Been reading the comments here and noticed a nearly unanimous agreement on how "awful" he was but I just don't see it. I thought he acted fine and was even kind of adorable.
...why thank you ever so, I never buy insurance. - Lorelei Lee
I agree with you. He has a wonderful smile!
shareWell, there's no accounting for taste--said the farmer as he kissed his cow. LOL
shareThe character is played correctly - he is a kind of loud, kind of simple-minded but harmless, nonmalicious person. I don't quite understand why people dislike him so on this board either after all he is a rather minor character in the story.
Remembering JANE WYMAN (1917-2007), BETTY HUTTON (1921-2007), YVONNE DE CARLO (1922-2007)
I didn't hate him, but what I found obnoxious was that he didn't support his wife. He was patronizing and dismissive when she kept repeating that she'd seen Joseph Cotton. Even the cop, whom she'd only met once or twice, gave her more credit.
shareHe was good for the role. Sort of an "Everyman". I think the problem was Jean Peters. She was simply too delicious. The role would have been better suited to someone similar to Carole Burnette or Eve Arden. With a less glamorous actress, I don't think there would have been many complaints regarding the Ray Cutler role. Of course, we all would have been denied the privilege of seeing Miss Peters at her technicolor best. Right?
shareI agree with HarlowMGM. I thought he was ok for the role. Maybe not great but adequate enough. As pointed out he was basically a minor character of the four honeymooners. The movie was really about Marilyn, Jean and Joseph.
shareActually, the role of Polly was originally offered to Anne Baxter who turned it down, declaring that she would never do a film with Marilyn Momroe.
Not surprising. Even with her limited acting ability, Marilyn would have blown the wooden Baxter right off the screen!
Anne Baxter was extremely jealous of Marilyn Monroe, I don't know why, they were two very different types of actresses. I've read where she was furious that she didn't get HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE and wanted Marilyn's (!!!) part. I can see Anne in the Lauren Bacall role but MARILYN'S???
Of course Anne DID work with Marilyn - twice in ALL ABOUT EVE and A TICKET TO TOMAHAWK but I believe they had no scenes together in the latter. Perhaps she was jealous seeing this former bit player in her movies zoom right past her into superstardom. I have heard of people who didn't want to play secondary roles in films starring people who once SUPPORTED them.
Ray Cutler is a witless goober, of the type that men felt they neeeded to become, to advance in 50s industry; a yes man. He's a bit repulsive. My only problem with him, is that it's hard to believe smart, pretty Jean Peters didn't have better otions, instead of this letch.
shareI agree, "Ray Cutler" is an overbearing, obnoxious jerk. He's not a bad guy, just a clueless clod, one of those middle-American, hail-fellow-well-met types who joins silly men's clubs and parades around in fezzes and that sort of stuff. He's the perfect incarnation of a guy who doesn't think very deeply, behaves like a tourist even at home and reacts with his mouth. But in all this he's probably typical of a great many American men of the 50s.
Even so, it is hard to figure what a thoughtful, demure, beautiful, altogether winning girl like Polly (Jean Peters) would see in this guy. Besides his loud and crude demeanor, that grating, awful laugh and leering gestures, he is't good-looking or rich or brilliant. He's a narrow boob. A girl as smart, sexy and resourceful as Polly should clearly have done vastly better.
Still, don't blame actor Max Showalter (billed as Casey Adams here) for Cutler's obnoxiousness. This is obviously how the character was written and directed. (And I don't agree that Cutler is a "minor" character in this film.) Blame the writers, led by Charles Brackett (who also produced), and director Henry Hathaway, who made Showalter portray Cutler as such an ass. Their characterization was a mistake and they should have known better. Showalter was actually a talented performer who could do much better, but I think he was miscast here anyway. Even if he'd played a more normal guy, he doesn't seem like someone who could really have wooed, won and wed the lovely Polly.
