MovieChat Forums > Two for the Road (1967) Discussion > Did Joanna know about (or even suspect) ...

Did Joanna know about (or even suspect) Mark's Infidelity?


As far as I can see Two For The Road doesn't provide any indication that she does, so we should assume she doesn't know/suspect anything, but what do other people think? Am I missing something? I've read the odd review that describes Joanna as (among other things) getting sick of her husband's philandering, but I can't find any evidence for that myself.

Relatedly, I've tended to interpret Mark's fling with the blonde in the blue convertible as his only fling, but I guess it's possible to interpret it as standing for a wider pattern of philandering - perhaps the reappearance of the blonde in the blue convertible in the slightly surreal shot of all the cars passing through the roundabout about 2 minutes from the end of the film signals this? What does everyone think?

reply

I wondered about this myself. There's a scene where they're about to make love - probably - and Audrey says, "Wouldn't matter who I was, would it?". That made me think that she felt that he was unfaithful to her as a matter of course. Take a look at this thread: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062407/board/nest/188617396.

But his infidelity seems to be unimportant to the plot.

(I just watched it for the second time after many years. I came to IMDb to see if I could get a clue as to why I found it so unsatisfying, unpleasant, and disturbing. It was as if it couldn't decide what it wanted to be/say. And no, I'm not a fan of action films or simple-minded romantic comedies.)

reply

@printphi. Thanks for your response and the thread suggestion.

My own inclination, however, is to take Joanna's "Wouldn't matter who I was, would it?" not as referring to Mark's infidelity but as expressing the uncomfortable, anti-romantic truth that talk of 'sexual appetites' can always raise: that an appetite's satisfaction is quite bodily and impersonal (almost anyone of the right sex as far as you are concerned will do at that level, just as any food with appropriate nutrients etc will stop you from starving). Team America had great fun with this sort of idea:
http://youtu.be/wQ5mcU-wwYo

Anyhow, I too have come back to Two For The Road after a number of years, and I'm trying to understand it better. For example, I've recut the film strictly chronologically just to see how it plays (Obviously you lose all of the ingenious transition match cuts and other immediate paralleisms, but maybe something else is gained - there are six separate time periods juggled after all, which makes it easy to get confused). I may try to put that recut version up on youtube later this week and I'll post a link here if I do that

reply

On the film's commentary track, director Stanley Donen says that Joanna isn't "really completely aware of Mark's sexual transgressions" (note the plural) - at least, not in the same way that Mark is aware of hers. But the fact that in the 1963 "red Triumph" sequences we first see Mark having one of his flings, and then soon after Joanna rebuffs his advances by telling him "it wouldn't matter who I was, would it?" indicates she has a general idea of what he's been up to.

Also on the commentary track, Donen notes that he never felt Two For The Road would play well in standard chronological fashion, because he felt what gave the film its zest and unique quality was the non-linear structure that allowed for a VARIETY of romantic moods and emotions. He felt that the serious tone of many of the later scenes would become relentless and unvaried if arranged in standard chronological order. He also wanted to drive home the point (with the cross-cutting of time periods) that each time period represented the present, and that each time period should feel like the present to both the characters and the audience.

And personally, I wouldn't want to see the film any other way.

One other point - there are five separate time periods in the movie, not six. Hepburn's hairstyles tell you where you are, and so do the automobiles (thanks to the registrations stickers on the windshields):


1954: Joanna and Mark, after glimpsing each other on the ferry, travel first in the VW minibus together. After the other choir girls come down with chicken pox, they hitchhike.

1956: The Ford Country Squire stationwagon, with Howard & Cathy Maxwell Manchester (and Ruthiebell).

1960: The MG, which they drive until it meets a fiery death.

1963: The red Triumph.

1966: The white Mercedes 230.

reply

One other point - there are five separate time periods in the movie, not six. Hepburn's hairstyles tell you where you are, and so do the automobiles (thanks to the registrations stickers on the windshields)
I count Mark's cheating with the blonde when, we gather, Joanna's at home with Caroline as a baby still being fed at 3 in the morning, as a sixth time period (say, 1961).

Of course, a chronological edit loses way too much to be ever *preferable* to Donen's ingenious version, not least for the reasons you mention. Still, it can be revealing. For example, it does rub in how slippery certain points are.

Example: Joanna and Mark do more than just glimpse each other on the ferry, for example, they *do* exchange words, she very forwardly fishes out his passport from his bag, etc. (Indeed, it's almost inconceivable given both their natures that they wouldn't have flirted on immediately on the ferry, but set that aside).

In the chronological version it seems a little preposterous for Joanna to (2 seconds later) say and act as though she'd never met/spoken to Mark before when she runs across him on the tractor. The 'tractor' scene is separated by 8 minutes from the ferry scene in Donen's cut and that's *just* enough to not notice (in our real time) the discrepancy and implausibility (at least I'd never noticed the problem).

