There was an intriguing duality about Paul Newman. He was always quick to make fun of his blue eyes, and the fuss that was made about his good looks. He knew that those things had nothing to do with his acting, but a great deal to do with his stardom. Usually, he’d make a crack on the order of, “If I had brown eyes, I’d still be in Cleveland.”
But each interview in which he voiced these sentiments was always accompanied by a new, full-face close-up that enabled the reader to get lost in those blue eyes that Newman spent so much time pretending to resent.
Part of this was just a movie star tending to the franchise, but it also captured an essential conflict within the man, one that he papered over quite well.
For Paul Newman was one of those men who managed to have it both ways: shy away from the narcissism of the acting profession from which he was not exempt, while taking advantage of the fact that he was greatly blessed by nature. At bottom, Newman always seemed slightly uneasy about being an actor. Not in any writhing, embarrassed way, but rather because it seemed insufficient.
Which is why he became such an expert driver of racing cars, why he threw himself into philanthropy after Newman’s Own franchise, begun as a local lark in his home in Westport, Connecticut, inexplicably took off. Well, maybe not so inexplicably; the products were and are good. But let’s face it: People — millions of them — loved Paul Newman.
Shawn Levy’s new biography of the late actor won’t change that. It gives us more information about his upbringing as the son of the owner of Newman-Stern, a very successful sporting goods store in Cleveland, more details about his two marriages, and his various careers.
But at the end of the day, and the book, he’s the same guy you thought you knew — not just a good actor, but good company.
The truly interesting thing about Newman is that, for all of his renown and acclaim, he was far from the best actor of his generation. He couldn’t get close to either Marlon Brando or Montgomery Clift, and I’ll
bet he would have been the
first to say so. But Clift was a sprinter, not a long-distance runner, and Brando was grievously damaged psychologically, i.e. borderline crazy.
Newman, on the other hand, was one of those rare men whose talent was unaccompanied by the gene for self-destruction. He worked hard to develop his skills, then worked equally hard to get the most out of the gift he had.
When he hit a fallow period in his acting career, he took up directing, and did well with performance-based pieces such as Rachel, Rachel and The Glass Menagerie. In this, he was similar to Burt Lancaster, another very handsome man untouched by genius, but who worked and worked and worked some more until he became the very best actor he could be.
Newman had his weak points. He wasn’t terribly good at romantic leads, and for a guy who was obviously a lot of fun to be around, he never made a really good comedy. Newman’s great gift was for solitary rogues. Sometimes they were redeemable (The Verdict) sometimes not (Hud, Cool Hand Luke), and sometimes their fate would be ambiguous (The Hustler), but he refused to stop there.
He played an uptight
Midwesterner beautifully in Mr. and Mrs. Bridge, he played beautiful losers beautifully (Slap Shot, Nobody’s Fool). And every once in a while, just to keep the franchise current, he’d do a big, gaudy commercial movie that had money written all over it (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Sting, The Towering Inferno) and was bound to contain plenty of close-ups of that close-cropped curly hair, those arctic eyes.
Levy has written books about subjects as varied as Jerry Lewis and the Rat Pack, and he’s written as good a book as can be written about a man who didn’t cooperate and who told his friends and family not to cooperate. Beyond that, Newman’s life lacks
primary conflict.
Levy has some valuable insights about the actor’s place in his time: “Newman’s body of work nicely encapsulated the history of an in-between generation of American men who helped their fathers and uncles conquer the world in war and commerce, but who could only watch — likely with some jealousy — as their younger siblings and their own children acted out on the native rebellious impulses to overturn everything.”
Newman’s life and talent encompassed both solid fathers and rebellious sons — the former in his life, the ragged, dangerous latter in his art.
The canonical shot of an East Asian city is a night skyline studded with towering apartment and office buildings, bright with neon and plastic signage, a landscape of energy and modernity. Another classic image is the same city seen from above, in which identical apartment towers march across the city, spilling out over nearby geography, like stylized soldiers colonizing new territory in a board game. Densely populated dynamic conurbations of money, technological innovation and convenience, it is hard to see the cities of East Asia as what they truly are: necropolises. Why is this? The East Asian development model, with
June 16 to June 22 The following flyer appeared on the streets of Hsinchu on June 12, 1895: “Taipei has already fallen to the Japanese barbarians, who have brought great misery to our land and people. We heard that the Japanese occupiers will tax our gardens, our houses, our bodies, and even our chickens, dogs, cows and pigs. They wear their hair wild, carve their teeth, tattoo their foreheads, wear strange clothes and speak a strange language. How can we be ruled by such people?” Posted by civilian militia leader Wu Tang-hsing (吳湯興), it was a call to arms to retake
Desperate dads meet in car parks to exchange packets; exhausted parents slip it into their kids’ drinks; families wait months for prescriptions buy it “off label.” But is it worth the risk? “The first time I gave him a gummy, I thought, ‘Oh my God, have I killed him?’ He just passed out in front of the TV. That never happens.” Jen remembers giving her son, David, six, melatonin to help him sleep. She got them from a friend, a pediatrician who gave them to her own child. “It was sort of hilarious. She had half a tub of gummies,
The wide-screen spectacle of Formula One gets a gleaming, rip-roaring workout in Joseph Kosinski’s F1, a fine-tuned machine of a movie that, in its most riveting racing scenes, approaches a kind of high-speed splendor. Kosinski, who last endeavored to put moviegoers in the seat of a fighter jet in Top Gun: Maverick, has moved to the open cockpits of Formula One with much the same affection, if not outright need, for speed. A lot of the same team is back. Jerry Bruckheimer produces. Ehren Kruger, a co-writer on Maverick, takes sole credit here. Hans Zimmer, a co-composer previously, supplies the thumping
RSS