Opiniones de usuarios

Joan Collins is Evelyn Nesbit, the beautiful "Girl in the Red Velvet Swing" in this 1955 film also starring Ray Milland, Farley Granger, Cornelia Otis Skinner, Frances Fuller, and Glenda Farrell. The film purports to tell the story of the White-Nesbitt-Thaw triangle that ended with the murder of White, the arrest of Thaw, and the testimony of Nesbit.

The facts are there, but as others have pointed out, the personalities are not. White (Milland) in fact was a notorious womanizer, and Evelyn was but another conquest. And while it may surprise people that beautiful, sexy "Dynasty" star Joan Collins could play demure and innocent, Evelyn probably wasn't. The unbalanced Thaw (Granger) was also a drug addict, not mentioned in the movie.

This film, which initially was to star Marilyn Monroe and later Sheree North, should have been much more exciting, given a) the story and b) the money spent on it. Unfortunately, the lack of character development holds it up. The White character remains elusive; Milland never loosens up. Granger does an excellent job as Thaw. Collins is absolutely beautiful and does a good job with the character, but the character as written doesn't give the film much of an edge.

The scene on the swing between Evelyn and White is dizzying and dazzling; and the end of the film is one of the best things about it.

Evelyn Nesbit overcame the trial, rejection by Thaw's family, suicide attempts, alcoholism, and addiction to morphine, living until the age of 82 in 1967. She served as an adviser on this film.

"I Love My Wife, But Oh! You Kid"...

Of course the Production Code limited depiction of the more lurid elements of this story, but it was largely due to Evelyn's participation as Consultant that "Red Velvet Swing" turned out as a nearly G-rated version of a very R-rated, even X-rated, story. We see Stanford White and Evelyn presented as something like star-crossed lovers-- oh, if only he'd been younger and single! Quite a fairy tale. Still, the picture makes it pretty clear that they made whoopee; watch for White's swing hanging empty, still gently swinging...

White was a dissolute roué with a taste for Young Stuff, and didn't scruple to drug the winsome Evelyn and 'have his way' with her while she was unconscious. Yuck. Nice start to a relationship. But after all, he was such a brilliant architect that such minor foibles could be overlooked, right? Milland's Nice Guy portrayal doesn't even include any attempt at a physical resemblance; the real White sported an enormous mustache. Possibly if a 'stache was tested, it may have been concluded that it made him look too much like a melodrama villain. In the 50s screen good guys were cleanshaven, no matter how historically inaccurate that might be.

As I understand it, White's hedonist lifestyle had so run down his health that at the time Thaw killed him he may have had only about six months to live. But Harry had the satisfaction of taking him down personally. We trust that it was worth the subsequent whirlwind... At least in the movie Evelyn permitted Farley Granger to play Harry Thaw as the unstable and abusive creep he was. It's rather chilling when his mother provides a tragic back story to excuse Harry's nasty nature-- but somehow it's still hard to feel much sympathy for him.

We see White trying to do the Right Thing by little Evelyn in sending her away to school. He actually did so, but not out of any noble motivation; he was getting her away from impossibly handsome John Barrymore, with whom she was deeply involved-- in fact the two were planning marriage.

I'm giving this six stars instead of fewer, because (despite flaws) the colorful turn of the century period re-creation is enjoyable (how about those watermelon petticoats in the cakewalk? Whew!), and it can be appreciated as a 1950s period piece as well. But it's largely fictional, and as others have mentioned is clearly overdue for a new treatment, and not just a remake. Now, who should play the principals this time around?

If you made a completely factual account of the famous Thaw-Nesbit-White triangle which scandalized the folks of the Theodore Roosevelt era, I suspect none of these people would be regarded as innocent. But with 20th Century Fox entitling their film about the case The Girl In The Red Velvet Swing you know the accent will be on Joan Collins as Evelyn Nesbit as a wronged woman.

Collins with her involvements first with the married Stanford White played by Ray Milland and later marrying the homicidal Harry K. Thaw played by Farley Granger is shown as a girl just in over her head before she realizes it. In real life pushed by an ambitious stage mother, chorus girl Evelyn was well aware of her spectacular beauty even as a teen and it was as a teen that she met Stanford White who seduced her.

