This is exactly the sort of movie that must have infuriated Bette Davis. After all, her acting was stupendous--with an incredible emotional range and fantastic acting--it was just so realistic she carried the film all by herself. AND, despite all her great acting, the film was a sappy, soggy, soapy mess! It's because the writing, to put it charitably, stunk! The film was stylistically dated when it appeared in 1937--and was just way too melodramatic and soap-opera-like.
Bette is a sweet lady who was unfortunately married at a very young age to a gangster. When the movie began, the thug had been dead for years and Bette had tried very hard to put this past behind her and create a whole new life for herself. You could tell that despite this early experience, she was a real decent lady. So decent that her boss (Ian Hunter) and a rich immature brat (Henry Fonda) fell for her.
Well, she eventually elopes with rich-guy Fonda, but on their wedding night Fonda's overbearing father Donald Crisp confronts them and demands they have the marriage annulled. Bette could see that she was about to lose Fonda and so she makes a hasty retreat. Fonda NEVER tries to follow her or get her back.
Several years pass. Bette now has a child that was conceived during their honeymoon (that only lasted a few hours--barely enough time to even hope to conceive a child!) and Fonda has remarried to some rich society lady. Bette doesn't bother trying to get in touch with Fonda because she logically reasons that if he didn't return for her, it wasn't worth telling him about the kid and getting him to return.
Now at this point, the movie has been pretty good and not too sappy. Unfortunately, this was a synopsis of only the first half of the film. Later, Ian Hunter dies and Bette is accused of causing this death or having an affair with him, Fonda FINALLY returns and his father tries to steal the baby, and you find out Fonda's wife is in a wheel chair and Bette decides to give this other woman the baby?!?!?!?!?!?!? This didn't make any sense, but considering there were MANY more plot elements that all took place in the last half of the film, it's not worth trying to figure any of this out! Giving away the baby when she loved it? Hmmm. This sounds highly reminiscent of STELLA DALLAS and countless other soapy films. Bette Davis playing this super-martyr isn't very attractive or interesting.
THEN, after giving up the baby, she finds out some time later that Fonda's wife has died (that was nice of her) and she and Henry and the baby are all reunited for a sappy,....I mean "happy" ending.
The movie was lousy but still gets a 5 for Miss Davis' wonderful performance and that's about all. Everyone else, frankly, stunk--including milquetoast Fonda in his most forgettable role. And, the writers should be ashamed of themselves.
This film is ONLY for Bette Davis fans--others will no doubt be put off by the plot.
Bette is a sweet lady who was unfortunately married at a very young age to a gangster. When the movie began, the thug had been dead for years and Bette had tried very hard to put this past behind her and create a whole new life for herself. You could tell that despite this early experience, she was a real decent lady. So decent that her boss (Ian Hunter) and a rich immature brat (Henry Fonda) fell for her.
Well, she eventually elopes with rich-guy Fonda, but on their wedding night Fonda's overbearing father Donald Crisp confronts them and demands they have the marriage annulled. Bette could see that she was about to lose Fonda and so she makes a hasty retreat. Fonda NEVER tries to follow her or get her back.
Several years pass. Bette now has a child that was conceived during their honeymoon (that only lasted a few hours--barely enough time to even hope to conceive a child!) and Fonda has remarried to some rich society lady. Bette doesn't bother trying to get in touch with Fonda because she logically reasons that if he didn't return for her, it wasn't worth telling him about the kid and getting him to return.
Now at this point, the movie has been pretty good and not too sappy. Unfortunately, this was a synopsis of only the first half of the film. Later, Ian Hunter dies and Bette is accused of causing this death or having an affair with him, Fonda FINALLY returns and his father tries to steal the baby, and you find out Fonda's wife is in a wheel chair and Bette decides to give this other woman the baby?!?!?!?!?!?!? This didn't make any sense, but considering there were MANY more plot elements that all took place in the last half of the film, it's not worth trying to figure any of this out! Giving away the baby when she loved it? Hmmm. This sounds highly reminiscent of STELLA DALLAS and countless other soapy films. Bette Davis playing this super-martyr isn't very attractive or interesting.
THEN, after giving up the baby, she finds out some time later that Fonda's wife has died (that was nice of her) and she and Henry and the baby are all reunited for a sappy,....I mean "happy" ending.
The movie was lousy but still gets a 5 for Miss Davis' wonderful performance and that's about all. Everyone else, frankly, stunk--including milquetoast Fonda in his most forgettable role. And, the writers should be ashamed of themselves.
This film is ONLY for Bette Davis fans--others will no doubt be put off by the plot.