苏珊彼得斯

详细资料：
Susan Peters: Tragic Promise
By Therese Duzinkiewicz Baker & Larry Sean Kinder
Susan Peters made her first film in 1940, and it wasn’t long before people began to take notice. Her performances impressed moviegoers and critics alike, who were drawn to her cinematic presence, wholesome “girl-next-door” beauty, and natural talent. After two years of working steadily and honing her craft, Peters delivered an impressive performance in Random Harvest, earning an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress. At this point, Peters’ star was still ascending, and she seemed poised for major stardom; however, this was not to be, as tragedy intervened, curtailing her promising career and changing her life forever. The rest of Peters’ short life is the story of a remarkable woman who valiantly fought against incredible odds to regain her former happiness and career. Although she died before she could fulfill her potential, Susan Peters continues to live on in the hearts and memories of her many fans, who admire her innocence, special talent, and gentle charm.

Susan Peters was born Suzanne Carnahan on July 3, 1921, in Spokane, Washington, to Robert Carnahan, an engineer, and his wife Abby. A second child, Robert Jr., arrived two years later. When Peters was still very young, she moved with her family to Portland, Oregon, and they stayed there until Robert Sr. died in an automobile accident in 1928. Mrs. Carnahan then moved her children to Los Angeles and managed a modest apartment building, where they all lived with their French grandmother.

Peters spent her early school years at Flintridge, Sacred Heart, and La Rue School for Girls. She loved the outdoors and excelled in swimming, tennis, and horseback riding. As she did not come from a family who acted on stage or in films, Peters was not encouraged to pursue such a career. Instead, her practical mother encouraged her to become a secretary. Peters, however, had other career aspirations. While she attended Hollywood High School, her two favorite subjects were chemistry and biology, so she considered becoming a doctor.

Despite this keen interest in science, Peters decided to take a drama course her senior year, thinking it would be an easy class. She was sorely mistaken and struggled just to pass. In her article about Peters in Photoplay (Dec. 1946), Lana Turner repeated what Peters told her about the class: “It wasn’t the teacher’s fault. He was patient and kind. I don’t think it was my fault, either. I worked hard, but I wasn’t an actress. I knew I was heading for a big fat flunk and that meant I would not graduate. I needed those points. I was confident of passing my other courses.”

One day, Lee Sholem, a talent scout, sat in on one of Peters’ drama classes. Sources vary as to his exact reaction, but one popular version claimed he told her afterwards that her performance was one of the worst in the class. Nevertheless, he saw something about her梞aybe winsome good looks or latent talent梩hat caught his attention. Whatever it was, Sholem immediately asked her to make a screen test and was no doubt puzzled by her indifference: “I wasn’t even surprised,” Peters confided to Lion’s Roar (Dec. 1942), an M-G-M in-house publication, “for there was nothing unusual about it. That sort of thing had happened before at Hollywood High. And all my life I had known motion picture people who lived in our neighborhood. They were just like everybody else, just as normal, just as natural. There was nothing glamorous to me in the picture business. It simply meant a job, a way of making a living.”

Peters did sign with an agent, and after graduating in 1939, she turned all her attention to acting. She was helped on her newly chosen career path by writer Salka Viertel, a friend of the family who had Hollywood connections and important friends, among them Greta Garbo. Viertel set up a meeting between Peters and the director George Cukor, who was impressed enough by the aspiring actress to cast her in his film Susan and God (1940), which starred Joan Crawford. Although Peters was not credited in the movie, this screen appearance gave her valuable experience. She can be seen in the background梐long with a very young Joan Leslie梚n a few of the party scenes.

After this first film, Peters began studying acting in earnest, first under Gertrude Vogler, then at the Max Reinhardt School of Dramatic Arts, all the while doing screen tests. It wasn’t long before Warner Brothers rewarded her hard work and talent with a contract. Even at this early stage in her career, Peters could be headstrong, something The New York Times would note two years later (Dec. 20, 1942), describing her as “charming but an extremely stubborn and self-willed person.” Studio executives discovered this trait firsthand when they suggested that Peters, who was still going by Suzanne Carnahan, change her name to Sharon O’Keefe. She refused, disliking the new name. She opted to keep appearing under her birth name. Around this same time, Peters made an equally important career decision when she set herself a deadline for achieving success: “I made a pact with myself that after three years, if I hadn’t made good, I’d become a stenographer, a secretary, or try some other profession. I still win. Hollywood is no place for a girl who doesn’t make good.” (Lion’s Roar, Sept./Oct. 1942).

