MovieChat Forums > Lady in a CageĀ (1964) Discussion > TOTAL Mismatch of Interior and Exterior ...

TOTAL Mismatch of Interior and Exterior House


No damned way in the world does that house exterior they used and that alley go with the interior set, at all.

Not only would the high ceilings not fit in that style of house with its pitched roof, but they're totally Hollywood glam, and the house exterior is modest and with a craftsman-style front door.

Either they got turned down for every house they wanted, couldn't afford to pay anything for a suitable exterior, or took advantage of using the house of someone associated with the production or a friend of a friend and got it for free.

Watching this film is like watching parallel worlds with a temporal disturbance in space and time.

reply

Yeah sure, a Paramount picture starring two time Academy Award winner Olivia de Havilland couldn't afford to pay for a suitable exterior. lol

reply

This nearly ruined the film for me. The interior was like a palace. The exterior was almost a slum.

reply

I think you missed the point. While I can't address the architecture issues (the house does seem bigger inside that from the exterior), the idea is that the neighborhood used to be nice but is now rapidly deteriorating. The Hilyards moved in when it was an upmarket area. Now, it has become run down. It's a heavy-handed metaphor for the deterioration of civilized society, which was a widespread theme in the 60s. That's pretty ironic considering how much more civilized the world of 1963 seems compared to ours, but to folks back then, society seemed to be in steep decline. If only they knew ...

Anyway, here we have this island of civilization in the midst of modern decay, only to see examples of the worst society has to offer break in and trash the place. I love the film, but the message really is pretty heavy-handed. It has nothing to do with the style of the exterior.

reply

I think you missed the point. While I can't address the architecture issues (the house does seem bigger inside that from the exterior), the idea is that the neighborhood used to be nice but is now rapidly deteriorating. The Hilyards moved in when it was an upmarket area. Now, it has become run down. It's a heavy-handed metaphor for the deterioration of civilized society, which was a widespread theme in the 60s. That's pretty ironic considering how much more civilized the world of 1963 seems compared to ours, but to folks back then, society seemed to be in steep decline. If only they knew ...

Anyway, here we have this island of civilization in the midst of modern decay, only to see examples of the worst society has to offer break in and trash the place. I love the film, but the message really is pretty heavy-handed. It has nothing to do with the style of the exterior.


That's pretty much it. The '60s were like two decades in one, and the deterioration of the cities, along with the cultural schism taking place midway thru the decade, seems to be what the movie is tapping into (in a rather obvious way).

It's overdone, the metaphor, but not invalid.

--

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m127/tubesteak69/Divas_Who_Drink-1. jpg

reply

This is true of all films shot on location for the exteriors, and on sound-stages for the interiors. If you posted this comment on the boards of all films that feature mismatched sets and locations, you'd be doing it non-stop, for weeks.

"It's only a movie, Ingrid." ~ Alfred Hitchcock

reply