MovieChat Forums > The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947) Discussion > George Sanders so miscast.

George Sanders so miscast.

posted 13 years ago by DenLilleHavfrue85
35 replies | jump to latest

Rex Harrison was great. Gene Tierney was gorgeous, and good in most scenes, though I thought she overacted in one or two scenes which kind of took me out of the movie.

I was pretty much enjoying it though until George Sanders entered the picture. Don't get me wrong, I love George Sanders - I just thought he was terribly miscast in this. The first day he met Mrs. Muir...oh my God, I couldn't believe what a CREEPER he was! And she LIKED it! And George Sanders ain't exactly Cary Grant. I realize that this was the 1940s and that the leading men are much more forward which in some cases could be a turn-off to us modern gals in real life, but my boyfriend and I laughed so hard at his creepiness (yeah I get he was supposed to be smarmy, but come on). We rewound it so my sister could watch and she almost fell off the couch from laughing so hard. He's stalking her, he's all up in her grill, he writes children's books as "Uncle Neddy," and he can't wait to meet her daughter. Then the kicker was when he took her handkerchief and sniffed it.

His following scenes were a little better, but I was still just jarred out of the movie. The end of the movie was romantic and I liked it, but I didn't feel very emotionally involved with the characters (not because of George Sanders, I just never felt very attached to them). Overall, a decent movie, but I don't understand the rave reviews, honestly. I didn't know that it was based on a book - perhaps I would like that better.

"I don't want to make money. I just want to be wonderful."

[–] austendw 13 years ago

As a matter of interest, and if you don't mind me asking, how old are you?

Call me Ishmael...

[–] DenLilleHavfrue85 13 years ago

I don't mind! I'm sure my post came off as being immature given a lot of the vocabulary and slang that I used (if that's why you're asking), but I'm actually in my mid-twenties.

Vernacular aside, I totally stand by my opinion that George Sanders was a CREEPER in this movie. I've been watching old movies for almost my entire life and this is one character that really stood out to me. I get that he's supposed to be a slippery, predatory type, but he was way over the top IMO.

"I don't want to make money. I just want to be wonderful."

[–] flooxer 10 years ago

I totally agree with you. In fact, the word "creep" was the first thing to come to mind when I first saw him. He kept invading her space, and was right up in her face. I almost got a potential rapist vibe off of him. I'm a 50 year old male, by the way lol

[–] hka-3 10 years ago

He kept invading her space, and was right up in her face.

Exactly. A lot of people would be creeped out right away by someone like that and wouldn't have any more to do with them.

Mag, Darling, you're being a bore.

[–] HomerParrish 13 years ago

George Sanders was playing a cad. Which he did many times. He wasn't miscast.

[–] DenLilleHavfrue85 13 years ago

Well yes, I understand that (I guess I didn't make that very clear); what it was that I simply couldn't understand was the attraction on the part of Mrs. Muir to such an unnattractive character (though of course this is coming from a straight up modern POV). I don't think that part of the film has aged well at all, to comic results. There was no subtlety to his character - he might as well have had villian moustache that he constantly twirled. So yes, to me, he was miscast, though I'll concede that of course the writing and the sixty-odd years have much to do with it.

I prefer more believable cads like, say, John Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons. Not conventionally attractive, but so seductive and sophisticated despite still having that totally rakish air. Or you know, even a Mr. Wickham from Pride and Prejudice in those various portrayals. Far more believable (to me) that ladies would fall for them as opposed to someone like Sanders, who I prefer in roles like Addison DeWitt.

"I don't want to make money. I just want to be wonderful."

[–] ghostfan 13 years ago

Have you read the book? I'm not being snippy, but I think it kind of explains things a bit more, but since a few things are changed from book to movie, it is kind of hard to explain here.

Based on just the movie though, I think you have to remember that Lucy was in a kind of denial at this point. They grew very close writing the book together, sharing history, to an extent and thoughts, and Lucy knows that she is falling in love with him, and of course it is an impossible love because he is a ghost.

What's that line she says to Martha? HE"S HUMAN, which of course confuses Martha, but Lucy has a point. She is still very naive in a lot of ways, even being widowed, and here is this charming, sophisticated man that gives every inclination of being smitten with her. And he's a fast mover! Remember, she didn't know her husband very long before marrying him either.

I think it was a case of being bowled over by his (insincere) charms, and denying frantically that she has fallen in love with a ghost.

[–] DenLilleHavfrue85 13 years ago

No, I haven't read the book. This is my point of view after viewing the movie one time. I love to read books that movies are based on, and all that rich detail from the novel certainly is an enhancement to my enjoyment of the film, BUT a good movie should stand on it and not require familiarity with the source material.

Since I've only seen the movie, I've only seen what George Sanders and the writers that adapted the novel had to offer, and that character didn't impress me. I guess I need to clarify that I'm not confused here - it's not Memento or Inception - everything is pretty obvious as far as plots go. I get that she's SUPPOSED to be attracted to him and I get WHY she would be. I just didn't like Sanders in the part for all the reasons I've said in the posts above. Clearly from this thread some viewers don't share my opinion, which I absolutely respect. I didn't know that this was based on a book so I think I might check it out - thanks for mentioning it.

"I don't want to make money. I just want to be wonderful."

[–] ghostfan 13 years ago

By all means, do, and report back -- you can probably find it at your local library or download it from Barnes & Noble or something.

There are a few differences from the book to the movie, mostly made for time constraints, and a couple of differences between book and movie might actually please you, but I hesitate to mention them here -- I don't want your reading the book to be spoiled. And there is really no sense putting them in spoiler brackets, because it is the book, not the movie.

