THE MOON IS BLUE
US, 1953, 99 minutes, Black and white.
William Holden, David Niven, Maggie Mc Namara, Tom Tully, Dawn Addams, Gregory Ratoff.
Directed by Otto Preminger.
The Moon is Blue is a light romantic comedy – something like the French farces which introduce elements of sex and comedy.
However, while the film was nominated for several Oscars (including Maggie Mc Namara as best actress) and won a Golden Globe award for David Niven, the film is remembered for the controversies that it raised.
This was 1953. The Motion Picture Code had been in force for almost thirty years. There were a number of prohibitions, even of words. F. Hugh Herbert’s play, produced on Broadway, did not cause a stir when it used such words as pregnant, virgin, seduction, mistress. However, with the transfer to film, the Hayes Office objected and an appeal to the Motion Picture Association was turned down. The film received a condemnation from the Legion of Decency.
In retrospect, this seems very strange – but was a sign of the moral tone of the motion picture industry in the United States in the early 1950s.
Otto Preminger, who had emerged as a significant director in the 1940s with such films as Laura and Forever Amber, continued to make interesting films and, in this same year, William Holden won an Oscar for Stalag 17. Preminger continued to make a number of films in the 1960s which were big-budget blockbusters including Exodus, The Cardinal, In Harm’s Way.
Preminger also challenged the Motion Picture Code in 1966 with some innuendo and phallic symbols in Hurry Sundown with Michael Caine and Jane Fonda.
Aside from the controversy, The Moon is Blue now seems a witty light romantic comedy.
1. The title referred to 'once in a blue moon'. Did this indicate the tone and significance of the film? How?
2. The film was based on a play. Was the film too stagebound? Too contrived in its following of the stage scenes and acts?
3. Was this a good comedy? Why? How humorous and laughing was it? How much a comedy of manners? How much a comedy looking into human foibles? Was the comedy too local? Was the comedy in situations? Dialogue?
4. Who was the central character of the film? Why?
5. Patty. What kind of a girl was she? Was she attractive in her personality? What were your first impressions of her at the Empire State Building? How naive was she? How sincere? How sure of herself? Why was she attracted by Don? Was she too much of a flirt? How did she handle situations? The directness of her language? Her relationship to David Slater? Her ability to say everything at once? Her response to the misunderstandings by Don and by David? Her falling in love with Don? Was it sincere and real? What future would she have with Don?
6. Don Gresham. What kind of man was he? On that day? after his break with Cynthia? Don as a typical middle American, architect etc? Was he trying to seduce Patty? How did he treat her? His attitude towards David? Towards Cynthia? Was he able to cope with Patty's' directness? Why did he fall in love with her?
7. David Slater. His role in the film? Comic relief? A balance to Don? His relationship with Patty? The sincerity of his proposal of marriage? What values did he stand for? How did these correspond with Patty's? His role as Cynthia's father and his treatment of her?
8. Cynthia. What kind of person was she? Did she have any sincerity? The contrived nature of her tantrums?
9. A lot of direct talk was contained in the film. How acceptable was this? In its time it created scandal. Why have things changed now?
10. Was Patty's approach to the truth more acceptable than Don's circumlocutions? Why? Was Patty a truthful person? Was this attractive in her? Was the lack of truth and sincerity in Don and David repellent?
11. What was said about the nature of real love and the relationship of men and women? Did the film have something to contribute here?
12. There were many witty lines in the film. Did they give particular insights into behaviour and human character?
13. The film caused great scandal in its time. Is this understandable? Why?