Not long after signing with Warner Brothers, Peters appeared in a couple of short features, but her first opportunity in a full length film didn’t come until Santa Fe Trail (1940), an epic western with Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland. The film’s title is a misnomer as most of the plot focuses on pre-Civil War clashes between the US Army and the abolitionist John Brown (Raymond Massey). Peters is far down the cast list and is virtually unrecognizable in the blond wig she wears to play Charlotte Davis, de Havilland’s schoolmate from Boston. Although she appears in only a few scenes, Peters acquits herself admirably and is the picture of grace and beauty. She even manages to snag one of the male leads, George Custer (Ronald Reagan), who is completely besotted by her when they first meet at a high society ball.

In 1941 Peters followed up this performance with inconsequential parts in The Strawberry Blonde, Meet John Doe, and Here Comes Happiness. She made countless screen tests, and according to some sources at the time, she was one of the most screen tested girls on the Warner Brothers lot, not to mention all of Hollywood! Unfortunately, little came of these tests except dashed hopes and frustration. In Photoplay (Nov. 1943), Helen Mary Sharpe described one such screen test disappointment: “Her test for Sergeant York was a perfect thing, one and all admitted. 惯he only thing is,’ they said, 憏ou’re too young for the part.’” If Peters believed this explanation, she must have been crestfallen when she learned the part was given to someone several years her junior, Joan Leslie.

Now billed as Susan Peters, she next appeared in Scattergood Pulls the Strings (1941), the second in a series of films featuring the character Scattergood Baines, a New England store owner known for his homespun philosophy and penchant for helping others while doling out advice. In this film, Baines, skillfully portrayed by Guy Kibbee, comes to the aid of several people in his town of Coldriver, including Ruth Savage (Susan Peters), whose pharmacist father is none too happy with her choice of a suitor. Peters’ performance in this heartwarming tale did not go unnoticed. Variety (May 14, 1941) noted that “Susan Peters, newcomer, catches attention in her first part as the ingenue.”

Peters’ first film of 1942 found her playing the second female lead, Ruth Carter, in The Big Shot, a potboiler about a criminal (Humphrey Bogart) who wants to go straight, but is falsely convicted of a crime and returns to prison. The rest of the story contains typical gangster film elements梐 prison break, car chase, and settling of old scores. Critics thought Bogart’s performance was the best part of an otherwise routine, unimaginative story. The New York Times (July 18, 1942) thought Peters and her love interest Richard Travis were “properly juvenile as a couple of unfortunate babes in the woods.” Variety (June 3, 1942) was less kind to Peters and the top billed female lead, Irene Manning, saying that they “do not photograph attractively here . . .”

Once Peters had completed The Big Shot, Warner Brothers unceremoniously dropped her contract. With no acting prospects on the horizon, and her three-year deadline quickly approaching, she was beginning to lose hope. Things certainly looked bleak for her, but later on when she looked back on this difficult phase of her career, Peters had a different perspective: “The best thing that ever happened to me was being a failure during my first two years on the screen. That gave me a sense of proportion and balance. Once or twice, I was almost a success, but not quite. Naturally, I was terribly hurt at the time. But I came to realize that there isn’t much difference between success and failure. Opportunity has a lot to do with it.” (Lion’s Roar, April

Luckily Peters persevered, because hope was on its way in the form of director S. Sylvan Simon, who offered her the role of Cora Edwards, young ingenue in his upcoming film Tish, which featured Marjorie Main. Peters accepted the role and reported to M-G-M to begin filming in the spring of 1942. In the film, Letitia “Tish” Carberry is a blustery busybody who attempts to play matchmaker for her nephew Charlie (Lee Bowman) and young friend Cora. She is assisted in her scheme by two doddering spinsters, (ZaSu Pitts and Aline MacMahon), who become embroiled in a series of mishaps that include an encounter with a bear, a boating accident, a brush with the law, stolen church money, and an orphaned baby. Charlie and Cora do eventually fall in love, but not with each other. Charlie ends up with Kit (Virginia Grey), the daughter of Tish’s nemesis, Judge Bowser (Guy Kibbee), while Cora finds her soulmate in the judge’s son Ted (Richard Quine).

Overall, the film’s box office receipts were disappointing, and it fared poorly with most critics. The New York Times (Sept. 18, 1942) found the feature “silly” and “inept” and added that it had “as much point and humor as a cheap radio soap opera.”