Howard Hughes Blows Up Hollywood | Author Jeffrey Richardson explores Howard Hughes’s impact on Hollywood and the American film industry | 5

Speaker A: M wonder.

Speaker B: It's December 1957. At a film studio on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood, California. 31 year old Ron Kistler knocks on the door of a darkened screening room. He takes a steadying breath as he waits for a response from his boss, Howard Hughes. Howard is notorious for his unpredictable temper and his volatility has only worsened. Since selling RKO pictures, Ron's learned that the best way to handle Howard is to keep his head down, follow instructions and ask no questions. Come in, Ron, um, picks up two large shopping bags and steps inside. A western is playing on the screen in the darkened room. Howard looks entranced by the movie. Good morning, Mr. Hughes. How are you today? Howard's eyes remain locked on the screen. Did you bring what I asked for? Yes, sir. A case of Hershey bars, three cartons of milk and six boxes of Kleenex. And all unopened. Yes, everything is sealed. Can I get you anything else? Howard doesn't answer. Instead, he sorts through a bowl of pecans, lifting each one to the light. Those with cracked shells are discarded on the floor. Finally, one nut passes inspection and then vanishes into his mouth. Ron tries again. Mr. Hughes, do you have any further instructions? Ron takes a step closer. Howard suddenly pivots in his seat. You stay back. Ron freezes near the doorway. Mr. Hughes, don't speak unless I ask you a question. Now listen carefully. Every morning and evening, you will bring me one fresh bag of halved pecans, 10 Hershey bars and a quart of milk. You will not speak. You will wait quietly behind my chair until I'm ready. Ron stands silently, trying to mask his unease. Even for Howard, this is unusual behavior. Howard glares at Ron before continuing. And then, if I raise my left thumb, you may walk around and stand in front of me. You will roll back the edges of the bag containing the goods and hold it at a 45 degree angle. Then I will take five layers of Kleenex and extract the items from the bag one by one. I want no deviation from this procedure, you understand? Understood, Mr. Hughes. No talking. If I ask you a question which requires a simple yes or no answer, then you may nod for yes or shake your head for no. Sometimes I might need to present you with more complicated questions. And in that case, I will use a number 14 grease pencil and write the question out on one of my legal pads. You will then write your answer on the same pad. Understood? Ron nods meekly. Howard then turns and looks back to the screen. Now leave me in peace. In late 1957, 51 year old Howard Hughes took up residence in a rented screening room just blocks from home. Over the next four months, he rarely left. He stopped bathing, cutting his hair or nails. He spent hours stacking and restacking tissue boxes in precise formations. He refused to speak to his staff, and almost the entire time, movies ran on a continuous loop. Because even as Howard Hughes slipped into a mental health crisis, he still clung to the silver screen and his memories of as a Hollywood movie mogul.

Speaker A: Here it is.

Speaker B: This corner kick could be a big one. There's the cross.

Speaker A: He rises to meet it. And it's a car. Soccer's biggest tournament is here.

Speaker B: An enterprise is turning every corner kick goal into your chance to win a car. The moment a corner kick is called,

Speaker A: post on X with one sweepstakes and tag Enterprise.

Speaker B: If it's a corner kick goal, you can you could win.

Speaker A: Winners may pick up their cars at

Speaker B: an enterprise or an enterprise car sales location on a corner near them. With over a thousand corner kicks expected, that's a lot of chances to win.

Speaker A: For more details and an additional chance to win, visit ONER.com no purchase necessary

Speaker B: for legal residents of the 50 US

Speaker A: states in DC, Puerto Rico, Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Spain

Speaker B: who are 21 and older.

Speaker A: Sweepstakes ends July 19, 2026.

Speaker B: Void where prohibited prize awarded if a

Speaker A: corner kick goal is scored. For entry details and official rules, visit on every cor.

Speaker C: I'm Raza Jaffrey and in the new season of the Spy who we go back in time to meet Benedict Arnold, the spy who betrayed the American Revolution. As America fights for freedom from Britain, Arnold emerges as one of the rebels greatest generals. But when his loyalty is pushed to the limit, he turns spy and devises a plot to shatter the rebellion and make George Washington a prisoner. Follow the Spy who Now Wherever you listen to podcasts, you can also listen to the full season of the Spy who Betrayed the American Revolution. Early uh and ad free on audible.