Why is Max Showalter billed as Casey Adams? The actor changed names mid-career?
shareYes. When he first arrived in Hollywood he used his real name, but in about 1952 he adopted the more "American" (or "normal"?), blander-sounding name "Casey Adams". Of course, this was a common practice in Hollywood from the 1910s into the 1960s. I don't know who made the suggestion -- 20th Century Fox, Showalter's agent or the actor himself -- but whoever's idea it was, Max went along with it and was billed as Casey Adams for the next decade or so. But he switched back to his real name around 1963. Incidentally, both he and Jean Peters died the same year, 2000, Max about six months before Jean.
shareThis actor was known by two names. Not unusual in Hollywood.
shareThe director of NIAGARA, of course, wasn't Jean Negulesco (who directed HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE) but Henry Hathaway.
shareQuite right. Must have had a mental crossover lapse. But it's been corrected. Thanks for catching it.
shareNo problem
shareI can never see this movie and not see him as the priest in "10" with Dudley Moore singing that awful song! His laugh especially!! Loved him in "10" The scene starts at about the 9:00 minute mark here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMBSot4rKG0&feature=related
I think that Ray being so shallow may have contributed to Polly bonding with Loomis. Loomis was flawed but he was more of an adult than Ray.
"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne
I agree, Noir-It-All,
I think both Polly and Loomis were deep-thinking, mature individuals compared to their respective spouses.
I think that's an interesting idea. Look at how Ray, besides acting like such a goggle-eyed, immature jerk at times, also keeps trying to control his wife -- overruling her, calling her crazy because she insists she saw Loomis, and so on. He's a stereotypical 50s husband: he uses his wife as an appendage or adornment in his corporate climb, but won't take her seriously, ignores her or treats her condescendingly, never tries to understand her feelings and is completely disinterested in her opinions.
Loomis is something of a basket case, true, but a lot of his probems seem to stem from, or were at least severely aggravated by, Rose, so with someone more normal, supportive and loving -- and not trying to kill him -- like Polly, he would surely have been much better. He was clearly a more educated, considerate man than the cloddish, self-centered Ray. And you never get the idea that Loomis would use his wife to help his career, or treat her as some kind of trophy he puts on display to show how great he is, but whom he otherwise expects to keep quiet and not trouble her silly little head about men's work.
I also think that the character of Ray's shallow, blowhard boss, Mr. Kettering (Don Wilson), was intended to give the audience a look at what Cutler himself would be in twenty years' time. Even Mrs. Kettering seems to be trying to teach Polly how to cope with living with the kind of jerks they both married, from her long years of experience. She was probably a lot like Polly when she was younger, and like Polly has had much of her life and spirit stifled by the overbearing clown she married.
hobnob53 -- I'm watching 'Niagara' for the first time all the way from beginning to end as part of THISTV's salute to Marilyn, and I have to agree with your insight on Polly, Loomis and Ray.
SPOILERS TO FOLLOW:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I had thought Ray a tad annoying anyway -- and of course the first thing that made me roll my eyes is the idea that he was bringing along books to read ON HIS SECOND HONEYMOON. I mean come on -- you're lucky to be married to the charming Jean Peters and you're going to read books? Okay so that was dorky. But he really begins to get on my nerves when Polly sees Loomis in the doorway...and he launches into this "Oh honey you're just being a hysterical silly woman." I even hated how he does the little "is he hiding in the cupboard? Is he hiding under the sink?" routine and then nearly shoves a glass of water down her throat. He grows more and more obnoxious with each passing scene, but I know it's because I'm annoyed with his treatment of Polly.
As you said, Kettering is what Ray will likely be in 20 years time.
Optimistic me can only think that perhaps -- before too much of her life has gone by -- Polly will wake up and realize she doesn't want to go the way of Mrs. Kettering.....
Seriously though, I did like how well Jean Peters and Joseph Cotton play off one another, and even at the end, when Loomis makes sure that Polly is off the boat and safe, well, I'm sure he knew he would go over with the boat. At that point, it didn't matter anymore because life as he knew it was over anyway. (Well, it had been over for a long time to be honest, emotionally and mentally).
But wanted to let you know how much I agreed with your comments. Thanks for the read.
Thank you, Tina, and the details you added showing Ray's obnoxiousness serve to make him seem even more of a condescending control freak.
I never particularly thought about it, but I agree with you -- I'd like to think that one day Polly would wake up and get rid of Ray, lead a more independent life -- possible even in the buttoned-down era of the 50s -- and find herself a decent, caring guy who loved her for herself and all she could be.
