MovieChat Forums > Jezebel (1938) Discussion > Gone With The Wind Vs Jezebel

Gone With The Wind Vs Jezebel

posted 19 years ago by FloatingOpera7
53 replies | jump to latest

Alright, so undoubtedly the better movie was Gone With The Wind, but I hear that Bette Davis, who was the strongest second choice for Scarlett O'Hara, chose to do this movie instead. Her character is so similar to Scarlett in many ways. She's willful, beautiful, ostentatious, scandalous and proud. She also suffers of an unrequited love like Scarlett did for Ashley. Both films are set in the Old South. She is aching for Best Actress in her performance. She is doing a great job, but I can't seem to enjoy this movie because the shadow of Gone With The Wind is greater. But this film has its strengths. It is not in Techni-Color but it has brilliant dialog, moving scenes, great acting and a lot of heart. This is a fine movie too, but GWTW is a classic, and one more fondly remembered than this one.

[–] Hoomo_Deluxe 19 years ago

Bette was the first choice for "Gone With The Wind" but turned down the movie becuse Errol Flynn was set to play Rhett Butler

"Jezebel" was a play wich came before the book of "Gone With The Wind" so I relly don't understand why people keep calling "Jezabel" a pale movie of "Gone With The Wind"

I choose "Jezebel" becuse I don't like Clark Gable(homophobe) & Vivien Leigh(bad actress)

[–] Mayesgwtw39 19 years ago

With 2 Oscars, a slew of LA and NY Film Critics Awards under Vivien Leigh's belt- not to mention the most seen movie ever-which SOMEONE'S acting is reeling the legions of fans in SOMEHOW, I am knocked over by the last sentence in the last post-- I now know just how subjective good versus bad acting can be.

But, really,I have never heard anyone who was out of touch enough to call Vivien Leigh a "bad actress".

[–] FloatingOpera7 19 years ago

Vivien Leigh A BAD ACTRESS ? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? DO YOU FORGET WHOM SHE WAS MARRIED TO ?? She was a successful, talented actress (have you seen her in Anna Karenina and Antony and Cleopatra, Streetcar Named Desire ?) she was a terrific actress. But Bette Davis was one heck of an actress as well. Let's leave it at this before this sparks a Bette Davis VS Vivian Leigh debate, both actresses were wonderful in their own individual light. I love both actresses.

[–] Hoomo_Deluxe 19 years ago

Ive seen Streetcar, Roman Spring and Gone With The Wind.

Vivien used stage acting on film and that is something I don't like. Maby Vivien was better on stage. But Ive never seen her on stage so I don't know if she relly was good

[–] Mayesgwtw39 19 years ago

Bogus!

What a cop-out statement "used stage acting", indeed!

Vivien's Scarlett was done before her enormous stage work, when she had been primarily a film actress.
= Her subtlety and realness make the film so watchable. Her Blanche is perfect--and and Blanche was theatrical.

For over the top theatricality--it doesn't get any BIGGER than Davis (we love it, but it's scene-chewing)-now, THAT'S stage-acting.

[–] Hoomo_Deluxe 19 years ago

I am so sorry I don't find Vivien a great actress. I guess I must be retard

[–] Mayesgwtw39 19 years ago

Well, admitting you have a problem is the first step!

But, honestly, you are entitled to your opinion--as I am entitled to an opinion of your opinion:-)

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] FranLovesBetteD 18 years ago

I too think that Vivien Leigh was a little bit overrated actress, not bad, but overrated. Miss Davis would have been much better as "Scarlett O'Hara". Her performance as "Julie" is certainly much better than Leigh's.

But you are, Blanche! You ARE in that chair!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thenonna92 17 years ago

wrong.
anyone who knows anything about gone with the wind would kno that David O. Selznik had Viv in mind from the start. The whole "search" was a ploy Bette didnt turn GWTW down warner wouldnt loan her out to selznick she begged for the role but they were persistant. regarging errol flynn- the public and the produces also knew who they wanted Rhett to be...and it was not errol flynn Clark Gable was ALWAYS the first pick.

and errol flynn and Davis got along fine they even became friends after filming Elizabeth and Essex

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Devans00 17 years ago

Jezebel wins over Gone With the Wind for me.

I suppose I prefer Davis over Leigh.