Speaker B: From wondering. I'm Lindsey Graham and this is Business Movers. Today, Howard Hughes is remembered as an eccentric billionaire, but for many, the details of his incredible life are hazy. Some know about his triumphs in aviation, breaking the airspeed record and circumnavigating the globe quicker than ever before. Others are aware of Howard's struggles with obsessive compulsive disorder and his reclusive final years. But what's often overlooked is the three decade stretch in which he spent trying to reshape Hollywood. Howard moved to Los Angeles in 1925 when he was just 19 years old, but already a millionaire after inheriting his father's tool company. But Hollywood was more than just a rich kid's playground. Howard was determined to prove himself on his own terms. Whether he succeeded is up for debate. He struggled to turn a profit as an independent producer, despite several of his films drawing strong box office numbers and critical praise. Then later, after acquiring a controlling stake in RKO Pictures, Howard ran the once great studio into the ground, effectively destroying one of the big five studios of Hollywood's golden age. Still, the Hollywood that Howard left behind in the mid-1950s looked nothing like the one he first encountered in the 20s. And much of that transformation was his doing. Howard championed a new style of filmmaking he spent lavishly, made headlines and chased spectacle to ensure his blockbusters brought in the crowds. And he embraced controversy. And his movies reflected the changing tastes of the American public, even when that meant clashing with regulators and censors. After finally giving up on his Hollywood dream in 1957, Howard's mental health deteriorated. This may have been the result of unresolved trauma from his parents early deaths, the head injuries he suffered in several plane crashes, or the long shadow of undiagnosed and untreated obsessive compulsive disorder.

Speaker C: Disorder.

Speaker B: Whatever the cause, Howard retreated into isolation, and he died alone, frail and forgotten. Despite his bleak end, though, Howard's legacy endured. He was a disruptor, and nowhere was his impact more lasting than in Hollywood. And here to talk about Howard's impact on the American film industry is Jeffrey Richardson, author of Howard Hughes and the Creation of Modern Hollywood. Jeffrey Richardson, thanks for speaking with me today on Business Movers.

Speaker A: Lindsay, thank you for having me on the show.

Speaker B: Now, you have a background in museum management and historic preservation, so what made you write a book about Howard Hughes and Hollywood?

Speaker A: I'm a historian by trade, and like many people, as a burgeoning young historian, I knew the name Howard Hughes, and I knew him primarily as an aviator and an eccentric. And a biography of Hughes came out around 2000 that I read, and it really introduced me to his tenure as a motion picture producer. It was something that I was unfamiliar with, and I thought it was very fascinating that such a rich, colorful character in American history was also involved. And it wasn't just a story that I knew. And the more I read about it, the more I learned about Hughes's time in Hollywood, I came to understand this was one of those unique opportunities in history where there's a story that I think has been misunderstood, uh, misappreciated, and it really was something that I delved into a lot in my research in undergraduate and graduate school. And then really when I became a historian and a museum professional, it was something that followed me around. And I had a wonderful opportunity to finally write a book on this topic a few years ago. And again, this is a unique example of a really important moment in American history that really is misunderstood, misappreciated, and it's still to this day. Is that. So I'm glad not only that the book has come out, but other podcasts, you know yourself, are talking about this story, because it really is important, and it's one that I think more people would like to know more about.

Speaker B: So that's what drew you to Howard, what drew Howard to Hollywood.

Speaker A: First and foremost, when we talk about Howard Hughes, we have to start with his wealth. Howard Hughes's wealth was what ultimately made him able to be such a Renaissance man and to conquer so many different fields of industry. By the late 1960s, early 1970s, Howard Hughes was arguably the richest man in America. And that really opened him up to so many different opportunities. He assumed his wealth. His father had started the Hughes Tool Company in Houston, Texas, and really, it was the desire not to do what his father had done. And he really wanted to stake his own career, make his own mark on the world. And he identified three things that he wanted to do. He wanted to be the world's greatest golfer, he wanted to be the world's greatest aviator, and he wanted to be the world's greatest motion picture producer. And his father actually had a few ties to the motion picture industry. They had an office in Los Angeles. His uncle Rupert was a screenwriter. And his father not only pal around with his brother Rupert, but also, you know, knew some actors and knew some starlets. So there was a connection early on in Howard's life that really kind of allowed him to make his entry into the motion picture industry, because he had a few of those nominal connections via his father.

Speaker B: Now, if Howard Hughes was the richest man in America in his time, that invites an obvious comparison to the richest man in America right now, perhaps the world. Elon Musk, whose attention is also a bit divided. Golf, aviation, movies, then the tool company, the aircraft company. This is a lot for Howard to handle. What does this say about him as a pioneer and as an executive?

