I have always found this line of "reasoning" amusing, at the least.
Since about 1950, in America but not throughout the world, there has been this propaganda promoting the idea that only couples of little or no age difference can be successful in marriage and family life. For thousands of years before 1950, the opposite was true. Men did not usually seek marriage until they had established themselves and had something stable and secure to provide for family life. The age difference in "To Catch A Thief" is not remotely new for the time. And do not forget Danielle Foussard, a still younger girl who also had her sights set upon John Robie.
As regards the concept of lasting longer, the young chap may last longer in bed initially, but he is more likely to trade her in when the novelty fades, and so the more mature gent may indeed last longer in the marriage and family. And as regards lasting longer in life, the wild young thrill seeker may perish long before the family oriented gent passes on leaving grandchildren or even great-grandchildren to his legend. It is all relative, non?
I do find it an odd coincidence, to be writing on this here, whilst researching some details on the film for my "half-my-age" girlfriend, who happens to love this ancient classic, and compares her own attraction to me with that of Francie to John - she claims I possess a similar charm, so love must be blind, indeed.
Optimist, cup half-full; Pessimist, cup half-empty; Lux, cup always full: half liquid, half air...
reply
share