There's always more or less than meets the eye
It must be hard to be the husband of a rich and famous woman.
Andrew, I don't particularly feel sorry for Elliott Gould or anything. I just find it interesting that he and Barbra Streisand were ever man and wife. Had the quote been "Me and Barbra once went to the auto show" I would have used it. They had such different personas. In his motion picture heyday, Gould usually played counterculture types (one reason his stardom didn't survive the end of the counterculture era), whereas Streisand is the consummate, even definitive, show biz diva. Of course those are just surface differences.Maybe I shouldn't be so surprised. I happen to like both Streisand and Gould, so maybe they saw in each other what I see in them.
Hi, Kirk!This I swear. Someday I will be known as Granny Clampett's husband.I see that Gould married another woman twice and twice divorced her. I remember going to a theater to see Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice which also starred Dyan Cannon who had been Mrs. Cary Grant for three years. Her marriage to the screen legend, who was 33 years older, ended around the time production began on Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice. Add Natalie Wood and Bob Culp to the main cast of the edgy film, put them all in the same bed, and BOOM, what a time capsule is turned out to be. I also went to see M*A*S*H when it was released to theaters. I have always liked Donald Sutherland more than Elliott Gould.Thanks for the memories, good buddy Kirk!
Shady, I just told Andrew that Gould tended to play counterculture types, but I reminded by your comment that in Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, Gould's character is more straitlaced (albeit in a Matthew 5:29 sort of way) than Robert Culp's character. However, in MASH, both Gould and Sutherland not only act but LOOK like a couple of early 1970s hipsters (some 20 years ahead of schedule.) I like them both in that film.
Oh, one last thought on MASH. When the TV series was being cast, Wayne Rogers was originally asked to play Hawkeye, but asked if he could be Trapper John instead, thinking he was going to be the more colorful character. I wonder if he got that impression from the movie version, where Gould's Trapper was the indeed the more extroverted of the two. Sutherland's Hawkeye is much more soft-spoken (though no less witty.) But on TV, Alan Alda came across more like Gould than Sutherland, despite playing Sutherland's character.
Oh, one last, last thought. When 20th Century Fox decided to make a TV show with just the Trapper John character that took place 30 years after the Korean War, without first asking the TV MASH producers permission, they successfully argued in court that Pernell Roberts was playing an older version of Gould's Trapper rather than Rogers' Trapper. Now, to my eyes, neither Gould nor Rogers resembled a latter-day Roberts, but I suppose if I had to chose, Gould came a little closer in appearance. Court adjourned!
Heartthrob Gregory Harrison ("Gonzo") will be age 70 six months from now. Time marches on!
Hmmm... the leading man as opposed to the star. Never thought of Gould as much of a leading man myself. We once bought a book on tape (yes, it was a LONG time ago) for a road trip. Elliot Gould was the narrator. The WORST narrator! Half way through we couldn’t tolerate listening to him anymore. Awful.
Leading man as opposed to the star. Interesting observation, Mitchell. Gould and Streisand first met when they both appeared in the Broadway musical I Can Get It For You Wholesale. Gould did indeed play the musical's protagonist, whereas Streisand just had a small role. The musical ran for 300 performances, and did indeed raise Gould's profile, and eventually Hollywood called, though it called on someone else first. Despite her role being small, Streisand got to sing a few songs, and, as you might expect, that raised her profile, too. A few years later, she was cast as Fanny Brice in the Broadway musical Funny Girl, and THAT made her a star--on stage anyway. But as I'm sure you know it became a hugely popular film, too, and she thus became a movie star a good two years before Gould did. However, they didn't divorce until 1971, by which time they were both thriving in Hollywood. So I have to think Gould is talking about the two years in-between Funny Girl and MASH (unless you trace his film stardom to Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, in which case it's more like a year-and-a-half.) There's another quote I came across in which Gould states that Streisand was simply more careerist than he. Given what happened to his career, that makes sense to me!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR3JusHc7Fohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CieHjyPH7UI
Debra, I'm thinking that's Gould you're referring to, though God knows that charge has been leveled at Streisand over they years (she certainly has the talent to back that ego up.)
I have the feeling if you date or marry her, be prepared to be eclipsed.
Maddie, maybe that's why she ended up with James Brolin, who was earlier eclipsed by Robert Young.
That must have sucked.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Adam, after she divorced Gould, Streisand dated her hairdresser, who went on to produce a movie of hers (the one in the title of this post, in fact) and he went on to run Sony pictures. He certainly knew how to capitalize on her fame!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.