Help identify the movie these pants are from?

Collect Bakelite

Collect Bakelite

Registered Guest
I need a little help with this one please. It is United Costumers Inc ladies pants. The issue is that I do not know which movie it is from. I looked to no avail. The name on the label does not come up under any of their movies. I searched for stills from their movies and no one is pictured in anything similar. The name is McGraw. They are ladies pants and definitely 30's from the construction. Has anyone seen any of these movies (I am including a list of all their movies) that maybe I can narrow down my search. They fit me great so I doubt if I will ever part with them but I would like to know where they came from. I bought them at a salvage yard of all places. Crazy!!!

COSTUME-WARDROBE (feature film)
1. A Midsummer Night's Dream (1935) as Cost suppliers.
2. Cardinal Richelieu (1935) as Costumers.
3. Clive of India (1935) as Cost supplied by.
4. The Mighty Barnum (1934) as Cost supplied by.
5. The House of Rothschild (1934) as Cost supplied by.
6. The Affairs of Cellini (1934) as Suppliers of cost.
7. Queen Christina (1933) as Cost supplied by.
8. Whoopee! (1930) as Cost executed by.
9. Suez (1938) ... Costumes Supplied By
10. In Old Chicago (1937) ... Costumes Supplied By (uncredited)
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    73.9 KB · Views: 325
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    80 KB · Views: 367
Rue_de_la_Paix said:
Are you referring to Charles McGraw? He was not making movies, as far as I know, in the early 1930s. I think he started in the 1940s.
Click to expand...
Thanks but it is not him. I already looked. None of the movies line up with the costumer and these are ladies pants. Also, he started in the late 40's while United Costumers Inc last movie was in 1938, years before Charles McGraw got into movies.
 
Oh, they looked like menswear. What makes you think they are for a woman? I cannot tell from the photo. Looks like there is no fly, they close on the side?

Are you sure they were not used for a theater production, and not a movie? Or, they could have been used in a movie in later years, as the studios used to keep their costumes in wardrobe dpts. and reuse/alter them for many years. Lots of studio costumes were sold off in the 1970s and 80s. If United Costumers did not rent the costumes, they could have sold them off to about anyone. Where did you make the purchase?
 
Rue_de_la_Paix said:
Oh, they looked like menswear. What makes you think they are for a woman? I cannot tell from the photo. Looks like there is no fly, they close on the side?

Are you sure they were not used for a theater production, and not a movie? Or, they could have been used in a movie in later years, as the studios used to keep their costumes in wardrobe dpts. and reuse/alter them for many years. Lots of studio costumes were sold off in the 1970s and 80s. If United Costumers did not rent the costumes, they could have sold them off to about anyone. Where did you make the purchase?
Click to expand...


They are eye hook up the side and have the darts of ladies pants. They are short below the knee. There is no "fly" on them. Like I said, I bought them at a salvage yard of all places. I have narrowed it down to the previous 10 movies and wanted to see if anyone recognized the movies and could help steer me. I have looked many many places to identify them and asking if anyone saw those movies above. The company dealt with films only, not theater.
 
Have you tried looking at McGraw actors of that size?
The styling of the trousers looks faintly military (the buttons/stripe down the side) so I'd be ruling out something like A Midsummer Night's dream, unless they had uniforms in that production.

I could see them being used in The Mighty Barnum - they have that performance costume look to them.
 
Is it possible the pants are for one of the "extras" and not a credited actor? I've purchased clothing from Universal Studios, and some of the pieces still had the production and name on the garments, but none were actors that I recognized.
 
I figured it was an extra since none of the stars in any of the movies is named McGraw. Nor is any of the characters referred to is called McGraw. I do not think they are necessarily military cause of the red metal studs up the side would be horrible in war. I could not find them in the Mighty Barnum movie. I have really searched a lot and I keep hitting roadblocks.
 
As a costume person-They sure look like men's breeches to me, especially the fishtail cut of the back waist which usually have darts.
The waist size seems to be 30 on that label- so a small mens size in my opinion. They have a pseudo military look to me, like Melanie suggested .
 
Could you show a photo that is right side up, please? Your photo is sideways and we cannot get a good idea of the length and the cut and shape of the pant's legs. Do they balloon out from the knee area? Or do they hit lower, say mid calf?
 
It is possible they are part of a Zouave costume. The cut looks right although I cannot tell form the sideways photo. They side trim could be decided by the individual unit or soldier, so the brass buttons and stripe might work for that idea as well.

Zouave "trousers" did not traditionally have a fly on the pants, so this would explain that missing.

Just a thought, but here are 2 photos of both antique Civil War era and modern (re-enactors) American Zouave uniforms. These are actually rather tame compared to the original Zouaves, but have the general look. If you look at the 1830s, and later European French Zouaves, (as well as some US troops) the uniforms could be quite extreme.

Based on the fact that the Zouaves could be found in a number of the movies mentioned above, this could be a possibility.
 

Attachments

  • zouave 2.jpeg
    zouave 2.jpeg
    53.7 KB · Views: 378
  • zouaves.jpg
    zouaves.jpg
    26.6 KB · Views: 339
I agree that these are military style men's breeches. Don't pay much attention to the lack of a fly, film costumes of the '30s were rarely historically accurate, they were going for a look. I agree that it would be helpful to know where these sit when being worn. Remember that men of the '30s were much smaller and the size is an average men's one for them but large for a woman.
 
Thank you everyone!! This has been a great help. I will model them later. They do not seem as dramatic as the Zouave. The Picts are find on my iPad but they always come up sideways. Weird.
 
That is interesting Gayle. Every pair of actual (not made as costume) mens kmickers that I have ever seen or studied has a front closure...at least from 1900s forward. I will have to delve back into my menswear references to learn more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top