Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again everyone. Malcolm Gladwell is here now to preview an experiment he'll be trying at an event at Town Hall next week. He's going to invite you to participate in it in a little preview right now. Malcolm Gladwell, just to remind you is the author of so many bestselling books, including Blink, The Tipping Point, David and Goliath, and his most recent one just coming out in paperback next week called The Bomber Mafia.

Mostly these days, he is in the host of his podcast business. The podcast Revisionist History, which does just that looks back at things in history to see what people generally tend to get wrong about those things. Next Monday, June 6th, at Town Hall, he will be revising a classic Hollywood blockbuster or beginning the process of making a Revisionist History podcast episode about it with an all-star cast of friends who will help figure out before a live audience, how to approach it.

He'll have Mike Birbiglia who maybe, you know best from This American Life. Also Dr. Barron Lerner from NYU, maybe best known for his book on the history of Drunk Driving, and screenwriter, Charles Randolph, maybe best known for the Big Short and Bombshell, but his first guests for this experiment are going to be you on the phones right now. Malcolm, it's always great to have you on the show. Welcome back to WNYC. Thank you for coming out to play.

Malcolm Gladwell: Thank you, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: I thought we might have some fun with this right off the bat by inviting callers to guess what Hollywood blockbuster you'll be revising? I haven't said it on the air yet. I'm going to give people one clue to start out and we'll see if this is enough. Listeners heads up, this Hollywood blockbuster was made four times. What movie are we talking about that really limits the field?

This Hollywood blockbuster was made four times. What movie are we talking about? 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or tweet @BrianLehrer. It was made four times once in the 1930s, once in the '50s, again in the '70s and just a few years ago in 2018. You think that's too much information.

Malcolm Gladwell: You'll give it away.

Brian Lehrer: [crosstalk It's only one classic film that fits that bill but honestly, until I was boning up for this Malcolm, I didn't know it was made four times. Let's see, we're getting a few callers coming in, but while the calls are coming in to guess the film, you want to remind folks of the premise of your podcast series, Revisionist History. What led you to this and you a successful author to audio as your major endeavor?

Malcolm Gladwell: I thought it would be fun to try something new a couple of years ago and my friend, Jacob Weisberg said, "You should do a podcast." I tried the first season and decided, realized I loved it and so we've been doing a show for seven seasons now, and it's 10 episodes a year. Each episode we revisit some historical episode or some issue in contemporary society. We either have little fun with it or get outraged. There's any number of directions we go with Revisionist History episodes.

Brian Lehrer: You were right. I gave people much, too much information. All our lines are full. I presume everybody's got the right answer. We're going to let Sylvia in Laurelton. Is that where you are Sylvia? Do the reveal. Hi, Sylvia?

Sylvia: Hi. I'm in Floral Park, New York. [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: Oh Floral Park.

Sylvia: Yes. I'm so happy to be on your call, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: I'm so happy to have you.

Sylvia: I love you both. [laughs]

Brian Lehrer: Thank you. What movie do you think was made four times that Malcolm is going to revisit?

Sylvia: A Star is Born.

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes.

Brian Lehrer: You are right, Sylvia. The film that was made four times was in fact, A Star Is Born.

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes. Well done.

Brian Lehrer: Malcolm, you probably know that three of the four versions, as I understand produced hit songs in their eras?

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes. I did actually know that. The movie, it's funny every generation has its own version. We've done four versions since 1937, which means that each Hollywood generation finds a way to make this movie real which is super interesting. There's something about the plot that is really timeless and also it's capable of infinite reinterpretations. I think that's maybe why this movie keeps I'm sure. It'll get it again. I'm sure we've not done it for.

