Angharad 24 was lucky enough to hear from Xavier, a friend of Michael’s, who got to know him pretty well during the late eighties.

Xavier and the others in his group – all now professional musicians – were about 20 years younger than Michael. Michael was very happy to find a younger generation so interested in jazz and blues, and they became friends. He seemed to enjoy the company of younger people, and they enjoyed his.

Michael was a really very nice bloke, who was generous and open most of the time. He was not at all egotistical; rather Xavier thought him self-effacing, and burdened by self-doubt, which probably had a detrimental effect on his career.

When they first met, Xavier had never heard of him, and was only told that he had been in films such as “For Your Eyes Only” and “The Devils” by the others. Michael never spoke much about his films, and didn’t name-drop, though he had acted with some of the best-known actors of the century. He did express frustration at being offered ‘hit-man’ roles, and hoped he would be given a chance to get out of them, but said, ‘nobody wanted me.’

Xavier felt sure that playing a part well meant more to Michael than money or fame.

He loved music and just wanted to learn more. He played saxophone and drums well, but even in music, Mike would have moments where he would say “Oh, I’m no good at this.” Xavier thought he was self-taught, because he would ask for help with reading difficult music.

The whole group loved “Some Like it Hot”, and Michael thought that Marilyn Monroe was a great actress.

He had around three different girlfriends in the years 1989 – 92. He said he wouldn’t have minded marriage but did not want children. Unfortunately, most of the girls he’d been with had wanted them. He liked children, but had no ‘paternal feelings.’

Once, a young female punk walked into the bar where they were meeting, and drank out of a bottle. Michael asked why women thought they had to dress up and behave like men to get liberated, and said these young women didn’t know they were born! His grandmother and mother had lived very hard lives, but they came through it and bettered themselves while retaining their femininity. “My mother always made sure that she dressed nicely and kept her appearance and femininity throughout” (or words to that effect). Nevertheless, Xavier thought Michael was definitely in favour of equality.

Michael had a fierce hatred of Thatcher. He was a champion of the working classes, and Xavier thinks he would have voted Labour.

Xavier and the others knew of Michael’s depression. He told them he could go for weeks on end just not wanting to join the rest of the world, and that at one time he’d had to drop out of a project in the early stages, because he just couldn’t force himself to go to the studio. He also said that making and listening to music soothed him.

Xavier was out of the country and hadn’t seen Michael for about a year when he heard of his death. The whole group were very upset.
In 1981, American Cinematographer interviewed Arthur Wooster, Second Unit Director, and Director of Photography on ‘For Your Eyes Only.’ He told them about the second unit work, including how the stuntmen worked with Michael Gothard for the car chase in the tunnel. Some extracts from the interview appear below.

The Second Unit Has All the Fun

In a film boasting "wall-to-wall action", much of that action - both in and under the water-took place in front of second unit cameras.

As Second Unit Director and Director of Photography on the latest James Bond movie, FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, I constantly found myself in situations where much of the action was. Our Second Unit shot the following sequences: the three car chase, the climbing sequence, the underwater fight between Bond and Melina and JIM at a depth of 600 feet, the underwater fight between Bond's submarine and the Mantis (a small, one-man submarine), part of the keel-hauling sequence to cut in with Al Giddings' material shot in the Bahamas, the Front and End Title sequences (directed by Maurice Binder).

The hectic car chase sequence involved a tiny Citroen 2CV being chased by two powerful Peugeots. Bond and Melina, the leading lady, are in the 2VC and the two Peugeots are much faster. Therefore, the only way they can get away and survive is by being very clever and very "Bondish".

We had Remy Julienne, who was the French stunt-car coordinator, with his team and two sons driving the stunt-cars …

The whole sequence was shot on Corfu, and John Glen and I went on a recce and planned the sequence, which was storyboarded when we got back to England. This is what happened on all of the sequences we shot …

Towards the end of the sequence the 2CV has to jump one of the Peugeots, hit the roof and then carry on down. Remy built a very long ramp and actually started on the hill side, working out very, very carefully, almost to the millimetre, exactly where the car would land and from where it would take off. Every car stunt he arranged was planned to such a degree of accuracy that we never had any problems about choosing camera positions, as he could tell us to an inch where everything was going to happen.

… As far as camera speeds were concerned, we varied the camera speeds all the time, but not very much-the cars were going fast enough not to have to under-crank much to make them look fast.

We had another car chase sequence which takes place after Bond and his party have raided a warehouse at night and the "baddie" gets away in a car with Bond chasing on foot up steps to try to cut him off in a maze of zig-zag bends ...

One of the problems with this particular sequence was that the tunnels through which the car had to drive were extremely narrow and the driver, Michael Gothard, who is the actor, drove the car himself. This was necessary because we were shooting at night and I was lighting it so that we could clearly see the actor.

He had to drive very fast through these tunnels – he was terrified and we were terrified – but he did it marvellously and only scraped the sides of the car occasionally. Remy Julienne practiced with him driving and I think Remy was quite scared being driven by Michael. They slowly got faster and faster going through these tunnels and Remy built up some of the corners of the edges of the tunnels, so that as he went round the corners the wheels went up on the bits of concrete and helped him to get round the corners faster.

Finally they all arrive at the top and Bond shoots at the car hitting Michael in the shoulder. The car goes into a brick wall and finally Bond kicks him over into the sea.

