MovieChat Forums > Period of Adjustment (1962) Discussion > A Waste of Young Talent

A Waste of Young Talent

posted 9 years ago by barrpub-115-548099
25 replies | jump to latest

I found its wandering tone from comedy to heavy drama back to comedy, often in the same scene a complete misfire. Poor Lois Nettleton, a fine actress, in her first film,saddled with an addled script. SPOILER AHEAD--In the climactic scene, Lois pores her heart out to hubbie Franciosa who tells her, among other things, that he never thought she wasn't good looking. Devastated, Lois is about to leave for good when she finds Tony's gift, a luxurious fur coat and short "I love you" note. The extravagant gesture was enough to wipe away their intense tete a'tete encounter 2 minutes earlier. Unbelievable.

reply

[–] myndchanger 9 years ago

Unfortunately that was pretty par for the course in the early 60's. Many women saw expensive things as a sign of love. It wasn't that far away from the depression and WW2 and men were expected to shut up and get on with making a living. Expensive gifts were a sign of caring.

reply

[–] athomed 9 years ago

When I watch the film it's pretty clear to me that Dorothea is won over by the contents of the note and the thought behind the gift, rather than the extravagance of a luxurious coat. The note says specifically that Ralph loves her more each day, meaning to Dorothea that even if their courtship once had ulterior motives, Ralph's love has grown and continues to grow for her since then. It's a reality they can both live with by the film's end.

___
I used to think I knew everything about the world. Now I just know that it's round.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I think that Ralph was in love with her from the very start. Maybe she wasn't a beauty in his mind, but I think that she had that Something personality-wise which made him decide to marry her. He claimed that it was because of her dad's money, but marrying for that reason is risky because Daddy could always live for another 20 years or so.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

Franciosa didn't have to wait for the old man to die. He already had an executive job which he didn't earn.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

If he really wanted to marry for money, he could have found himself some really hot rich babe with a wealthy father and tried his luck there. There must have been something more than just money which attracted him to Dorothea.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

The pool of hot rich babes attracted to a guy with no money or prospects is as shallow as the script for this movie.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I love this film! I watch it several times each Christmas season. 



~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

Nettleton was won over at first glimpse of the coat before she read the note. Wouldn't have had the same impact if he had bought her a pair of gloves.

Also, remember he said some pretty nasty things just a few moments earlier, of course, after he wrote the note.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

It's common for married couples to say nasty things to each other during times of stress. The man and woman in each relationship snarled at each other throughout the film, then made up, and made love at the end. Nothing unusual about that.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

I'm not trying to persuade you otherwise. Enjoy!

I always enjoyed the Hutton-Paula Prentiss pairings especially The Horizontal Lt. in which they starred and not just supported the leads.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I love The Horizontal Lt. Fun film! Interesting that Jim is in pretty much every scene, while Paula is absent completely for about 1/2 hour of the movie.

I think that both Where the Boys Are and The Honeymoon Machine were the kinds of films in which there really aren't any leading/supporting actors. Okay, in each case, a couple of them were listed as leads, but it seemed to me that, in each movie, none of them got much more screen time than the others. (Equal emphasis on all the couples and their issues in both movies.)

In Bachelor in Paradise, Jim and Paula definitely had supporting roles.

I love all four of those movies. I especially love the soundtrack to Bachelor in Paradise.

Jim and Paula should have done more films together IMHO. They were together one last time in Looking for Love, in which he was the star and she appeared as herself for about 20 seconds.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

The Horizontal Lt.was the only film in which they were top-billed and had to carry the film.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

Oh I know. 

I just meant that both Where the Boys Are and The Honeymoon Machine were really group efforts. Those listed as the leads weren't expected to carry the films.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

It's safe to say Steve McQueen was "expected" to carry The Honeymoon Machine,not Jim Hutton.

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

Except that the first part of the film switched between the two couples (McQueen & girl, Hutton & girl). Later, the four of them were together. And certainly that film wouldn't have worked without "Old Foghorn". 

Steve McQueen might have been listed as the star, but it wasn't a strong leading role (like Bob Hope in Bachelor in Paradise or Jim Hutton in The Horizontal Lieutenant).

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

McQueen parlayed this starring role to starring roles in more important films in the late 1960s at the same time Hutton was pursuing supporting roles until making a comeback of sorts in Ellery Queen in the 70's..

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I don't pay too much attention to the "starring versus supporting" role business. In some cases (like Cast Away), it's extremely important. In so many other cases, it's a team effort. Period of Adjustment is another one of those "team effort" films. Anthony Franciosa is listed as the leading male, but just how much did he do in the first 20 minutes (or so) of the film? A lot of the later scenes rely on Hutton and Fonda to carry the scenes, but there was also a long stretch where it was Franciosa and Fonda together on the screen. Team effort.

By the way, I've heard quite a bit of debate on the boards about who should have been considered the leading male actor of Ordinary People - Donald Sutherland or Timothy Hutton. (Sutherland was considered to be the lead, with Tim Hutton supporting.) It just seems like such a pointless argument, really.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 9 years ago

Leading man vs. supporting player wasn't pointless to Hutton or isn't to his true fans. Think of what his legacy would have been had he starred in films in the late 1960s and early 70s rather than being subordinate to, in a few cases, even the second lead--e.g., David Janssen, Richard Harris!

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I don't think that this had anything to do with his popularity (or lack thereof).

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] DontBogartMe 9 years ago

How would you measure his popularity (or lack of same?)

reply

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I personally think that he didn't really get the recognition that he deserved, but that might have been a result of some of his movie choices in the mid to late 1960s.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

reply

[–] amyghost 9 years ago

By the way, I've heard quite a bit of debate on the boards about who should have been considered the leading male actor of Ordinary People - Donald Sutherland or Timothy Hutton. (Sutherland was considered to be the lead, with Tim Hutton supporting.) It just seems like such a pointless argument, really.

Uh, hello, Sutherland played the senior role, Hutton the juvenile, so in the tradition of acting Sutherland's would have been by default considered as the 'lead' role. I can't imagine too many people have ever seriously questioned this.

reply

[–] Scarecrow-88 8 years ago

Life is like that. Relationships are like that. Up and down. Peace and turmoil. Laughter and drama. We are not always unicorns and rainbows.

reply

[–] barrpub-115-548099 8 years ago

More a question of tone. Comedy was way too broad for the dramatic story. Not a good fit.

reply

[–] liscarkat (19416) 3 years ago

It wasn't so much the fur coat that changed her mind, it was the note. It said that he really did love her, which she had doubted before.

reply