Brian Lehrer: Just for musical fun, in 1954, the song was The Man That Got Away when Judy Garland played the lead role and I actually thought we might set this up because I have a theory about where you're going to go with A Star Is Born, which of course could be totally wrong. I thought we might set this up by discussing something you did on another Hollywood blockbuster in your last season of Revisionist History, you revisited Walt Disney's 1989 version of The Little Mermaid, the Hans Christian Andersen's fairyTale. You did three half-hour episodes on that. Before we ask, what led you to A Star Is Born, what led you to The Little Mermaid?

Malcolm Gladwell: Little Mermaid, that's actually funny. I just randomly ran across an essay by this really brilliant academic, at the university at Northwestern in which she did-- she's a legal expert and she did a legal analysis of The Little Mermaid putting out all of the ways in which The Little Mermaid's fate is in violation of well known legal principles asking semi-seriously, "Are we sure we want to be giving our children such a completely ridiculous notion of what the law does?" Amount of things, The Little Mermaid is bound into a-- she signs a legal contract with-- oh God, I've forgotten her name.

Brian Lehrer: The sea witch?

Malcolm Gladwell: The sea witch. She's a minor. She can't be the whole thing. She points out 10 different ways in which this whole thing's ridiculous. I thought it would be fun. Maybe we should go back and rewrite it and fix some of these problems. Then the closer I looked, the more problems I found. I enlisted a well-known Hollywood screenwriter, Brit Marling, to rewrite the ending, to do it properly.

The other problem, of course, is that The Little Mermaid follows all of the most egregious tropes of a fairyTale. That is that the little mermaid has to be rescued by a handsome prince. Her entire fate is in the control of a man who comes in from the outside and saves the day. Why is it impossible for the little mermaid to control her own destiny? I could go on. We go through 10 different problems with it.

Brian Lehrer: I actually pulled the clip because I was listening to your third and final episode about The Little Mermaid over the weekend, how I spent my Memorial day weekend listening to Nancy Solomons and Malcolm Gladwell's podcast. How great is that? I pulled a clip from your guest, the actor, and screenwriter, Brit Marling who described really from a feminist standpoint, why everything was wrong with the way the little mermaid got saved from her fate and got to marry her true love. Here's a little bit of Brit Marling on that.

Brit Marling: I went back and rewatched it, Malcolm because I was like, it can't be as bad as I think it is, but it's worse. She's standing on the dock, watching the wedding ship, go out into the sunset, knowing that Eric is about to marry this princess and when the sunsets she'll be turned into this algae creature, that's a lost soul in Ursula's garden of lost souls under the sea.

She's crestfallen and she's standing there and then scuttle the seagull comes flapping over and it's like, "Oh my gosh, I looked through the portal window and it's Ursula, who's marrying Prince Eric." Jariel flings herself off the docklands in the water and she can't swim. Then not only does Flounder have to drag her to the boat on the back of a barrel, but then when she gets up onto the deck, she's standing there and it's, Scuttle the seagull that goes and gets the shell off Ursula's neck, throws it on the floor and it just happens to land where she's standing and she just happens to reabsorb her voice through literally no agency of her own.

Brian Lehrer: No agency whatsoever.

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes, exactly. That's the problem with that movie. We did the feminist version. The fun feminist version.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. You did your own by the way, the music in that was so great. I'm going to have to start scoring all my soundbites now. I'm still thinking about The Little Mermaid as I'm thinking about A Star Is Born are you taking on A Star Is Born also because in each version, the high functioning woman basically is willing to give up her career to take care of the alcoholic man on decline.

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes, it's funny you say that. We could have done that and that's a really good suggestion, we don't-- I'm not giving too much away I think. We're interested in the fact that there were two versions of the original script of A Star Is Born. David O Selznick, who's the Hollywood mogul who makes the A Star Is Born is unhappy with the initial script, which is written by Dorothy Parker among others.

Brian Lehrer: I was just going to say it. For a film that might have feminist problems in several generations, Dorothy Parker-- Then later the Barbra Streisand, Christopher Thompson, Joan Didion, right?

