The father looked about 60, Bogart looked about 65, Cindy's who looks about 20 her boyfriend looked about 40?
Were they short on young male actors? Or was it just more culturally acceptable for younger women to date much older men back then?
-things I write on IMDB may come from my blog
nogard64, you must be about age 15 for them to look that old to you. Unfortunately I'm about 70, and they all looked young to me!
--------
He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good... St. Matthew 5:45
Fredrich March, the father was 58 when this was filmed. Admittedly he was a bit old for the part. Cindy (Mary Murphy) was 24 and Gig Young (the boyfriend) was 42.
Bogart was 55 during filming (his birthday is Christmas Day) but definitely looked older. Within a few months, his cancer was discovered but its clear that he's tired here and is not well, probably due to that and drinking.
Some women did date older men back then as they do now but they also miscast people in movies, age not having much bearing on it.
March is a little old for the father but the real disparity is Gig Young, who was 41 during filming (his birthday was in November, so he wouldn't have turned 42 until late in the year). Mary Murphy was 24 but was supposed to be 18 (okay, she could pass), but Young was supposed to be her 20-something boyfriend, which is utterly preposterous, especially as the role was written. Young was in fact a year older than both Arthur Kennedy and Martha Scott, who played the mother!
shareI noticed that as well. Good ol' Hollyweird - sticking old men with young women since the dawn of film.
shareBogart looked fine in this, although there was a bit of an age gap with his brother, the only one who was far too old for the role was the boyfriend, maybe if the boyfriend and Bogart's brother had switched roles it may of worked better.
shareBoth Bogart and Fredric March were so good in this film, I don't see how anyone could get hung up on their ages! Just appreciate the great acting, for Heaven's sake!
share