We had a lot of bad weather shooting this sequence-it rained constantly so we had to try and shoot the material inside the tunnel when it was raining and when it stopped we would rush outside and shoot the exteriors.

The sequence was supposed to happen just before dawn and Alan Hume had lit the main part of the sequence down below in the warehouse, where they have the shoot-out, for night. I lit with Brutes and Sun-Guns and odd bits of lighting to try and make it progress, so that as they got to the top of the steps it was dawn and there was enough light to be able to show the car going over the cliff …
Marvel Super Special Magazine: For Your Eyes Only on-set report, including an interview with Michael Gothard.

This came out in 1981.

[Contessa Lisl’s] killer in For Your Eyes Only is a cold-eyed assassin called Emile Locque. Played by Michael Gothard, Loque is the film's equivalent of such past villainous henchmen as Red Grant in From Russia With Love and Mr. Wint in Diamonds Are Forever. Gothard is no stranger to cinematic evil – during his career he's played a vampire (in Scream and Scream Again), helped to burn Oliver Reed alive in The Devils and stabbed Simon Ward to death in The Four Musketeers. But he's suffered a lot of on-screen retribution himself.

"I've been killed in so many different ways on both the large and small screens," he said wryly. "I've been hanged, stabbed, strangled, shot, immersed in an acid bath,
crashed on a motorcycle, killed by a 10-year-old boy by a vicious blow to the spine, drowned and – on one memorable occasion – stabbed and drowned simultaneously.

It's quite a challenge to try and make an impact with a character as restrained and quiet as Locque. I had to act in a sort of straitjacket but I certainly did my best to make him into a menacing and evil presence. Audiences usually remember the Bond villains, and their henchmen, so I'm hoping I won't be an exception."

Some of these on-screen deaths are ones we know about:
As John, he was hanged in Michael Kolhlhaas.
As Kodai, he was shot in Stopover.
As Keith, he was immersed in an acid bath in Scream and Scream Again.
As Terry, he crashed on a motorcycle in Up the Junction.
As Hansen, he was killed (or at least maimed, which resulted in his being killed) by a 10-year-old boy by a vicious blow to the spine in The Last Valley.

That leaves four deaths "stabbed, strangled, drowned and stabbed and drowned simultaneously" unaccounted for.

If, as Michael says, these deaths were on film or TV, they must presumably each have occurred in one of five productions:
- the Armchair Theatre play - The Story-teller - in which he played Brian
- the episode of Menace – Nine Bean Rows - in which he played Pip
- the episode of Fraud Squad – Run for your Money - in which he played Jacky Joyce
- the Thirty Minute Theatre play – The Excavation - in which he played Grady
- the TV series - The Further Adventures of the Musketeers - in which he played Mordaunt.

We don't yet know which death belonged to which character.
See entry on "The Three Musketeers" for background information.

In "The Four Musketeers", Michael Gothard's character, Felton, is charged by the Duke of Buckingham (Simon Ward) with guarding Milady de Winter (Faye Dunaway), because Buckingham mistakenly believes Felton to be impervious to beauty.

Milady convinces Felton that Buckingham is secretly a Catholic, and therefore his enemy, and that she, on the other hand, is of his persuasion; then she seduces him, and persuades him to help her escape.

Still under Milady’s spell, Felton then kills Buckingham, and is immediately apprehended.

Michael Gothard’s performance here, as a righteous man, being gradually lured to his destruction by a manipulative woman, is subtle and compelling.

Asked what Michael considered his best performance, his friend from the 1980s, Sean McCormick, said “I think [Michael] thought that his best work was the ‘Three Musketeers’ or at least it was the best film he had done.” [Presumably he was still thinking of the two films as if they were one.]


DVD Savant – Glenn Erickson

“As D'Artagnan's sidekick, Lester brought along faithful stalwart Roy Kinnear. A blinkered producing decision might have signed up someone like Benny Hill, and thrown the picture off balance. Even a 2nd string role was filled by Michael Gothard (Scream and Scream Again), another clever choice instead of a commercial one.”

Full review

Krell Laboratories

“Dunaway gets the showiest role in the film as the most fatal of femme fatales. She gets an entire sequence to herself to corrupt the puritan gaoler [Felton, played by Michael Gothard] provided her by Buckingham and, boy howdy, does she make the most of it.”
Full review

Review on “Audio Video Revolution”

IMDB entry
Interviewed by Clare Spark, in February 1973, Don Levy stated:

“It’s not necessary for the actors to know what they’re doing. What they’ve gotta know, is – what they are. In fact, that’s all I require of them."

The audition process for ‘Herostratus’, described in the BFI booklet as "intense", was perhaps designed to find out whether the actors who auditioned (including, per. Amnon Buchbinder, John Hurt as well as Michael Gothard) possessed what Don Levy considered that essential knowledge.

Evidently, Michael Gothard did, because he was chosen to play the lead role, Max.