Malcolm Gladwell: Joan Didion. No end of talent has been attracted to this. Selznick doesn't like the way that Parker ends it, and so he brings in incredibly, Budd Schulberg, who would later go on, of course, to write On The Waterfront and win an Oscar for that and also write What Makes Sammy Run? the quintessential Hollywood movie, who is at the time is 21 years old.

Also, Ring Lardner Jr., who had in self go and win an Oscar, whose at that point 22 years old. He brings them in and they re-write a crucial scene. My whole episode is all about a, what if, what if Selznick had kept the original version? Because I think the Dorothy Parker version is a really transgressive, deeply subversive, socially consequential version.

Brian Lehrer: They kick out that Dorothy Parker's ending.

Malcolm Gladwell: Kicked out Dorothy Parker's ending.

Brian Lehrer: Wow.

Malcolm Gladwell: They subbed in what I think is a complete capitulation to the standard norms of Hollywood. The movie could have been-- it's been insanely, as you say, they made four times. The movie had a chance to be a once-in-a-generation social statement and it gets eviscerated. What I want to figure out is could you have made the movie the original way, does the story work? Would the original version have had the effect that I think it would have had?

That's what we're going to talk about and work through in the live show we're doing at Town Hall.

Brian Lehrer: You're going to do this on Monday at Town Hall with, again, Mike Birbiglia, Dr. Barron Lerner, and screenwriter, Charles Randolph. Before we go further into it, my question for you right now is for our listeners, can we ask them to participate as if they were on your panel? What would be the question for listeners right now? If they all got to sit on you on the stage with you at Town Hall next Monday, what would you be asking them to say you're doing? Let's ask them right now.

Malcolm Gladwell: I have a bunch of questions for them. The subject of the entire evening is endings. We're really concerned about how you end the story, particularly how you end an emotionally powerful story. That particular way in which the revised version of A Star Is Born and all the subsequent stories-- Sorry, one stories end, is that in order to resolve the central problem of the movie, the heroine who stars on the rise has to, in some way, resolve the fact that her husband whose star is falling has-- their careers are in conflict.

He can't deal with the fact that his wife is now a much bigger deal than he is. He goes into this alcoholic spiral. The question is, how do you end that story? How do you tie that? You have a Cinderella story, which is an unknown woman comes to Hollywood, is discovered, and becomes a huge star. Then you have the reverse Cinderella story, a well-known big deal Hollywood actor, marries that woman, and as she rises, he falls.

You've got two contrasting trajectories. How do you bring that story to a satisfactory conclusion? It's a really hard problem because they're headed in different directions. What we want to do is to walk through a bunch of different ending scenarios and say, "Does that work? Does this work? Does this work better than the one they chose?" Now, the one they chose, of course, is that the husband commits suicide, and that lets the woman off the hook.

Then that brings up an additional set of questions which is, what is the motivation for his suicide? Is that clear in the original version? I think it muddied a little bit. Then the other issue is the very ending of the movie, which is how does she deal with the fact that her husband has just sacrifice his life for her career. All of those are--

Brian Lehrer: All of those are salient questions. Listeners, if you've seen any version of this, A Star Is Born-- Now, it sounds like you're focusing mostly on the original 1937 version. Is that right? Or does this really run because they do change?

Malcolm Gladwell: They do change but yes, I'm focused on the '37 version, which sets the template. All of them are dealing with this same central problem, which is how does a man deal with a wife whose star has eclipsed his, that's the-- which is a very Hollywood problem because they're operating in this world where the zero-sum game of Hollywood stardom, where for every star who rises, one must fall. There's a limited number of--

Brian Lehrer: Only so many roles.

Malcolm Gladwell: There's only so many roles. Here we have that dynamic contained within one relationship. Another thing that we're really interested is all these movies are about alcoholism, all the versions of A Star Is Born are essentially-- the other big theme of them is alcohol and how that's the chosen path of the hero's destruction.

