MovieChat Forums > Odds Against Tomorrow Discussion > Johnny's wife was a hard case

Johnny's wife was a hard case


As Johnny himself said "she's worse than Bacco - if the alimony isn't there on the first, her laywer is on the second".

I can see why she's had it with Johnny's gambling, but she gives him NO chance at all otherwise. Even when he tries to make some concessions, she shuts him down; she doesn't even give him credit for being a good father, saying that she only allows Johnny to see their daughter because its the law.

That aside, this is a favorite movie of mine, ever since I saw it on a late, late show in thw late 1960's. Great acting by Belafonte, Ryan and Begley, as well as several supporting performances - the only disappointment was Shelley Winters, who was not given much to do.


"I don't drink, I don't smoke - two out of three ain't bad" - Bob Crane

reply


The writers wanted to make her hard and unyielding. Johnny was a cad and a lowlife and Belafonte wanted to have such an unflattering character be portrayed in a film. Johnny was a loser and few would have the nerve to introduce such a character. See if you can find the four part series on YouTube about OGT. It was insightful.

reply

Johnny was in gambling debt of $7,500.00 (equal to $85,000.00 in 2023 money) to a gangster, and yet continued gambling and losing money every day. Not only his life, but his wife's and daughter's lives were in danger, yet he was doing nothing to clean up his act. His solution to the problem was to rob a bank. The only thing he had going for him was good looks and charm. She was right to leave him and take the kid with her, and right to be a "hard case" to resist taking him back.

reply

That she was but as others mentioned, Johnny left her with little choice. He somewhat reminded me of George Clooney in 'O Brother, Where Art Thou?". Maybe Johnny is not a terrible person. From what we see, he's not violent or as unstable as Slater (Ryan). But he was not reliable and could not provide his family with stability.

reply