MovieChat Forums > How to Marry a Millionaire (1953) Discussion > I thought Lauren Bacall was meant to be ...

I thought Lauren Bacall was meant to be older in this


in one scene, when she is talking to her beau, she says she is 35 (or thereabouts). He laughs and says she is more like 25. I thought she was meant to be about 40 when I first saw it. She looked much older than Monroe or Grable. I thought they'd made her look older for her character!

reply

Bacall's character is only supposed to be in her mid-20s, but she always looked a bit older to me than her actual age. In 1953, the year HTMAM came out, she turned 29 (still 28 when filming), but if I didn't know that I'd peg her at about 32 or 33 -- not hugely older, but a few years, and that was true in most of her movies. Even in her first film, To Have and Have Not (1944), which she filmed while still only 19, she seems more like 24 or so.

I don't think she looked older than Grable (37 in 1953), but she definitely looks older than Monroe (27), as in fact she was. The biggest age difference between actress and character was Betty Grable, who was clearly supposed to be in her mid-to-late 20s, like the other two.

reply

When I first saw this film I thought Lauren Bacall was the oldest. I was surprised that Betty Grable had a decade on Monroe and nearly a decade on her. Bacall was always attractive but had that deeper more streetwise voice that added to her maturity.

reply

In that scene she says she's 40.

reply

I know! She looks about 40 in this film.

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

reply

Bacall always seemed older than her actual age. She was only 19 when filming "To Have and Have Not", but looked (and acted) older - You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? You just put your lips together and, blow".

Part of it was her husky voice, I wonder how may cigarettes she smoked in a day? 

reply