MovieChat Forums > Undercurrent (1946) Discussion > Hepburn miscast because..

Hepburn miscast because..



Taylor would never have fallen crazy in love with her nor Mitchum- Vivian Lee or Gene Tierney maybe.
Mitchum was miscast also.


.
_____________________________
http://theobamafile.com/index.htm

reply

Why wouldn't they?

reply

Because she was doing her awkward Alice Adams routine, that's why not.

"The night was sultry."

reply

Ah, so a woman has to act a certain way before men will even look at her?

reply

I have no idea. I'm no expert on women's behavior nor to which stimuli men can be expected to respond.

The OP and I were discussing a movie and the casting of Hepburn in it. I'm not sure what your point is or indeed, if you have one at all.


"The night was sultry."

reply

The OP says that the two men in the movie would not fall in love with her and that's why she was miscast, why? That's what I want to know.

reply

katherine hepburn was a great actress who certainly didn`t make it on her looks... the premise that robert taylor would flip out over this very plain woman is too much of a stretch. and robert mitchum getting the jellylegs over ms. hepburn is laughable..
reread the comment above about vivian leigh or gene tierney being a better casting choice..

reply

You must not have paid any attention to the movie. He was drawn to her because she is very similar in features and body type to the woman he wanted but who loves his brother~who won't return her affection.

Remember the woman she spoke to in the ladies' lounge? She mentions the resemblance. Later, she realizes he simply wanted to make her over to a closer image of that woman. Only, she adores him, not rejects him.

As for Robert Mitchum: It was shown that they are kindred spirits. She felt a connection as early as the underlined passage in the book of poetry.

Besides, Katharine Hepburn is a lovely woman! Yes, they stressed how she could look plain, which she is unafraid to do, then showed her ability to be glamorous when she wore the "right" clothing. It was a believable transformation. Before, she had no reason to "gussy up", being focused on her research.

I found it quite believable. I really loved seeing the men in roles that some might have expected to be reversed. Seeing a "kindler, gentler" Mitchum was quite an experience!

*** The trouble with reality is there is no background music. ***

reply

Totally agree.

Complete miscast of nearly all the principle characters.

No on screen believability or charisma between characters that were supposed to be madly in love.

Contrived story...simply awful.

Perhaps enjoyable if you enjoy style...and without substance.

And yes...the hats were atrocious!

reply

You're CRAZY if you don't think Hepburn was gorgeous....and you're probably a dog yourself who is the only person who thinks you're attractive.

reply

[deleted]

Katharine Hepburn may not have been conventionally beautiful, but that just makes her striking features more interesting. She is quite attractive in my opinion, and I don't doubt that either of the Roberts would have trouble falling in love with her--no more so than any of her many admirers in real life did.

reply

Robert Taylor's character didn't fall in love with her. He chose her because she reminded him of Sylvia Burton, whom he loved but she didn't love him in return.

Robert Mitchum's character was too down-to-earth to snub her just because she wasn't as pretty as Gene Tierney.

~~
JimHutton (1934-79) & ElleryQueen

reply

Katherine Hepburn was magnificent, like a finely honed work of art -- chiseled features, angular and beautiful!

reply

Nearly fell off my chair laughing when Kate Hepburn tells Jayne Meadows they are similar in looks and demeanour. Bony, flat as a board, boyish Kate and lovely big eyed Jayne Meadows.

reply

I agree that there was no resemblance between them at all...so the shocked looks on Taylor and his assistant didn't make sense. Katherine Hepburn is attractive but very angular. Jayne Meadows had much softer features.

reply

I don't see any resemblance but Hepburn even at 39 has it all over the twentysomething Meadows. Katharine Hepburn was gorgeous in her youth with an elegant aristocratic glamour even here at almost forty while Jayne Meadows was brash, loud, and painted, there's more than a little Iris Adrian in her.

reply

I think that maybe Katharine Hepburn should have played both of those parts.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen = 

reply

Robert Taylor played opposite a great variety of actresses, certainly not all of them "Vivian Lee" (sic) types. His own wife, Barbara Stanwyck, was not the Leigh/Tierney type and much closer to Hepburn. I will agree with you that Robert Mitchum was miscast; he may have been well-read in real life but on screen he in no way suggests a cultured, artistic man.

reply

too old.

reply