La fière créole

If you've heard The Foxes of Harrow being compared to Gone With the Wind, it's probably because the novels have a similar setting. The movies really aren't alike. I've since looked up a synopsis of the novel, and it's quite different from the 1947 drama. So, in case you don't like the movie, you might still be interested in checking out the scandalous novel, which spans more time and goes through the Civil War.

In the movie, Rex Harrison plays an illegitimate Irish rogue who makes his way to America by gambling and sometimes cheating. He doesn't care about being a scoundrel, because he always lands on his feet and he climbs his way back to the top. He gets an influential friend, Richard Hayden, in the crème of New Orleans society, and quickly he amasses a fortune and becomes a legitimate suitor to Maureen O'Hara, a fiery debutante. She should know exactly what she's getting into, because she's seen his roguish ways first-hand, but after she marries him, she seems shocked and disgusted by his character. They have a child, but because his housekeeper threw away some good-luck voodoo dolls made by one of their slaves (remember this is pre-Civil War times), their house gets a curse on it and things go from bad to worse.

I'm neither a Rex Harrison nor a Maureen O'Hara fan, so I wasn't the best target audience for this movie. I appreciated the intense melodrama of the story, and part of me is tempted to read the book, but since I find Rex unlikable anyway, I couldn't really get behind the story. He's unlikable enough even when you're supposed to root for him, let alone when he's a scoundrel!

This is a Cliff's Notes version of a heavily plotted historical novel dealing with Stephen Fox's rise and fall in New Orleans plantation society during the 1820's-1830's. Film has plot points similar to GWTW and "Anthony Adverse." Fox is Yerby's version of Rhett Butler; Odalie, his version of Scarlett. Rex Harrison is sadly miscast as Fox; Maureen O'Hara is waxy and cold as Odalie. Treatment of black characters is the most condescending I've seen in a film from this era (1947). Received top notch production values; should have been in color. But '47 was the year Fox made "Forever Amber" and its color went into that historical romance.

"The Foxes of Harrow," released in 1947, like a lot of Fox movies, is reminiscent of classics made at other studios. Fox was very reactive: when San Francisco was a hit, Fox followed with In Old Chicago; It Happened One Night - Fox does Love is News; and here we have Fox's low-budget answer to Gone with the Wind, The Foxes of Harrow. Based on the novel by Frank Yerby, it is purported to be the first novel by a black author purchased for films. Given that Fox paid $150,000 for it, I suspect the intention was to do the film in color, especially with Maureen O'Hara in it - I mean, what a waste in black and white. What happened, I don't know.

I don't have any doubt that this film was intended for Tyrone Power (and this may be why the budget was cut) - I mean, come on, Irish roots, Maureen O'Hara, period costumes, swordplay - it has his name all over it. He was busy in 1947 during this time, having gone from Captain from Castile into Nightmare Alley, so Rex Harrison plays the role of Stephen Fox, who was taken from his wealthy family when he was born illegitimate. In the 1800s, he becomes a successful gambler and eventually wins a Louisiana plantation from a compulsive gambler, though Fox turns around and purchases the property from the man's widow. He builds Harrow, intent on creating a new dynasty with the woman of his dreams, the beautiful Odalie 'Lilli' D'Arceneaux (O'Hara), the feisty daughter of a friend (Gene Lockhart).

Odalie finds him disgusting and wants nothing to do with him, but her father points out that the line between love and hate is a thin one. Once she confronts her feelings, the two marry. After a fight on their wedding night, during which she locks him out of her room, he knocks the door down. You can guess the rest. She never has anything to do with him again, though a child is born as a result of that night. The story continues from there, as Fox obsesses on his son and later becomes involved in the bank crash of 1821.

Slavery, voo-doo, prostitution, and kissing in front of a double bed (the Hayes office must have loved that one) are all part of "The Foxes of Harrow," and the film is fairly well done. It's a funny thing about miscasting - with a good enough actor, sometimes it works out. This isn't a usual role for Rex Harrison, but brilliant actor that he was, he pulls it off. He's quite dashing and powerful here. Maureen O'Hara is gorgeous, with magnificent costumes. Though she has a gentle, lilting voice, she does feisty well, and here she plays a rather cold woman who softens toward her son.

The big problem is that there are no sparks between Harrison and O'Hara. The chemistry just isn't there. Nevertheless, this is a good, entertaining film. Sigh. I just kept picturing Tyrone's flashing eyes, and talk about chemistry with Maureen O'Hara - oh, well, the best laid plans.

Critics suggested that Frank Yerby must have fashioned his THE FOXES OF HARROW on the sort of epic best-sellers enormously popular when GONE WITH THE WIND and ANTHONY ADVERSE were taking the public by storm. But Fox apparently had less faith in this turgid screenplay and gave it a more modest B&W budget, apparently investing all their time in producing FOREVER AMBER in lavish Technicolor.

It was a wise decision not to spend too much on this supposed blockbuster of a movie. It's amusing to note that when it opened in New York at the Roxy theater and was mercilessly panned by Bosley Crowther for being adrift in a sea of clichés, MILTON BERLE was the featured attraction of the stage show that accompanied the film.

REX HARRISON is the strong-willed tyrant who breaks up his marriage in order to win fame and wealth in New Orleans of 1820. The lumbering script is as dull as his character. MAUREEN O'HARA plays her usual feisty heroine, "proud and beautiful" as described by RICHARD HAYDYN, the type of cardboard beauty seen on the covers of risqué bodice rippers. She's a frozen delight in the role.

The long and very uninvolving story has them bickering like a less colorful gambler and scoundrel playing Rhett to Maureen's bold Scarlett, with none of the necessary plot ingredients necessary to make this more than a stale and very tall tale full of dull dialog and long stretches of boredom.

Trivia note: If you look carefully, some of the interior sets look like holdovers from FOREVER AMBER.

Maureen O'Hara is always stunning, but I don't remember seeing Rex Harrison so young and handsome. Even so there wasn't much romance between two such intransigent characters as Odalie D'Arceneaux and Stephen Fox. Their relationship is tragic enough, but the film also makes no apologies for the institution of slavery that haunts the background of so many scenes. Fox starts out as a decent "maitre," who'll work alongside his workers and slaves, but he never recognizes the parallel between his own loss of family and birthright and that of Little Inch, whose fierce mother Belle intends to be a warrior. In that sense "Harrow" may be a more useful look at slavery than in more enlightened films.