No two persons ever watch the same movie.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Regina_Giddens 14 years ago

I read that the final list of candidates Selznick was considering (as per a memo from Selznick to his secretary Daniel O'Shea dated November 21 1938) included Katharine Hepburn, Jean Arthur, Joan Bennett, Loretta Young, Paulette Goddard and Doris Jordan.

Well according to a well cited documentary about the making of GWTW Selznick never wanted Katharine Hepburn because there was an 'intense public dislike' of her at that time, and he didn't think she had enough sex appeal or consider her nearly attractive enough. Hence the well told story of him telling her 'I can't imagine Clark Gable chasing you for ten years.'

If Selznick had never met Vivien Leigh, Paulette Goddard would very probably have gotten the role. She would have been alright...

As for Bette Davis's 'ego being deeply bruised,' that's not quite true. She didn't 'lose' the the part, or 'reject an offer' per se because she never even auditioned for it. Jack Warner told her he had something in mind for her, and she replied something to the affect of 'I bet it's a dud,' then flew to England where she proceeded to sue Warner Brothers for not letting her make English films. She rejected considering whether she wanted the role, and didn't realise what it actually was until later, when it would have been too late anyway. Not that she would have been hired, but it's not true that Bette desperately wanted the role of Scarlett O Hara and lamented the loss of it all her life.

Her comments in later years weren't to the affect that she was bitter because she was rejected (even though she was) or that she thought she would have been perfect (she wouldn't have been.) They were saying that she regretted not considering the role and screen testing.

It's opener, out there, in the wide, open air

[–] katza_33 19 years ago

Yeah that is sad but true that Gone with the wind is more fondly remembered than Jezebel wich is really ashame because it is such a great movie!! I love both movies though..!

[–] ladytink_534 19 years ago

I actually wasn't that impressed with the movie.I mean it was good though and Bette Davis is a great actress (this is the first movie I've ever seen her in) but it kind of just left you hanging! Gone with the Wind seemed to be more of a complete movie to me.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hoomo_Deluxe 19 years ago

according to rumors, Gable refused to make GWTW if Gerorge Cukor was gonna direct it

Sug kuk och lev livet

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hoomo_Deluxe 19 years ago

Just becuse he did like black people doesen't mean he liked gay people

Sug kuk och lev livet

[–] Mayesgwtw39 19 years ago

It wasn't about Cukor's being gay--but, purportedly, it was over what Cukor knew about Gable's beginnings in Hollywood that made him uncomfortable--

But all of this is rumor. Cukor was fired by Selznick and that
was because Selznick wished it so.

[–] osminbet 19 years ago

To All who think Viven Leigh is a great actress you need to go out and buy REBECCA- Criterion collection.....in the special features they show her screen test for the leading role.....IT IS TERRIBLE! its a complete mess.... her best performance is:

One flew over the the cuckoo's nest! hahahahaha (Crazy Bitch)

[–] Mayesgwtw39 19 years ago

She is a great actress--but her screen tests for Rebecca are dreadful--HOWEVER, she played in the radio version with Olivier in 1950--and was terrific!

BTW--One Flew "OF" the Cuckoo's Nest...?

Get the title right and the slams will be more effective,

[–] streeptacular 18 years ago

I don't think Viven was a good actress, either. she was too technical.. maybe she was good on the stage, i dunno, but certainly not on silver screen "in my opinion". so don't shoot.

[–] Mayesgwtw39 18 years ago

And yet your name has Streep in it--so perhaps you are an admirer of hers...and you would then know that that is the same criticism that many people level at Streep-that she is too technical for film. I happen to disagree with that.

As for Leigh--Her Scarlett was deemed by Mitchell herself as "perfect" and by the time of GWTW her primary experience was film (a medium in which she really began her career). "Waterloo Bridge" is one of the least self-conscious performances on film--seen it?

If you mean her Blanche, then--then the character was theatrical.

[–] Harold_Robbins 18 years ago

I've just watched JEZEBEL again and thoroughly enjoyed it - comparisons between it and GWTW seem to be inevitable, mainly because of their settings and their strong-willed heroines, but I just accept both films for what they are - Hollywood film-making at its best. It's possible that JEZEBEL might be more highly-regarded today had GWTW gone belly-up, but no matter - it's still nothing to be ashamed of!

I don't know how much the film of JEZEBEL ultimately resembled the play on which it was based - it's very possible that the film is more GWTW-ish than its source material, because by the time JEZEBEL was made, GWTW was becoming a cultural phenomenon - but something that isn't mentioned often is that JEZEBEL was written in the early 1930s and produced (unsuccessfully) on the stage in 1934 - two years before GWTW was published.

