उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

The topic of racial boundaries is explored in fine detail in this story about a light-skinned doctor and his family who all pass for white in a New England town. All points of view and opinions are represented. What makes this such a remarkable film is that it was made in 1949, hardly a year of profound social change in America when it came to the color line. This makes the movie that much more daring. A much better look at the topic of passing than either Pinkie or the second version of Imitation of Life (the first was quite extraordinary, and far superior). There are some really wonderful scenes including one at the town dance when the doctor's son brings home a dark-skinned black friend. The levels of acceptance and non-acceptance of the young black man are nuanced and played out beautifully.

The film suffers a tiny bit from hokey dialogue and mild melodrama, but that is more a result of the year it was made.

"Lost Boundaries" is a 1949 film, based on the true story of a black family that passed for white in New Hampshire. The stars are Mel Ferrer, Beatrice Pearson, Richard Hylton, and Carleton Carpenter. Ferrer plays a black doctor, Scott Carter, who looks white. He wants to live as a black man, and his future wife (Pearson) who comes from a family that has always "passed" has agreed to live as a black as well. But after they marry and there's a baby on the way, and still no job, Scott decides to take a position in a white hospital. Eventually he becomes the town doctor. Before you know it, 20 years have passed, and he and his wife have never even told their children that they have black blood. This leads to complications.

Released the same year as "Pinky," "Lost Boundaries" is a very good movie about deep-seated prejudice that occurred in the north and not in its usual place, the south. Its essential problem is that it doesn't employ any black actors to play the Carters. "Pinky," a superior film, was criticized for the same reason, except that without Jeanne Crain, "Pinky" would not have been made. "Lost Boundaries" has no stars.

It is curious that the issue of "passing" seems to have piqued Hollywood's interest in the late '40s, and one wonders if World War II had something to do with it, with people venturing out of their neighborhoods and meeting others from different social positions and walks of life, all with the same goal of fighting the Axis. However, when Lena Horne went to entertain the troops in World War II, the black soldiers were behind the prisoners of war in the audience. You really wonder what was going through anyone's minds. Certainly not liberty and justice for all.

Lost Boundaries (1949)

This affected me more than I would have expected. I mean, the changes in how we see race and "race relations" since 1949 are huge. The acting is really solid, if not searingly intense (which it has room for). And the narrative is complex enough with a few turning points to make it all interesting.

There is a sense as you watch that you're being shown a social issue and that the jury is already in. We know what we are supposed to feel, and we feel it. There is also a sense of something that doesn't happen much any more—the well known trick of "passing," which means being an African-American (usually) who is light skinned enough to "pass" as white. This is no small thing, since it required a social shift and truly living a "white" American's life, including both the advantages and the inner angst of having left behind your own roots.

So it's important stuff, and good stuff. And it was more compelling in its details and acting than you might think, being both socially loaded and a bit low budget. The production standards are high, however, and the results make it worth watching. I frankly did more than confirm what I already knew about the era and race in America. I realigned a little, feeling more than reminded, but also a little educated.

Yes, the approach here is outdated, and it ignores the true range of racism and hatred of the time, even in the supposedly enlightened New England setting here. But it has the truth woven into the stylized telling. If you think you already know all this, give it a look anyway. It's imprtant enough to try.

No need to detail the plot as others have done. On the whole, this is a very sincere and thoughtful production. Easy to say that by today's standards the film lacks honesty, especially by casting whites in the lead roles. However, I expect the production went as far as any commercial production of its time could in dealing with the emerging issue of race prejudice. Remember, much of the commercial audience was in the Jim Crow South, and I expect many theaters there refused its showing, (probably in the North too, only more subtly).

Besides, the effort to de-glamorize everyone and everything in the film, along with its location photography and varying sound quality, suggests that social conscience is what the film-makers were aiming for and not big box office. This was an independent production, far from the Hollywood glamor factory, even though the executive producer Louis de Rochemont had been a top producer at 20th Century Fox. I particularly like the way they used ordinary looking people in so many of the principal and supporting parts, especially the charming but plain-faced Susan Douglas and the equally charming but goofy-looking Carleton Carpenter. The ending too, is handled with a fair amount of honesty. especially the highly symbolic very last frame.