Brian Lehrer: Is that why Dr. Barron Lerner is on your panel?

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes. He's on our panel because the deleted scene, the revised scene that's at the heart of our investigation is the scene in which the hero, Norman Maine's alcoholism comes to a head. What happens is Dorothy Parker had written, who was-- what's fascinating about Parker, of course, is that when you realize A Star Is Born is really-- it's both the thing about a relationship and two Cinderella stories, it's also really a movie about drinking.

Of course, she dies of alcohol. She basically drinks herself to death. She knows what she's talking about. [laughs] She writes this unbelievable scene about how Norman Maine's drinking comes to a head and that's what gets taken out. One of my questions is, does it have to be taken out?

Brian Lehrer: All right. Listeners, would it have to be taken out? How do you want to help Malcolm Gladwell revisit for his podcast, Revisionist History, A Star Is Born, 212-433-WNYC. All our lines are full by the way, they didn't need much prompting. Melanie in Kent, Ohio, you're on WNYC. Hi, Melanie.

Melanie: Hi, Brian. Thanks so much for taking my call. I don't recall seeing the original version of this film but I would love to. Dorothy Parker, she died, it might've been wet brain. She was Alzheimer's by the time she died but it's fascinating that whole round table group of brilliant writers, I would have to revisit that. What really has annoyed me about the last versions that I've seen, including this most recent one, which I absolutely loved with Gaga was he always dies in the end.

It's always like this, she rises so he's got to fall. I don't buy it anymore. I think there's just so much more that could happen. They don't have to end up together but he doesn't have to end up dead either. He doesn't have to resolve it that way. It seems depression in men, that's one of the most brilliant things that came out of Uvalde. I hope I'm pronouncing that right. Recently on NPR NewsHour, a psychologist was interviewed.

She said, "Depression expresses itself differently. In males, often depression is anger and just like suicide by gun. Suicide by running in and doing what's happened." I would like to see a different ending. I would like to see recovery. I believe recovery can happen. I think this is 2022, but that said, I really should see the original before I make that judgment. I just wanted to weigh in. Thanks very much.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you very much. [crosstalk]

Malcolm Gladwell: It's interesting. What's interesting the caller puts her finger on something really important here which is the effect of the ending of A Star Is Born where Norman Maine commits suicide because his wife has said, "I'm going to give up my career to save you." He says, "I can't let you give up your career. I'm going to commit suicide instead." The effect of that ending is that he upstages her, she only has her career because her husband made the ultimate sacrifice of taking his own life.

Going back to our Little Mermaid discussion, it is the same problem. It's impossible for the heroine to have an independent career, everything she does is contingent on the decisions of her husband. Even the very last line which was written by Schulberg and Ring Lardner which is, she looks into the moment of her greatest professional triumph after her husband is dead and she's gone on to have this great movie career.

She's standing in front of the premier of her big movie and she says the last night of the movie is, my name is Mrs. Norman Maine. She embraces the identity of the wife of this guy. It's all about him. He's running the movie from the grave. It's maddening. Why can't she have her own career?

Brian Lehrer: Does Lady Gaga in the 2018 version which I have not seen do that still?

Malcolm Gladwell: No. I think that only the next two versions and you couldn't do that in 2021 or 2020 whatever it was. For her even, it's such an archaic ending but in 1937 they felt that was the only way they could resolve it, was to have her affirm her marriage to this dead guy. The movie has all kinds of issues.

Brian Lehrer: Lynn in Manhattan. Who on WNYC with Malcolm Gladwell. Hi, Lynn.

Lynn: Yes, hi. Thanks for taking my call. I would like to see there was a book by Herman Wouk Marjorie Morningstar that was made into a movie with Natalie Wood and Jean Kelly. It was all about how really we make people so important that once we grow up and we mature we see them more clearly.