In “Sight and Sound”, summer 1965, an unnamed reporter says that “Levy spent a good deal of his time testing artists: having decided that this was to be a film developed entirely by improvisation around a firm narrative, he wanted a particularly malleable and intense type of player. After the extensive improvised auditions, he settled on Michael Gothard, then a drama student, for the lead …"

As to why a young actor would put himself through a tortuous audition for a reportedly unpaid role – per Philip Ward: "This is Art, with a capital ‘A’, which may explain why, challenging as the film’s contents were, actors were keen to get on board. When the British film industry was turning out generic pap like the Carry On series, the prospect of a home-grown arthouse movie must have been enticing …"

It is easy to see how, having been cast in his first prestigious film role, Gothard could have been temporarily mesmerised by Levy, and regarded him as some kind of mentor: possibly letting himself be put through experiences and processes that were more demanding and revealing than he might have liked, or otherwise have tolerated.

In “Sight and Sound”, Levy says: “The film has several long takes up to four minutes. Some people are afraid of these, but I feel I need them here as the actors require space to reveal their deepest states of intensity ..."

Richard Whitehall, in 1972, spoke of: “Long takes, through which the actors improvise brilliantly … as Levy explores the ramifications and resonances of his theme: the revolt of a young failed poet against the horrors and corruption of society, and the means he takes to make his protest known."

According to Philip Ward: “… the filming, which extended from summer 1964 to spring 1965, took a huge toll on those involved as Levy, by his own admission, drove his cast to confront unwelcome truths about themselves.

Gabriella Licudi, the lead actress, suffered a breakdown during filming and retired from the business not long after … The resulting film gives a vivid idea of what it would be like to crack up mentally. Gothard’s derangement is expressed both as outward violence – in one frightening early scene he trashes his rundown bedsit to the sound of loud choral music – and in inner turmoil ...”

Drewe Shimon also mentions mental problems allegedly suffered, this time by Gothard himself:

"As the actor – Michael Gothard in his first major role - embarks upon this odyssey of wanton destruction, we are dragged into his psychosis in a way we wouldn’t have imagined when, five minutes earlier, proceedings commenced in an admittedly abstract but comparatively restrained manner. ... Gothard’s performance … is a revelation, a spitting, snarling yet suave diatribe on legs, and proof of what a performer can achieve when stretched to his outer limits (Levy would later admit Michael had at least “two breakdowns” during filming)."

The source reference for these supposed breakdowns among the cast have so far not been found, but Levy himself said that Michael Gothard had “been going through these incredible convolutions …”

In “Sight and Sound”, Levy says: “Details of characterisations and dialogue were all developed during a very complicated process of improvisation and recall, designed to produce through various psychological methods a peculiar emotional state whereby the acting became behaviour. The improvisation was not based on their own characters … but was used as a technique for freeing and distorting action and reaction and enveloping the characters of the play.”

In other interviews from the BFI library, Don Levy seems to have no shame in describing his treatment of the actors, which is at best unreasonable, and at worst, downright cruel.

Of Gabriella Licudi, he says: “In the final scene I had to get something very difficult out of Gabriella – difficult because she didn't want to give it, to admit to this in herself. I stood and shouted at her (that's my voice you hear on the film right at the end) until eventually she broke down.

She kept switching from herself to Clio and back again – she couldn't separate her own guilt as an individual from that in the part she was playing.

The camera crews had to stand and watch this in silence for an hour and a half. They were horrified, and argued fiercely about the morality of it. But I got the response I needed.”

In “Sight and Sound”, Levy says that sometimes the actors appeared to be in a state akin to hypnosis, during which they were able to operate by drawing directly on the subconscious. In connection with one scene ... where the girl, posed in the corner of the screen against a white wall, goes into a long hysterical outburst, he commented: “The actress was not informed of the end result required. The scene was gradually built up by a violent actress-character conflict during the recall and preparation which took about two hours. When it finally occurred, two members of the unit were not able to watch and one was unable to work.”

One can only imagine what effect watching this treatment of Gabriella Licudi might have had on her co-star, but Michael Gothard wasn’t spared either. Levy says: “Everything was shot on location and they didn't have to pretend it was cold or raining or dangerous. Mike Gothard, the leading actor, can't stand heights. But we had him standing on the edge of the roof of an 18-storey block, with no safety devices and in a howling gale. He was terrified, but he did it.”

And in another interview:

“At one point in the film Max has to stand on the edge of a high building in a howling wind. The actor who plays the part, Michael Gothard, is terrified of height – but I made him do it. Most scenes really happened like this. The love scene is an act of love.”

Even if the talk of mental breakdowns is exaggerated, Levy very obviously relished the feeling of superiority and power over his actors, and had little care for the possible consequences of what he put them through.

One might suspect that, in making this experimental film, Levy was not only experimenting with techniques, and with his audience, but on the actors: seeing how far he could push them, while dispassionately filming the results, just like any scientist observing his "experimental models" – rats in a maze.

Philip Ward describes Levy as “one of a rare breed of artist-scientist … he made educational documentaries on scientific subjects for the Nuffield Foundation …”

Drewe Shimon observed: “Indeed, it seems he [Don Levy] only gave ‘Herostratus’ what linear narrative it has to ‘throw people a thread.’ This attitude demonstrates not only a contempt for cinema audiences (and a feeling of intellectual superiority to them), but cinema itself, and possibly even humanity in general ...”

Levy was, however, an admirer of the poet Rupert Brooke, whom he – somewhat presumptuously – credits as an “assistant” on an earlier film, ‘Ten Thousand Talents.’ Brooke was: "A young Apollo, golden-haired …” (Frances Cornford), who was beset by mental anguish, and travelled around Europe trying to find himself: a narrative which might also have fitted Michael Gothard in his early years.