Too bad that this was precisely the kind of gritty little conscience film that disappeared from the screen following the Mc Carthy purges that loomed on the horizon. Even though the movie is now mainly of historical interest, it indicates the sort of challenging entertainment that was lost to the public during the Cold War decade of the 1950's. More than anything, it now needs to be shown more often, so that younger generations can get a definite sense of time, place, and attitudes, even if the actors are white.

Can you imagine Mel Ferrer as a Pullman porter in the 1940s? Neither can I. He doesn't play one but his character, who is a young doctor passing for white, says that if he let his race be known he might end up doing that.

This is (so we are told) a true story. The Ferrer character is given a break: He becomes the local doctor in a small New Hampshire town. His wife, also played by a white actress who therefore can very easily "pass for white" goes along with his charade.

(The actor playing their son as an adult is very good. His character becomes involved in an adventure -- what, I cannot say without giving away the plot. It is related in a noir fashion that both works and seems a little generic.) Possibly we're meant to be inspired. My main feeling about the choice this couple makes is that it is egregiously unfair to their two children. The kids don't know they are black.

It's a low-keyed story, generally well acted. I found it hard not to get caught up in the central characters' dilemma.) I'm not sure why but the casting didn't bother me so much as that of "Pinky." Maybe because "Pinky" is more self-congratulatory about touching such a daring topic. "Lost Boundaries" is really not a message movie. It tells a story and tells it well -- albeit a bit dishonestly

On a famous Law And Order episode S. Eptha Merkerssen confronts a suspect who has passed for white asking him what it was like. It must be a unique experience. But it's one gay people for generations did with use of the closet. I think Mel Ferrer's real life character of Scott Carter would have identified with the closet. He was in fact in a race closet.

Mel Ferrer got his first big break playing the lead who with his wife Beatrice Pearson is a light skinned black man, one who has 'good color' so he can pass. After losing a job at a hospital he was hoping to get Ferrer gets a position at a small Maine village, not unlike Bing Crosby coming to work to take over Barry Fitzgerald's practice in Welcome Stranger. But Bing wasn't exactly carrying the secret Ferrer has. He and Pearson never even tell their kids.

It all comes crashing down when a background check on Ferrer disqualifies him from a Naval commission. The only place for black people in those days was mess stewards. The rest of the story is how Ferrer and his family deal with being ripped from the racial closet and the town around him.

In the climax the town preacher Robert Dunn who was a real minister as well speaks for the town and how they deal with this knowledge about their trusted town physician.

Mel Ferrer got his first big break in Lost Boundaries and while it's not quite a classic it holds up well for today's audience.

Might be a good film for a gay black audience to view.

Others have described Lost Boundaries very well here, so we will not retrace the plot. As we watched this movie on TCM, it again reinforced our feeling that the movie industry has in some ways lost its way today. From what we can see, while Lost Boundaries was well reviewed by contemporary viewers, it was not particularly recognized when it was made. Nevertheless, being a modest production of its time, it easily surpasses so many movies made today with far greater resources in terms of budget, "star power," and other means. When the industry focused on telling human stories with human beings, it was much more convincing. Today, there is so much focus on marketing, gimmickry, "star" power, and extraneous things like special effects and post-production polishing that it seems the stories lack that "human touch."

We live in Hawaii, and recently saw "The Descendants" out of natural curiosity to see our home state featured, and our response, and that of others we know, was lukewarm. The story seemed to lack depth and any real investment of characters to any stakes (since it was in part about land and wealth), yet it is being touted for Best Picture and more. Clooney was already given Best Actor in the Golden Globes, and our belief is that the award is being rigged because he is a Hollywood favorite and insider. It is a typical Clooney job...glib and slightly sarcastic, and it baffles us that it merits any such recognition.

Occasionally someone makes a great picture because talent is irrepressible and will always emerge, but now it seems to be in spite of the industry rather than because of it. It seems that the television producers seem to have passed the feature film producers in telling stories (Mad Men, Breaking Bad). Tell stories with people, about people, by people...please.

This film is loosely based on the experiences of Albert Johnston, a black physician who could pass for white, and his light skinned wife, also African American.

