talisencrw > Can't see Deborah Kerr giving up everything in her life for a man like Johnson, unless she was a nymphomaniac.
At first I thought you were referring to Johnson's acting abilities but when I read this part of your comment I realized it's a reference to his looks. That's not right. At some point you must have heard the phrase, 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder.'
I realize it doesn't quite work that way in Hollywood. There, usually certain types of actors get the lead, while others end up stuck in supporting roles. In real life, it's not at all inconceivable for someone like Sarah to end up with a guy like Johnson. Most people, particularly women, choose partners on the basis of many factors; not just looks. For example, I hear the book's sexual content had to be toned down substantially for the movie. Perhaps Maurice has certain talents and is skilled in ways the movie could not adequately portray.
Come to think of it, the guy who plays Sarah's husband, Henry, isn't exactly leading man material by your standards. He doesn't play that role in the movie but it shows Sarah's taste in men may lie closer to Johnson than Grant. Also, I don't know if nymphomaniac is the right word for her but Sarah is having an illicit affair with Maurice and, early on in the movie we see her kissing another guy who's not her husband. In fact, it may be the reason Maurice decides he can/will pursue her.
reply
share
talisencrw
9 years ago
With all due respect, it's just terms of personal preference. I have liked Johnson's work in supporting roles, particularly Destination Tokyo. Particularly in terms of the great romantic dramas Deborah Kerr has made, I just feel Johnson's weak as the romantic male lead role. I have seen great character actors try to make the leap to top status. Check out Edmond O'Brien in DOA for a prime example. I simply don't feel in that set of circumstances it was realistic for Kerr's character to be willing to give up absolutely everything for a man of Johnson's looks. Take for instance at the beginning of the film the qualities of the man she was kissing when Johnson saw them in the mirror and realized that she was available, his for the asking. He was much more attractive. When it came to Johnson, Kerr's character was slumming. He was readily available, and she was probably very turned on by the fact that they were such good and close friends. Had the film a more believable male lead, such as Grant in An Affair to Remember of Lancaster in From Here to Eternity, it could very well have been a classic for the ages.
And yes, it was really cool seeing Cushing out of his usual stereotypical role as the good guy of the horror films--it reminded me of seeing Adam West as the romantic lead who had to commit suicide rather than have society know he couldn't please his wife in The Young Philadelphians.
reply
share
mdonln
9 years ago
You say it's your personal preference. I can understand and appreciate that; one can't argue with someone's personal preferences. However, when you say it is 'unrealistic' that she'd give up absolutely everything for a man with his looks, that's different.
I have to disagree. Sarah is already having an affair with the guy so we know there is an attraction. Putting that aside, we know a few other things too. By comparison, her husband is a more important, more successful man than Maurice. Also, when she thinks he's dead, she's so devastated she's making deals with God on his behalf. That's a big deal because she wasn't even a religious person.
These things show she doesn't just love him she's also not a self-absorbed shallow person. Shallow people are unable to make deep, lasting connections with other people. Everything they do is ultimately in their own best interest.
Sarah may have her faults; she's unfaithful to her husband, but she's not all about herself either. She's willing to give up status and wealth for him; she's willing to forego her own happiness for his life; she's willing to let the man she loves go on believing she wants nothing to do with him; she's even willing to stay with her husband when he begs her not to leave (though ultimately she does leave him albeit in another way.)
It doesn't matter which actor is cast in the role. Based on what we know about her, we have to believe the character loves him and would run off with him. That's what makes it realistic in the context of the story. The fact he's not a traditionally handsome man may support his behavior not hers. Early on he's insecure and suspicious; later he's jealous and vindictive.
Viewers, especially those who are as ‘looksist’ as you are, should find that part a lot easier to believe. If you can't believe she'd run off with Johnson, you'd probably have a hard time believing Grant would become obsessed, jealous, and would set out to ruin her. Handsome men, supposedly, wouldn't care, right?
Perhaps you're doing yourself a disservice. By being so focused on looks you're missing key aspects of the movie. If it helps, think of him as a supporting actor in this movie. After all, it's more Sarah's story than it is his.
reply
share
talisencrw
9 years ago
IMHO, it's just Johnson's weakness and lack of credibility as a lead actor. It was fully shown to me, not once, not twice, but in three ways last night, when I saw Black Narcissus for the first time. For the three guys who tickled her fancy in that marvelous film, only Sabu had lead actor credibility, though David Farrar had very good looks. Shaun Noble had decent looks--but all three nailed their performances, and were entirely believable as possible suitors for Kerr.
reply
share
mdonln
9 years ago
Black Narcissus - I have that on DVR so I can't read the rest of this until after I watch it. I wouldn't want you to spoil it for me or influence what I think about it. I'll get back to you.
reply
share
mdonln
9 years ago
Whew, I'm glad I stopped reading this right when I saw you were about to mention Black Narcissus. Not having seen it, the rest of what you said wouldn't have made any sense to me. Had I not seen the movie, I'd have been completely lost.
I do have to agree that it's your own opinion. You're saying you can't see her with Van Johnson but you could see her with Sabu or the two other guys in Black Narcissus, Con and Mr. Dean? That's unbelievable to me. I thought she had zero chemistry with all three of those guys combined but I could totally buy her relationship with Van Johnson. You must really have something against that guy.
I don't know what movie you were watching but in Black Narcissus, Sabu is a kid. If there was meant to be any attraction between him and Sister Clodagh, I totally didn't see it. Clo was attracted to Con but I never saw anything that suggested he reciprocated those feelings. He treated her like a sister (sibling not nun), which we find out later was probably what he always had in mind too.
Actually the actor who played Con played him totally flat, emotionless, so I didn’t get much information from him about the character. I think that was intentional because we don’t really get his point of view, just hers. Even in all her fond flashback memories of him or them together, it's clear their ‘relationship’ is one-sided. She assumed things that were not in his thought process at all.
As for Mr. Dean, I was completely creep-ed out by him. He was supposed to be dashing and handsome but I think Sister Ruth and any other woman who went gaga over him was suffering from both altitude sickness, stress, and the fact he was the only actual man in the town to whom they could be attracted.
Had you said you couldn't see her giving everything up to run off with him, I'd have agreed one hundred percent. I'm not so much talking about the actor but the role of Mr. Dean. He was just very disrespectful, slimy and annoying.
I also don't equate the two movies but if I'm comparing roles I can say I didn’t feel Sister Clodagh’s angst nearly as much as I had felt Sarah’s. I have to say I'm not completely sure I get the point of Black Narcissus but I do fully understand The End of the Affair.
reply
share