Unfortunately, at the end it seemed as if she and Ray would go on to a happy life together...or then again, maybe not. Ray still seemed unchanged, in spite of the close call his brave and resourceful wife had been through, and if you wanted to make the point you could almost interpret his exchange with the police inspector --"I'll bet that was the first time anyone said 'Scuttle her!' as a prayer" and Ray's riposte, "And had it answered" -- as Ray's taking credit for her rescue. He even hauls Polly out of the room as though she were a doll to be protected, not even allowed to say anything to anybody. So, with luck, maybe one day Polly would summon her innate strength to break loose -- not as an empty "statement", but simply to establish her own life in a more satisfactory way, without some shallow dope always bossing her around and treating her like a mannequin.
Perhaps the sad example of Mrs. Kettering would eventually boost Polly's courage to get out on her own. Mrs. K. might have been able to make the best of her lot, but this was the 1950s, and maybe women could hope for something more than being married to a baboon. (For the record, I'm a man, and nothing special, but often appalled at the actions and attitudes of many members of my own sex.) It wouldn't be easy or pleasant, but it could be done, and Polly seems to have the guts to do it.
Interesting also that they had no children, though married for a few years at least. Quite surprising for the time...and perhaps further proof that Polly harbored doubts about Ray's suitability as a father, not to mention as a husband.
Of course, there's always this perplexing question: why did she marry the guy in the first place? Probably a wartime thing. People weren't always thinking clearly.
Anyway, thank you for your kind remarks, and good to know we're on the same page in this!
I love you posters!
You express the same feelings for female independence that I've felt for 40+ years.
Sadly, after WWII, all those women who worked so valiently in the factories and shipyards were expected to quietly retreat back to the kitchen, and be treated like children (or slaves) by their "lords and masters".
Check out the I LOVE LUCY message board, and you'll see what I mean.
Yes, except that the reality was that Lucy was a control freak and very definitely the boss, and a tough one at that. (Though even she gave Desi all the credit for the commercial decisions that made the show and Desilu so successful. Lucy was the creative mind, Desi the business genius.)
Sometimes I wonder whether the filmmakers of Niagara weren't intentionally going over the top in their characterizations of Cutler and Kettering -- these guys, especially Kettering, seem so much like cartoons, even by 50s standards, that it's hard to think they were supposed to be taken seriously. On the other hand, the producer, Charles Brackett, was an ultraconservative, so he may well have liked (or been completely obtuse about) their condescending attitudes toward women.
I can't think of anything worse than being shunted aside, told not to bother your pretty little head about things, treated like a child or bossed around (or worse, actually abused), the way so many women were after WWII. Of course, some women wanted nothing more than to be housewives and mothers and let their husbands make all the decisions and do all the "real" work, and if that's their choice, fine. But a lot of women wanted and were fully capable of leading more independent lives, and didn't want to be subjugated or objectified by some dumbbell.
Oddly, Marilyn was the real exception to that stereotype here. But then she was an adulterer and murderess. See what happens when you treat women like equals?!
Hello, hobnob53,
Actually, I was referring to the program I LOVE LUCY, not the workings of Desilu Studios.
And on that show, Ricky Ricardo was clearly the boss of the household, and he used his power like a tyrant.
I don't doubt that some women wanted nothing more than to be housewives and mothers, especially after WWII, but eventually many became dissatisfied with the limitations on their lives, and sought escape.
BTW, treating women as equals doesn't mean they will turn into adulteresses and murderers!
Yes, I realized you were referring to the program, which is why I said "in reality", meaning Desilu, etc.
Actually, in ILL, a frequent plot device was Lucy's endless attempts to break into show biz -- to have a career, in fact. That certainly wasn't normal for 50s TV housewives. More to the point were programs where the wife was limited strictly to the home and made no effort, and showed no desire, to have it otherwise. Father Knows Best, The Donna Reed Show, The Honeymooners and of course that quintessential TV household, Leave it to Beaver, all featured contented hausfrauen happy to stay home, beat the kids and wait for hubby to come in drunk demanding dinner and ungratifying sex. Though I guess we never saw that reality either.
BTW...What??!! Treating women as equals doesn't mean they'll turn into adulteresses and murderesses?! Ten years of sociological studies down the drain!
Or maybe Polly's nearly being killed made Ray appreciate her a little more so that he won't become Kettering. But I agree that his treatment of Polly when she told him she'd seen Loomis, especially in front of Mr. Starkey, is reason enough to dislike him.
"How's that for Japanese efficiency?"
I find the comparison of the Cutlers with the Ketterings, as in who/how they might become, apt and very interesting. You remarks and postings with others on the topic make me consider Rose Loomis in a different light too.
I'm a fountain of bloodshare
In the shape of a girl
Thank you! I guess this is why discussing movies becomes so fascinating, even for films you've seen and think you know: there are always aspects you've never thought about to suddenly look at and delve into, aren't there? (Not that, in this instance, Ray Cutler would've been happy about it!)
shareThis was my second watch of Niagara and I need to watch it again soon with a view to the remarks here. I was surprised that the character of Polly was so accessible. I wonder if her character attracted any criticism at the time for being forward-looking.
Agree with you about how discussing films is fascinating and
aspects you've never thought about to suddenly look at and delve into, aren't there? (Not that, in this instance, Ray Cutler would've been happy about it!)Quite!
I'm a fountain of bloodshare
In the shape of a girl
Niagara will be run on TCM this coming Monday (9/12/11) at 9:30 PM EDT. It's rare for TCM to show Fox films. Usually the movie turns up on Fox Movie Channel. Anyway, a chance for another look.
I don't think anyone made anything about Polly's being forward-looking or anything of the kind back in 1953, for the simple reason that I doubt many people ever thought about her that way or really took note of such qualities lurking beneath the surface. No one would have thought of her as independent or having a mind of her own, even though the sympathy of the audience would have been with her as she argued with her obstinate, cloddish husband about Loomis still being alive.
I think back then most people viewed her as a spunky little housewife who showed some guts near the end, perhaps, but who also probably only had herself to blame for getting into that final predicament in the first place. (Frankly, she should have gotten out of the boat and gone for help, rather than try to struggle with Loomis, a fight she couldn't have won. But then there wouldn't have been such a hair-raising climax.) The aspect of her inner talents and strengths probably never even occurred to most people. Ray Cutler was such a caricature of the ambitious young corporate executive of the era that both he and Kettering would have seemed like "regular fellows" to most of the audience, even if they came across as overbearing and obnoxious. But I'll bet a lot of women, who in general are much more sensitive to such things than men, might have harbored some sympathy for both Polly and Mrs. Kettering, recognizing how they, too, had to put up with such husbands.
Hello again. I have this on DVD, as I'm a Monroe fan, so can re-watch it soon, which is just as well as I can't get that TV station where I am (London, UK) but I appreciate you helping me to see it again :)
I guess that what we see in her today is, as you write, not what would have been perceived then. Right from the off when they arrive at the holiday cabins and she gives her husband a wry smile she seemed of independent mind. Although I take your points (and others') about Ray, I rather liked their relationship until her scare by Loomis that Ray is dismissive about. Mind you that he had brought books to read on their deferred honeymoon does suggest a man out of touch with his wife. Still I felt there was a warmth in their relationship.
Aside from the hair-raising final I suspect Polly didn't want to leave the boat as she still wanted Loomis to hand himself in over the death of Rose's lover. It was only a little later that he reveals to her he killed Rose too. Even the presentation of Loomis as sympathetic and caring for Polly seems quite astounding to me.
I'm a fountain of bloodshare
In the shape of a girl
IMDb seems so dominated by my fellow Americans that I sometimes forget that some of my correspondents hail from elselwhere! (And shame on me, since several of my favo(u)rite contacts are in Britain as well. Not to mention that my wife is English and we have a home there too.)
Anyway, I quite agree that Ray loves his wife. The problme is he is, as you say, out of touch with her; or perhaps, was never really "in touch" with her. He clearly loves her, cares about her, but at base he's the man, he's the boss, he wants his way, and he really doesn't value Polly for anything other than her being pleasant and submissive and posing in her early bikini for him (and take note of his excessive admontions to her about getting her in profile and having her "inhale" so he can get the best shot of her breasts).
(Incidentally, it never occurred to me, but it was quite something for Jean Peters to have worn a two-piece bathing suit in a Hollywood film of the 50s, especially since she's supposed to be just this homebody from the American heartland...not to mention the fact that it somewhat detracts from MM. This can also be taken as a sign of Polly's independence, of her confidence not only in her body but in herself. Believe me, very few women in that era in the States wore such a suit. The idea that she would do so, proudly and without embarrassment, is another indication of her personal independence. Of course, Ray could only see this as a chance to ogle his half-naked wife and snap lewd shots of her with his camera while wiping the drool off his lens.)