White on the other hand was a notorious rake, a fact his wife in the film played by Frances Fuller realizes and accepts. In the beginning he sees her off to Europe and Ray Milland is off to fun and frolic. If you see a picture of the real Stanford White he had a huge handlebar mustache which no doubt tickled many fancies. Milland plays him clean shaved.

And Harry Thaw was definitely a candidate for the rubber room. Of the three in the triangle Farley Granger more closely captures his character than either Milland or Collins. What is not shown is that in addition to his psychological problems, Thaw was also a drug addict. That was not something discussed in polite society and in fact a subject rarely brought up by Hollywood during the rule of the Code. The same year The Girl In The Red Velvet Swing came out, Hollywood finally an honest film about dope addiction with Otto Preminger's The Man With The Golden Arm.

None of these people are candidates for sainthood. White, the most brilliant architect of his time was a rake, Nesbit was a gold digger and more than likely may berated have husband Thaw with tales of Stanny's sexual prowess and Thaw was just nuts.

So tilting this film toward Nesbit gave us the film we have which is not a bad one. Collins, a third choice to play Nesbit after Marilyn Monroe and Sheree North, was definitely great in the role. The film is more or less factually true, but it's all a question of spin.

In a magazine with some of his work in it, wealthy and influential Stanford White comments on the model on the cover. When he sees her in the flesh he asks that she be brought to his house. Meeting her there he talks to her and the two quickly kiss. He asks her mother not to bring her back but he cannot help himself and soon falls into an affair with her as she falls in love with him. The young and innocent Evelyn Nesbit also attracts the attention of the newly rich but arrogant Harry Thaw, who charms her despite herself. With the attentions of two so wealthy men, it is no wonder that Evelyn is affected by it and the two men are brought into conflict, neither particularly caring for the other anyway.

The title made me think this film would be a light romantic comedy from the 1950's that would be distracting but not that interesting. Watching it proved to me why I should never turn away a film on the grounds of such sweeping judgements because I found it much more interesting, engaging and morally darker than I expected it to be. The plot is supposedly a true story and, not knowing the total truth of this I can only assume that it takes liberties in the way that any "true" film does – regardless though, it only adds to the value that it is based on a real case. It sees a sweet young girl be torn between two men who are both far beyond the level in society that she could have expected. The text after the titles give away that this story is leading up to a court case of some sort but the development is still good and I found the basic facts to be interesting and made all the better by the subtexts and character development that the script brought out. The character dynamics worked well but also the way the characters (specifically Stanford and Evelyn) grew and changed across the film.

Responding to this the cast were surprisingly impressive. Well, perhaps that is unfair to paint them all with this brush because the person that surprised and impressed me was Joan Collins. Maybe it is because I am the "Dynasty" generation but I never really rated her as an actress, so here I was quite taken by her range, her subtlety and her awareness of her character. It is not a perfect performance but she is a big part of the material working at more than just the narrative level. Milland is not as good because his character isn't as good but he is still convincing and seems bought into his character. Granger is betrayed by the character and falters as a result – the script puts him in one place at the start and leaves him there with little to do – he is the "conclusion" to the story but other than that he is of little interest. Support is solid enough but the film belongs to Collins and, to a lesser degree, Milland, and both do well with it.

Overall an engaging and interesting film that is a lot more morally complex that I expected from the period. The basic facts of the story are good but it is the character development that makes the film interesting and the main two actors respond well to it to produce a solid film that I found interesting, a bit melodramatic but well worth a look.

This is a glossy melodrama (scripted by Charles Brackett, who also produced, and Walter Reisch) about a famous early 20th century crime of passion. The love triangle comprises Ray Milland (ideally cast but who isn’t particularly stretched by his role of architect Stanford White), Joan Collins (in one of her better Hollywood parts – by the way, the real-life Evelyn Nesbitt acted in a few Silents herself and served as a consultant on this film!) and Farley Granger. The latter is a revelation: usually playing self-effacing types, here he’s arrogant, temperamental and possessive; he reminded me of Robert Ryan’s equally neurotic millionaire in Max Ophuls’ CAUGHT (1949). Besides, Granger’s jealous probing into Collins’ past relations on their wedding night basically replicated a scene from Luis Bunuel’s EL [1952]; and, likewise, his murder of the Milland character over Collins presents a similar situation to a subplot in the Pre-Code BABY FACE [1933] – which, interestingly enough, I watched the very next day!

