Mary Astor - worst casting ever? - The Maltese Falcon (1941) Discussion

[–] oversplayer 19 years ago

Bette Davis DID play the Brigid O'Shaughnessy role in "Satan Met a Lady" (1934), the 2nd of the three film versions of the Falcon.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dgz78 19 years ago

No, the worst casting ever for me was Bogart in Sabrina - I had trouble seeinmg Holden and Hepburn together but Bogart was way too old for her. It's the only Bogart movie where I wish someone else had his part.

reply

[–] oversplayer 19 years ago

No, the worst casting ever was John Wayne in "The Conqueror."

If he were still with us, he would be the first to agree.

reply

[–] jackmronner 11 years ago

Seems like sacrilege to say it, but I agree. Partly because NO ONE was worthy of Audrey (aside from me, of course). Not to say his acting was not good, but just couldn't see the crush factor in Bogie.

reply

[–] Pythe 19 years ago

I agree. I hate to sound shallow, but Mary Astor isn't all that attractive in this movie, and for the role to make sense as far as moving the story along, a gorgeous and seductive actress should have been cast.

Mary had a little lamb...for dinner.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stanleybix-1 18 years ago

See Mary Astor in "Little Giant" 1933 With Eddie Robinson. Funny movie, with young and pretty Mary.

reply

[–] jasonhurd 18 years ago

FawkBush seems to believe that the more explicit nature of the 1931 version entitles it to superior status. This is not always the case. Look at Hellman's play The Children's Hour, filmed first in the thirties as These Three and then later in the sixties under its original title. In the thirties version, the lesbian accusation is changed to one of a heterosexual threesome, while the later version keeps the lesbian element as it is truer to the source. However, the thirties version is an excellent film and the later, theoretically more faithful one is not. Fidelity to the source does not guarantee superiority or even quality. And just because Hammett liked the 1931 film better than the 1941 does not automatically mean it really IS better.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 1640abt 18 years ago

Astor is very well cast in this ludicrous film. She is supposed to be a lady so that it comes as a surprise when her true character is revealed. She's not supposed to be 'sympathetic'. She's supposed to look a little shopworn. And she's dressed with great Orry-Kelly chic.

The problem is Bogart. He could never act much and in this movie he's required to play something that isn't merely himself and is completely out of his depth and league. True, the love story is badly written but still, a real actor might have been able to match Mary Astor and make something of their scenes together.

She doesn't look 45. She looks like a good-looking woman of that period. Times change and so do tastes.

reply

[–] cumax3 18 years ago

I don't know, I think Bogie personifies the Noir private eye myself and I have no problem with his acting, but I do think Astor is nowhere near as memorable as other Femme Fatales like Jane Greer in Out Of The Past or Barbara Stanwick from Double Indemnity, Mary Astor comes across as something of a bubble head IMHO I know she was hired because she had a notorius reputation in real life back then, but I don't think that she translates into a truly memorable Film Noir Femme Fatale. I always wish Lauren Bacall had played that part. Just my two cents worth.

reply

[–] ae7641 18 years ago

A lot of Bogie fans would disagree. They'd say Bogie is what made the movie. He is this guy like the Spade in the book, a coarse, rough guy. Nobody in the entire film or book is honest. Spade seems to have served in the military in England and went into the PI business.

reply

[–] UmbertoJones 18 years ago

Putting my sexist trousers on, but I gots to agree, when Spades secretary (who BTW seemed deliberately dowdied down to not show her up and had ten times more screen presence) comes in and says “you’ll want to see this one she’s a knockout” I immediately thought what!! but she was draped with fox furs which musta gingered up her looks in 40s eyes and she acted the part well enough but its instructive that in so called classic films you can stil see some studio manipulation that mars the final result without resoarting to the nostalgic rose spectacles, so that’s my problem

reply

[–] bjnevin 18 years ago

I disagree with all of you who slate Mary Astor's performance. She was BRILLIANT as Brigid O' Shaughnessy and is recognised by most people who know of her as "the one in 'The Maltese Falcon'". She added a touch of class to the role and conveyed her feelings and attitude towards Spade's decision to send her over superbly. Though we can say "what if (X) got the role" it will do no good- Astor got the part and in my opinion was classy, believable and overall, the right choice.

In short, MARY ASTOR ROCKED!!

reply

[–] McGonigle 18 years ago

I agree that her performance in this movie was superb. After watching this and the 1931 version back-to-back, I have to guess that I'm just not in tune with vintage-movie standards of beauty, since I didn't find Bebe Daniels particularly 'hot' either, but that's not a flaw in either actress, just a difference in perception after six or seven decades.

'The Sound of Music' twice an hour, and 'Jaws' 1, 2 and 3.

reply

[–] cableaddict 18 years ago

She was completely, totally mis-cast. Watching Bogie kiss her makes me gag.

I don't care how great of an actress she might have been (IMO she was not good in this role, even as an actress) she simply did not fit the part at all. She seems like someone's maiden aunt who never had a date in her life.

I consider this film only average because of this. Great movie otherwise, but everytime Astor is onscreen my "suspension of disbelief" goes right out the window.

reply

[–] bjnevin 18 years ago

AVERAGE???????