In sum, Ray is simply a shallow clod incapable of growth, whose intellectual and emotional development has ended, and who'll remain what he is from now on, and nothing more (execpt probably worse: a young Mr. Kettering). Cutler relies on his position in life -- as the husband; as the Shredded Wheat winner -- to gain respect...and obedience. He doesn't command these things automatically and willingly...and maybe he doesn't even readily command unquestioned love even from his wife. Maybe Polly married him because she liked him but has over the years found him increasingly less engaging and interesting; discovered herself increasingly less able to abide his rigidity and goofiness; realized she may not wish to repress her own personality, her own talents and desires and opinions in favor of her less and less satisfactory husband.
And she has begun, perhaps, to reassert herself. It's clear she's unhappy with much of what her bossy hubby insists upon, but has not yet reached the point of open rebellion. But there may be signs -- especially in the fact (which I believe has been brought up before) that they haven't yet had children, a highly unusual delay for a young couple of that time. In fact, the pair would have seemed more "normal", or perhaps I should say "usual", had they either been on their actual honeymoon, or had had a couple of kids back home whom her mother was looking after while they were away.
As to Loomis, I'm not surprised at how he's portrayed, in liking and being sympathetic towards Polly. They probably are intellectually and even emotionally closer to one another than to their respective spouses (Loomis, obviously! -- although he kills, just as she had intended to). Loomis is drawn as a basically sympathetic man. The audience is on his side when he kills Rose's lover off-screen, and even his stalking of Rose seems more terrifying than unjustified...though there was really no excuse for his killing her. Perhaps his doing everything he can to save Polly is a redemptive effort on his part for someone he genuinely likes and wishes he could have met first, which would also soften any audience unease about him. And besides, he gets his "just desserts", 50s-style, when getting away with murder was strictly against the Hollywood Code, no matter what the excuse.
he really doesn't value Polly for anything other than her being pleasant and submissive and posing in her early bikini for him (and take note of his excessive admontions to her about getting her in profile and having her "inhale" so he can get the best shot of her breasts).I'd forgotten about this. That was quite a funny scene and still makes me think the film was ahead of its time.
This can also be taken as a sign of Polly's independence, of her confidence not only in her body but in herself. Believe me, very few women in that era in the States wore such a suit. The idea that she would do so, proudly and without embarrassment, is another indication of her personal independence. Of course, Ray could only see this as a chance to ogle his half-naked wife and snap lewd shots of her with his camera while wiping the drool off his lensInteresting observation about the bikini as evidence of the character's independence. I might add that your comment about her and Ray's response reminds me somewhat of how feminism advanced hand-in-hand with the pornographic industry.
I'm a fountain of bloodshare
In the shape of a girl
@Poppy
What? Feminism was around LONG before the porn industry---one had nothing to do with the other. And yeah, I didn't like how the husband in NIAGARA dismissed/blew off anything she had to say in front of the detective, as if she was too stupid to make up her own mind about the situation---he was acting like your typical male chauvinist pig of that era.. But I've noticed that was par for the course for the treatment of women in '50's movies, where being married and having kids was supposed to be a woman's highest aspiration in life. If NIAGARA had been made a decade earlier in the '40's, Polly would have told her husband to shut the hell up, and that she knew what she was talking about. I say that because female characters in 1930's and '40's films were way more independent,stronger, and outspoken than in the '50's films.
Nothing at all wrong with Ray Cutler as portrayed by Max Showalter.
shareHe isn't terrible. He just comes off as a simpleton... a bit of a clod.
While watching, I always can't help wondering how he and Polly ever got together.
You see that a great deal though. You meet couples and you wonder what one ever saw in the other.
I'm not talking about looks either. In this case, it just seemed as though Polly was a bright, vivacious, intelligent young woman. I can't imagine her being happy, stuck in the house and stuffing turkeys with shredded wheat each Thanksgiving while Ray sits back with his nose in a book.
Reading is good though. Nothing wrong with that. I just can't see him sharing a discussion with her on what he read. He'd probably say it was something she couldn't possibly understand.