MovieChat Forums > Auntie Mame (1958) Discussion > Love the film - one question

Love the film - one question

posted 11 years ago by GiaJake
5 replies | jump to latest

This is such a beautiful and inspirational film. Everyone wants an aunt like Auntie Mame. It was amazing to see how free of judgement and prejudice she was, at a time when many were like the Uptons. Boy did she put those snobs in their place!

I was confused about Auntie Mame's financial situation. Did she lose ALL of her money in the stock market crash of 1929? If so, how was she able to keep such a luxurious apartment in NYC? I know she had money difficulties and had to look for employment, and was unable to pay her household help. Her nephew's education was covered by the trust, but would that also cover Mame? This wasn't really explained in the movie, and I didn't read the book. Thanks.

[–] Harold_Robbins 11 years ago

The Beekman Place apartment (more of a townhouse, actually) was Mame's sole residence in the play and film - in the novel several are mentioned during the course of the story (the art directors on the film evidently had a blast - Mame changed her decor as often as she changed her hair-color.

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."

[–] jobimfan3000 11 years ago

She may have owned the town house outright in which case she wouldn't have had a mortgage.

She made money by working at all of those jobs she was fired from. She also mentioned to Patrick that she has put her furs and jewels with a pawnbroker. I"m assuming that after that, she had her late husband's money.

Darling, I am trouble of the most spectacular kind!

[–] willjohn 11 years ago

When I finished paying my house off an old friend told me "If you own your own house you will never go hungry." If Mame owned the apartment she would not have to find money for rent and could economise on food.

I do not know what the set up was in the USA, but my father told me that in Australia people who owned rental houses stopped evicting people during the depression because they found empty houses fell down from neglect, so they were better off leaving tenants in the houses paying what they could.

[–] budikavlan 11 years ago

She owned the apartment, and lost the bulk of her money, but wouldn't have lost every last penny. It was apparently invested somewhat unwisely, but she would've had a reserve of cash, plus the belongings she sold, and some small income from the jobs she held briefly. But it's almost impossible to literally lose everything at once.

[–] jayghani 7 years ago

In places like New York rich people can own an apartment even though they do not own the building. It's weird.