Thought this was from Reckless when I first saw it, but turns out it’s from Dinner At Eight. Should have known, the white fox from Reckless was larger, but ultimately didn’t get the same screen time as this one from Dinner At Eight. This one didn’t get very much either, to be honest, and that’s…
Thought this was from Reckless when I first saw it, but turns out it’s from Dinner At Eight. Should have known, the white fox from Reckless was larger, but ultimately didn’t get the same screen time as this one from Dinner At Eight. This one didn’t get very much either, to be honest, and that’s one of 2 major problems with that film. The other being Marie Dressler, if you’re keeping score.
Do not be so hard on Miss Dressler; i thought that she played her part well considering she is remembered for playing rough old bags (Tugboat Annie for example) and i would not describe her character as such. (I also liked her furs).
Jean Harlow wears the cape you mentioned on screen for 3 minutes and 4 seconds (not bad), she also wears a similar one in bed for 41 seconds. Please do not ask how i can be so precise.
There is a short called Come To Dinner where lookalike actors play the parts, it is mildly amusing and actually rather good to watch.
It’s probably best I don’t wax further on Miss Dressler. Suffice to say, if one were to agree with the notion that “the better the fur coat, the more attractive the wearer,” I can say, with some confidence, there does not exist a fur coat so gorgeous, so magnificent, so utterly resplendent in size, color, and texture… as to make Marie Dressler the least bit palatable.
Hey, you’re talking to a guy (for those keeping track) who not only cares how long the fur is around but does the math and comes up with a percentage. My only question would be… 3 minutes 4 seconds of “only fur,” or 3 minutes 4 seconds including cutaways to… Marie Dressler.
Three minutes and four seconds of the fur on screen; I actually edited the film so it is Jean Harlow in white fur only (of course there are parts where she is with others). I have just watch it; there are three instances where she is not on screen and instances are what they literally are, about a second where the camera pans down to her legs and possibly just over a second where she is not on screen so I would still say a good three minutes and one second. I was top of the year in maths when I was fourteen and it has been down hill since then.
Ah, yes, the only way to calculate, good show. Hopefully I employed that English colloquialism correctly.
The stills I post here are from my own similarly-edited clips. Lord knows I’ve never been able to understand why editors constantly feel the need to waste precious seconds of screen time not showing the beautiful woman in the large fur coat, so it’s always good to do one’s part to correct these grave cinematic errors whenever possible.
Heh, in all seriousness, I find the best scenes the ones where they simply switch angles, but both include said attractive lady and her fur. Sadly this is not a common occurrence. The bar scene from Lady of Burlesque springs to mind as a good example.
Leave a Reply