Mothers of Men (1917) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Very melodramatic to say the least!
planktonrules14 October 2016
"Mothers of Men" is a ridiculously melodramatic film...and I'll talk more about that in just a bit. Despite having a plot which is impossible to believe, it is well worth seeing as it's an important film in the history of women. When the film came out in 1917, women in most of the United States could not legally vote and the 19th Amendment was still a few years away. However, the film shows that a good woman could make a great elected official and that women are tough enough and up to the task.

When the film begins, a group of women come to Clara and ask her to run for office. After all, she's a lawyer and could make a fine judge. This is tested, however, when one of her husband's clients is up for an appeal and instead of recusing herself, she rejects the appeal outright--earning her a lot of respect among the public. However, when she is later asked to run for governor, things get really wacky. The local newspaper is blown up by a nasty Italian* and soon Clara's husband is implicated as well. Considering the editor of the paper was killed, the husband could likely get the death penalty. Yet Clara does not intervene as she knows that weakness will hinder the cause of women...and even though she is (gasp) pregnant!! What's going to happen to the hubby and poor Clara?!

If you think the plot is unbelievable, you're mostly right. Think about all the difficult to believe plot elements...but one is possible and that is back in 1924 (only a few years later), a woman DID become governor in Wyoming! So, at least that part of the film isn't far-fetched. Enjoyable but often super-melodramatic to the point that it impacts on the overall quality of the film (esepcially the ending as well as the preachy quality of many of the intertitle cards). But, given when it was made, it's also surprisingly watchable and certainly is interesting!

*Having the anarchistic guy be a foreigner with a silly intertitle accent is not too surprising. While the film is very modern in most of its sensibilities, the distrust of Italians and the like was, sadly, a product of its time.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Exploitive pot boiler.
westernone5 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This story involves the seldom seen, if ever phenomenon of a female jurist in those days who is eventually pitted in court against her lawyer husband and later, he's sentenced for a murder he didn't commit, just as she's about to have a baby. It's sheer mawkish mush for those who enjoy a good cry, a typical silent cheapie, with semi-or non- distinguished actors, and unimaginative direction. How come scene after scene has everyone tightly grouped together, so all will be in the shot, even in a larger room? It has strange touches like repeatedly reminding us that the newspaper the bad guy editor edits is called the Democrat, and the weep-insurance of having an utterly gratuitous blind sister, overplayed by a gal that has never seen a blind individual. Like many low budget, states-rights pictures, it has a pretentious but mystifying name, "Mothers of Men" being a phrase usually used in connection with the mothers of soldiers. Here it seems like a copyrighted in advance name. Another classic States rights characteristic was they re-released it with a new name a few years later, now with the equally abstruse alias, "Every Woman's Problem" which by the fantastic novelty of the story would mean the title is the exact opposite of the subject shown.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
An Unsuitable Job for a Governor
richardchatten3 June 2018
As women's emancipation became a much-discussed issue in the years preceding the 19th Amendment in 1920 it became a subject earnestly discussed in movies like this and 'The Woman on Oath' which professed a desire to Seriously Discuss women's role in modern society while usually hedging their bets with outrageous quandaries and coincidences. So newly elected governor Dorothy Davenport finds herself in the position of having to prove her mettle as a politician by authorising the execution of her own husband for murder or revealing herself a decent, nurturing but weak female by pardoning him.

SPOILER COMING: No prizes for guessing the question is ducked by having one of the genuine offenders have a fit of conscience at the last minute and confess on the gallows; thus saving hubby's neck and sparing Governor Davenport her tough decision.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed