MovieChat Forums > A Summer Place (1959) Discussion > Something about the divorces I don't und...

Something about the divorces I don't understand


I know that divorce was still pretty scandalous during the 50s, but, in real life (for that time period), would their parents' divorces and remarriages receive the attention it did in the film? It seemed that everyone knew about it, like Molly's classmates, for example. And it was mentioned in multiple newspapers as well. Was this just an exaggeration, or pretty close to the real thing for that time period?

And so the Lion fell in Love with the Lamb...
*~TWILIGHT~*

T~O #1449

reply

I think the divorce became such a big scandal because he was so wealthy and she was married to the owner of a resort patronized by high society. Just like today, rich people are news. And you're right, divorce was considered shocking in those days.

reply

Divorce really wasn't that rare as far as people with money were concerned.....then, like now, if you had enough money, you could get away with anything.

reply

They were both socially prominent families, so it might be newsworthy. Besides,they had to have that in the movie in order to show the humiliation and embarrassment of Molly and Johnny, as when the girl rode by with her mother in front of the church.

reply

Not to mention the small town mentality that would make a big deal of this.



The Fabio Principle: Puffy shirts look best on men who look even better without them.

reply

[deleted]

I lived in a very socially UNprominent area and people were a lot more tolerant than that. It was just sad when there was a divorce. It's ironic that the rich got more divorces but were the ones to have major hissy fits over it. :) I wonder if that was because social standing meant so much to them.

reply

OMG, the 50's. Benighted, big time. I was born in 1949, and at least I was a child rather than a teenager then. I feel so sorry for those 2-10 years older. It was awful--and I was fully aware of that at the time.

reply

Molly's family was very rich, I think thats why everyone knew

reply

Hadn't seen this movie in many years and completely forgot it.

In my high school in the mid 1960s, there were over 3300 kids. One had divorced parents. Everyone knew and whispered about it. Her mother actually had a different last name from her! Shocking.

Even today, most kids would rather have their parents with them and miserable than away from them and happy.

What I couldn't figure out was why Troy's father got custody. Wasn't he a little old for that? Who gets custody of a college student?

Also, I was totally shocked that Troy & Sandy weren't punished for having sex & even getting pregnant. In a movie from the fifties. Totally shocked. I kept waiting for one of them to die.

reply

I think the fact that Johnny's father got custody of him comes from the fact that 18 didn't become the legal adult age until the Vietnam era. I'm pretty sure it was 21 before that (both were probably 17 or 18, needing both set of parents to determine custody). I just find it strange that an alcoholic would get custody over an adulteress. But, then again, drinking was more socially acceptable for the time, and, like someone else posted, women were more to blame in cases of divorce.

Why did I write? Because I found life unsatisfactory.
*~Tennessee Williams~*

reply

Proving bart was an alcoholic would be harder ghan proving Sylvia had an affair.

Also having custody meant child support just like today. So the woman really needed custody if she could get it. So few women had careers. That is why divorce was more rare.

But i agree about the custody of college students hardly seemed needed. But someone had to provude for them so custody was imp to helen.

reply

Yes, what gets me is that in the custody fights everyone talks about and treats these college students as if they were about 9 years old. (And frankly, their inclination towards "naughty thoughts" notwithstanding, both Johnny and Molly have the emotional maturity of nine-year-olds, though I recognize this may be an insult to actual nine-year-olds.)

Did the judge have Arthur Kennedy and Dorothy McGuire stand on opposite sides of his chambers and award custody to whichever one Troy Donahue ran to first?

reply

If Troy ran to me I would have opened my arms. hahahaha

reply

Yeah, well, if he ran to me, I'd push him back to his mother.

Troy may have been good-looking (which, as a straight male, means nothing to me), but on screen he was always sullen, petulant, priggish, self-righteous and thoroughly, utterly, completely humorless.

If he were my son, I'd probably turn to booze, too. And I'd certainly insist his mother get stuck with him. Hell, I'd pay her to take him!

reply

I agree that he wasn't a very good actor. He's better in some movies, especially with a good costar, like Suzanne Pleshett in Rome Adventure.

reply

Yes, I'll agree he was much better in Rome Adventure, but then, he was able to literally -- and finally -- act his own age there, and that probably helped. Previously he'd always been a troubled teen, years younger than his actual age. Playing an adult made his character much more varied and likable. Still, it's the grim screen persona he usually displayed, more than his limited acting ability, that I find off-putting.

reply

Good point. After seeing him recently in Parrish I finally said: Enough. No more Troy.

reply

Parrish is so ungodly awful that it's laughably watchable in an inane sort of way. You can tell Karl Malden enjoyed hamming it up for the paycheck! And poor Claudette Colbert -- and her last film to boot.

But, if I may be permitted an uncharacteristic lapse into crudity (), the rod up Troy's ass was jammed in higher than ever!

I really can't believe I wrote that. Better read it quick, before the administrator gets after me!

reply

HOBS! ;-D

reply

I stand rebuked, head bowed in shame!

reply

Boy, you are so right about Claudette Colbert. They gave her maybe one good scene, and then she really didn't have much to do through the rest of the movie. It's a shame if that was her final performance on film.

reply

hobnob, you are funny! I love what you said, that if he were your son you'd turn to booze too and insist his mother take him. That you'd pay her to take him!

So, yeah...Troy. I had a hard time with him too, for all the same reasons -- especially the woodeness and the total lack of humor. Still, he was in some of my favorite films of the era and married Suzanne Pleshette!

It's weird that that "type" was put out there as the paragon of what a man should be. Maybe it fits for the late 50's early 60's. They were so weird in all the best ways.

In real life, I'll take the homelier, funny guy every time. Give me Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert or Seth McFarlane any day. Not that any of them is homely -- quite the opposite. All very cute, mischievous, naughty boys. I mean men.

This was a fun and funny thread, especially thanks to you, hobnob. You definitely don't have a rod shoved deep up your a__! I don't want to get deleted by the administrator.

reply

Hey, thank you very much, pouncemo!

I was thinking about this thread the other day when the movie was on, and seeing it again it only reaffirmed my previously stated opinions!

True, Tory married Suzanne, but she dumped him after a few years. I rather liked his being cast in a small role The Godfather, Part II as Connie's boyfriend at the beginning of the picture, playing a character called "Merle Johnson" -- which was Troy Donahue's real name.

You're right, he was a "type" of his period, which was a disservice to him in the long run. "Types" don't last long or wear well. Sadly, Troy's reputation hasn't risen or even been treated more charitably over time. (As many of the posts here attest!)

Glad you enjoyed reading through the thread, we've been having some fun with it. Happy you've joined in!

reply

Molly and Johnny's children all ended up with 11 toes and 13 fingers becuz their parents were brother & sister.

reply