No one has mentioned this particular scene. Perhaps it was censored in most versions? Is the audience to believe that they were homosexual or was it the norm, like in Lincoln's time, for men to sleep in the same bed together? I don't buy the excuse that there was a shortage of beds at the Inn.
shareactually that is exactly it. They had to use the maid's room remember?
That was all that was left.
So no, not homosexuals sorry :P
This is a Hitchcock film. He doesn't do anything by accident. Of course the bed scene is meant to slyly imply they're homosexual. That together with their indignation when the cute maid undresses, and their general fecklessness.
sharePlease remember this was a British film that did not have the heavy censorship of American films and the Hayes office.
shareCheck again and you'll see a pair of pajama pants and shirt hanging on the wall. Seems odd for two men, one shirtless and one pantless, innocently to share the same bed in only one pair of pajamas when another is readily available, no?
sharethere is actually a cut scene explaining that one of them (im not sure which one) dropped his pj's in water therefore they had to share the other pjs.
"The only Abnormality is the incapacity to love"
Agree that Hitchcock implies the two are homosexuals. Following the bed scene, there is a scene on the train where the two end up together in the toilet.
shareSeems a bit over the top, for Hitchcock. He was way more subtil than that.
shareSlinter, that scene was over the top. LOL
http://www.cgonzales.net & http://www.drxcreatures.com
Scenes of mistaken sexuality were long a staple of movie comedies. The only ones that come to mind right now are Reaching for the Moon (1930) where the hero is in love with a beautiful girl but doesn't know what to say to her. His butler coaches him and they practice a little scene together, which the janitor overhears and draws erroneous conclusions from.
And International House where W.C. Fields is lost and lands his auto gyro on the roof of a hotel in Wu Hu, China. He (as the cops say) exits his vehicle and asks the hotel manager "Where am I?" The manager, the eternally prissy Franklin Pangborn, very stern with hands on hips says "Wu Hu". Fields looks stunned, then looks down and notices he has a flower on his lapel. He plucks it out and says "Don't let the posy fool you, where am I?"
Watch the scene in which the maid first enters the room to change. The men turn their backs, and one of them accidentally drops their pajamas into the bucket of water. In the scene in which the two men are together in bed, the wet pair is hung up to dry. The dry pair they split between them, with one wearing the shirt, and the other the pants. A brief bit before they are in bed shows them splitting the clothes.
It's a joke.
The post by lordillogicalhawk is correct - there's no homosexuality here, the OP is reading far too much into the scene :)
shareYeah and Caldicott also makes one or two sexual remarks about the chambermaid.
If you save the world, We can do it in the *beep*
I interpreted it as implied homosexuality, mostly for comedic purposes, much like the Famous scene with Steve Martin and John Candy in Planes, Trains and Automobiles. But ultimately, it's left up to the viewer.
I saw this this weekend after first seeing it maybe 30 years ago, and I think that the raciness is one of the reasons I like it.
I think that one of the more serious messages is that peoople are so wrapped up in their own agendas that they don't want to "get involved". With the two twits, it was a football match. The adulterous couple had their own problems, and so on.
...how you could have posted this over a year ago, for a British film, and no-one has yet replied mentioning Morecambe and Wise, who this scene immediately reminded me of.
Now what was that about? I asked my parents about that once when I was young, but they pointedly refused to acknowledge my questions and carried on talking as if nothing was amiss. And when I say young, I mean I was 22.
Like one of these twits remarked when a tied-up, half-dead nun fell onto him as a result of opening a carriage door: "seems a bit queer".
Absolutely hilarious to see these two in that bed together.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
All of the above explanations sound valid; however, I prefer to think of them
as a couple--they were just so cute together. I thought it would be more ironic
to the story, too--the two (less manly?)twits shooting back at the attackers, while the
adulterer is a coward who refuses to defend himself with his gun (his female
companion sneers at him and uses it instead) and wants to surrender.
I'm not crying, you fool, I'm laughing!