Angharad24 has speculated that Don Levy saw this similarity, and picked Michael for the role of Max because of it.


Following his work on ‘Herostratus’, Michael was unemployed for 18 months, a time which he described as "too depressing to think about." Per a 1973 TV Times article, “It was this taste of unemployment that determined his practical attitude to his profession.”

Whether or not Michael Gothard and Don Levy kept in touch, Levy clearly continued to follow Gothard’s career.

In his 1973 interview, he said: “The lead actor, for a year or so, held out, waiting for a role – really good work – finally said … recognised, to himself, at least, that a … there wasn’t any such thing as good work, and so he just accepted everything that came along. Really. He’s played in ‘The Devils’ of Ken Russell. He’s played in ‘Scream and Scream Again.’ So he’s just a … working actor, but he does this with incredible reluctance.”

It’s hard to tell whether Levy regarded ‘The Devils' and 'Scream and Scream Again’ as extreme examples of good and bad work, or whether he considered both equally unworthy; neither does he suggest what, in the supposed absence of “good work”, he expected Michael to do for the rest of his career.

Michael Gothard appears to have been aware of Don Levy’s opinion. Things he said in the second of only three interviews he is known to have given, (this one in October 1973), could be seen as a rebuttal of Levy’s criticisms:

“In order to survive, you must compromise. If not, how can your ideals remain on a high level? I don’t like the glorification of violence and materialism, but I realise that I cannot just sit at home waiting to do a righteous, moral film. It may never come along.”

He also said: “You see, my work is an extrovert thing, performing publicly – but I approach it in an introvert manner. I’m quite happy to show myself as the character I’m portraying but I’m not at all interested in doing it as a direct revelation of myself.”

This is the exact opposite, in terms of performance, to what Don Levy sought to extract from him, and from Gabriella Licudi, in ‘Herostratus’; Michael is clearly rejecting Levy’s approach. He must have recognised that, while ‘Herostratus’ was a big break for him, Don Levy was not the most helpful director he could have worked with.

Michael Gothard with Don Levy with Gabriella Licudi

Image from the BFI booklet, showing Gabriella Licudi, Michael Gothard and Don Levy. Gabriella appears to be wiping away a tear.

Articles referred to:
Review by Philip Ward

Review by Darius Shimon

TV Times interview, 8 February 1973

"Petticoat” interview, 6 October 1973

Sight and Sound 1965, on location:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Clare Spark’s interview with Don Levy, in February 1973 can be heard on the British Film Institute DVD of ‘Herostratus.’

Interviews found in the BFI Archive.
You may recognise him as a screen and television star. But Jerry Bauer talks to the real Michael Gothard.

The Three Musketeers, the film Michael Gothard is making, is set in Estudios Roma, the film centre outside Madrid. The temperature is close to a hundred, although one tried not to think about it.

“The Three Musketeers and I seem to have an affinity for each other. In this film version I portray Felton, the lover of Madame de Winter – Faye Dunaway but on television, I was Madame de Winter’s son in yet another dramatisation. Presumably, I was chosen by Richard Lester for this role because he’d seen me as the inquisitioner in The Devils. Both characters are repressed, violent and mad.”
Read more... )

MICHAEL GOTHARD was among the first of the "underground" heroes to emerge into the mainstream of the acting profession.

In Arthur of the Britons (Wednesday) he plays the Saxon, Kai, brought up in the Celtic community. Generally, he is associated with more sinister, misfit roles, for example his part as a killer in Scream and Scream Again, and the psychopathic priest-inquisitor in another film, Ken Russell's The Devils.

Gothard, single and in his early 30's, has a broad, massively square face and a deep, hard voice which seems un-English, though he comes from North London. Contrasting with his appearance are his small, rectangular metal-rimmed glasses, perched low on his nose in the style of the docile shoemaker in Pinocchio cartoons.
Read more... )
"I didn’t like him at all."
Curtis Harrington

Louis M. Heyward

The set of ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’ was clearly an unhappy one. Executive producer, Louis M. Heyward, who - having been impressed with him on ‘Scream and Scream Again’ - had cast Michael Gothard in the role of Albie, said:

“Curtis Harrington was great to work with but Shelley was difficult. There were problems between her and co-star Michael Gothard. She also kept insisting that I get a 'Sir' for supporting role. I got Ralph Richardson but she had meant Laurence Olivier.”

Judy Cornwell's problems with Shelley Winters

Judy Cornwell, who played the maid, Clarine, gives a more detailed account of Shelley Winters’ ‘difficult’ behaviour, both before shooting began, and on set:

"Richard [Eastham, Cornwell’s personal manager] told me that ‘Wuthering Heights’ had now opened in America and I had wonderful, rave reviews for my performance. Unfortunately for me, Shelley Winters too had seen the reviews, and she had overall script approval in her contract for the next film.

Before the shooting in Shepperton began, my part was almost deleted from the script. The best scenes were changed to become hers, and any of my scenes that were not essential to the story line were cut.

When I was sent the final draft of the script I was horrified and talked over the situation with Richard … He wanted to know whether I would rather pull out of the film, but I decided not to do so. I liked the producers of the film and this would be my fourth for American International Pictures. The heads of the company sent me Christmas cards. There were not to know that a certain actress would invoke her script approval clause.

I knew that Michael Bryant had worked with Shelley Winters on a film for television, so I phoned him to see what it was like to work with her.

'Tricky,' he replied. 'She makes mistakes when you are giving your best performance, so you have to do it again. This goes on until you drop your performance, then she comes up, and that is the take they use.'

My heart sank.

The first day of filming for ‘The Gingerbread House’ [as ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’ was originally titled] arrived and I met Curtis Harrington, an experienced and charming Hollywood director. We talked through the scene and then Miss Winters arrived. I was introduced to her as the girl who gave the great performance in ‘Wuthering Heights.’

She gazed at me with small beady eyes and said, 'I know. She's a scene stealer.'

Curtis laughed as if she had made a joke; I knew she had not.

When we began preparations for the scene, as Michael [Bryant] had warned me, she fluffed and made mistakes. I kept steady … not panicking, just keeping up my performance and not dropping it for one second.

Suddenly there was a wail from Shelley who said she had a headache and she stormed off the set, so we broke for an early lunch …

After lunch we returned to the scene again and this time she wanted me in a different position from before. Curtis tried to accommodate her. Every position that would work for the camera was unacceptable to her.

I heard a couple of yawns from the crew. They did not like one of their own British actresses being put through the wringer by this Yank.

Curtis began to lose his cool. 'Would you like me to put her under the table?' he said.

I took several deep breaths and stayed calm.

We began the scene again and suddenly she came up with a performance. So did I, and there was a shout of 'Take and Print.' I think she thought I was going to be thrown by the sudden change but I was not. I was tired at the end of the day, but the first scene was in the can, and my next scheduled scene did not involve her.

[Presumably this was her scene with Albie (Michael Gothard) and Mr Harrison (Hugh Griffith) in the kitchen: Judy seems to have had no problems with either of them]

The next time we had to work together she started again. I had had enough by now, so I let her have it with both barrels and told her that I had worked with some pretty big names, people with huge talent, and that none of them had behaved as badly as she had. I said life was too short for such games and could she please stop pissing about.

Instead of wailing and storming off the set, which by now was frigid with silence and tension, she smiled, her face relaxed, and she said, 'My God, you remind me of me when I was young.' … from then on she was nauseatingly nice to me, and I had no more trouble from her."

Curtis Harrington's friendship with Shelley Winters

Harrington seems to have been very tolerant of Winters’ unreasonable behaviour – he must have known what to expect, as he’d already worked with her on ‘What’s the Matter with Helen?’

In fact, in an interview for ‘Terror Trap’ in April 2005, he admitted: “A lot of movie stars particularly can be quite difficult. I mean, Shelley Winters is one of them. So I've learned to handle all that fairly well by being diplomatic and sympathetic and all those things. When I hear of directors who are very brutal with their actors, I think that approach is all wrong. I mean, actors need a lot of TLC to do well."

As we shall later see, this ‘TLC’ was something he denied Michael Gothard; but then, Harrington and Winters were friends.

Another friend of Harrington’s, David Del Valle, says:

“Curtis did [‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’] because Shelley asked for him personally, the perks were of course a trip to the UK and the joy of working with Sir Ralph Richardson whom he adored …

… I got to know Shelley Winters who acted for Curtis on two occasions. Curtis would organize parties around her and we would all find ourselves sitting on the floor around this ornate loveseat in his living room as Miss Winters held court from her throne, she loved to be the center of attention at all times …

Shelley bonded big time with Curtis on the set of ‘What’s the Matter with Helen?’…”

In the ‘Terror Trap’ interview, Harrington answered questions about both ‘What’s the Matter with Helen?’ (in which Winters starred with Debbie Reynolds) and ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’

TT: Did Debbie [Reynolds] and Shelley get along?

CH: Just barely.

TT: Interesting.

CH: It was rather inevitable that they would have a conflict occasionally. Shelley imagined a rivalry with Debbie.

TT: Why is that?

CH: Well, Debbie still had a very youthful figure and by this time Shelley was already dumpy and heavy. It was that sort of thing, a kind of female jealousy.

TT: You'd get Ralph Richardson for your next project, as well as Shelley Winters part deux. Tell us about ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?’

CH: Yes, we made that right after ‘What's the Matter with Helen?’ She and I both flew to London together to make it at the Shepperton Studio.

TT: Who approached whom?

CH: It was an AIP production. They had already contracted her to do a film for them. And they decided this was the one they wanted to do with her. Because I had just worked with her and she liked working with me, they hired me to direct it.

TT: How was the second round with Shelley on this one?

CH: Well, she didn't have the rivalry of Debbie Reynolds being on the set this time. Shelley was the solo star, there were no problems at all. She was completely happy through the whole production.

Shelley Winters’ fraught relationship with Debbie Reynolds was already well-known, but Judy Cornwell’s revelations had yet to be published.

If Cornwell’s detailed and specific accounts of Winters’ ‘neurotic’ behaviour, and deliberate fluffing of her lines – in the presence of multiple witnesses – are true, then Harrington’s anodyne disclaimer, “She was completely happy through the whole production,” is clearly a lie.

Harrington looks like a man trying desperately to protect his friend, Shelley Winters, from criticism, at the expense of the truth.

This might explain why Heyward thought there were problems between Winters and Gothard, when no other record of this has been found. Winters’ attitudes to younger women seem to have been common knowledge at the time the film was made; Harrington may have put the blame for the time and film Winters wasted in trying to spoil Cornwell’s takes, on Gothard. If Harrington had tried to blame Judy Cornwell, the truth – that Shelley Winters’ insecurities were responsible – would have been obvious to anyone in the business.

In another example of his loyalty to Winters, when interviewed by Rusty White, Harrington talks about the script changes, but fails to mention that they had been demanded by Winters, due to her jealousy of the younger actress.

RW: Yes. I noticed Jimmy Sangster [Hammer film director] was listed as one of the screen writers. Did you get to know him?

CH: He wrote the original script, but we did a lot of changes. We had no contact with him at all. The final script, a lot of it uncredited, was written by Gavin Lambent.

Harrington comes off even worse in an interview with Harvey F. Chartrand, first being bitchy about his employers:

“American International Pictures had offered me a contract to do a picture. I was scheduled to direct a new version of ‘Wuthering Heights’, [the film for which Judy Cornwell got good reviews, and Shelley Winters called her a “scene stealer”] which they subsequently made with another director. It was a disaster, of course.

In the meantime, AIP had ‘Whoever Slew Auntie Roo’ in development … I worked extensively on the script. Originally, it was very poor and we improved it a great deal.”

So Harrington spins the cutting of Judy Cornwell’s lines, to pander to Shelley Winters, as ‘improving the script.’

Curtis Harrington's attack on Michael Gothard

In an interview with DVD Drive-in, Harrington again chooses not to mention either his annoyance with Winters, or the fact that Cornwell faced Winters down over her behaviour. Instead, he reserves most of his criticism for Michael Gothard.

“Michael Gothard was one of the most neurotic actors I’ve ever worked with. I didn’t like him at all. He was assigned to me by the producers. I wouldn’t have cast Michael Gothard. He was an extraordinarily egotistical bad actor who kept flubbing his lines. It was like pulling teeth to get a performance out of him. I never understood why Gothard had any career at all. I guess casting directors thought he was an interesting type.”

It seems almost as if he has transferred any possible criticisms of his friend Shelley Winters to Michael Gothard.

If you transpose Shelley Winters in place of Michael Gothard:

“Shelley Winters was one of the most neurotic actors I’ve ever worked with … She was an extraordinarily egotistical bad actress who kept flubbing her lines. It was like pulling teeth to get a performance out of her” – you get something Judy Cornwell would probably agree with.

The question is, why implicate Michael? An uncharitable view might be that he was not around to defend himself. As he had taken his own life, he was apparently fair game for accusations of ‘neurotic’ behaviour.

We don’t know what, if any, problems there were between Michael and Shelley Winters. If she behaved in the same way with him as she did with Judy Cornwell, that might have been enough to make anyone fluff their lines, which was the result Shelley Winters was looking for anyway.

It is also possible that Michael Gothard, who had a strong sense of justice, may have become uncooperative because he felt aggrieved at Judy Cornwell’s treatment, just as the film crew reportedly did.

Just one man's opinion

Harrington’s accusation that Michael was a “bad actor” and “kept flubbing his lines” is out of line with the experiences of others who worked with him.

In correspondence, Mark Lester, who played Christopher Coombs on 'Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?' said: "I worked with Michael in the 1970's and to my knowledge he was a truly professional actor with a unique charm and presence. It was a pleasure to work with him."

Harry Fielder – an old pro in the industry, described Gothard as: “good guy to work with" and added that "Michael was always word perfect.”

Executive Producer Louis M. Heyward said of him: "I felt that Michael Gothard was going to be the biggest thing that ever happened. He had that insane look and that drive, and he was wonderful … He had a lot of class and a lot of style.”

Peter Sasdy, who directed him in two episodes of ‘Arthur of the Britons’, the Hammer film ‘The Sweet Scent of Death’ and an episode of ‘Lytton’s Diary’, wrote:
“As far as Michael Gothard is concerned … I thought of him as a very interesting actor, with strong personality and in the right part he’d always give a good performance.”

Even Patrick Dromgoole, Executive Producer of ‘Arthur of the Britons’, who did not particularly like Gothard, said he was “an artist of high standard” – not the kind you would expect to fluff their lines.

John Glen, who’d worked with him on ‘For Your Eyes Only’ cast him in ‘Columbus’ because he knew he could rely on him to perform, not just his own lines, but those of another cast member, without “flubbing.”

“I was anticipating trouble. When you're a director you have to box a little clever sometimes and I'd cast a very good actor called Michael Gothard as Brando's assistant, the idea being that if Marlon didn't turn up any time I would put Gothard in. And sure enough, on the first day, Marlon was a no-show, so I put Michael in and he took Marlon's lines.'

Glen also described Gothard as a "captivating" actor.

David Wickes, who directed him in "Jack the Ripper" and "Frankenstein", had this to say:

"Michael had a screen presence unlike that of any other actor with whom I
have worked. He could frighten an audience with a glance. His soft, husky
voice was electrifying and he knew how to use it to maximum effect.

Each time I welcomed Michael to the set, I knew that we were about to get something special in the can. There are very few actors in that category."