And Donen's version has a larger poetry to it - couples just do *love* to tell their own origin myths and often they do have multiple, slightly incompatible versions if you pay close attention.
On the film's commentary track, director Stanley Donen says that Joanna isn't "really completely aware of Mark's sexual transgressions" (note the plural) - at least, not in the same way that Mark is aware of hers.
Good, thanks for that. Given that was Donen's (and presumably Raphael's) intention it is kind of remarkable how much they play down Mark's fling or flings, e.g., Joanna never attempts to partially excuse her straying as tit-for-tat. If I had to guess, I'd say Donen's basic idea is prevent Mark becoming too unlikeable (a lot of people can't credit that Joanna would continue to put up with Mark as things stand; imagine how much greater that audience reaction would be if her nose were rubbed in his straying a lot more) and also to keep things kind of symmetrical: Mark's been discrete and hasn't in this primal way humiliated her whereas Joanna's straying is out-in-the-open and much more brutal and humiliating.

reply

I count Mark's cheating with the blonde when, we gather, Joanna's at home with Caroline as a baby still being fed at 3 in the morning, as a sixth time period (say, 1961).

Donen himself says there are five time periods on the commentary track; Joanna and Caroline could have easily joined him a few months, or even a few weeks, after the car had been "run in."





Example: Joanna and Mark do more than just glimpse each other on the ferry, for example, they *do* exchange words, she very forwardly fishes out his passport from his bag, etc. (Indeed, it's almost inconceivable given both their natures that they wouldn't have flirted on immediately on the ferry, but set that aside).

I never said that glimpsing each other was the only thing that happened between them on the ferry; just that this marked the beginning of the 1954 sequence. Originally, there were more scenes on the ferry that established Mark's awareness of ALL the choir girls. In Frederic Raphael's published screenplay for Two For The Road, there's a scene at the ferry snack bar where Mark is buying a sandwich from the display case while the choir girls are standing next to it; the clerk asks Mark which sandwich he wants, and he responds that he's not particular - that any of them would do. And when he says this, the girls giggle, aware of the double meaning in his response. Later, when the cars on the ship disembark, Mark tries to hitch a ride at the bottom of the runway; all the passengers ignore him, including the choir girls in the VW minibus. That's why he gloats rather grandly on the tractor; the girls now need his assistance - after they'd refused him before.

reply

Donen himself says there are five time periods on the commentary track; Joanna and Caroline could have easily joined him a few months, or even a few weeks, after the car had been "run in."
Well, my own guess is that Donen's just not counting the very short 'cheating' segment that's apparently when Caroline's still a baby ('When I'm not being woken at 3 in the morning, I feel very paternal.') and money/work's still hard to come by as a distinct time-period. That's perfectly fair of him, but I think my way of counting makes sense too.

Thanks for the additional info about the ferry scenes that either weren't shot or didn't make the cut. Clearly if any of that stuff has been included they'd *really* have had to alter Joanna's initial V.O. in the tractor scene.

Anyhow, I've put my chronological edit of Two For The Road (an exact counterpart of the dvd extra/easter-egg that Memento gives you to watch *it* in chrono. sequence) up on vimeo (youtube didn't buy my scholarly fair use defense) here:
http://vimeo.com/58958265
While a chronological edit loses way too much to be ever *preferable* to Donen's ingenious original, it's still worth watching/grabbing a copy of I'd say (and would be a good extra for the still absent blu-ray edition of TFTR to include).

reply

...my own guess is that Donen's just not counting the very short 'cheating' segment that's apparently when Caroline's still a baby ('When I'm not being woken at 3 in the morning, I feel very paternal.')


Well, if that's the way you see it, that's the way you see it. Personally, I think Donen is highly aware of every time period in Two For The Road, and Raphael's published screenplay also makes it clear that Mark's fling with the blonde doesn't take place a few years before 1963. As we see in their argument scene following the change of hotels (which takes place after he makes his "paternal" comment), Caroline is still in a crib and still needs attention when she wakes up during the night. And Mark makes it clear in his VO that his days of designing corporation bus shelters are behind him; if money and work were hard to come by, I doubt he'd be driving a spiffy new Triumph.

The additional scenes in the ferry wouldn't have altered the need to change Joanna's VO when she sees Mark in the tractor; the girls could have been "putty" about Mark but still recognize there was no room for him in the van without bunching up. Of course, Joanna still says "I'd never even spoken to you," in the final cut, even after the audience has watched her saying "You're welcome" to Mark aboard the ferry. But we have to entertain the possibility that Joanna didn't categorize two perfunctory words like "you're welcome" as actually SPEAKING to him (in the sense of having a conversation with him).

reply

This is a good question, worthy of debate. I've decided that she DOES know. Even though he is less than honest (with her, and even with himself) he is extremely transparent. She has so much insight into his character. She sees everything--she's got his passport!! and she has accepted him with all his flaws.

I think that the blonde in the convertible is just the only fling that we see, that we see it because it's the only one that happens in the movie's setting On The Road.

I love the contrast between the two infidelities that we see. He's the one who is so "honest" right from the start about how he can't be faithful, but when we see him having a fling, it's behind her back, and he lies outrageously to her in his letter home. HER affair begins right in front of him, right in front of his face in broad daylight, and she is completely honest with him all the way through.



reply

I think she might have suspected it subconsciously...have an emotional feeling about something being off ..not as much attention or affection.

I think the comment in the hotel room saying it wouldn't matter who I was or something to that effect was because she was very upset with him and hurt after their argument especially him agreeing with her that he just wanted an affair with her not to get married. Then while she's still really upset he tells her he has an appetite. That's why she says it doesn't matter who I am. He just wants sex right after their fight.

reply