MovieChat Forums > Strangers When We Meet (1960) Discussion > Phony/Ridiculous Scene

Phony/Ridiculous Scene

posted 11 years ago by robfwoods
13 replies | jump to latest

Coe goes to Maragaret's house to find out if anything wrong as she was not at kids' bus stop. (What in hell is it his concern anyhow? - to the supposed unknowing world) Door answered by mother and Coe explains - mother asks if he would like to have some coffee.

Coe goes to M's bedroom where she is in bed - I don't recall him closing the door which it iself would be quite a move. The mother then OPENS door which had never been closed and had it been would ring BELLS - even preceded by a knock! - and has the whole coffee service to be had in the bedroom.

Totally incredible sequence which could only be (stupidly) invented in Hollywood

++

This whole thing then followed by a super-wooden visit by Eve to the house construction site.

Trashy soap operas are very often much better made.

[–] pouncemo 11 years ago

I get what you are saying but I think the purpose of the scene was to show that Coe was so desperately in love with Maggie that he was willing to go way out on a limb - be seen at her door, by her mom, in her bedroom, etc., etc. He was at the point of not caring who knew what and what the consequences might be.

Yeah, the coffee thing with the whole tray and what have you is Hollywood. But the idealized unreality and phoniness of it is what makes films of this era fun and retro.

The visit by Eve didn't seem wooden to me. It just seems like she was realizing she had been a nag lately and not the good wife, and that it had been a while since they had been close. I know the feeling well.

[–] robfwoods 11 years ago

I certainly appreciate "dramatic effects" and "Deux ex Machina' - and also how Hollywood phoniness is in-built to much product and also provides hilarity especially when the phoniness was not intended as per well-done parodies.

But I can't see him trying to carry around 'signboards' for the mother at that point. IMO opinion - way over the top - but that's just what it is - in my opinion and I guess that's what these 'boards' are all about.

++

Eve's 'wooden' visit was accentuated by the 'wooden text' and the way it was spoken. Sure - I understood why she went there - but the Director and scriptwriter should have provided it with a lot more sincerity.

That this was a film done in the 60's doesn't give it even a bit of a pass - really good and solid films were made 20+ years earlier. (And the Greek storytellers did it 2000+ years ago :-) ) One thing sure is that 'Hollywood' doesn't seem to pay attention to previous quality - there really isn't much of a 'notching up' process.

[–] pouncemo 11 years ago

The signboards for the mom is a good way to put it. But what a great way to show how insanely in love he was. Most men would have backed off when the mom answered the door.

I'll re-watch Eve at the building site. Maybe she seemed wooden because she was in a contrite mood. Knowing she hadn't been supportive, attentive, etc., realizing it now and wanting to make up for it - without wanting to say it out loud to Larry (was that his name?).

You definitely have sophisticated sensibilities as to script and dialogue. I'm sensitive to dialogue too, but not like you are I guess.

As to what the Greeks were able to do 2000+ yrs. ago, I just wouldn't know. I had to read some of it in college and have no idea what I was reading. Don't love to admit that about myself, but true. I hated Thucydides and Aeschylus, et al. But love movies with Kirk Douglas set in L.A. in 1960.

Wooden was Kim Novak. Almost always, IMO. I did like her performance in Picnic and thought she was perfectly cast as Madge.

Anyway, thanks for your input. I love that you have 'passionate' opinions about this film. I do too.

[–] robfwoods 11 years ago

The signboards for the mom is a good way to put it.

I was also thinking of fluorescent marker text on his forehead. This film was not set up as a parody - it was supposed to be somehow reflective of what might happen in real life - no one would walk into her bedroom like that - there would be no real way of it even happening in a practical sense - if one is at a front door - it would involve some kind of a room hunt to even locate her - and then even CLOSE the door (which we never saw) - NOPE.

But what a great way to show how insanely in love he was.

I think it was superficial infatuation - not anything one could call 'love'

Most men would have backed off when the mom answered the door.

Not really - one could easily and naturally told he was the father of a classmate and was just asking if anything serious etc etc.

I'll re-watch Eve at the building site. Maybe she seemed wooden because she was in a contrite mood. Knowing she hadn't been supportive, attentive, etc., realizing it now and wanting to make up for it - without wanting to say it out loud to Larry.

All accepted - that was what she was supposed to relate to Larry and us - but the Director and script was someplace else - more like Gilligan's Island.

As to what the Greeks were able to do 2000+ yrs. ago, I just wouldn't know.

I was saying that stories had TIGHT logic and 'syntax' - the science of a good story has not changed now in thousands of years - what it was at the time of drawing horses on cave walls is unknown to me though I believe anthropologists have probably told us.

Wooden was Kim Novak. Almost always, IMO.

She was set out as some kind of beauty icon - she was a rather poor actress.

Anyway, thanks for your input. I love that you have 'passionate' opinions about this film.

I wouldn't say passionate about it - rather that it was basically a good story but poorly done - and let's just say I was very annoyed about going thru all that and not coming up with a much better product.

[–] pouncemo 11 years ago

Wow, dang! You are a barracuda. As my daughter would say, "you be cray out of 10". But I get a kick out of it.

I thought I was harsh and critical. My family all seem to think so too. I actually wish I could be more accepting and not find fault with so many things. My husband pretty much likes all movies/tv he sees! Or at least doesn't hate the bad stuff.

