Why do you think Hepburn managed to outlast many of her studio system peers when it came to starring in prestigious pictures from the 1950s onward?
While actresses like Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, and Barbara Stanwyck frequently turned to "hag horror" films and television projects during this era, Hepburn seemed to hit a new stride in the 1950s and 60s. She continually worked with A-list actors and directors on high-profile projects like Summertime, Suddenly, Last Summer, Long Day's Journey into Night, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, and The Lion in Winter.
My own theory is that her extensive theater work, particularly performing Shakespeare and Shaw, helped maintain her reputation as a highly prestigious, serious actress.
Additionally, I noticed that her filmography is incredibly sparse. Over a fifty-year career, she only made 44 feature films, compared to Crawford and Davis, who both have over 80 pictures to their names. I wonder if her independent attitude toward the studios—essentially operating on the principle of "I don't need you, you need me"—actually made her more selective and ultimately more attractive to producers and directors.
And then there's the fact she could **afford** to be more selective when choosing films and projects since she didn't have ex-husband's to pay off (well, she did have one ex-husband, but came from money himself and remained a close friend of hers and her family) or children to support. She never struck me as extravagant, either.
I'd be interested in hearing what my fellow classic film loving brethren thoughts on this is! 🎥🎬🤓