In the film, the protagonist is Dr. Scott Carter and his wife Marcia Carter. His wife's family has been passing for white their entire adult lives, and is not happy about Albert's decision to practice medicine openly, as a black man, for fear that the truth would come out about themselves.

So Carter gets an internship in Georgia at a black hospital, but is rejected there because he looks so white. He goes back to Boston - where he graduated and where his wife's family lives - and tries for internships in white hospitals as a black man, with no success. Then he finally decides to "pass" for white long enough to finish his internship, and gets one in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. While there he saves the life of a doctor whose father, the town doctor in Keenan, NH, has just died. That doctor recommends him to take over his father's practice, even after Scott confesses his true race to him.

Scott says this is only for a little while, until he can get some money in the bank and build a reputation, and then he will practice somewhere as a black doctor. Scott DOES build up the clinic in Boston open to all races named after a mentor with an old school buddy in his spare time. But time passes in Keenan. First a son is born then a daughter, both light skinned as their parents are, and although the reason is never given, it is probably because the Carters can give their children a life of opportunity that they could never give them if they were known to be black, that they continue the ruse for twenty years. Their son is attending a good college, their daughter is a typical teen with crushes and giggly friends. And then their secret gets out in a most unusual way.

This is a very well done film with good acting, direction, and production values, with it being shot on location in New England. The sequence where the teenage son is told his heritage is particularly poignant, with him looking in the mirror and at his arms and hands, like he is seeing himself for the first time. The original material actually focused on the son.

What is different about this film is that it is a tale of prejudice and what it takes to get around those prejudices in the north, where the opposition does not consist of organized violence and bullying and men on horseback with torches in the night. Instead it is quiet but firm social exclusion. And there are sympathetic white folks in the film - the preacher in Keenan, the doctor who gives Scott his big chance, and a cop in Harlem. But the societal boundaries that keep African Americans from succeeding and participating in all walks of life are still there.

Producer Louis De Rochemont was originally going to make this film with MGM, but there were creative differences. I can only imagine that Louis B. Mayer somehow wanted to make it into a musical . Instead, Rochemont put up his own money and made the cinema gem that is this film. Highly recommended.

My first reaction to this movie was that it came across as very dated, indeed - both in terms of the plot and the social issue involved, and just in the fact that it looked like an old movie. Some movies from that era hold up well and continue to feel fresh. This one didn't have that feel. Still, when you think about it in the context of the era in which it was made, it seems to have been a courageous enough movie, and those involved with it must have thought that it had an importance to it, because I doubt that anyone connected with it went into it thinking it would be a box office hit! In fact, it was banned in several cities - especially in the south, including Atlanta.

The story (based on the actual life of Dr. Albert Johnson) revolves around the Clark family. Mason Clark is a doctor, and Marcia is his wife. They have a seemingly normal existence. They move to a small town in New Hampshire, where he becomes the town doctor and eventually becomes quite respected and even loved. They raise two kids and everything is outwardly blissful. But the Clarks have a secret. They're "passing." Mason and Marcia both have "Negro blood" - which means they're black as far as society is concerned, but they hide that from everyone including their kids. When World War II breaks out and Mason tries to join the Navy a little investigation reveals their secret, and the once beloved town doctor is beloved no longer, and his kids are devastated - understandably since their entire life, their entire existence and their entire identity has been turned upside down.

One of the more controversial things about this movie was the casting of Mel Ferrer and Beatrice Pearson as the Clarks - both very much white actors playing blacks. Without black face, of course - because the Clarks are supposed to have been light-skinned enough to "pass" - but some are bothered by that. I think that's a 21st century reaction, mind you, that probably didn't cause much fuss in 1949. This was the first credited role for Ferrer, who had a long career and in later years became more known for guest roles in TV series and made for TV movies, and Pearson didn't really do very much after this either. I thought their performances were all right, but neither, in my opinion, were outstanding.