For the record, Miles does appear in the book, as well as the movie, but for all practical purposes, at slightly different points. It's hard to explain. Though I must say, when I see the movie, Saunders seems well-cast, but when I read the book, a whole different Miles-face comes into my head... but trying to put a 1940 actor's face on the book-Miles, I have never been able to do. In both cases, Miles is a cad, though.

In some ways, playing with a remake of this movie could be fun, but only if they do an adaptation of the original book -- not try to update it to 2012. I have in my possession a paper-copy of a remake script that was produced back around 2000 I think- by the same woman who wrote Mrs. Doubtfire.... dreadful.

[–] scndform 13 years ago

I used to have the same reaction to George Sanders in this film- that he was miscast. Although the character is supposed to be a womanizer he came across to me as a total fop (even a little feminine in his mannerisms) and I couldn't see how any woman could be attracted to him. Then it occured to me that the viewer is supposed to regard him and Lucy's attraction to him the same way the captain does- incomprehension regarding Lucy;s attraction toward him; especially when compared to Captain Gregg.

[–] Tchoutoye 12 years ago

Spot on.

[–] VValkyrie 11 years ago

I really enjoyed reading your thread - very good comments by all. Just my 2 cents re Mrs Muir and Miles. Lucy is a very lonely lady and enjoys being pursued. This is a new experience for her, The line Miles lays on Lucy, comparing her to a Renoir - Wow. Very true but what girl would not succumb.
We found out all too quickly that Miles is indeed the worst of the worst & deep sigh, the tears begin to flow. One of my favoreite films and OMG - Rex Harrison is gorgeous. I hope a no remake is every attempted of this classic.

[–] lamont-hard 11 years ago

Not just Mrs Muer but most women did not know there husbands very well before marriage in those days.

[–] mdmzara 11 years ago

While I found Miles Farley to be smarmy and wondered how she could stand him, Lucy herself explains it when she says, "he's alive." The feelings she developed for the captain made her realize that she was lonely. She couldn't have a full life with the captain and she could (or so she thought) with Miles.

[–] Maya55555 10 years ago

ghost fan:

"He's REAL"!

"A stitch in time, saves your embarrassment." (RIP Ms. Penny LoBello)

[–] dakoko 9 years ago

George Sanders was playing a cad. Which he did many times. He wasn't miscast.

Exactly.

[–] dizexpat 11 years ago

I think you used the incorrect word.

Those familiar with George Sanders' work would say that he was typecast as "the cad" rather than miscast.

While I can understand how a modern viewer can react so negatively to the character I think the purpose of Lucy's relationship with him is to tell us that hers will be a life with its fair share of disappointments and even the occasional heartbreak. In other words, a normal life.

Incidentally, all things considered, his wife comes across as a very gracious lady who actually feels sympathy for Lucy. Her comportment during their scene together is very impressive.

La Madre Puta
La Puta Madre
La Hija de Puta
El Chorizo

[–] vinidici 11 years ago

Great thread & responses!

I'll throw in my two cents, here, that (1) Sanders wasn't so completely unattractive; (2) He and Lucy were now in the same social strata after the success of her book; (3) He WAS a bastard who deserved a thrashing and no one else thought much of him except a lonely and love-starved Lucy.

So, no, I don't think George Sanders was miscast and thought he was brilliant as always in his usually unsympathetic roles.

Okay folks, show's over, nothing to see here!

[–] turtletommy 11 years ago

vinidici, agree with your post, and as others have said Sanders was type-cast as a cad and with that knowledge when you first see him in this you want to scream at Lucy to run away! But he's such a delightful rogue of a cad. Some might know that Sanders acted before with Tierney in SUNDOWN (1942), and he does one of the all-time great double-takes when he first sees the gorgeous Gene appear. I don't recall him being a cad in that role. One of the great speaking voices ever too by the way.

[–] vinidici 11 years ago

Thanks, Tommy.

Okay folks, show's over, nothing to see here!

[–] turtletommy 11 years ago

You bet vini.

[–] kaseyh 10 years ago

^^ I agree completely. George Sanders was totally typecast as an over-the-top charming cad because he was terrific at it. He was perfect as Miles Fairley wooing lonely, naive, unworldly Mrs. Muir in one of his many memorable villainous roles. I enjoy watching his performances even though I usually dislike his character and would run far away if I met them in person.

[–] molarmaven59 11 years ago

DenLilleH:

George Sanders character was supposed to be a cad. She, Lucy really does not like him, but she is LONELY!

Lucy later confessed she did not understand why she ever "fell" for him. BUT he was REAL.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kenny-164 10 years ago

I must disagree with the OP here. Sanders was supposed to be unconvincing, in the end, as Mrs. Muir's lover. It worked because she was naive partly out of her sheltered history and partly because she wanted too much to have it work with a "real" man.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hka-3 10 years ago

I was still just jarred out of the movie.

I was, too, for a few minutes. I'm familiar with George Sanders's other work. I know he's typecast as a cad. I know his character in this film was supposed to be that of a cad. I've seen plenty of films and TV shows with smarmy cads who had deceptively charming allure. Fairley had absolutely no charming allure whatsoever.

I tried to take comfort in the fact that Captain Gregg and Martha were against Fairley and that it probably meant Lucy wouldn't end up with him. I still ended up taking a few minutes away from the film since Lucy was still swooning over Fairley and I simply didn't find that part entertaining. When I came back to watch the film, Lucy was requesting his address, so I suspected it was time for her to see the light about him.

Mag, Darling, you're being a bore.

[–] Popcorngal (4937) 2 years ago

I figured Mikes was a jerk, but never dreamer he was a caddish married womanizer.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]