MovieChat Forums > Tarzan and His Mate (1934) Discussion > Not Maureen O`Sullivan in the nude

Not Maureen O`Sullivan in the nude


According to the trivia section on IMDB that was not Maureen in the nude. It was a body double. Regardless the way it was shot you would never know. I could not believe it the first time I saw this movie uncut! Full frontal nudity! Not to be crude, but pubic hair in a Tarzan movie?!? YOW! These movies were cool enough with the native torture scenes and Tarzan fighting wild animals but bush in a Tarzan movie from the `30s. Now thats cool. This was before the Hayes code came in and ruined everything. Imagine Hollywood without that conservative loser!!!

reply

Yes, the Hayes Commission did indeed cut those skinny dipping scenes out, but fortunately, they were found in the late 1980s, and restored for DVD release. And no, it wasn't Maureen O'Sullivan swimming underwater, but rather Josephine McKim, an Olympic swimming star from the 1920s, (she was also that little mermaid in THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN) doing those scenes as Ms. O'Sullivan states on the DVD that she was claustrophobic and really couldn't do any underwater sequences. It was basically Maureen above the water and Josephine McKim below. In terms of beautiful actresses during the 1930s, I am partial to Fay Wray myself, but in looking at these films, Maureen O’Sullivan was definitely quite sexy, especially the outfit she wore for this movie, which unfortunately, the Hayes Commission once again interfered and had her wear something more conservative in the later features.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

And it wasn't Jane Wyatt in Lost Horizon either. Life can be a drag sometimes.

reply

[deleted]

I assume the producers wanted a female swimmer who could keep up with Weismuller underwater, hence the use of a fellow Olympian.

May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?

reply