Speaker A: Hughes had the opportunity, just as you, uh, know, the individual that you referenced, you know, to kind of shift from one area to the other. It opened up doors and opportunities to him that, uh, other people didn't have, and it allowed him to operate in a way that had very few restrictions. I mean, Hughes was really able to do what he wanted, the way he wanted to do it across industries. Uh, you referenced a few of those, you know, aviation, electronics. His time in Vegas was equally revolutionary. So Hughes really, because of his wealth and his determination to kind of use his wealth for a variety of different purposes, gave him the opportunity to again make his mark in Hollywood, make his mark in aviation and all of those other fields. But, you know, as we can see, um, in some of these industries, his lack of attention, his getting pulled in various directions had an impact, uh, on the product, the quality of the work that he ultimately did. It really meant that's why his reputation, his legacy to this day is so splintered because he was involved in so many, many different areas. And in many instances, especially in Hollywood, he was seen as an interloper who was kind of playing make believe. So it really again impacted his legacy because he wasn't so focused in one particular area.

Speaker B: Let's indulge in another then and now. Comparison and turn to Hollywood. How did Hollywood in 1925 differ from Hollywood today?

Speaker A: The Hollywood that Hughes entered in the 1920s was one of the most potent oligarchies in American history. An oligarchy is, of course, when several businesses dominate an industry. Most people are more familiar with a monopoly, where a single business or individual dominates an industry. But Hollywood was an oligarchy where you had five primary companies, three smaller companies. So a total of inked the big five and the little three that dominated the industry. And as a result of that, they were able to determine the dictates, the mandates of all aspects of movies, from how movies were made to how movies were exhibited. So Hughes entered a motion picture industry that is radically different than it is today. The motion picture industry that Hughes entered was a very regimented, very closed system that was really designed to keep outsiders at bay. And everyone who was involved in the industry had to toe the line of, um, those major five corporations and the mandates that they established. So it was very difficult for independent producers like Hughes to make their mark in the industry when Hughes arrived. Still difficult today for independent producers, but the constraints that they faced are certainly different.

Speaker B: So as an outsider to this oligarchy, derived as a sucker with money, how did that position impact Hughes approach to producing and moviemaking? How was he different?

Speaker A: Initially, Hughes was like everyone else. I mean, uh, they say the only job in Hollywood that requires no qualifications is that of a producer. All a producer needs is money. And Hughes, of course, had that in spades. So when Hughes first came to the industry, as he did in aviation and others, he kind of just tried to absorb as much as he could. So initially, in the late 1920s, when Hughes arrived in the industry and made his first few films, he was simply just a financier. So he was watching other people make movies. Uh, Mary Astor, who worked with Hughes early on, said that Hughes, when he first showed up on sets, he couldn't understand where the fourth wall was. He just really had trouble understanding the basics of movie making. But like with everything else, he was able to quickly understand the technical and he was able to understand the marketing that went into movies and how he could promote movies in a unique way. So initially, Hughes was just absorbing the industry, but over time, as he did throughout his career, he came to believe that he could do the job just about as good as anyone else. And again, he had the money to prove that he could do it as well.

Speaker B: So as he inserted himself more and more into the filmmaking process, how did the directors, writers, actors around him respond to his involvement? Um, which might be unusual for a producer.

Speaker A: There's a wonderful example at the movie Hell's Angels, which was Hughes's multimillion dollar blockbuster. It's going to premiere in 1930. It is one of only two films that has Howard Hughes listed as the director. But that film was initially designed to have, uh, another director come on board. And the first director found Hughes is meddling and his micromanaging to be too much and ultimately quit. A second director came on board in a similar situation. Hughes was constantly telling him what to do, saying, why not this? Do all of this? And the director came up to Hughes at one point and said, if you think you can do better, why don't you direct it yourself? And Hughes basically said, okay, sure. And he fired the director and became the director himself. And, you know, Hughes did micromanage every aspect of it. I mean, a perfect example is simply the amount of film that Hughes used for the production. A typical producer produces about 10 times more film that actually shows up on screen. Howard Hughes had 150 times more film that he produced that ultimately showed up on screen. 2.25 million feet of film were exposed for this particular production because Hughes would spend days focusing on just the smallest amount of details that would only show up for a few seconds on screen. So this is a rare example of what you see on screen is a result of Hughes micromanagement. Hughes's ideas really being forced out. In most other instances, Howard Hughes served as a Producer. And he was really more behind the scenes, determining, you know, what the script would be, what the final film would be. But his actual impact on what you see on screen from a production standpoint is often limited because, again, his role was normally in the background as a producer. But Hell's Angels was one example where, again, he micromanaged every single aspect of it and he had to do things his way. So he took on more and more responsibility beyond simply the producer, where he was the director. But Hughes wanted things done his way. Sometimes he was comfortable hiring good talent like the director, Howard Hawks, to get his vision on screen. But there were times when Hughes had to step in himself to do the things that he wanted to do in the way that he wanted it done.