Fleischer handles the proceedings efficiently enough (he was certainly adept at real-life crime stories, as his later dramatizations of the lives of other infamous murderers such as Leopold and Leob, Albert De Salvo and John Christie – in COMPULSION [1959], THE BOSTON STRANGLER [1968] and 10 RILLINGTON PLACE [1970] respectively – can attest) but, here, he’s somewhat bound by the commercially-minded formula approach of the studio system which, for instance, necessitated the inclusion of corny musical numbers…even if Collins’ character does start off as a dancer in a variety act. Unfortunately, too, the courtroom scenes aren’t the most compelling ever put on film – but they’re nonetheless elevated by Luther Adler’s presence as Granger’s defense attorney. Another valued appearance is that of author Cornelia Otis Skinner: this was one of only 4 films she did (which include the classic ghost story THE UNINVITED [1944], also with Milland, and the existentialist drama THE SWIMMER [1968], starring Burt Lancaster); she has one interesting scene towards the end where Granger’s mother recounts his overly-protected childhood to Collins, and which inevitably marked his character forever. Collins’ mother, then, is nicely played by veteran character actress Glenda Farrell.

While THE GIRL IN THE RED VELVET SWING has been a regular on Italian TV over the years, I had first watched it as a kid; I decided to check the film out again now in view of Fox’s upcoming SE DVD, as part of THE JOAN COLLINS COLLECTION. By the way, the final scene – with Collins doing the titular stage act for impresario Emile Meyer, who’s eager to exploit her new-found notoriety – ends the film on a satisfyingly ironic note.

First some truths and then a review of the film itself.

Evelyn Nesbit, from my own impressions of her recent bio, American Eve, and a clip of her singing from 1930, was a coarse, cheap, nearly talentless beauty of 1906 - all this faded by 1930, when she looked quite plain and homely. Stanford White was obese, a womanizer and a trafficker in underage virgins. Harry Thaw was a madman, pure and simple, protected by his wealth. He also was quite plain and homely. Evelyn's mother was also a trafficker, for her daughter - she makes GYPSY's Madame Rose look like Melanie Hamilton.

Hollywood could not have produced a film true to the characters in 1955. It would never have passed the censors. You didn't touch motherhood then. GYPSY on stage was four years later.

Given the basic narrative structure of the facts, and allowing for Hollywood's restrictions, THE GIRL IN THE RED VELVET SWING is for me an excellent filmization of this narrative. Beautifully photographed and given sumptuous production design as well as excellent casting, it stands as a very interesting "take" on the "crime of the century."

I applaud it and its makers. For something truer to the original characters, visit the segments in RAGTIME devoted to this story. Elizabeth McGovern's turn as the passive, dim-witted Evelyn is much truer to the real woman and deservedly brought her an Ocar nomination.

Shame on the Academy for denying it any noms- it deserved recognition in the Cinematography, Art Direction and Costume Design categories. Farley Granger gives his best performance as the deranged Thaw. Glenda Farrell as Mrs. Nesbit also deserved consideration in the supporting category.

Interesting to note that the love theme is a blatant steal from Max Steiner's Melanie and Ashley love theme in GONE WITH THE WIND, borrowing the first two stanzas of that theme.

If they ever film the bisexual Granger's fascinating life, consider Michael Ellison, the sensitive young actor of THE BEST MEN - a look alike with hidden depths.

Do see THE GIRL IN THE RED VELVET SWING and RAGTIME in succession to get an overall impression of this fascinating triangle.

I first saw this movie years ago. The older I got the more I got it. Collins played Gibson Girl Evelyn Nesbitt Todays version of the Super models. So it is not surprising that is exactly the way she acts. She hangs out in nightclubs. Goes out with rich and famous men, some married some not. One day she double dates with one of her co workers and she meets Sanford White the very famous, very married, very rich architect, whose apartment the date takes place. She is smitten at once, he just seems like a lecherous old man. Evelyn lives with her mother, but for some reason her mother disappears and moves back down to Pittsburgh.