I'd like to see it if you want to make a feminist A Star Is Born. I'd like to see it that way. She goes on with her career. They don't end up together. He can drink or not drink but as the years go by she sees him making his movies or whatever he does but he's an unserious man and she just sees the serious one and the mature one and she goes on with her life.

Malcolm Gladwell: Yes. This is what frustrates me about the original A Star Is Born which is it gets close to really saying something important and then stop short. The idea that she could have a female star whose success is the result entirely of her own doing and talent somehow that's an impossibility in 1937 in this particular movie. To have made a movie that said that in '37 if you'd done that you would've had a movie that people would've remembered forever.

It would've been capable I think of making. Now one of the reasons I want to have this discussion at Town Hall is maybe I'm wrong. Maybe what I'm doing is I'm simply suggesting that a movie made in '37 should resemble a movie made in 2022 and had it been made my way no one would've seen it. It just would've seen out there too far-fetched.

Brian Lehrer: One more call, June in Yonkers. You're on WNYC with Malcolm Gladwell on his plan to revisit A Star Is Born in his podcast. Hi, June.

June: Oh, hi. Thanks for taking my call. My take on A Star Is Born especially the earliest version is that it's more of a parable about what happened with some of the silent film stars like John Gilbert who was very much a Norman Maine character. Who had been the most prominent male lead of his day but when there was a transition from silent to sound he was ridiculed for his voice and basically they didn't want to pay his salary or salaries like his.

They were looking for younger stars who could be signed more cheaply. I think especially since Dorothy Parker, who knew all about the silent film industry since she was involved with the script that's how I've always seen it. No matter how many times it's re-made it's like re-making King Kong. I think you can't really remake an original like that. I don't think the subsequent.

Although Judy Garland was great and James Mason but really that is how I understood it was just that the system was trying to get rid of people like Norman Maine by first promoting all their eccentricities. Then condemning them for those same behaviors when it was more convenient for the studios to be paying people less.

Brian Lehrer: Malcolm?

Malcolm Gladwell: It's funny I went to the archive. All of David Selznick's papers are archived at the University of Texas. I went to the archive and was reading through a lot of the memorandum and stuff that led to the development of the movie. It's very clear. I think that you're right that the original impetus for this was that David Selznick saw all these fallen stars around him.

These forgotten once-great male actors in Hollywood who for one reason or another the advent of talkies their own drinking problems. Alcoholism was a huge problem in Hollywood at time, actors falling away. He has that strength from the beginning but he also gets really interested in the Cinderella story and wants to graft it onto the story of the fallen man.

If you read the memorandum it's really fascinating because he can't decide which of those two stories he's interested in more.

It goes back and forth. It's really hard I guess to write a screenplay where both of those figures have equal billing. You got to pick which one of them you think is going to be the dominant story. He can't. He keeps sending the script out for rewrites because he can't figure out what movie he wants to make. Dorothy Parker gives him one version, Budd Schulberg and Ring Lardner give him another version.

There's all kinds of other people who get thrown into the mix as well. He was making up the movie as he went along. The movie was half shot before he'd even figured out what the ending was. It's a really fun movie to investigate in the way we're going to do.

Brian Lehrer: This was great, Malcolm with our callers. You're going to do this on stage at Town Hall on Monday with Mike Birbiglia, Dr. Barron Lerner, and the screenwriter Charles Randolph. I have to be true to our listeners and say that a bunch of people are noticing that you don't have any women on the panel despite the theme.

Malcolm Gladwell: Oh, we do. We're doing a second show in Philadelphia and we have women on that panel. I just couldn't line up that. I have my women in Philadelphia. I have my men in New York. We have a show on Wednesday in Philadelphia where that imbalance is addressed.

Brian Lehrer: Thanks a lot. Our listeners were really into this conversation. We could keep going on with really interesting observations about Hollywood and relationships and changing MOS and everything else if we had more time. Thanks for doing this. Good luck at the Town Hall event Monday as you re-visit, A Star Is Born.

Malcolm Gladwell: Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2022 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.