Speaker B: So it sounds like Howard Hughes was a bit of an accidental auteur. How did his vision for filmmaking influence the visual or technical style of Hollywood?

Speaker A: I think the best way to talk about the visual style, the impact that Hughes had, is to talk about what we kind of think of the motion picture today. And today's motion pictures are filled with a lot of sex. They're filled with a lot of violence. And in the 1930s, uh, the motion picture producers and distributors of America, the industry censorship body, had very distinct rules. The Motion Picture Production Code that listed what could and could not be shown on screen. And it was very straightforward. You know, you couldn't have nudity in silhouette or in actuality. You couldn't show miscegenation. You couldn't show sex. There was a lot of things, you know, if a gun was used, it had to be used in a very distinct way. Criminals always had to be shown being found guilty and that, uh, they were never glorified. So there were very, very distinct parameters on how movies could be made and what could be shown on screen. And Hughes blew all of those up. Uh, from a technical standpoint, you know, he promoted violence. He promoted sex in films, violence, most notably with the film Scarface in 1932, sex with Jane Russell and the Outlaw, which, uh, initially was released in 1943. So really, you know, the sex and violence that we see on screen, Hughes was revolutionary in bringing that to the forefront because he was directly challenging the dictates that most. Most other producers had to follow. But because of Hughes's wealth, because of Hughes's independence, he was able to make, again, the films that he wanted to make, the way that he wanted to make them. But even going back to Hell's Angels, for example, you know, typically in the early days of the motion Picture industry production was seen as an inconvenient necessity. The majority of your income came from exhibition. So as a result of that and a variety of controversial Hollywood practices like block booking, where you couldn't buy a single film from a production studio, had to buy a whole slate of films, it really meant that, you know, you didn't want to spend a lot of money on one particular movie because there was going to be a guaranteed audience, a guaranteed market for it, no matter what. So big budget films had a much greater possibility of underperforming in those smaller films had a guaranteed audience. But Hughes wanted to make these big, lavish spectacles. So he was one of the first to really spend millions of dollars on a film. So he, behind the scenes in a variety of different ways, from how movies were made to how movies were promoted, really challenged those dictates of the Motion Picture Production Code that had dramatic ramifications as the industry moved into the 1960s and 1970s.

Speaker B: What do you think his penchant for sex, violence and spectacle says about him?

Speaker A: You know, Hughes commented in several times, basically saying when it came to Scarface that this is front page news. You know, we're talking about things that people want to know more about. So why would these types of things be censored? So we see today how sex and violence are just ingrained in our culture and in the movies that we do. Hughes knew that the arbitrary restrictions of, um, the Hollywood Production Code were taking away from filmmaking and taking away from his ability to make profits in doing so. So he challenged them in a way that others could not do it. It really, again, had some dramatic ramifications in a ways that were sometimes unintended, but didn't have a long game. Hughes wasn't playing, you know, 5D chest and thinking that this is ultimately going to lead to this. Hughes was worried about what was in front of him and what was in his best interest first and foremost. And if it was his best interest to promote a scandal, regardless of the impact that it may have on the participants, he was going to do so. So again, Hughes was really focused on what he thought was best, because throughout most of his life, his intuition was often correct.

Speaker B: So it seems like in his clash with censors, you are indicating that Howard Hughes was more of a rebel than a true pioneer of free speech.

Speaker A: Hughes was certainly a pioneer of free speech. His actions had dramatic ramifications that ultimately were codified in 1952 when the Supreme Court declared that movies were protected under the free speech banner of, uh, the First Amendment. But Hughes's actions were not, not based on any sort of moral or ethical considerations. Hughes just thought, this is what audiences wanted. He wanted to give them to them, and quite simply, the consequences be damned. He wasn't really worried about the future. He wasn't worried about others. Other producers had to fall in line because first and foremost, they needed their films to be distributed, they needed their films to be exhibited, they needed to ultimately make money. Hughes could lose a million dollars, could lose several million dollars on the film, and it didn't impact his bottom line result of that. Hugh certainly was a pioneer of free speech, but he almost was a reluctant pioneer of free speech, or almost a unintended pioneer of free speech, because what he was trying to do was for his best interest. He was not thinking about others.