I was impressed with "Mrs." Todhunter's courage (I'm not afraid to use it!"), but I also admired Chaldecott's (or was it Carruther's) taking the gun from her so she wouldn't be in danger; he claimed to have experience in shooting.
So, you see, when the chips were down, the passengers did unite for their preservation (all except Mr. Todhunter, and you know his fate. He kinda reminds me of Frank Burns on MASH).
But what I REALLY love about this film is that while Iris had just met Miss Froy and Gilbert never saw her at all, both of them moved heaven and earth to find her when she disappeared. That kind of chivalry just doesn't exist any more.
I agree, when I saw them in bed I went "aaaww...". It made the rest of the film much more interesting. :)
shareWhen some of you say that they were homosexuals, you're simply putting words in Hitchcock's mouth as there's nothing that implies what you're saying is true in the movie.
The two "gay" scenes that have been mentioned have logical reasons and were perfectly explained in the movie. How can you not "buy the excuse that there was a shortage of beds" when that obviously was the case?
You're looking for something that's not there in an effort to come off as knowledgeable.
If you want implied homosexuality in a Hitchcock movie you should check out Murder! (1930).
--------------------------------
Oh you mad cuz I'm stylin on you
Well, think of it like this: have you any reason to believe they're heterosexual? I mean Iris is gorgeous but they never appear to be smitten by her at all. In fact she's just a nuisance to them.
Not that I knew that man or how he approached his work, but from the movies I've seen, I don't think Hitchcock is quite as innocent as he'd have you believe. His movies are actually quite twisted. I think there's a good case for this theory. Having said that, I doubt they were OPENLY homosexual. They just had a good time with their homoeroticism.
(the bit where they're sitting in their cabin with their feet touching hinted it to me as well :P)
It's open to interpretation.
Everybody sees what he/she wants to see.
Well, think of it like this: have you any reason to believe they're heterosexual?
Yes. When they walk away from the front desk after being given the maid's room there is an exchange something like this:
Younger Guy: Too bad they didn't give us two.
Older Guy: Two what?
Younger Guy: Uh...rooms.
I don't think the "uh" is there, but it's clear from his delivery that his original meaning was not "rooms" but "maids".
The joke is that they're more interested in cricket than anything else, including pretty young girls.
shareI really wonder if the ones obsessed with homosexuality in this movie ever bothered to find out the context of Charters and Caldicott. (I hate admitting it, but most of the nummies who think these two men are gay are dumb, clueless Americans.)
These two men are friends, old school Englishmen who live to watch cricket. Their lives revolve around cricket matches. But they are still very proper Englishmen; notice how they dress in tuxedos for dinner in the inn where they're stuck after the avalanche; they're the only ones all dressed up for it.
Their old school ways include courtesy and modesty. When the maid, whose room they got because the inn was full up via guests of the avalanche, comes in to change her clothes, they're embarrassed. NOT because they are gay, but because the maid, who seems to be a blooming young thing, comes across to the stuffy Englishmen as a bit saucy.
They're embarrassed to be seen in their nightclothes in front of her, because one doesn't do that in front of strangers. They share her single bed because it's the only bed available in the inn due to the overcrowding. They're sharing a newspaper together, looking for cricket scores. They don't think there is anything odd or unusual about two men sharing a bed - this was back in the good ol' days when everything wasn't bizarrely sexualized. Men could be roommates and friends, and share a home without the dimwits automatically assuming it meant they were gay.
Yes, they are two rather odd ducks, but THEY don't think they're odd. In this movie, done while Hitler was in power but before WW2 started, Charters and Caldicott are stand-ins for old fashioned English virtues. Sure that includes some rather eccentric behavior, but that has always been an English tradition. It's part of what's endearing about Britain. Notice that the two men always have funny quips about the oddness of foreigners, while they're pretty obtuse about their own quirks.
The two men throughout represent Britian at its best and most unusual. This makes more sense when you consider the Bavarian type country they're stuck in. Notice also the spies and other underhanded dealings going on around them, then think of Nazi Germany.