Even Harrington’s friend, David Del Valle, appears to find Harrington’s inability to get along with Gothard puzzling.

“Curtis absolutely hated Michael Gothard whom AIP forced upon him after the actor’s favorable reviews in Gordon Hessler’s ‘Scream And Scream Again.’ Gothard had also scored with a tour de force in Ken Russell’s ‘The Devils’, yet Curtis found him unpleasant and difficult in a modest but key role of the sinister chauffeur.

They squared off over Michael’s long hair which he refused to cut until Curtis threatened to fire him …”

Studio in-fighting?

Whether Louis M. Heyward would have put up with Michael Gothard being fired is open to question, and perhaps that is part of the problem.

Del Valle continues: “I always wondered why Curtis was never offered any of those Poe films American International was making at that time in England. Perhaps the lack of success with the aforementioned films [“What’s the Matter with Helen”, and “Whoever Slew Auntie Roo”] sealed his fate with that company.”

Even Harrington’s friends can’t help but portray him as bitter and disappointed man.

“… the whole experience would have buried a lesser director, yet Curtis continued to work even with out that all important block buster that would admit him to that exalted realm of the Hollywood player.”

It is easy to see how having not had the blockbuster he wanted from AIP, and not being given any more work by them, he might have taken out his frustrations on the actor the Executive Producer, Louis M. Heyward, had chosen to cast, with the added bonus of deflecting criticisms of Shelley Winters.

In the end, perhaps Michael Gothard’s good name was just collateral damage in the behind-the-scenes wrangles between the major players.

It seems very unjust that the opinion of Curtis Harrington – who didn’t even like Michael Gothard – is the one that has so often been allowed to stand unchallenged, as the last word on Michael’s life and work.


“Science Fiction Stars and Horror Heroes: Interviews with Actors, Directors, Producers, and Writers of the 1940s through 1960s”, by Tom Weaver, Michael Brunas and John Brunas. (1991)

Interview with Louis M. Heyward by Gary A. Smith, in “Uneasy Dreams: The Golden Age of British Horror Films, 1956-1976.” (2006)

“For My Eyes Only: My Life with James Bond” by John Glen (2001)

“Hollywood Hellraisers: The Wild Lives and Fast Times of Brando, Hopper, Beatty, and Nicholson”, by Robert Sellers (2010).

Judy Cornwell’s autobiography, "Adventures of a Jelly Baby: A Memoir” (November 2005).

Rusty White’s Film World Obituaries

Vinnie Rattolle’s Cult Oddities

David Del Valle: Dreaming Dreams no Mortal Ever Dared to Dreamed Before

DVD Drive-In

Terror Trap

Correspondence with Peter Sasdy and Patrick Dromgoole.

Thanks to Tzaratango for finding many of these references.
Read more... )
Menace was a series of twenty-three thrillers, each lasting 75 minutes, broadcast on Tuesday evenings. They found their basis in the aspects, perceptions and representations of menace in various settings in and around the villages, townships and cities of the United Kingdom.

The title of the episode in which Michael Gothard appears as Pip, “Nine Bean Rows”, is a quotation from a poem by WB Yeats, “The Lake Isle of Innisfree.”

'I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee …'

The episode was broadcast on BBC2, at 9:20 pm on Tuesday 1 December 1970.

Radio Times plot introduction

In the house near the Irish border the atmosphere is already tense with fear. An unexpected arrival makes a crisis inevitable.

Exerpt from an interview with Jordan Lawrence, the creative force behind Menace.

“I'd say ten out of the thirteen are positive winners - but it might prejudice the viewers if I told them which ones. But the best? They're each so different. Apart from the theme of menace running through all of them - and the fact that they're all modern, and set somewhere in the United Kingdom - you just can't compare them.

Thirteen writers wrote them, eleven different directors plumped for whichever ones appealed to him or her. So each has a unique personality stamped all over it. But if you insist, well, I think I'd choose ‘Nine Bean Rows’ by Hugo Charteris. That, and ‘Killing Time.’

‘Bean Rows’ isn't due till December - but believe me, it's an absolute bomb. About a murder in an Irish stately home. With Constance Cummings, who's super …"

Plot synopsis:

Herky (Peter Blythe), ten years a mercenary in Africa, arrives at his mother's home in Ulster. She has remarried and Herky suspects that her new husband, Mick, has misused the money held in trust for his younger brother Pip and himself. He delivers an ultimatum: either he gets his money at once or he kills Mick. Can Mick and Pip deal with Herky before he carries out his threat?

Full article on Startrader

IMDB entry

Unfortunately, according to Lisa Kerrigan at the BFI, this episode appears not to have survived.

“Scream and Scream Again” was Michael’s first foray into the horror genre, as the vampire, Keith

Vincent Price is reported to have said: “Michael Gothard … received the best notices for “Scream and Scream Again” as the dynamic and desperate vampire.”

Both the Director, Gordon Hessler, and the Executive Producer, Louis M. Heyward, were very favourably impressed with him.

Incidentally, Nigel Lambert (who played Ken Sparten) appeared in two of the same episodes of “The Further Adventures of the Musketeers” as Michael, “Peril” and “Escape.”

From: “The Christopher Lee Filmography.”

