Just watched the film, a remarkable example of what film was in 1944. The impact of the Hays Code was obvious. The married couple slept in twin beds. The word, "pregnant" was not in the script, courtesy of the Hays Code, no doubt. The scene between Ellen and her mother was creatively written to say the least, given that Ellen would have been at least seven months pregnant. The costuming standards did not allow for realism either.
shareDear Wasps;
That's correct. However there is a
'down shot' later on where the heads
are together side by side while in bed.
Happy trails to all...
This film is one instance in which the practice of not showing a pregnant woman looking pregnant is especially bizarre.
As silly as this practice was -- huge, flapping maternity tops over a flat belly to signify "pregnant" -- I can usually dismiss it and focus on the story.
Except that, in this film, most of the scene in which Thaxter's character is confiding in her mother, and zooming back and forth to the closet with that huge shirt flapping over a very thin body, her being concerned because she has gained weight is the point of the scene!
Even with my "hey, it was 1944" filter on, it's hard not to yell "what are you on about?" at the screen.
And, I find it especially silly because of some of the realism allowed in the scenes with the men. Yes, some of their dialogue is super-clean and corny, but other things are very frank. For example, their realistic groans of pain and their helplessness when they are hurt, and Walker's character clumsily trying to help, make the scene on the beach after the crash heartbreaking to watch.
But show Thaxter with a baby bump? Heaven forbid!
I too was amazed at the silliness of not showing the pregnant wife without her holding a big coat in front of her, or a huge top swinging.... Who was it who would be so offended by the concept of a baby being nurtured in their mother's belly? I'd love to know the real who and why of that.
It made me so grateful for the vivid middle finger (metaphorically) of Demi Moore's magazine cover about 9 month pregnant and stark naked!! I hope the fool who thought women's bodies should be hidden from sight was either still alive to suffer or rolling over in his grave. Normally that stuff seems like cheap, attention-getting ploys but now I'm thrilled she needed that attention!
The twin bed scene also bugged me...reminded me of I Love Lucy and Ozzie and Harriet--real life married couples forced to pretend on TV they sleep 4 feet apart. Here, she was pregnant, they were married--did they think we did not know they did the deed? Esp when he was off to risk his life in war? It would have been a lot more comfortable if they could have done it in a nice big bed! Don't we allow our heroes to sleep with their wives in beds large enough for them? A war hero and his wife squished into a twin bed fit for a child...it's so silly. And after the baby comes, how does a mom breast feed her infant in a twin bed? Risk dropping it on the floor if she dozes off for a minute or two? I wish our boomer generation had been able to confront those foolish men....actually, it's pretty amazing so many boomers got here at all. A testament to the proposition that their twin beds and censorship didn't limit what anyone was thinking about!
I too was amazed at the silliness of not showing the pregnant wife without her holding a big coat in front of her, or a huge top swinging.... Who was it who would be so offended by the concept of a baby being nurtured in their mother's belly?