Speaker B: Now, you mentioned the controversy surrounding the marketing of Jane Russell in the Outlaw. How did Howard's approach to promoting stars, especially women, perhaps reshape Hollywood's notion of celestial celebrity?

Speaker A: I think we're all really familiar with, you know, couples sleeping in separate beds, you know, in TV and movies, women who would, uh, be pregnant and would disappear for nine months in the first half of the 20th century. Television and, uh, film stars. Because, again, there was a very wholesome, a very moral image that the industry was trying to project. And the industry was trying to project that image because they wanted this potent oligarchy, and they were always terrified that the government would step in and initiate antitrust actions against the industry. So they wanted to diminish any sort of controversy whatsoever. But Hughes realized controversy, you know, any publicity is good publicity. So Hughes embraced controversy, and he exploited controversy to promote his films. He wasn't concerned about the participants. So if it had a negative impact on this person or that person or even his reputation, he simply did not care. If he thought promoting a scandal or exploiting an actress was to the benefit of him in a film, he would do so. And he was not the only producer in Hollywood at that time that had an attitude about the exploitation of women. Hughes just really made it as part of his marketing campaign for so many different films. And that is where Hughes was revolutionary, because now we understand how sex is so intertwined with Hollywood and with the image of so many actresses. And again, there was a time when there was a separation of that that Hughes thought was arbitrary. And as a result of that, he broke that down again, not worried about any consequences, just because he thought it was in the best interest of his films and himself. Um, as Americans, we're constantly grappling with a fundamental question do we settle for the world as it is, or do we strive to create the world as it should be? Our answers tend to end, ebb and flow through the decades. But once, just after a war that nearly tore us apart, we came as close as we've come to answering it. And it's a story worth a closer look. I'm Michelle Obama, and I'm proud to announce Higher Ground's new podcast, the Unfinished Promise. Guided by bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell and featuring my husband, Barack Obama, this limited series uncovers the untold stories of reconstruction, what they mean for us today, and how our past can shape the future we choose to build. The Unfinished Promise is available now on Audible or wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker B: Whether you're exploring your current fascinations or discovering new ones, Audible has all the stories that'll introduce you to your most fascinating sites. Tap into a whole new world of heated conversations with a saucy romantasy series, become your friend group's sci fi expert on the latest blockbuster book to screen adaptation, or find unexpected reveals through the exclusive episodes of a viral true crime podcast. However you choose to listen, Audible keeps you fascinated so you can be just as fascinating all in one easy app. With plans now starting at $8.99, you'll get access to over 1 million audiobooks and podcasts podcasts, including trending bestsellers, the hottest new releases, and exclusive podcasts you won't find anywhere else. Sign up now to become a member and get any audiobook every month, plus exclusive podcasts. Plans now start at $8.99. Audible be fascinated. Be fascina.

Speaker C: Foreign.

Speaker B: I'd like to return to Howard's other interests, and especially how perhaps his ambitions to be excellent in so many varied, different arenas might have affected his Hollywood movie making.

Speaker A: There was a significant gap from, you know, when he was making films in the early 1930s to the Outlaw, which came about in the early 1940s. And it was during that time, for example, that the Spruce Goose was manufactured and he flew it and he was, you know, fighting Congress and all of other things involved with that war, uh, appropriations. So Hughes constantly was getting pulled in a variety of directions so he would just kind of stop. But this goes back to the fact that he didn't have to be a normal producer. He didn't have to establish a reputation, he didn't have to continue with contacts in the industry because of his wealth. He could leave a few years, a few months, and come back and pick up exactly where he was because he wasn't reliant on other individuals, he wasn't reliant on other studios. He, in and of himself, was his own studio. But that Hughes was constantly getting pulled away. And I think that's what impacts more of his legacy than anything else. The fact that he never just stayed in one industry and made a significant mark throughout his career because he was pulled in so many different directions, it makes him a renaissance man. It makes him unique. But it also took away how much he was able to contribute to that industry and what that industry ultimately thought of him from a legacy standpoint.

Speaker B: Now, you just mentioned that eventually Howard did decide to give up the world of independent producing and join the system by purchasing a controlling interest in rko. But he was not your ordinary studio boss at the time. How did he approach his new control of one of Hollywood's Big Five?

Speaker A: He approached being a studio mogul the same way he did as an independent producer. And he was going to do what he thought was best in the way that he wanted to do it. And he ultimately ran rko, one of the great studios in Hollywood history, formed in 1928, one of the Big Five, probably best associated with movies like Citizen Kane and King Kong. But Hughes, ultimately his actions, his mismanagement, well, more, I guess appropriately, his management style, led RKO to cease production almost entirely. And the studio ultimately was disbanded and sold off into parts, again because of Hughes's mismanagement.

