I was watching the old Grant/Hepurn movie Charade the other night when I noticed that “Tex” (James Coburn) persisently wore a rather prominent medallion on his coat. Not very clear photos of it are here and here.
“Tex” was a WW2 veteran, but I can’t imagine that he would routinely wear military medals on a civilian jacket, and anyway, the medallion seems to be hanging on what looks like a piece of string rather than the typical ribbon. (If the medal is of genuine significance, I apologise for my ignorance in describing it.)
Thanks, CWN, you might well be right. However, it still seems a little odd. Tex’s tobacco consumption was not a conspicuous part of the character or the plot. I can’t understand why the costume dept thought we needed to be reminded of it in every shot - it seems unnaturally conspicuous.
It may be that certain tobacco habits were markers of social class or status and are now long forgotten - like long cigarette holders were indicators of upper class status and pipes of grandfatherliness, etc. Certain brands still identify strongly with an image the smoker wishes to project - Marlboroughs for real men, rollies for realer men, French brands for poseurs, etc.
But, assuming you’re right, I don’t get what the director is trying to project here.
I seem to remember James Coburn as Tex rolling a cigarette from that pouch in front of the kid (supposedly Hepburn’s nephew? or best friend’s son or something). Basically it reaffirmed Coburn’s Old West type character.
Having grown up around old timers who rolled their own cigarettes, seeing the tobacco pouch displayed like that was quite common.
Thanks, CWN, you might well be right. However, it still seems a little odd. Tex’s tobacco consumption was not a conspicuous part of the character or the plot. I can’t understand why the costume dept thought we needed to be reminded of it in every shot - it seems unnaturally conspicuous. QUOTE]
It wouldn’t surprise me if a scene had been shot where the tobacco pouch, if that is what it is, played a prominent role, the scene later being dropped from the movie.
He does. But since everyone smoked then, it was unnecessary to go to such lengths as the string tag to demonstrate that he legitimately had matches. Hell, it wouldn’t be necessary in a modern movie. If people carry matches, you assume they’re a smoker; you don’t need to see them smoke to lock that in.
I guess the answer is that at the time the movie was made, the tag didn’t stand out as much as it does to my 21C eye, and didn’t need explaining at all, but helped to project a “Marlboro Man” identity.