I'd think of this more as a historical curiosity than a truly good movie - one that gives a wee bit of a look into the plight of blacks in that era and some insight into why many of those who were able to would simply choose to hide their race and live "white" lives. (6/10)

Based on a true story Lost Bounderies is a movie about an African American couple that pass for white so the husband can get a job as a doctor. The couple lives this lie for many years until they are forced to face the truth and come clean with their children and community. Like all movies based on a true story Lost Bounderies takes liberties with the original story adding plot devices to make the story more dramatic and interesting. All in all the movie played out like a very long sitcom. The acting was average at best, the actors delivering the lines in the same monotone style no matter the situation. The plot was extremely weak leaving the motivations of many of the characters very ambiguous and contradictory. For example, the main character was an African American doctor who seemed very proud of his race but somehow he has raised a racist daughter who doesn't know that she is black. Another problem for the movie was making the townspeople seem extremely cautious of outsiders while at the same time not making them seem xenophobic and racist. i cannot help but feel that this movie was a very feeble and mediocre attempt at making a movie that dealt with race relations. The greatest weakness to this film is that it skirts around the real issue of racism and instead goes for the side issue of personal identity and the acceptance of other people.

There are many who regard 1939 as an amazing year for Hollywood filmmaking, with 'Gone With the Wind' of course cited as a part of that. What a contrast this film is, made just ten years later in 1949. GWTW had incredibly lavish production value and major star power, but was based on a novel propagating the Southern myths about the Civil War and among other things, glamorizing slavery. 'Lost Boundaries' is quite humble by comparison, but dared to confront white supremacy in America, and most notably, in a northern state (though interestingly, changed the ending of the real-life family, thus doing a bit of glamorizing of its own, but I'm getting a little ahead of myself here).

The film should get a lot of credit for treating the subject of light-skinned black people 'passing' as white, and the myriad identity issues around that (with oneself, one's family, and the community). It doesn't hold back in showing the cruelty of subtle racism - people who are friendly on the surface, but harbor ugly views. Among others things, there's a nurse who doesn't want to submit a black man's blood during a war blood drive, a woman who doesn't want to serve cake to a black man invited to a party as a friend, and institutions like hospitals and the Navy who simply won't take black doctors or officers. We see just how ridiculous it is that the merest drop of black blood in a family tree is enough to taint a person and incite racism (the supreme irony of course, being that a "superior race" could be so vulnerable). The black people in this film who can't pass are also treated with dignity and respect, not speaking in stereotypes and just regular people.

At a time when America was just emerging from the nadir of race relations and creeping towards the Civil Rights Movement, there were a great many publications and speeches warning of the "mongrelization" of the white race if the segregation was ended and blacks were treated as equals. Indeed, this fear persists to this day, though the underlying white supremacy is (slightly) more cloaked. This film defies that racist view, which is all the more impressive considering the Production Code's edict against miscegenation. Theaters in several southern cities banned it, and while it may seem stilted or quaint today, it was certainly viewed as progressive bordering on radical at the time, and dangerous. I love it for all of those things even if I recognize its faults, one of which was the casting of white people in the lead roles. To me, that's regrettable but minor given what the film stood for, and when it was made.

As for entertainment today, I confess my mind wandered as the story played out. There is some nice footage in New England but little else to recommend the film on a technical level, and the story feels overly packaged with the narration. It doesn't go into depth about what it means to be black, and the alteration to the ending to make the audience feel good was disrespectful and a mistake, undercutting the power of what came before it. The performances are decent but the film lacks the feeling of real danger for these characters. It's worth seeing for the window into what progress looked like in 1949 though.

The production of this film is so so. Nothing to brag about. But the subject content and the way it was approached, at least for the time that it was produced and shown, this was a groundbreaking film. No wonder it was banned from many movie theatres in the South and in the north, simply because it speak truth to power and it humanized black people. Once you're able to humanize something or to empathize with it, you're less likely to abhor or hate it. That's why this movie is so great, and it's why it got so much flak from White America for portraying such truth.

Lost Boundaries I felt was a really good film. Never would have even thought of something like it. The family had such good hearts and were caring and loving people who got along with everyone they met pretty much. No body knew they were actually African American though. If people had known they would not have had the life they lived for such a long time. He wanted to tell people. He did not want to have to keep his race a secret just so he would be treated differently. Its sad to think that people were really like that. This movie has a great ending however. You think for a little while that once their secret was revealed that they were going to be shunned by everyone. They were at first too except for the daughter with her boyfriend. He never let it bother him. She was more ashamed of it than he was which is also very sad. Those kids grew up just like all the other white kids thinking that being a Negro was a terrible thing and even though the son was kind to them and one of his best friends was Negro he was not pleased and was disgusted when he found out he was actually African American himself just very light skinned. But the town comes around when in church the preacher preaches about how that is not how God would do things. God loves everyone and treats everyone equally and it was at the end of the service that people let go of the grudge they had against different colors. They also kept him as their town doctor. I saw many things in this film that I would be appalled to see actually happen to day but that doesn't change the fact that that is how the times were then and just how people acted.

