Totally agree. She is the one actor in the film who seems out of place and ill at ease, speaking her lines in a deadpan, monotonous delivery. And no way should she have received a Best Actree nom for her performance.
"Peggy, this isn't China. There's no money in virginity."
I agree. It was such an obvious miscasting. Also Donna Reed as well, in no way does she pull off the prostitute role. Actually most of the actors seemed too old for the roles they were portraying.
shareI absolutely disagree about Deborah Kerr. I thought she was great, she was a wonderful actress. Donna Reed did fine as well, IMO.
Maybe people are so used to seeing them in goody-goody roles they have trouble accepting them here. But both actresses were highly praised for their performances when the film was released.
Not looking for an argument, just had to stick up for them. Particularly Kerr.
I agree with Robbie about Kerr. I think the fact she was British and played refined roles for the most part, and now she plays an American who cheats on her husband and has a "steamy" love scene on a beach, would lead many to praise her performance.
Same with Reed. The movie she was most associated with before this one was "It's a Wonderful Life", where she plays a goody-two-shoes girl. She always appeared as a wholesome girl a guy would marry and she'd have babies and that's that. But in this film she plays a not-so good girl who presumably will have sex with anyone because it is part of her job. I grew up in the 1960s watching Donna Reed on TV, so when I saw this movie the first time it was quite a culture shock for me!
Anyway Reed deserved all the praise she got as well as Kerr. There was a lot of fine acting in this movie, top to bottom.
I absolutely disagree about Deborah Kerr. I thought she was great, she was a wonderful actress. Donna Reed did fine as well, IMO.
In the book Karen Holmes contracted gonorrhea from her husband which resulted in her having a hysterectomy. Never saw a woman that young who had a hysterectomy and looked that good and the medications are much better now.
shareI think Deborah Kerr did a fine job. And that she did deserve her Best Actress nomination. The reason she took this role in the first place was because Hollywood had typecast her into what she called "poke her up the ass" parts. They put her into costume dramas because they thought she was a prim and proper lady and nothing else.
It might be shocking to realise that Deborah Kerr had already proved she had quite a bit of range over in the UK. The role that got her real attention was when she played a prostitute in Love On The Dole. Looking at her performance objectively, I think she nails it. She gives Karen plenty of depth as well as the rough edge she needs. The main issue people seem to have is that prim and proper Deborah Kerr did such a different role. It's like Sigourney Weaver in Heartbreakers. She plays a seductress, which you wouldn't expect. It's different but she makes it work.
I strongly agree with those who praise Deborah and Donna. The whole point is the daring in casting them against type. And both received Oscar nominations, Donna winning. The criticism is entirely misplaced.
shareIn the beginning, the role was think for actress Joan Crawford, but after was scrapped.
For me the choice was correct, she it's fine.
Agree. I would say Donna Reed was disastrously miscast as well. Both Kerr and Reed seemed forced and uncomfortable, playing against type. Kerr's American accent was especially atrocious.
Saying they were "forced and uncomfortable" is an excellent way to portray them. That sums it up in a nutshell
shareShe worked for me, that repressed sexuality came out very well, and she is beautiful.
RSGRE
But "forced and uncomfortable" is what the two female characters were feeling in their situations (assuming Donna Reed's character wasn't in love with being a virtuAL prostitute). So you're actually paying them a compliment to say they seemed like how they were supposed to be.
shareDenis--Great minds think alike in regard to casting Columbia's own top star Rita Hayworth as Karen in "Eternity." The role Rita played later in "Fire Down Below" was similar and reminded me of a story I read about that film's making. On location, a harried crew member made a beyond rude comment in front of everyone, that they might as well just get on with it and shoot her (photographically!) because nothing was going to make her look any younger. An onlooker said that Rita sat silent, frozen.
shareJoan Crawford made some silly demands. As she was a free agent, not signed to a studio, Zinnaman took her off the picture.
shareDisagreed. People are quick to cast off her performance here as it broke her staple typecast but she did a marvelous job.
One day in the year of the fox came a time remembered well...
Kerr’s persona was a long way from the Karen of the novel or the script and yes, I think in a sense she is miscast - as is Clift as Prewitt - but like him, she overcomes it with a great performance that, somehow, clicks perfectly. Sometimes casting outside of the box can work wonders.
shareI think they deliberately cast against type.
share