Speaker B: So you've anticipated my next question, which was to ask whether it was Howard Hughes's management or just the market timing that led to RKO's downfall.

Speaker A: Unlike the other studios that kind of had an identity, RKO just made a broad swath of films. And as a result of that, again, they weren't as identified as some of the other studios were in the public's consciousness. But Hughes's mismanagement is what's going to lead to the end of rko. And probably even more important, Hughes's ownership of RKO is going to put Hughes in a position to be one of the studio executives in charge of a major motion picture production company. When the Paramount case, which was the government antitrust case that had been being bandied around for many, many years, but it goes before the Supreme Court in 1948, and what the Supreme Court recommended was breaking up production and distribution from exhibition. So films, you know, you produce a film, that's one aspect, that film then gets distributed from the producer to the exhibitor, and then the exhibitor shows the film to audiences. So studios own all three aspects of the entire production of the film, from the script to the scre. And that was what was considered in violation of antitrust laws. And the Supreme Court declared that they should be separated. But Hughes was in a unique position because all of the other studio executives were determined to keep their empires intact. They wanted to make sure that they were in control of, uh, what was arguably their most financially, um, profitable aspect, which was exhibition. But Hughes saw the opportunity when the Supreme Court made that ruling to say, wait a minute, if I am able to break off production and distribution from exhibition, I'll have two valuable companies and I can probably sell one of those two companies for a profit. So not only did Hughes lead to the closing of rko, Hughes's action as a studio mogul were instrumental in the disillusion of what we refer to as the Hollywood studio system or the golden age of Hollywood. Now, much like rko, the Hollywood studio system would have ended the. At some point, one of the studios would have had to been forced to separate production and distribution from exhibition. But Hughes being in that position certainly made that break happen much sooner and for lack of a better word, much cleaner than it ever would have happened if someone, an outsider like Hughes, was not in the position that he was in.

Speaker B: So we didn't touch too much on this in our series, but we hinted at it. But I'm curious, to what extent did Howard's increasing paranoia and obsessive compulsive disorder contribute to Archeo's failings?

Speaker A: Hughes had a variety of medical conditions. He was a germaphobe, which came from his mother. But he also had gotten into several aviation accidents, including one on the filming of Hell's Angels that were very, very severe that caused significant damage to Hughes. He became more paranoid, he became more isolationist. And again, when he was put in a position to run a studio, it just was not suited for his temperament and where he was. So the paranoia that we think of of Hughes, the isolation that becomes to define Hughes in later life and of course takes over his legacy is starting to appear at this time. But it is not all consuming as it becomes later in his life what he has shifted towards Las Vegas and the gaming industry. But you clearly see his micromanaging, his obsessive compulsive disorder. So Hughes is his paranoia, his isolation is going to consume his life and it's starting to take hold while he is in Hollywood. But it's not defining him as it will come to do so when he moves to Vegas and the gaming industry.

Speaker C: I'm Raza Jaffrey and in the new season of the Spy who we open the file on Benedict Arnold, the spy who Betrayed the American Revolution. America is fighting to free itself from the British Empire, and one of its foremost generals is Benedict Arnold. He's a smuggler turned, um, battlefield hero and admired for his aggressive tactics. But when a war wound, a new wife, debts and politics test his loyalty to the max. He turns spy and devises a plot to shatter the revolution and help Britain capture rebel commander in chief General George Washington. And that plot would make him the most infamous traitor in U.S. history. Follow the Spy who now wherever you listen to podcasts, you can also listen to the full season of the Spy who Betrayed the American Revolution. Early, uh, and ad free are not

Speaker B: audible foreign

Speaker C: Jaffrey and in the new season of the Spy who we open the file on Benedict Arnold, the spy who Betrayed the American Revolution. America is fighting to free itself from the British Empire, and one of its foremost generals is Benedict Arnold. He's a smuggler turned, um, battlefield hero and admired for his aggressive tactics. But when a war was a new wife, debts and politics test his loyalty to the mags. He turns spy and devises a plot to shatter the revolution and help Britain capture rebel commander in chief General George Washington. And that plot would make him the most infamous traitor in U.S. history. Follow the Spy who Now wherever you listen to podcasts, you can also listen to listen to the full season of the Spy who Betrayed the American Revolution. Early uh, and ad free on audible.

Speaker B: Howard Hughes obviously had a great impact on Hollywood. Hollywood. But I'm wondering, is it more accurate to describe him as a success or a failure in the industry?

Speaker A: I think you've hit upon why his legacy is what it is, because it wasn't so much from his legacy standpoint, whether he was successful or whether he was a failure. He was impactful. The actions that he took, the things that he was able to do, he was able to get things on screen that others were not able to do. So in that he was impactful, he was revolutionary. Was he successful or failure? Again, I don't think it's the right question to ask, but the answer to the question is he was a failure, um, because he tried to. For example, with Hell's Angels, he tried to declare Hell's Angels, the most expensive movie ever made, was a huge financial success that made twice its production budget. But in actuality, records show he lost $1.5 million on the production. So he was always was able to present himself as a success. And this applies to all industries. That he was in when he really wasn't. I mean, he was a nominal producer who, uh, produced a lot of really either mediocre or simply bad films. But he was really, really impactful. You could ask the question, was he a success or failure in some of the other industries like aviation? And he set world records. It's easy to say, well, he's the record holder. He was successful when it comes to looking at his legacy in Hollywood, not successful when we would think of it in kind of the standard terms. But his impact was so revolutionary. That's what ultimately needs to be understood. And again, because he made such bad films, because of the scene that he was playing Hollywood, that has really impacted his legacy even to this day.

Speaker B: We've been talking about his legacy quite a bit, and he has several different legacies lying around to evaluate. But I'm wondering, how did his reputation in later life as an eccentric recluse color the public perception of his legacy?

Speaker A: When you think of Howard Hughes, you think of him as a cautionary tale. Here was someone with fabulous wealth. Here was someone who dated starlets. Here was someone who was front page news. But he let his paranoia, his isolation consume him. And later in life, he literally locked himself in hotel rooms, not just in the United States, but to avoid, uh, some legal, um, requirements. He bounced around from country to country. And that is what we know of how Howard Hughes today. You know, if I think if you said to someone, you know, what. What does Howard Hughes look like? They're going to say, oh, is that the guy with the long hair and the fingernails? He's wearing, you know, tissue boxes on his feet and peeing in jars, all of which were true. I mean, all of this is how his life ultimately ended. And that's what we think of when we think of Howard Hughes. So we think of him as an aviator who then became a rich eccentric who isolated himself. And that is what we know. And as a result of that, it has really impacted how we understand how Howard Hughes's legacy And that in the motion picture industry, more so than any other place, he wasn't simply playing Hollywood. He wanted to make an impact on the industry, but he wanted to do it his way. And unfortunately, when it comes to Hollywood, it's been really, really difficult to shift the narrative away from that legacy.

Speaker B: So staying in this evaluation of his legacy mode that, uh, we're in this moment, which of Howard's films do you, you think perhaps had the most lasting impact on Hollywood?

Speaker A: It's an interesting question, because a lot of these Films are not very good. Um, but I think if you were to ask what was his most lasting film that he produced, it was Scarface 19, uh, 32. Howard Hawks directed, Paul Muni starring, um, and this was one of the great gangster films of, uh, that gangster film cycle of the 1930s. Considered, you know, one of the probably top five gangster films of that particular era. Now, Hughes was not really involved with the production itself, except for really making sure that what was a very violent movie for the period that he was able to keep as much war and violence in it as he possibly could as he was battling sensors. So Scarface is a movie that even to this day gets talked about as really one of the defining movies of that particular era. So I think any legacy accused in Hollywood begins with Scarface. But the other movies, I mean, the Hell Angels, because of its impact on shifting from silent films to talkies, uh, the multimillion dollar blockbuster, it's one that was important in the history of Hollywood. There's another movie that is constantly associated with Howard Hughes, and that's the Conqueror, which comes out in 1956. This was a movie starring John Wayne as Genghis Khan. I probably should pause there and let people think about John Wayne as Genghis Khan. But this was a movie that is infamous in Hollywood history because it was filmed outside of St. George, Utah. It was believed that that area, uh, there was a lot of atomic radiation because of the atomic testing that was taking place in the Nevad test site just outside of St. George. And there was a very famous article that was printed in 1980 that said of, uh, the 220 people who worked on the film, 91 of them had contracted some form of cancer. And they tried to make the claim that it was the result of the filming that took place in St. George. And they also brought a lot of the dirt from that area back to Hollywood to do interior filming. So that's also one of these really most infamous films in American history because of its supposed radiation, uh, of the cast and crew. And this is now part of Hughes's legacy. So it really gets to the fact that this isn't an individual like a Daryl Zanuck or, uh, Louis B. Mayer, where we're talking about all of these amazing films, films that people still know today that have won Academy Awards. You know, Hughes, because he wasn't making great films. His legacy is more not the films themselves, but what the films were able to accomplish.