1949 was an incredible year for films when it came to race. Several movies that year were ahead of their time when it came to dealing with black America and prejudice. Up until I saw this film, I would have said the best of these is "Intruder in the Dust"...a film about a Southern town intent where the mob was intent on lynching a innocent black man. "Pinky" is a film about a very light-skinned woman who passes for white. And, "Lost Boundaries" is the sad story based on a real family where a very light-skinned black doctor faces discrimination from all sides.

When the film begins, Dr. Carter (Mel Ferrer) has just graduated from medical school. He's also just received an internship at a Southern black hospital (in those days, hospitals in the South were segregated)...but when he arrives, the internship is rescinded because he is so light-skinned. Having few other options, Carter finds himself moving to a New England town and eventually taking a job....and not telling anyone he's not a Caucasian (despite appearances)....though it pains him not to be publicly proud of his heritage. It's simply because he can't find work as a 'black' doctor. Eventually his understandable decision to pass comes to light.

This story is based on the lives of Albert and Thyra Johnston and is essentially true, but with a few change (such as names and places). It's interesting because this story and the real life folks were New Englanders...defying the stereotype that prejudice was just confined to the South in the old days.

While I had a few minor gripes about the story (such as how everyone back in the 1920s dress and look like folks from 1949), there isn't a lot to dislike about this film. It honestly deals with race in a way that is even, possibly, more open than we are willing to talk about it today. The film doesn't shy away from offensive language...which I think helps the story because it clearly shows how ugly racism is. A terrific and seldom seen film that needs to be seen. I particularly liked hearing from a black man in the story who said that he hated the way whites were 'overly polite' when around him...a strange and covert type of racism. Unflinching and exceptionally well made...and, not surprisingly, a film not made by any of the major studios.

By the way, some today might complain that the blacks posing as whites were all played by white actors. However, for 1949, this sort of thing simply wasn't very likely...and so, considering everything, I appreciate the casting decisions and understand this.

Quite moving. The only complaint I have is Hollywood was very hypocritical. They do a movie on blacks passing as white because of lack of opportunities but they won't give real blacks a chance to play the leading parts in Pinky and Lost Boundaries. The leading characters are good in their roles, they try really hard to step in the shoes of the Negro but they don't know what it's really like for a Negro or a white-looking Negro. The movie would have been more so effective with white-looking, mulatto Black actors/actresses playing the part. Fredi Washington was the only white-looking Negro to play a true mulatto in Imitation of Life. There were many white looking black actors and actresses who could have played the leading parts such as Hilda Simms, Anne Wiggins Brown, Fredi Washington, Jack Carter, Barrington Guy, Monte Hawley, Niles Wells, Dick Campbell, Lorenzo Tucker, Frank Silvera but Hollywood rather use white actors and actresses who didn't even look mulatto to play white Negroes. I feel if your gonna do a movie on light-skinned Blacks passing as whites, at least, get whites who look the part. Linda Darnell would have been perfect as the mulatto in this movie and in Pinky because Linda looks mulatto, she don't look like the average white woman just like Ava Gardner and Helen Morgan who played mulattoes in Showboat. Hollywood's main audience were white so they catered to white audiences and they knew whites didn't want to see REAL white-looking Negroes passing for white being among whites on screen, it would be too real for white America, they rather see white actors playing the "passing" role.

I often wonder how could a so-called Black look white and not be white? I feel if you look white, why not be white if that's dominant in you regardless if you have one or two drops of black blood. No one is pure 100% white or black. Whites made the rule that if you got one or two drops of black blood in you, your Black even if you look white. White America didn't want mixed blood in their race, even if it was their fault, so they called the mixed blood ones mulattoes and kept a close eye on them making sure they didn't pass. One thing I want to add is not every mulatto wanted to be white, not all of them were confused and ashamed like these movies try to make lighter complected Negroes out to be. Not all of them were forced to be Black by society, many chose to be Black. Many white looking Blacks were more prouder to be Black then some darker ones. Many never took the easy way out by passing when they could have but it never crossed the minds of ones actors mentioned above. Leonard Reed, a popular performer in his time lived as Black and white but he was mostly involved in the Black race.

When people say light skin is better do they mean if your light you have a better chance at a better life because you can pass for white? This movie proved whites didn't care how light a black person looked, if you had black ancestry, black family, black blood, your in the same boat as darker Blacks. Don't let other people's prejudice and racism be your problem, that's their problem. Being white doesn't automatically mean your free and perfect. This same year this movie came out, one of the first black female playwrights Elsie Roxborough committed suicide after passing for white for over 10 years, she wasn't much of a success as a white woman as she was a Black woman which goes to prove the grass isn't always so greener on the other side.

The young kids in the movie after finding out their Black already know at a young age the ridicule they will face in life and automatically they think something is wrong with them because society teaches kids at a young age, white is right and black is bad by separating and by talk. Movies of this type always try to make it look like Black people's problems are their own faults and whites done nothing wrong when it was whites who taught self-hatred to the Negro and brainwashed everyone to feel something is wrong with Blacks. If this really was the land of the free no one would hate or feel the need to pass to have a better life.

Some passed for white to help their race later like in slavery time mulattoes would pass later to return to buy their family who were still slaves and give them freedom. Many would trick whites like by buying a home from whites that they couldn't get if it was known they were Black. Some felt the white man do wrong by being prejudice so blacks did wrong by passing. This movie proves judge a person by their work, heart, goodness, forget color and race. This movie also proves not everyone hates their race but if their desperate enough to pass to get what they want they will pass. Merle Oberon hid her true race because she knew she wouldn't have become a big star. So she tricked Hollywood. Frank Silvera was a black man who passed in Hollywood movies. Some still don't know that he was a black man. He played different races on screen but off screen he was a black man. The only way for him to show his talent and not be judged was by tricking the whites in Hollywood and Broadway. Many non-whites passed and hid their true identity, or let people guess in Hollywood, Broadway, and in the world so they couldn't be judged wrongfully. So maybe light skin is better if you chose to pass. A racist and prejudice person is a person has an inferiority complex they have to make others feel something is wrong with them to make themselves feel good.

For a film in 1949 to take on this theme, and do it so reasonably well is admirable indeed. Many today don't realise just how ugly racism was during this era and how difficult it was, not only to produce a movie such as this, but also how near impossible it was to get them distributed. Many theatres, shamefully, would simply not run them.

While the first few minutes have a dated feel to the production style, it picks up surprisingly well as it moves into its challenging (and factual) black-passing-for-white story. Some reviewers, perhaps understandably, still get upset because producers were casting white actors to play black (or ethnics) in these early racially-themed films but, they fail to understand that there were not enough well known ethnic performers available. The moviemakers then had the added difficulty of selling the final product - this was never an easy task, with movies being expensive to make, and many cinemas refusing to book them. Things may be different now, but back then, these films simply would not have been made if following 'idealist' notions.

Mell Ferrer is good in his role, playing real life Dr Scott Mason Carter, with a marvellous performance from Richard Hyland as his son (Hyland is sadly little known as he took his own life at age 41) Producer Louis De Rochemont, whose background was in producing news programs - infuses his movie with a 'semi-documentary' approach giving it a more realistic feel. All performances are top flight and the use of every-day looking (un-glamorised) associate cast members helps. Stage actress, Beatrice Pearson is good as the Dr's Wife in her second, of only two movie appearances. Writer, William White's sociological commentary has been thoughtfully adapted for the screen and treats its daring subject with sensitivity and respect - without over-dramatising or sensationalising its controversial subject. William J.Miller's strong B/W cinematography (Teresa'51) has a noir look and feel, adding stark moodiness to the more dramatic situations. Cannes film festival nominee William L. Werker ('He Walked By Night' also '49) earnestly directs.

The image and sound quality of the Warner Archive DVD are thankfully better than some other M.O.D. transfers around and worth buying.