The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing

"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?

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.

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.

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.

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.