The real stars of this film are Alfred Marks and Michael Gothard. … As the brutal vampire-killer, Michael Gothard projects an out-of-control, psychopathic quality that is cold and ugly and not easily forgotten.

Remarkably, he performed all of his dangerous stunts himself. He fell ten feet from a beam, rolled part way down a rocky quarry, and allowed himself to be pulled up the side of this same steep quarry by a steel cable to give the effect that he was running up it with his super strength. Gothard’s dedication gives this film much of its punch because, according to both Heyward and Hessler, "this was the only way the stunts could have been included because of the low budget."

(Johnson, Tom, and Mark A. Miller. Christopher Lee Filmography: all theatrical releases, 1948-2003, The. McFarland & Co., 2004. p. 199-200.)


Interview with executive producer, Louis M. Heyward.

"I felt that Michael Gothard was going to be the biggest thing that ever happened. He had that insane look and that drive, and he was wonderful. Here is a kid who really threw himself into the picture wholeheartedly. Do you remember the scene where he appears to be walking up the cliff? That's a stunt that, as an actor, I would not have agreed to; I'd say, 'Hey, get a double or get a dummy. I ain't either one.' But the kid agreed to do it, without a double--he was that driven. He had a lot of class and a lot of style. Gordon [Hessler, Alfred Hitchcock's protege] came up with the idea of using an overhead cable to give that illusion of his walking up the cliff."

(Weaver, Tom, Brunas Michael and Brunas, John. Science Fiction Stars and Horror Heroes: Interviews with Actors, Directors, Producers, and Writers of the 1940s through 1960s. page 176)

This is all the more remarkable when you consider Don Levy's assertion, "Mike Gothard ... can't stand heights." But Levy made him stand on the edge of the roof of an 18-storey block, with no safety devices and in a howling gale. At least on "Scream and Scream Again" he was attached to a cable!
Read more... )
From: TV Times: 8 February 1973

[Herostratus] brought Gothard approval from the critics, but no actual work. For 18 months - "a period too depressing to think about" - he did odd jobs and went intermittently on the dole. It was this taste of unemployment that determined his practical attitude to his profession.

"I was involved in helping to get the very first lunchtime theatre off the ground. It was a great experience but there was absolutely no money in it."

From: Petticoat interview 6 October 1973

“About a year and a half passed between my first important film part in Herostratus and my next big break – Out of the Unknown – a television series.” (He appeared in the first episode of season 2: The Machine Stops.")

In 1966 Michael appeared in the "The Spotlight" casting publication for the first time.
He does not seem to have had an agent, as interested parties were referred to the publication itself for contact information.

1966 Attwood crop

This was the photo used: taken in 1965 by Graham Attwood.
In the BFI notes with Herostratus, Michael is described as “a directionless state-school leaver.”

From TV Times: 8 February 1973:

"I left school when I was 17 or 18 with little idea of what I wanted to do. I think this would be true of most people if left to their own devices. Most of us are channeled into various functions, for better or for worse.

This is how things are constructed, but you always get the odd one who slips through, who doesn't fit too well. I mean, people either find something they like doing or they end up gangsters or just plain bums. It comes down to that, doesn't it?"
Read more... )
We do not yet know when Michael's parents split up, but we do know that the marriage had been dissolved by 1961, when his mother re-married.

Divorce was not very common in those days. There may have been conflict in Michael's upbringing - a possible factor in his later depression.

Also, per the electoral roll, a man named Jack Walker was living at 1 Gloucester Court with Irene, Michael's mother, from 1952 to 1958. Jack was presumably her new partner - and an unofficial step-father for Michael - rather than a lodger, as according to Ritva's account there was a man around whom she presumed was Michael's father.

Perhaps conflict with Jack Walker was one of the reasons Michael left home so young.

Michael never appears on the electoral roll for 1 Gloucester Court, so he must have left home before he was old enough to vote, at 18. His mother still lived there alone until her re-marriage in 1961.

Aileen McClintock communicated with Marcella Crisan, a librarian fan of Michael's, who had met and interviewed him on a number of occasions in order to write a thesis on his life. However, Marcella and destroyed all her notes, on being diagnosed with terminal cancer. She remembered that Michael said he was brought up by his mother, as a single parent. If Jack Walker was in a relationship with Michael's mother through Michael's teenage years, perhaps that tells us all we need to know about how Michael viewed Mr Walker.

Marcella also recalled that Michael had suffered a nervous breakdown while a teenager. However, it seems unlikely that a mentally fragile teenager could have survived travelling around Europe, alone, as Michael did after leaving school. She may have got her times mixed up.

From TV Times: 8 February 1973

For most of his teens he was in fact an outsider. He was a "beatnik", one of those lost-looking souls who wandered around in the early Sixties - before the Beatles and Rolling Stones brought long hair to the middle-classes. [His teenage years would actually have been the Fifties]

"I left school when I was 17 or 18 with little idea of what I wanted to do. I think this would be true of most people if left to their own devices. Most of us are channeled into various functions, for better or for worse.

"This is how things are constructed, but you always get the odd one who slips through, who doesn't fit too well. I mean, people either find something they like doing or they end up gangsters or just plain bums. It comes down to that, doesn't it?"


michael_gothard: (Default)

October 2013

  1 2345


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 21 Oct 2017 05:06 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios