hepclassic Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I remember watching this film a while back ago, and while it has the first Oscar winning Best Supporting Actor performance, not to mention, Frances Farmer in the flesh, I'll admit I was creeped out by Edward Arnold's character, who *spoiler* does not get with Farmer and ends up lusting after her daughter. I understand it was the thirties and this was a period piece at that, and while it is a good movie, it has been forever since I saw it because Arnold's character was just so creepy. What do you think and remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopBilled Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I remember watching this film a while back ago, and while it has the first Oscar winning Best Supporting Actor performance, not to mention, Frances Farmer in the flesh, I'll admit I was creeped out by Edward Arnold's character, who *spoiler* does not get with Farmer and ends up lusting after her daughter. I understand it was the thirties and this was a period piece at that, and while it is a good movie, it has been forever since I saw it because Arnold's character was just so creepy. What do you think and remember? I thought it was a clever use of a dual role. TO EACH HIS OWN does it too. John Lund plays the man that Olivia de Havilland has an affair with in the beginning, then later, he plays her son. So it's sort of the reverse of COME AND GET IT. It certainly saves on having to hire two different actors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 I thought it was a clever use of a dual role. TO EACH HIS OWN does it too. John Lund plays the man that Olivia de Havilland has an affair with in the beginning, then later, he plays her son. So it's sort of the reverse of COME AND GET IT. It certainly saves on having to hire two different actors. Yes, it does, but To Each His Own didn't have the stalkery, almost pedophiliac vibe to it like Come and Get It had. I am glad the Joel McCrea character got with the reincarnated Frances Farmer character in the end, but it still felt weird, like going-to-church-after-being-molested-by-the-priest weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopBilled Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Yes, it does, but To Each His Own didn't have the stalkery, almost pedophiliac vibe to it like Come and Get It had. I am glad the Joel McCrea character got with the reincarnated Frances Farmer character in the end, but it still felt weird, like going-to-church-after-being-molested-by-the-priest weird. Yes, I think that by adding the word 'creepy' in your subject header, you are going in a direction about the unsavory aspects of such storytelling. But I am not looking at it that way. I see it as economical casting, and also as clever writing. The ick factor doesn't have to be there, if you don't let it. And honestly, I doubt audiences at the time were creeped out by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starliteyes Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 I watched this film again a few months ago and really enjoyed it. I didn't find Edward Arnold's character creepy, but rather delusional and pathetic, thinking that this beautiful young woman could be in love with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 Yes, I think that by adding the word 'creepy' in your subject header, you are going in a direction about the unsavory aspects of such storytelling. But I am not looking at it that way. I see it as economical casting, and also as clever writing. The ick factor doesn't have to be there, if you don't let it. And honestly, I doubt audiences at the time were creeped out by it. Of course they weren't freaked out at the time by it, but ask any woman today when an older guy hits on her in a similar fashion and how she chooses to respond to it in a way that announces the ick, I don't think victim blaming is appropriate in this department. I suppose if it were like in this film the genders were reversed and Alison Skipworth lusted after Joel McCrea, there would be a different take on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 I watched this film again a few months ago and really enjoyed it. I didn't find Edward Arnold's character creepy, but rather delusional and pathetic, thinking that this beautiful young woman could be in love with him. I thought so too, but it took that character a mere 45-50 minutes for himself to realize how delusional and pathetic he was being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingrat Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 The idea of Frances Farmer in a love triangle with Edward Arnold and Walter Brennan, as in the first half of the movie, seems distasteful. I don't think this seemed as creepy to 30s audiences as it does now to us. I believe the notion of a man falling in love with the grown daughter of the woman he loved could be powerful, if you think of a character like James Stewart's Scotty Ferguson in Vertigo, but the subject would require careful handling. Edward Arnold as a romantic lead just seems wrong to some of us, but he and Frances Farmer were also paired in The Toast of New York, where she ends up with Cary Grant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 The idea of Frances Farmer in a love triangle with Edward Arnold and Walter Brennan, as in the first half of the movie, seems distasteful. I don't think this seemed as creepy to 30s audiences as it does now to us. I believe the notion of a man falling in love with the grown daughter of the woman he loved could be powerful, if you think of a character like James Stewart's Scotty Ferguson in Vertigo, but the subject would require careful handling. Edward Arnold as a romantic lead just seems wrong to some of us, but he and Frances Farmer were also paired in The Toast of New York, where she ends up with Cary Grant. In modern context, Scotty Ferguson could easily be in real life the obsessive kind of creep in the way he follows a woman around and gets her to degrade herself with an image of his past lover (spoiler not included) for his own voyeuristic fantasy. Edward Arnold's character is also fixated on the past, but creeps a different creep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 The idea of Frances Farmer in a love triangle with Edward Arnold and Walter Brennan, as in the first half of the movie, seems distasteful. I don't think this seemed as creepy to 30s audiences as it does now to us. I believe the notion of a man falling in love with the grown daughter of the woman he loved could be powerful, if you think of a character like James Stewart's Scotty Ferguson in Vertigo, but the subject would require careful handling. Edward Arnold as a romantic lead just seems wrong to some of us, but he and Frances Farmer were also paired in The Toast of New York, where she ends up with Cary Grant. Okay, I have to ask here... Could it more the case that with Edward Arnold never being "the most handsome guy in the world" that THIS might have some major bearing on this issue? Ya see, and speaking of Cary Grant, I have to wonder if HE had played a character similar to this in his later years and where HE attempted to woo the daughter of the women he was once in love with, IF perhaps THIS would still elicit the same amount of "ecks"? 'Cause as I recall, it sure as heck was "acceptable" for Cary to woo a heck of a lot of women in films later in his career and who were half HIS age at the time. (...food for thought, perhaps?) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 Okay, I have to ask here... Could it more the case that with Edward Arnold never being "the most handsome guy in the world" that THIS might have some major bearing on this issue? Ya see, and speaking of Cary Grant, I have to wonder if HE had played a character similar to this in his later years and where HE attempted to woo the daughter of the women he was once in love with, IF perhaps THIS would still elicit the same amount of "ecks"? 'Cause as I recall, it sure as heck was "acceptable" for Cary to woo a heck of a lot of women in films later in his career and who were half HIS age at the time. (...food for thought, perhaps?) Good point, Dargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Good point, Dargo. Thanks, hep! Yep, I would guess that almost any woman would probably "accept" being hit on by THIS guy even in his "later years"... ..over THIS guy... ...and even in the latter's younger days!!! (...what say you ladies???...I'm right, ain't I?!...in OTHER words, FACE it...YOU can sometimes be as "shallow" as us GUYS are!!!) LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 I can only speak for myself here, but just because a couple of us are attention-seeking, shallow jezebels doesn't mean we all are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 I can only speak for myself here, but just because a couple of us are attention-seeking, shallow jezebels doesn't mean we all are. LOL (...and now it's MY turn to say, "good point", hep!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 Getting back to discussion, because of this subject, I have avoided for so long watching Baby Doll and Lolita. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkblue Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 I believe the notion of a man falling in love with the grown daughter of the woman he loved could be powerful Happens all the time. Men never stop being affected by the beauty of young women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 Happens all the time. Men never stop being affected by the beauty of young women. Yes, but there is a distinct difference between love and lust, not to mention romance and obsession. The weirder thing is that women are always blamed for the man's choice of response. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkblue Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Yes, but there is a distinct difference between love and lust For men, one is often very much attached to the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGayDivorcee Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Thanks, hep! Yep, I would guess that almost any woman would probably "accept" being hit on by THIS guy even in his "later years"... ..over THIS guy... ...and even in the latter's younger days!!! (...what say you ladies???...I'm right, ain't I?!...in OTHER words, FACE it...YOU can sometimes be as "shallow" as us GUYS are!!!) LOL You know, at least in the photos, I have more of a thing for Mr. Arnold. But then Oscar Levant is my heart throb, so what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Kimble Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Oscar Levant is my heart throb, so what do I know? While Oscar is not exactly my "heart throb", I have to give a shout out to a fellow Levant fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 For men, one is often very much attached to the other. Yet often men go by lust and either catch up or never master the unification of love with lust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepclassic Posted July 19, 2014 Author Share Posted July 19, 2014 You know, at least in the photos, I have more of a thing for Mr. Arnold. But then Oscar Levant is my heart throb, so what do I know? To each their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkblue Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Yet often men go by lust and either catch up or never master the unification of love with lust. That's over the head of this grasshopper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dargo Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 You know, at least in the photos, I have more of a thing for Mr. Arnold. But then Oscar Levant is my heart throb, so what do I know? Eeh! I knew Oscar before he was a chain-smoking raconteur! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesJazGuitar Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Yet often men go by lust and either catch up or never master the unification of love with lust. If that stereotype is true, is the same thing true for women by replacing 'lust' with 'money'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts