charliechaplinfan]

Well, he did hate John Gilbert, that's true but what advantage would ruining him have to Mayer? Mayer was paid profits from MGM. Gilbert was only one star and Gilbert's demise did not ruin the studio. He probably did get a bit of satisfaction in seeing one of his least favorite people suffer. He could bear a grudge, that's one thing the book makes clear, apart from a couple of moguls the only person he seemed to hate more was Chaplin.

I love Buster Keaton and sympathise with his personal problems and the fact he was assimilated into MGM. it wasn't the way he worked and he had a breakdown/problems with alcohol but MGM paid for him to have a vacation to Europe to try and rehabilitate him. Thalberg had more sympathy for Buster, that's true but Mayer was the business man and could only tolerate a trouble maker for so long. I think Buster is a victim of circumstance and most of it not of his own making.

The big strike against Mayer in the book is that Lon Chaney demanded a bonus to change his contract to one of a sound performer, he asked for $150,000 and eventually got $50,000 when he died a few months later Mayer looked in to getting the cash back from his estate. That's pretty shameful.

[JackFavell]

Gilbert also pulled himself up from extreme poverty. His mother worked as an "actress" in second or even third rate touring companies and may have also done a little night business on the side. She left Gilbert by himself for hours on end. He had a really awful childhood. It's amazing that he made it out of that without even more problems than he had. He was thin and emaciated when he started out on his own, people were concerned about him not having enough to eat. He was zealous to make good in Hollywood, and once he started earning money, became fond of expensive foods, clothing and the Hollywood lifestyle. I think he was constantly trying to fill that need he had inside to be loved and to make up for the abyssmal poverty he endured. He also tried very hard to learn as much as he could, reading and writing voraciously, to get the education he missed out on.

The question is not whether Mayer hated Gilbert, but whether he might have sabotaged Gilbert's career. I think that giant mistakes were made - as I said before, the publicity machine started sending out damaging press on Gilbert, which is documented, and the making and release of terribly sub-par films contributed a lot to his downfall. My guess is that he was rather high maintenance for his friends in higher places. Thalberg, who had been a friend and champion, couldn't continue to help Gilbert out over and over when his position at MGM was tenuous as well. There was a point about this time when the studio tried to oust Mayer, but it failed and his power became more pronounced.

I would not be surprised if there were some effort on Mayer's part to let Gilbert slide, but it is unproven. The idea that Mayer wouldn't let a big star slide because of their money making ability makes sense in the real world, where individuals count as just that - but if you look at stars and actors as a commodity rather than as individuals, it makes perfect sense to just replace Gilbert with someone more willing to play the game, or someone cheaper. I think Mayer definitely thought actors were replaceable. Mayer's bottom line was cash....it was his job to make money for the studio. Once a star was on top their position became precarious if they didn't pull their weight financially. The studio was always looking for new, cheaper talent.

I have only read one bio of Marie Dressler, and I was not all that happy with the information in that book. My take on the Marie Dressler situation with Mayer is that he adored her as a performer and as a person (and as a moneymaker), but that money was so much a motivating factor in his makeup that he might have ended up cheating her out of her salary near the end of her life. This may or may not be true, as Dressler was prone to exaggeration. However, the source for the bio I read seemed highly unreliable. He also, in his zeal to help her when she was ill, sent her to a quack doctor which may or may not have contributed to an even earlier death than she might have had.

[drednm]

As I remember Leatrice Fountain's excellent book, she pointed out that in fact there were NO stories written about Gilbert's voice problems in his first few films (where the problem was more technical than vocal). The stories started appearing around the time of WAY FOR A SAILOR.

Gilbert's voice was nasal but not high and effeminate as Hollywood history has it. If anything he did suffer from a rather sing-songy vocal pattern especially when he was be "romantic." But this stany vocal pattern was gone by the time he made WAY FOR A SAILOR.

Colleen Moore was a neighbor, friend, and costar (THE BUSHER). She stated that even Gilbert's drinking was exaggerated in the press once they got the scent of blood. Of course Moore also got the short end of the Hollywood stick and knew how ruthless the moguls could be.

The idea that Mayer would not have sabotaged Gilbert's career because of money is baloney. Look what Warners did yo Kay Francis, their #1 star. While MGM may have lost money on Gilbert, the idea was to get Gilbert to break his contract and bail the studio thereby gaining in the long term. That Gilbert (and Miss Francis) did not cave in says a lot about their characters.

The bottom line for Gilbert is that even with MGM (and seemingly Hollywood) working against him, he turned in terrific perofrmances in DOWNSTAIRS (which someone mentioned he also wrote), THE PHANTOM OF PARIS, and THE CAPTAIN HATES THE SEA. Other talkies like FAST WORKERS and QUEEN CHRISTINA are solid. And I like his work in WAY FOR A SAILOR.

As has been mentioned, the demise of Gilbert's career was probably a combination of many things, not least was the change in style from the dreamy romantic silent era to the brusque style of the new talkie heroes. But Gilbert, who always despised the "great lover" label, would have been happy with a career as a writer and star character actor.

As for Mayer, the pattern of megalomania is clearly marked. This is the guy who referred to Renee Adoree as "that French peasant" and Judy Garland as "the little hunchback." His treatment of Marie Dressler (I think it was in the Betty Lee book) was so monstrous as to be beyond belief. After squeezing 3 films out out her (while she tottered at the brink of death) with the promise of a $100,00 bonus. Dressler, the consummate trouper, received the check only to find it was for $10,000. MGM made a fortune on her films.

John Gilbert was married to my grandfather's cousin, Ina Claire. What family stories I remember from the 50s never included anything negative about Gilbert (voice or boozing), but Miss Claire was not fondly remembered.

[rudyfan]

Eyman's book of Mayer certainly humanized Mayer for me. I still think he was a very flawed person, but who isn't? I have little doubt that Mayer was guilty of many things, including holding petty grudges and not above using his power to destroy. Gilbert had signed a very lucrative contract in the silent era and he was a dead weight to MGM in the 1930s. I'm going from memory here, he suffered from the romantic persona which did not translate in the depression era as mentioned previously. He also suffered from poor scripts and direction. This is not to say he did not loathe Mayer and vice versa, but I am sure Gilbert was much more tolerable when he was bringing in millions for the studio.

I've always appreciated Garbo's gesture and loyalty when it comes to Queen Christina, and more the pity, Gilbert under Mamoulian was wonderful and should have gone on to bigger and better things. Or to directing which he had wanted to do. A shame and a waste.

As an aside, I just finished Mark Vieira's excellent bio of Irving Thalberg, and I recommend it highly. One of the best bios I've read in years. It will certainly give you Thalberg's end of the deal and while I've always admired Thalberg and his reputation as the boy wonder, this also humanized him.