So Evelyn is living on her own. In the meantime she catches the eye of a younger man. The very rich and very spoiled Harry Thaw. We know he is smitten with her but she doesn't really notice it because she is so taken with Sanford White. We know that they are sleeping with each other because of a very metaphoric scene which involves this velvet swing White has in his apartment. The swing is definitely used as some sort of seduction tool. And when Evelyn's mother returns home she remarks that Evelyn has not picked up her messages in days. So we know they are past the kissing and hugging stage. She is obsessed with him and she admits that she will do anything to see him. After a while Sanford admits to Evelyn that he loves his wife as he does her, but he can't see her anymore. So he sends her away to a finishing school. Where because she is separated from Sanford has a nervous breakdown.

Now to me this movies veers off to Splendor in the Grass meets Back street. In Splendor young Natalie Woods has a nervous break down because of her break up with boyfriend Bud. Back street because Rae the main character will do anything and go anywhere to be with her rich married boyfriend. Instead of Sanford saving her we see Thaw coming to get her out of the Finishing school. She decides to take a trip with him overseas. This is racy stuff for a 50's movie. Now all am going to say is that the story picks up until the climax of the movie.

This incident was touched upon in the movie Ragtime. Norman Mailer played the Sanford White role and Elizabeth McGovern played Evelyn. We learn more about Evelyns fate from the movie Ragtime. Farley Granger IMO was very good in this movie. He usually plays namby pamby types, but in this movie because of his boyish looks he plays a psychopath to the hilt. He was truly scary. Ray Milland is one of the great actors. According to reports Sanford White was a ladies man. I think Mr Milland played him very well. He looked like the lecherous old man he was. I hear complaints about Ray Milland in this movie, but his part was not the showy part. Milland was the type of actor that wanted to act and because of this he made many movies that did not help, but this was not one of them. Joan Collins was playing Joan Collins. She was good enough, even though she looked a little too old for the part of the teenage Ms Nesbit I think Elizabeth McGovern played her more true to the character. This a very entertaining movie. If you can get past the innuendo's you will see this is a very racy movie too. All in all a good movie. BTW watch Ragtime to see more of the trial and what happened to Evelyn.

Set in New York in the early years of the 20th century, a stunning Joan Collins plays the title role, in which there are actually two scenes where she is the girl in the red velvet swing, both of which are fantastic. Both scenes give a lot of credit to the director, cinematographer, set designers, and art director. The film is beautiful to watch throughout, mixing sets from early Broadway stage to crowded fancy New York restaurants. Collins' part as a teenage chorus girl whose beauty is such that she bowls over both Ray Milland who plays a wealthy and well-established New York architect and Farley Granger an heir to a fortune from Pittsburgh, who both throw tons of money her way. What starts off looking like it's going to be a musical comedy actually gets fairly involved and intense, leading to a great and ironic ending.

Great actors here. Joan Collins did a beautiful job. It was supposed to be Marilyn Monroe. It seemed kind was a better fit.

Good acting always by Ray Milland, and their love seemed authentic but corrupted. It's not clear. Implement why she married granger character as he didn't provide enough calm, stability, peace. Granger did an excellent job being spoiled and unbridled and obsessed.

Some good twists and turns and Edie silly on the witness stand. Hard to imagine someone sort of defending your husband who created a murder f your favorite lover. And the turn of the mother in law was chilling.

The downside of this romantic story is that a lot of it is Hollywood washed. The Millard character didn't really love Joan's character. He was a huge womanizer. And di everyone was less caring, less invested, and it just made it all unsavory lives, although interesting.

Here's my guess as to why this 1955 "Trial-of-the-Century" drama (which highlighted the real-life Thaw-White murder case from 1906) failed to deliver a substantial enough wallop and, thus, hold onto this viewer's rapt attention.

It was because the real-life Evelyn Nesbit (who, at a much younger age, had played a pivotal part in this murder case) was now playing "technical adviser" on the set of this 1955 picture. And, as a result, nothing in the story could be filmed without her prior consent.

And because of this veto power that Nesbit (72 at the time) wielded, her youthful character in the story was white-washed, and made out to be the sweetest, most naive, little innocent bystander in the scheme of things.

And, on top of that, the sexual implications of Nesbit's torrid affair, at 17, with a man 3 times her age was down-played so unrealistically as to make it appear as if she and Stanford White were merely platonic friends.

As a result of all of this down-playing (at Nesbit's insistence) this film's story was virtually rendered flat and uninspired, with only shallow and apathetic performances given by all of its principal players.

I honestly believe that this 1955 picture could've been real dynamite story-telling had Evelyn Nesbit not had such a strangle-hold on its subject matter, as she adamantly insisted that her once ravishing "Gibson Girl" image remain intact, thus making certain that she was portrayed as the absolute epitome of "Turn of the Century" innocence.

Directed by Richard Fleischer (a fairly notable director), this disappointing melodrama suffered, as well, from a curious lack of essential close-ups.

Was it worth it? That's the eternal question which every practitioner of show business constantly has to answer and put to himself, which here is pushed to the extreme, as "The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing" Evelyn Nesbit (Joan Colllns) causes her multi millionaire husband (Farley Granger) to murder renowned architect Stanford White (Ray Milland) for having been his wífe's former lover. The case was the ultimate scandal of the times in 1906, the multi-millionaire murderer had his life ruined as branded for life as the crazy assassin obsessed with his wife's earlier relationship with a much older man, and there was this great film made about it, originally intended for Marilyn Monroe but finally featuring Joan Collins, somewhat romanticised making both Ray Milland and Farley Granger appearing more noble than they were, and on such a story it is not a bad film, in technicolor and superb settings. But the truth is always more interesting and revealing.

Richard Fleischer remains one of the most underrated of the American directors.His influence is huge,particularly in Europa:Chabrol's last movie "La Fille Coupée En Deux" is a disguised remake of "girl on the red velvet swing" -and not nearly so good.His movies dealing with criminal affairs are all interesting and form,in spite of their differences ,a well-knit group:"Follow me quietly" "Compulsion" "Crack in the mirror" and his more accomplished works "Boston strangler" and " 10 Rillington PLace" ."The girl on the red velvet swing" ,in spite of its costume drama side,belongs to the genre too.We're told since the beginning it's a criminal affair.The title is a transparent metaphor:Evelyn is not only caught between two men;she is a proletarian ,close to French writer Colette's "Gigi" in the world of the wealthy and the mighty.One of her men doesn't want to divorce and to marry her ,not because she is young enough to be his daughter but because the world he lives in is not prepared to accept such a monstrous union.If she were a rich heiress ,the daughter of one his rich customers who have him built desirable mansions ,all would be forgiven .And if the girl marries a millionaire ,it's only because he is impotent ,under an over possessive mother's thumb :in an amazing scene the mother recognizes the facts.People who know Mankiewicz's "The barefoot Contessa" will notice the similarities between the two "rich" marriages .

Like Max Ophuls' "Lola Montès" ,when her family-in -law denies her,it only remains for her to make a spectacle of herself in a theater ,a place she should never have left.The two scenes in which the girl is on the swing are the most impressive ,with a dazzling camera:there's something disturbing in the first one,when the girl asks for the moon (true and figurative sense)..But "it's only a paper moon sailing over a cardboard sea...it's only a canvas sky..hanging over a muslin tree"

The beautiful, naïve daughter of a costume seamstress in New York City falls for an older, already-married architect; his rival in society circles, a young multi-millionaire, hopes to woo the girl away, talking her into marriage, but her unwavering affections for his competitor drive him to murder. True life crime case from 1906--Hollywoodized but not energized by 20th Century Fox--comes to the screen a stilted roundelay that may have proved delicious. As part-time model and showgirl Evelyn Nesbit, Joan Collins (stepping in for Marilyn Monroe, who turned down the role) is lovely and touching at times, but seems to have been wiped clean of a personality; only at the very end does she get to show a self-satisfied sparkle. As the two men obsessed with her, Ray Milland and Farley Granger are dull (Granger, pancaked to a fare-thee-well, more so). The supporting players tend to show up the stars, particularly Frances Fuller playing Milland's very patient wife and Glenda Farrell as Collins' mother, a wise old bird. The censors likely curtailed the more sensational aspects of the triangle--and what we have left is unhappy soap opera. The picture looks good in CinemaScope, and has a camp montage of Collins suffering a nervous breakdown while ocean waves and laughing dancers roll across the screen, but it is neither exceptional nor exciting. The story was partially revisited in the 1981 film "Ragtime". ** from ****

It's curious that such a DEAD film can be made about what was considered "The Crime of the Century" at one time. A young Joan Collins is unbelievably lovely as the title character, but plays the role in a humble, eyes-downcast, saccharine-sweet way that, while it may possibly be what Nesbitt was really like, has an unvarying dullness to it.

The rest of the cast is wooden as well, and the entire design of the movie is obviously expensive, yet completely unimaginative. But the real problem with this movie is the script, which not only is too leisurely, but features some of the stuffiest, most phony-sounding dialogue I've heard.

This isn't actual dialogue from the movie (which I refuse to re-listen to), but it may as well be: "Oh my goodness, I thought this room was empty." / "No, my dear, it is not." / "I am sorry that I have disturbed you. I am afraid that you shall think me a goose." / "There is no need to run away, my child. Come here, and let me look at your face. Why, you are most beautiful. Yes, indeed. Most, most beautiful. But, you blush?" ETC. ETC. AD NAUSEAM! Again, Collins is beautiful to look at here (even though the movie curiously avoids spectacular closeups), but she's the film's sole virtue. (And even saying that, her contribution is her physical appeal rather than her acting performance.)

Like the person that preceded me on this thread, I, too, saw this movie on the True Stories Channel, just this very morning. Over the years, I had seen bits and pieces of it, before, but never the whole movie in its entirety.

With that said, I must admit that I am a HUGE (!!!) Joan Collins fan, so it's doubtful that I would've subjected myself to the movie's excruciatingly slow pace had it NOT co-starred "Joanie." I mean, I've followed "Joanie's" career through muck ("Empire of the Ants") and mire ("The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing"), so I can honestly say that "Joanie" MAY star in bad motion pictures, but she NEVER gives a bad performance!

Yes, I agree with the other posters, Ray Milland DOES, indeed, deliver a VERY bland and wooden performance as architect, Stanford White. However, much the same thing can be said for Farley Granger, too, in the villain's role of Harry Thaw. While I can't speak for Granger, I feel I must stand up for Milland: In 1945, under Billy Wilder's superior direction, he won a much-deserved Oscar for his performance as an alcoholic in "The Lost Weekend." So, for his lackluster performance in this movie, I place the blame on the director, Richard Fleischer.

Look, this movie was supposed to be a break-out role for "Joanie." Alas, it wasn't to be. Sure, she'd go on to make other "A" movies, like "Land of the Pharaohs" and the rare Paul Newman clunker, "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys!" However, after the final Bob Hope/Bing Crosby road movie, "The Road to Hong Kong," "Joanie" was lucky to get work in TV shows like "Batman."

Fortunately, OUR "Joanie" is a SURVIVOR! Super-producer, Aaron Spelling, remembered her from his salad days, and cast her as the Super-Bitch, "Alexis Carrington," in his night-time soap opera, "Dynasty," and the rest - as they say - is history!

In 1901, Evelyn Nesbit (Joan Collins) is a stage performer. She becomes the object of competition between wealthy industrial tycoon Harry Kendall Thaw (Farley Granger) and his rival architect Stanford White (Ray Milland). It results in murder and scandal.

Apparently, Marilyn Monroe was the first choice for the role. I would have loved to see it. I like Joan, but this role needs something more vivacious. She's darker than that. I want Evelyn to play up her girlish allure while these two men battle over her. The movie feels a little stiff. The camera moves, the staging, and the rest are all very static. It's a 50's movie. Director Richard Fleischer had a long and successful career with many differing movies. I don't want to blame him for anything, but this is probably not his best work. I wish that I didn't know about Marilyn Monroe. I just kept picturing her in this role. This is not necessarily bad, but I'm not drawn to these characters.