Old Movies

As we were watching old movies today, we noticed that there seemed to be the same stars and character actors in a lot of the films.

Was this due to them being contracted to certain studios and therefore just put into movies with the other actors who were also?

Did they have to screen test for parts, or were they just told the part they had to play?

Or is it because these were the best actors in Hollywood at the time, or the acting pool was so much smaller than it is today?

__________________
If God had wanted me otherwise, He would have created me otherwise.

Johann von Goethe

Well, in a word...yes.

Before the end of the 1960s, actors were under contract to specific Studios. The biggest superstars were sometimes lent out to other Studios on occasion, in exchange for one of their top stars back. But for the actors who weren't top-line stars, all those wonderful character actors, yes, they generally stayed at one Studio for their entire careers.

Once they had a string of successes and/or relationships with certain directors, who were also employed by the Studios of course, that liked working with them, pairings of actors with other actors and actors with directors were common. Some of the biggest directors, such as John Ford, had their own "stable" of actors that they used over and over again.

Up and coming young actors were given screen tests for various parts at first, and if the Studio was casting a special, "important" role for one of their biggest pictures then yes, even the more established stars might well screen test. But in general, once you were established at a Studio unless a director or producer was casting you against type, there would be no reason to screen test them. Once say Lee Marvin or Ben Johnson had been in three or four John Ford pictures, anytime he wanted to use them I'm sure the Studio was more than happy to oblige. And because of the Studio system it wasn't uncommon for actors and directors to have three or even four films per year.


So...yeah.

Does that answer your questions?

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

There are some fun stories with regard to the old studio days. I don't know the details, but if I recall correctly, Shirley Temple was not under contract with MGM and they wanted her to make The Wizard of Oz. They got Judy Garland instead.

And there was some big wheeling and dealing with regard to getting Clark Gable over to the studio that made Gone With the Wind. Fans of the book wanted Clark and that was all there was to it! I don't remember the deal, though.

One nice place to start are a couple of books that critic turned filmmaker Peter Bogdanovich compiled: Who the Devil Made It: Conversations with Legendary Film Directors and Who the Hell's in It: Conversations with Hollywood's Legendary Actors. That'll give you a nice cross section of a few generations of Hollywood stars and filmmakers, anecdotes and interviews galore. And of course the seminal Hitchcock/Truffaut is a must. But virtually any classic movie star or director you can name, there are multiple tomes devoted to them. Of varying quality, to be sure, but reams and reams of published material.

Really depends on who you're interested in most.