Charters and Caldicott are odd, endearing, but singular Englishmen who are close friends bound by their Britishness and their love of cricket. They are FRIENDS. They'd be horrified by the stupid, cloddish assumption that men cannot be friends, but then, this idea probably comes from idiots who have no idea what a close friendship looks like since they never had one themselves.
There was no point at all in writing a shortage of beds or PJs in the water into the movie at all unless it was supposed to lead to a humorous, gay-looking scene.
TheMetropolisTimes.com
Ok, that might be true, but it still does not make them gay.
They had to sleep in the same bed because of a bed shortage. They were not in control of the circumstances and would have had to share the bed no matter what their sexuality was. Therefore it's illogical to assume they're gay just based on that.
--------------------------------
Oh you mad cuz I'm stylin on you
Agreed. I don't think they would have slept together if conditions were otherwise. Also, these two characters were so popular that a series of spin-off films were made just about them. And in those movies, it is never hinted that they are gay.
shareThe guys asked for 2 rooms, they got stuck in the maids room because of a shortage and they didn't stare at the maid when she began to undress because of English modesty. I got the impression those guys were close friends, not gay.
Hitchcock did use gay characters though, the most obvious were the 2 guys in ROPE, and the house maid in REBECCA.
Yeah, really? I don't think it was meant to imply homosexuality at all. I think that the scene was even more funny because they were two sort of "proper" English chaps and they end up having to stay, not only in the same room, but also share a bed, and they only have one pair of pajamas to split between the two of them.
They turned around when the maid started undressing because this was an age where that would have been expected. Not like today when a guy would just watch. Anyway, I think this scene was hilarious (I'm laughing just thinking about it), and I definitely didn't get any homosexuality going on there. Sorry, I just think that would be reading too much into it. Like Ethereal-Cloud above me says, there was a shortage of beds, I mean they did end up taking the maid's room. That's part of what made it so funny -- that she kept walking in on them when the manager told her to take her things and leave so that the two guys could have the room.
"Love means never having to say you're sorry."
"That's the dumbest thing I ever heard."
When the two cricket fans ate lunch and had tea, they both sat on the same side of the table, together, rather than across from one another. That plus the bed scene hinted at homosexuality, I think.
shareThey also sit sort of oddly in the train car, after the dining room scene. The one with the scar (Charters?) sits on one side of the train car and his buddy sits on the other side of the car; however, they are not seated directly opposite one another but rather perpendicular to one another and their feet are resting on the seat almost touching or indeed touching. I've known of the homosexual overtones in this film, and I just saw it as an odd arrangement.
In my opinion, they are definitely gay. The best tell is the comment above that explains their utter lack of interest in the maid and iris--as I watched this film yesterday, I realized that Iris was a fitting name for the protagonist given that the Greek goddess of discord went by the same name.
One of them mentions his wife, if I recall right.
shareWhat a load of bollocks.
shareThey were obviously implied by Hitchcock to be homosexual. Their behavior and conversations with one another point this out. Not to mention their aversion to the attractive coquettish maid and other female characters. I agree it was a different time, and the British are known to be snobby and foppish. But the scene of them in bed, when the maid comes in to change her clothes in front of them, their subsequent reaction was all to telling.
My god, IQs are dropping round here like flies. Hitchcock *sets up* the joke that people in the hotel *think* they are homosexual, hence the knowing looks from the maid finding them in bed together. If they actually were that wouldn't be funny at all. I don't see how this could be any more obvious.
shareI agree with dombrewer. During the opening they cannot wait to get out of that town and are upset with everything that is happening to them. The situation forces them to share a bed, much to their annoyance, and when the maid enters and sees them together, the awkardness is obvious.
The humour in this situation is lost if they are actually homosexuals. By being heterosexual they are victims of circumstance and hence people might find it funny.
LOL, yeah I noticed her giving them that look like "I know what you're up to, you naughty boys!"
share