MovieChat Forums > The Day the Earth Caught Fire Discussion > Edward Judd's character is a complete *b...

Edward Judd's character is a complete *beep* in this movie


His chat up lines in this film suck. He comes across as a big creep, especially when he's on that bed looking at Janet Munro's underwear.

And eventually he gets his way with the girl in the most nauseating manner. What an *beep* A very unlikeable man.

And another thing. This movie was boring. How it received the rating it has is beyond me.

reply


You are very much missing the point. He is not meant to be liked, he plays a newspaper reporter and one that is down on his luck through alcohol and his seperation. Whilst I'm not going to say he is the best actor in the world, I will say that they do capture the mood and character traits of the gutter press at the time.

I am amazed you felt the film was boring, it may be because you didn't like the main character, which is fair enough, each to thier own. I would suggest though that you are in the minority.

reply

Tell you what, `spotlightne', I don't think your're being fair to either Judd's or Munro's characters. For me, both are entirely believable. He's a big, tough bruiser of a journalist at the salacious end of the tabloid world. He's used to shouldering his way to the front to get a story, and that takes a degree of arrogance and bloody-mindedness.

He's also an Alpha-male who has lost everything of personal importance to his wife's infidelity. I don't think you grasp the grinding resentment that is aroused when the man who has sneaked into your bed and supplanted you in your wife's affections, then goes on to replace you as your son's unwanted guardian. And on top of being powerless in law, most men are required to pay for it as well.

Old school journalists were always prone to drink in the days of Fleet St. And many, if not most, drank too much. Stenning was cast from that mould, and being a drinker began drinking too much whilst obsessing over his losses. At the time we meet him he is embittered, resentful, drinking far too heavily and flunking his job. But he is an Alpha-male type with a sex-starved high libido. It is therefore not the least bit surprising that he treats Ms Munro's character contemptuously whilst at the same time yearning to get her kit off. If you don't like his chat-up lines - blame the scriptwriters.

As to Ms Munro's character, Jeannie; she fancies him right away. He's big, handsome, and moreover: confident. He's a take-charge man - the sort all REAL women crave. Despite his evident vices, he's a protector - the stuff of heroes. Witness his prompt rescue of the lost child in the park, when others would just think of themselves. Jeannie immediately knows that both herself and her children will be well served in his hands. However, despite his size and courage, she learns that he has problems and recognises his vulnerabilities. Of course, she also knows he wants to get her into bed. But then she wants to go to bed with him. She just wants a little persuading first (it was 1961), however peremptory that persuasion may be. Any girl who's the right stuff knows how to take charge of an ardent male's excessive passion. And Jeannie is clearly the right stuff, that's why she's unafraid of inviting him up when all she's wearing is a bathrobe. His consignment to the bathroom is in token of her discipline. But it is only a token, and they'd probably have been in bed together before the night was over even if the telephone had never rung.

Before the movie ends he is becoming attentive to his job, turning down booze, and mellowing in his bitterness. That last narrative at the end represents Stenning back on form - reflective, hopeful, though a tad cheesy by today's standards. Cut 'em some slack; I've known plenty of men and women like both.

reply

I guess I misunderstood about the wife's 'infidelity'. I got the impression that she left him in part because he was a drunk and possibly a womanizer. (She obviously wound up financially better off as well.) Are you saying that his alcohol ABUSE started AFTER she left him?

reply

Are you saying that his alcohol ABUSE started AFTER she left him?
It was a bit confusing I agree. We hear about his alcoholic misadventures but don't really see much evidence of it (thank goodness...it was a sci-fi film for goodness sake). He goes to the pub at one stage with Bill and then doesn't drink any thing I think. I really think the film would have been better off without that sudsy sub-plot.

reply

While I don't agree at all with the OP's view that the movie was boring, I do agree that Stenning was very unlikeable. Of course many films benefit from having unlikeable characters, but this film would have been better if there had been something likeable about its main character. Just a hint of charm would have helped. As it is, the effect is off-putting. Good film despite this.

"I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken."

reply

I just think the character was written in an unbalanced way. There's all this talk about him being an alcoholic but we don't really see much evidence of that and the way it affects the main thread of the story, so I ask why introduce it in the first place in a 90 minute film. It just seems to be padding.

I agree with you, the film itself is not boring and it's themes are still quite relevant today.

reply

why make two threads about same thing?

--------------
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for enough good men to do nothing.

reply

His drinking is mentioned quite a lot, which only makes Leo McKern's character all the more likable, as he keeps "looking out for" his friend. It's only when Mckern is in the pub by himself that we learn WHY his friend's marriage REALLY broke up. He talks about newspapermen coming home late from the office... and sometimes, EARLY. And how THAT can sometimes have tragic consequences. Clearly, that's what happened to his friend-- he came home early to find his wife with another man.

While he did mention he was paying to help support his son, I don't imagine there was any ALIMONY involved, since it was clearly the ex-wife's fault the marriage broke up. Besides which, she married the other guy and wouldn't need (or deserve) any help.

reply