Take a photo of a barcode or cover
med_librarian 's review for:
To really get this one, I'd suggest rereading Breakfast at Tiffany's and watching the movie again.
It's readable, but as someone who is a huge film buff and who has read extensively on the history of filmmaking, I took issue with some of Wasson's pronouncements. Wasson contends that stars are creations of the studios. While certainly stars were shaped and polished by the studios (and today by their various handlers), to imply that anyone could just create an Audrey Hepburn or a Marilyn Monroe is absurd. That's a minor nit, but it colored how I read the rest of the book.
He also despises Edith Head which I found mystifying. Her failure to acknowledge Givenchy when she won the Oscar for Sabrina is well known and was deplorable. Her career was also on a marked downswing as Hepburn's was rising, but her contributions to film are substantial--certainly more substantial as a whole than someone like Axelrod or even arguably Blake Edwards.
More troubling to me was the fairly shallow take on women in the Fifties. Pop social history has its place, but it has its definite limitations and should not be taken as gospel.
Still, the structure of this book is excellent. To follow all the aspects a film from conception to birth is not an easy thing and Wasson manages to present it in a clear and compelling manner.
It's readable, but as someone who is a huge film buff and who has read extensively on the history of filmmaking, I took issue with some of Wasson's pronouncements. Wasson contends that stars are creations of the studios. While certainly stars were shaped and polished by the studios (and today by their various handlers), to imply that anyone could just create an Audrey Hepburn or a Marilyn Monroe is absurd. That's a minor nit, but it colored how I read the rest of the book.
He also despises Edith Head which I found mystifying. Her failure to acknowledge Givenchy when she won the Oscar for Sabrina is well known and was deplorable. Her career was also on a marked downswing as Hepburn's was rising, but her contributions to film are substantial--certainly more substantial as a whole than someone like Axelrod or even arguably Blake Edwards.
More troubling to me was the fairly shallow take on women in the Fifties. Pop social history has its place, but it has its definite limitations and should not be taken as gospel.
Still, the structure of this book is excellent. To follow all the aspects a film from conception to birth is not an easy thing and Wasson manages to present it in a clear and compelling manner.