The casting was PERFECT!!! Mary Astor makes this film worth watching and I MEAN it!! When, as O' Shaughnessy, she reveals her true side and how she was involved in the death of Archer she was so believable.

I stand by these words to the death!

Mary Astor's BIGGEST fan!!!

reply

[–] cableaddict 18 years ago

Mary Astor has fans?

reply

[–] oversplayer 18 years ago

"Bogart could never act much?" You gotta be kidding.

He was one of the best ever. The thing about Bogart is that you can see him honing his skills with each successive film.

He was horrible, even downright embarrassing, in '30's films such as "The Roaring 20's" and "Angels With Dirty Faces."

But he was a good actor by the early 40's, a great actor by the late 40's (e.g. "Treasure of the Sierra Madre") and one of the best ever by the 50's ("The Caine Mutiny" and "The African Queen" among others.)

He was the PERFECT Sam Spade. It was said that "Humphrey Bogart was a John Huston creation." Any student of Huston's would quickly tell you how perfectly Bogie captured his director's concept of the Spade character. "You got brains, Miles. Yes you do."

As for Mary Astor, people seem to be confusing looks with acting ability. It's not fair to say that she performed poorly just because she didn't fit the part lookswise. Her acting was superb.

But I completely agree that she was not pretty enough for the role. And the point where her looks truly come into play is at the end where it is simply not believable for Sam Spade to struggle so hard over his decision to hand her over to the cops.

Most of the actresses mentioned above for the part were too young in 1941. For example, Bacall was 16.

In my opinion, the perfect actress for the part would have been Hedy Lamarr. There was always something sinister about her (in real life as well as) on celluloid, and she was absolutely drop dead gorgeous.

No matter what Hedy had done, I could never bring myself to tell her that she was "going over for it."

BTW, trivia question:
What is the last line in the film, and who says it?

Answer: "Huh?" [Ward Bond as Sgt. Tom Polhaus]

reply

[–] jackthehack 18 years ago

*SPOILERS*

The film was cool and the line uttered by Humphrey Bogart(The stuff that dreams are made off) is cool. I liked the fact that no one was a hero in this movie. Everybody was gray. It was beautifully shown by John Huston. Isn't he the same one who starred in Chiantown?

reply

[–] dhad 18 years ago

Mary Astor was perfectly cast, and did a great job. So did Bogart, Greenstreet and Lorre.

reply

[–] SamuelSpade 18 years ago

I totally disagree, it would have been very easy to cast a "blond bombshell" type actress in the role, that would have been too easy, Brigid O'Shaughnessy knew, probably from pre teen that she could not rely on her looks to get her way, so she had to use her sexuality, she learnt how to twist any man, except Spade, around her little finger.

As Spade said, she's dangerous.

Run for it?, Runnings not a plan! Runnings what you do, once a plan fails!

Earl, Tremors.

reply

[–] benjamin_davison 18 years ago

If you read the book she was supposed to be a 24 year old sex bomb.

reply

[–] Cruentus1 17 years ago

Yup. In the novel, Bridget is a 22 year old, drop dead gorgeous, redhead. I like this movie but it would have been better without Astor in the role of Bridget.

reply

[–] [email protected] 9 years ago

"In the novel, Bridget is a 22 year old, drop dead gorgeous, redhead." A 22 year old, drop dead gorgeous redhead? Sounds like Rita Hayworth (23 in 1941) to me.
However, while Mary Astor didn't fill the bill physically, her performance was spot on. I don't think the switch would have improved the film and in fact may have hurt it.

reply

[–] moffieboi 17 years ago

The book doesn't matter in this regard but she was pretty hot for the role she played. She had to front up being an upperclass "lady" so she couldn't dress to look like what we call a sex bomb today nor let her hair down. That wouldn't help her act and keeping her hair up is a bit of a clue that she doesn't truely open up to others.

reply

[–] cabbageboy316 11 years ago

I think Bebe Daniels fared better and was certainly sexier in the original 1931 film. For what it's worth I think Geraldine Fitzgerald was the original choice for the role...and I don't see that either. Hedy Lamarr had the looks but nowhere near the acting chops to pull this one off.

To me the choice was clear: Barbara Stanwyck. Bette Davis had already been in Satan Met a Lady and would have been too obvious. Stanwyck could act and also was alluring enough to pull off that sort of role (witness Double Indemnity). Whenever I watch that final scene I can't help but envision Stanwyck saying those lines and how much better it would have been.

reply

[–] cabbageboy316 10 years ago

The dilemma with this role is that if you cast someone better than Astor (Bette Davis, Barbara Stanwyck) it would be obvious to the viewer that either of those women would shoot a man dead. Even in 1941 people would have been wise to it. Hedy Lamarr would look the part but she wasn't strong enough as an actress. It's a shame someone like Jane Greer wasn't old enough in 1941, since I think she would fit the bill here. She played the good girl enough as to not be obvious, but she could do the bad girl routine as well.

This is actually a pretty tough role to cast, unlike Sam Spade. I could have seen Raft doing Spade just fine, although I think he would lack Bogart's twisted sense of humor. Cagney or Robinson would have been fine. Robinson actually did a radio broadcast as Spade, didn't he?

reply