If Teresa Wright had stayed in the role of Julia and Grant and Niven hadn't switched roles! I can't see anyone other than Loretta Young as Julia. And I'm trying to imagine David Niven as Dudley with Cary Grant as Henry. It boggles the mind!
shareI think Teresa Wright would have been lovely in the role, although Loretta Young does have an otherworldliness that lends itself to the part.
Switching David Niven and Cary Grant could have worked. David Niven was quite adept at playing suave, debonair types and Cary Grant could play befuddled straight man pretty well, too. Think of BRINGING UP BABY.
I'm not saying that I would prefer the movie with a different cast. However, I can see the thinking behind the original casting, too.
Still my favorite holiday movie!
I haven't seen enough movies with Teresa Wright(wasn't she Charlie in SHADOW OF A DOUBT?), but am very partial to the underrated Loretta Young in the role. Those big eyes of hers are, to quote the old expression, the windows to her soul. I also haven't seen very many Niven movies, but have always liked him. I can't see Grant playing the Bishop though. I guess simply because I don't have the imagination. It certainly wouldn't be due to his lack of ability. BW is such a wonderful film. It is probably hovering around the top on my holiday films list.
share[deleted]
I just don't see in Teresa Wright(in my limited exposure to her)the Heaven on Earth quality Dudley says Julia has and which Loretta Young shows in spades. The casting of even the minor roles in the movie seems inspired.
shareTotally agree about LY's eyes...she could convey so much without words. Maybe that's because she started in silent movies, but this was the perfect role for her.
shareI have to admit I'm curious how great Teresa Wright would have been in The Bishop's Wife. I love to watch her movies, and the fact that she might have been Cary Grant's leading lady would have been very interesting!! Wright and David Niven were wonderful together in a beautiful romantic drama called Enchantment.
The film may not have been as great, but one wonders if casting stayed the same how much better or worse The Bishop's Wife would be.
"Dry your eyes baby, it's out of character."
If Teresa Wright had stayed in the role of Julia and Grant and Niven hadn't switched roles! I can't see anyone other than Loretta Young as Julia. And I'm trying to imagine David Niven as Dudley with Cary Grant as Henry. It boggles the mind!
I heard about that original casting story.
Niven as the Bishop is perfect and Grant as a flawed angel is outstanding, who doesn't get the girl in the end, like he usually did.
"I promise you, before I die I'll surely come to your doorstep"
eden_echo says > I heard about that original casting story. Niven as the Bishop is perfect and Grant as a flawed angel is outstanding, who doesn't get the girl in the end, like he usually did.I love the movie exactly as it is. Each of the actors played their roles perfectly. I can kind of imagine the roles reversed and I can even see Teresa Wright as Julia but not in the same combination of actors. I don't think Wright would have played as well against Grant and Loretta Young did. She would have been fine with David Niven as the angel or her husband but I can't picture Grant as her husband.
Loretta Young was perfectly cast as Julia. But Grant and Niven's roles should have been reversed---and here's why: before even reading anything about this movie, when I saw that both Niven and Grant were in it and that it was a movie about a bishop and an angel, guess who I automatically assumed would be the angel? That's right---David Niven! It's an instinct thing. And come to find out, the part was originally intended for him anyway, so my instinct was right-on! Too bad Cary Grant didn't agree!
Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!
MyMovieRomance says > ...Grant and Niven's roles should have been reversed---and here's why: before even reading anything about this movie, when I saw that both Niven and Grant were in it and that it was a movie about a bishop and an angel, guess who I automatically assumed would be the angel? That's right---David Niven! It's an instinct thing. And come to find out, the part was originally intended for him anyway, so my instinct was right-on! Too bad Cary Grant didn't agree!Your instincts matched what the filmmakers originally had in mind. They even started to make that movie but, apparently, they realized that wasn't the way to go. I think the change made for a better movie. Naturally, we can't know how the other version would have turned out but we do know that this version worked. By the way, from what I hear, Grant was happy to have been cast as the bishop and did not want to swap roles. He had to be convinced to go along with it. You seem to be saying that he always wanted to be the angel. He did such a great job as the angel I can see how people might think that was his initial choice.
I really don't think it would have been as good w/Grant's and Niven's roles reversed. I think they both played their parts to best effect; and I don't think it would have been as believable that Grant, as the bishop, would be paranoid about Niven's stealing away his wife--or Sylvester's mistaking Dudley for her husband.
This sentence is false. -- The Zurich Gnome