Still, I relate to your temperament. I also feel terribly let down, insulted even, when 'they' do stupid things, jerk my chain etc. So I do understand how you feel.

I had the opposite reaction. I was stunned by how little has changed in this love affair while married situation, i.e. 'the world outside has changed beyond imagining...' But not so for the worlds inside. At least for me.

Glad you thought it was basically a good story. But I know just how annoyed you feel going through all that to no avail. I feel like that most of the time. Just not with this particular film.

Stay hungry my friend. Or should I say 'discerning'?

p.s.
To be honest, a lot of what I loved was the beautiful actors, interior and exterior sets/scenes and the overall feel of 1960; no wars, depressions, and just boundless optimism for the future. Call me shallow, but I'm honest.

[–] raketex 10 years ago

"Call me shallow, but I'm honest."

I don't think you're shallow at all. I think your feelings and opinions of the movie are right on.

It's been a few years since I've seen the movie (can't even remember how I stumbled onto it; maybe taping it on TCM one night?) but what I do remember is that for a film I had never heard of, and one for which there seems to be no popular acclaim, I thought it was one of THE best films from that era, and definitely what I thought is Kim Novak's best film (better than "Vertigo," although I have to admit I have never seen "Picnic" which many others tend to think is her best).

I felt that there was this odd type of "unsettling" mood just under the surface the entire movie (at least for me) - you could sense and feel that the two main characters knew what they were doing was "wrong," but they just couldn't help themselves - or they could help themselves conform to the mores of the time, but really didn't want to, such was their two great desires - Maggie for her honestly attempted but unrequited love for her husband, and Larry for giving himself permission to "walk a little on the wild side" and taste some forbidden fruit despite his picture-perfect, should-be-satisfactory 1960's life. (That sort of high-risk behavior reminds me of Bill Clinton and Tiger Woods.)

Anyway, the worst casting decision of the movie I thought was the loud overplaying of the role Ernie Kovacs had. Even though few of us in this day and age recognize and understand how big a comedian Kovacs was back around when this movie was made, I thought a lesser known character actor would have detracted less from the role, so I truly wonder how 1960's audiences could suspend their disbelief back then when Kovacs was much more famous and instantly recognizable than now.

Now, besides Kirk Douglas and Kim Novak, I have to say that this movie really showcased a side of Walter Matthau I had never seen or known, having grown up in the years of Matthau as part of "The Odd Couple." Matthau's scenes in "Strangers When We Meet" during the iconic 1960's neighborhood house party barbecue mixer and later when he becomes an unhinged next-door-neighbor attempted rapist really has broadened my view of Matthau's acting range. I won't look at "Oscar Madison" quite the same way again!

[–] maturity 7 years ago

I disagree that Larry and Eve's marriage was picture perfect. She was controlling and overbearing. It also seems she's totally dependent and can't even drive. Larry does the shopping as well as working full time. She badgers him about taking jobs for the money...

[–] maturity 7 years ago

He DID tell Maggie's mother that he was the father of a class mate. And he also shut the door as I recall or you heard it shut behind him. It wasn't unbelievable or silly at all. Her mother already knew she was having affairs. The fact he knew where the bedroom was immediately could also be a giveaway that he'd been there before.

[–] maturity 7 years ago

I think Eve set up the party because she suspected he was having an affair. The fact she waited until the last minute (on the day of the party) to tell him and to invite Maggie clearly reveals her plan IMO. Maybe she didn't know what she was doing consciously at the time, but she was not being contrite or conciliatory. She wanted to get everyone they knew together and observe them.

[–] EliotTempleton 9 years ago

Anyone with your appalling writing skills has incredible balls to criticize the way anything is written.

[–] robfwoods 9 years ago

OK Froggy fan.

[–] maturity 7 years ago

There is nothing silly about bringing the coffe into her bedroom when she is sick in bed. I recalll he shut the door if you hear it shut. I just watched the movie a few days ago. Your criticisms are way off base and poorly written as the last comment said. I think this was better than most 50s / 60s melodramas, I can't stand Peyton Place, for example, and only a few Douglas Sirk films really grab me - Written on the Wind, All That Heaven Allows, and Magnificent Obsession.

[–] KutWrite (1220) 5 years ago

I agree with the positive interpretations above, though yes, the director, whom I don't know, might've touched-up the script a bit.

I'd add one thing. The Mom-Eve relationship foreshadowed some judgement of Mom's affair by Eve. She ends up in a similar situation (might even be pregnant) to Mom's and now understands.

I think Mom saw the signs (women's movie intuition) as soon as Larry bumbled into the house with the flimsy, though well delivered excuse.
Mom understood Eve's situation immediately and showed love and that understanding - symbolically - by bringing the coffee. Remember, she asks how he takes it and EVE starts to answer her.

I looked at the film as a cultural portrait of the 60s. I was a pre-teen then and only vaguely felt this kind of thing swirling around me, possibly involving my parents and even a local religious figure (three separate possible affairs).

Points always for performances like Matthau's, Babs Rush and Kim Novak. Loved Ernie Kovacs comedy back in the day and his performance here shows a nice character arc. Kirk Douglas was my idol back then & still defines "healthy in-shape" and "manly."