MovieChat Forums > Leave Her to Heaven Discussion > How was this not a production code viola...

How was this not a production code violation?

posted 11 years ago by paul-987
9 replies | jump to latest

I just watched LHTH for the first time on TCM last night. There's a scene that seems like a clear violation of one of the elements of the production code (man and woman in bed together). I'm not sure how they got away with it. When Richard and Ellen wake up one morning in the "Back of the Moon" house, they are sleeping in the silly separate twin beds as required by the code. But Ellen gets up, goes over to Richard's bed, lies down beside him and kisses him. Before anything else happens, Danny pounds on the thin wall, saying he can hear everything -- Danny, you're going to regret that shortly...

How is Ellen and Richard lying in the same bed kissing allowed under the Production Code? We can't see whether she had a foot on the floor (the clever way to dodge that bed rule) and it seems like she'd need to contort herself to keep a foot on the floor. Does anyone know anything about how they got away with that bed scene? I know there was considerable discussion during the production about how they could deal with Ellen's miscarriage and not violate the code, but I've never seen any discussion about that bed scene.

[–] bdkbach 11 years ago

This is the best still I could find. Look closely and her legs disappear behind the bed. It is a very thin line.

Nice catch.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-iGvcXs-YgR0/Ts08ZHGIPxI/AAAAAAAAC9Y/RiKQpDzW nr4/s1600/leavehertoheaven3.png

Wenn zwei sich streiten, freut sich der Dritte

[–] macfilm 9 years ago

The production Code at the time specified that if a married couple are shown in bed together, at least one of them had to have at least one foot touching the floor.

And, as bdkbach noted, Ellen's legs are tucked off to the side of the bed, and it can be assumed, reasonably, that she has one foot on the floor, even if it is not clearly seen to be so.

In any case, it seems the producers got the Code Office to think so.

[–] marckymarc71 9 years ago

I read this thread last night and watched the movie tonight--paying particular attention to this scene. When Gene climbed onto the bed it was clearly obvious that she did NOT leave a "foot on the floor".

It's important to note that the "code" was not iron clad. They got around the "rule" by having Gene on top of the covers and Cornell beneath.

2 other examples of 2 people in bed together "feet OFF the floor" are in MADE FOR EACH OTHER (Jimmy Stewart and Carole Lombard, 1939) and EASY TO LOVE (Jimmy Stewart and Eleanor Powell, 1936). In those cases they allowed it because in both cases both actors were clothed and on top of the covers.

"Who's running this airline?!"

[–] butaneggbert 9 years ago

Also worth noting the unofficial "barter" system that went on with the code. Sometimes it was overt - censors object to five scenes, creators push back on one, everybody settles for four.

Then there was the more one-sided technique: scripts were submitted with whoppers the studios could never get away with. And they knew it. Those were a feint to draw attention away from what they DID want to get away with.

Who knows what went on behind the scenes so that Tierney could ultimately be shown with both legs arguably on the bed?

Pure stupidity, the whole thing. All that effort to keep Hollywood product infantilized while worldwide cinema swept past. But that's a different topic (picks up soapbox, stalks away ... ).

_______________

Nothing to see here, move along.

[–] bctelecom 9 years ago

Not to mention a few scenes later they are back in the bedroom and she buries her face in his lap! ?

[–] RobbieCalifornia 9 years ago

The whole twin bed issue seems so absurd now, the whole Production Code thing must have frustrated directors to no end.

I just watched the twin bed scene, there was nothing sexy about it.

[–] JPLogan54 9 years ago

Men and women in bed was not strictly prohibited. It was to be handled with "special care". Perhaps Hays was all good with the scene since they did wake up in separate beds. The suggestion they might have had sex would have been avoided in this way.
I am not familiar with the "one foot on the floor" clause.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] liscarkat (18897) 4 years ago

"the silly separate twin beds"

Married couple sleeping in twin beds was common at that time. My parents, married in 1953, had twin beds until 1967, when they got a king-size bed. Sleep was sleep. Sex took place during inter-bed visits.