Speaker B: So let's do a bit of speculative history here. If Howard Hughes were a young Billionaire scion today, and he was entering the entertainment industry as it is. With Hollywood fractured and streaming on the rise, how do you think he would operate?

Speaker A: Hughes would have had more opportunities, more markets for his film. So I think that would have made things a little bit easier. And we do see to this day very rich individuals who step in by production studios, um, buy streaming platforms and are able to make their mark. So Hughes wealth today would have translated the way that, you know, wealth always does translate, and would have allowed him to continue to make a mark on the industry. But I don't think because the taste industry is so fractured, because there are so many different types of films, streaming platforms. I, um, think as a result of it, if Hughes were interesting, the industry today, he would have a market for his films, but he wouldn't be as revolutionary because he wouldn't have as many people to fight. You know, the industry today is pretty well established and those kind of, if you want to make a film about this, there's not many people who are going to say, you can't do that if there's an audience for your film. Nowadays, those films are accepted. That wasn't always the case before. It was, you know, films had to be moral, films had to be ethical. They had to abide by the motion picture production code. So Hughes was able to challenge that. He had a straw person to kind of go up against in a way that he wouldn't today. So he'd be able to make films, he'd be able to make big blockbusters. He'd be promoting sex and violence probably the same way. But his impact wouldn't be as revolutionary because the industry has changed so much.

Speaker B: And finally, this is a business show. So what business lessons do you think our listeners can learn from Howard Hughes's Hollywood career other than start with millions of dollars?

Speaker A: Starting with million dollars is the easiest way to, to make an impact in probably any industry. I think it was around 1948, Hughes gave, uh, an interview for a magazine. And when he assumed Hughes Tool, he didn't own all 100% of Hughes tool, his father's company. Uh, there were some family relatives that had a few minor stakes, but he ultimately walked them out. And he said he, because he knew he couldn't work with other people. And I'm going to quote him here for a second. He said, quote, if I hadn't been a brash kid, I never would have had any such idea. And I don't advise other brash kids to do what I did. I'll admit I didn't realize what hazards faced me. So maybe what I didn't know couldn't hurt. End quote. You know, I think what Hughes realized was that, you know, he kind of went into things headlong. You know, his wealth gave him the opportunity to do, do so. But even in times of some self reflection, Hughes realized that his approach was not always best and his approach was unique. Unique to him, unique to his financial situation. So I think the lasting legacy is, as Shirley said, first and foremost, it certainly helps to have vast financial resources. But when you go at it alone, it's going to provide you the opportunity to be revolutionary in a field. So it's kind of a double edged sword. You know, being someone like Hughes and charting your own path can be very, very difficult. But it can also be very, very rewarding. So it's, it's a constant struggle that so many entrepreneurs have every single day. And it's, you know, am I willing to stake my legacy, my career, my finances to do what I think is best, to produce a product, to start an industry, to start something. Hughes thought he could do so in many different industries. And I think, you know, whether success or failure, I think ultimately he was successful in so many things that he did because of the approach that he took. And I guess, you know, again, the revolutionary aspect of that because he was charting his own course.

Speaker B: Jeffrey Richardson, thank you so much for talking with me today on Business Movers.

Speaker A: Thank you for having me.

Speaker B: Lindsey from Wondery. This is the final episode of our series on Howard Hughes, Hughes and Hollywood. If you'd like to learn more about Howard Hughes's time in Hollywood, we recommend Howard Hughes, His Life and Madness by Donald L. Bartlett and James B. Steele. Howard Hughes and the creation of modern Hollywood by today's guest, Jeffrey Richardson. And Seduction, Sex, Lies and Stardom and Howard Hughes's Hollywood by Karina Longworth. A quick note about our dramatizations. In most cases, we can't know everything that happened. But all our reenactments are based on historical research. Business Movers is hosted, edited and examined. Executive produced by me, Lindsey Graham for Airship. Audio editing by Gabriel Gould. Sound design by Molly Bach. Our supervising sound designer is Matthew Filler. Music by Thrum this episode is written and researched by Reuben Abrams Brosby. Coordinating producer Jake Sampson senior producer Scott Reeves. Executive producers are William Simpson for Airship and Aaron o' Flaherty, Jenny Lauer Beckman and Marshall Louie for Wondery.