Those of you who think you know everything should politely defer to those of us who actually do!

[–] txwildswan 18 years ago

Vivien Leigh was an excellent actress, in spite of being so beautiful-and A Streetcar Named Desire just further proved she really could act!!! Bette Davis is in a league of her own however with such a long list of movies and roles in which she was brilliant. The true test of a great actress is in the eyes. Bette Davis Eyes is no accident, the lady used her eyes to full benefit. The scene at the Ball is just one example.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] txwildswan 18 years ago

Actually to me, Vivien Leigh mimicked this character in some ways, (not that I would say intentionally) when she played Scarlett O'Hara. Since Bette Davis played this character before Gone With the Wind was even made, this in no way at least in my opinion, is in the shadow of Gone With the Wind. I love them both. Although I am partial to the latter and I love Vivien Leigh and she is also a wonderful actress, I think Bette Davis is THE best actress of all time-bar none. (But Vivien Leigh is definitely up there too)

[–] roghache 18 years ago

I very much enjoyed "Jezebel" and accepted it for what it was -- great viewing and I love Bette Davis in her role.

However, this movie certainly doesn't have the complexity of GWTW, a true classic inspired by Margaret Mitchell's masterpiece. Julie engaged me far, far less than Scarlett did and Preston is really quite lacklustre compared to Rhett Butler. Scarlett and Rhett are both such magnificent characters! Even the supporting characters in GWTW are so well drawn, colourful and/or compelling. For example, "Jezebel's" Amy, who has little screen time and isn't a well developed character, is far less engaging than GWTW's Melanie.

GWTW is more an epic, spanning over a decade of the Civil War and its aftermath with Scarlett maturing from age sixteen to twenty-eight. "Jezebel's" external threat is of course the yellow fever epidemic but the story is set within approximately only a one year time period.

I didn't object at all to "Jezebel" being in black and white. I could still see the red of that dress!

[–] CaptainFlynn1959 17 years ago

People are dense if they like a movie more bc it is in color! Black and White films are gorgeous and in color you can't do the same things with shadow, smoke, and lighting. That is like saying citizen kane, Streetcar, psycho, the big sleep or philadelphia story would be better in color!

"Vivien used stage acting on film and that is something I don't like."

That is silly! Even if you think Vivien stinks (i don't! i think she is one of the greats) don't say it was because she was acting for the stage. Remember all the method acting studio kids(Brando, Clift, Newman, Kim Hunter, James Dean, Joanne Woodward, Shelly Winters,Geraldine Page, etc.) were from the stage.

AND EVERYONE NEEDS TO STOP ACTING LIKE GONE WITH THE WIND WAS FIRST!

[–] zuzupetal_99 16 years ago

Personally, I'd take Jezebel anyday over GWTW - I never did understand the draw to that movie, and believe me, I love old/classic films. The storyline was more interesting to me in Jezebel, and the actors were far more fun to watch than Gable or Lee.

Walk like it's for sale and the rent is due tonight- Miss Jay

[–] chronowoman2003 16 years ago

Personally, I prefer Jezebel over Gone With The Wind. There's just this aura that Bette draws out to people! She catches the viewers attention by merely moving one foot forward! And up until the end, I never took my eyes off her.

It's true that Vivien Leigh's Scarlett is cute! I love the first scenes with her on the green dress, but she didn't catch my attention that much compared to Bette Davis. I don't know why.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SeisCinemaSeis 16 years ago

I really like Jezebel but my vote goes definitively for Gone with the Wind.

[–] marcchanois 16 years ago

this movie has less "racial stereotypes" , so liberals won't like it.... they need desperately more films to call racism, you know.the more the better.. they want old classics all to be racist,so as to use them

[–] Rob_Dan 15 years ago

My Vote goes to "Jezebel" over "Gone With The Wind". I find that GWTW is over long and drags a little in the second half. "Jezebel" also has Bette Davis
in it and that gives it a edge over GWTW in my book.

[–] eek-a-mouse 15 years ago

marcchanois, I'm a liberal(and Black) and I preferred Jezebel to GWTW. I appreciated that the Black characters were less stereotyped and actually feel that they were treated with respect. I found their quiet, background participation in the film, particularly the dinner scene, laden with overtones of impending change.It would have been fruitless of me to expect more militance from them in a film made in 1938.