1055 minutes

So here’s the thing,

A few years ago, I saw a screening of the 1954 Judy Garland/James Mason version of A Star Is Born. And I thought the film, a story of a drunk Hollywood star on the decline who meets a young talented woman and helps her start her career only to see her stardom eclipse his, was great. Then last year, when the buzz around the new Bradley Cooper/Lady Gaga version started, I decided it would be an interesting exercise to actually sit down and watch all of the previous Star Is Borns to prepare for the new version. And it is genuinely fascinating to see how this one story grows and changes over time, reflecting changes in cultural tastes and in societal views, while remaining recognisably the same.

In the original 1937 film with Janet Gaynor and Frederic March (and which I understand bears heavy similarity to 1932’s What Price Hollywood?), the core plot is established, and it’s surprising how largely untouched that plotting goes throughout the different versions. The main difference is the absence of music, which is a big issue – instead she’s just an actor, and we’re supposed to believe that Norman Maine sees her star appeal and talent as an actress based solely on her serving at a party, which doesn’t play very believably (and which seems even more of a contrivance when you remember that the film actually makes a joke out of her trying to serve people in a way that shows her acting skills). The 1954 remake with Judy Garland and James Mason introduced music to the story, which was the thing that revolutionised these films; it may be hard to see someone’s acting ability or star appeal from watching them serve food, but anyone who hears Judy Garland sing would instantly know she has genuine talent even if she is an unknown. With this film, she’s still an film star, but since this is the period of big-budget Hollywood musicals, that’s the type of film she makes, and this becomes a vehicle to include song-and-dance sequences from all of the films she makes. But other than that, the film is pretty damned close to the original; it seemed to me that many scenes in the '54 would play out with near-identical dialogue as in the '37. By the 70s the era of major movie musicals is over, and so the 1976 version with Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson adopts the idea of her being a recording star instead, an approach that gives the story sufficient flexibility that it can change with the time and styles; I’d be shocked if any future Star Is Borns return to a Hollywood movie star setting. But while the 1976 version may have arrived at the ultmate form of the story, it is a flawed film – it is better than its poor reputation, but it is easily the least of the films.

And now we have the 2018 version with Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga. There was a lot of buzz around the film, and for a long time it was widely viewed as the frontrunner for the Best Picture Oscar; that buzz died down, and at this point it seems certain that it will be one of the Best Picture nominees that come up short.

[Comments on the 2018 A Star Is Born, and the seven other Best Picture nominees – Roma, The Favourite, Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, Vice, Green Book, and Bohemian Rhapsody – after the jump]