Espejismo de amor

The movie opens with a young woman, Kitty Foyle, assisting her doctor-sweetheart in delivering a child in a ramshackle tenement. They are a very compassionate pair. Afterwards he proposes marriage, she accepts and agrees meet him at midnight to be immediately married by an all-night Justice of the Peace. But while packing back at her hotel room, in pops an old flame, a wealthy married man who Kitty still desperately loves. He announces he has left his family and is leaving that night at midnight for South America. He still loves her, and wants her to join him. Oh, Kitty, what to do?

The remainder of the film is a series of flashbacks prompted by Kitty's image of herself in the mirror (i.e., her conscience) as it attempts to direct Kitty to the proper decision. Starting with her teenage years growing up working-class Irish in 1920s Philadelphia we learn how poor Kitty met and fell in love with a rich Mainline aristocat, and got herself in such a predicament.

Ms. Rogers won best actress for her role as Kitty, but the rest of the cast is no less deserving. A real movie treat.

While I am quite fond of Ginger Rogers - both her performances and her personality - "Kitty Foyle" is not an Oscar-worthy film. Yes, she does a great job, but not superior to Hepburn ("The Philadelphia Story"), Davis ("The Letter"), Fontaine ("Rebecca") or Scott ("Our Town") - all nominated actresses in the same category.

The book upon which this film is based was somewhat controversial at the time - abortion, extramarital affairs, etc. - all verboten by the Production Code of the 40s/50s. Yes, they "cleaned up" the story for the screenplay, but it is still somewhat risque for 1940. Most likely, the subject matter contributed to Rogers winning the Oscar. (Of course, "The Philadelphia Story" is a bit suggestive as well - and certainly more sophisticated.)

Distracting to me are the unnecessary "prologue," and Rogers portraying (briefly) a twelve year-old! The scenes with her two female roommates are a welcome comedic interlude. Unlikely is the prospect of Foyle secretly giving her ex-boyfriend's engagement ring to his young son, and expecting the child's mother to never see it.

This is worth viewing, of course, but the Oscar went to the wrong person.

"Kitty Foyle" is a lush, expertly done example of the "women's films" that were popular in the 1940's and are so rare today. The rather simplistic plot focuses on Kitty's choice of sharing her life with either a married scion of a mainline family or an impoverished doctor, both of whom love her. Pure soap opera, but lovingly done, especially those luminous closeups. The device of having Kitty talk to her own conscience is rather hokey, but does provide for an interesting touch. The spark in the production is the admirably natural but spirited performance of Ginger Rogers in the title role. She perfectly fits the role of a working girl surviving on her wits and gumption, and really shines when telling off her rich, patronizing in-laws. See it for her, and for a somewhat dated but still intriguing view of the travails of independent women during the first half of the 20th century.

A wonderful story of a young woman caught between two worlds, what she wants and what she needs. This has got to be one of the best stories of all time. Ginger Rogers gives an outstanding performance of a young woman from the wrong side of the tracks that stands up to society and makes her way on her own.

It is incredibly forward thinking for the time period and yet it deals with struggles that seem to be timeless.

I give it as many stars as can be given.

Ariana Eirlys

While I still prefer a Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire film like TOP HOT, this film is probably Ms. Rogers' best film because she is clearly THE star and the film gives her a good chance to show her acting ability. In fact, for this film she earned the Best Actress Oscar, though I really think that perhaps both Bette Davis' performance in THE LETTER and Katherine Hepburn's in PHILADELPHIA STORY were both a bit better. Perhaps she won that year because KITTY FOYLE is a very sentimental film or perhaps the other two actresses lost because they'd both already received that award. Or, perhaps Hepburn and Davis drew votes from each other. The bottom line, though, is Rogers is very good and compared to her other films, this one really stands out--even after all these years. My preferring the other performances in no way diminishes the fine job she did here. At the time, her winning was considered a big upset, though you can't deny all three performances were superb. And you really cannot be upset about her being chosen--she was deserving.

The film is a romance, though instead of being taught in the traditional linear fashion, it starts near the end and then is told in a long series of flashbacks. This really works well--especially because what you THINK Kitty is about to do at the beginning of the film isn't exactly what you might think. Additionally, these flashbacks are written and directed very deftly and so many little touches help to give this movie a heart. Especially touching were the ballroom dancing sequence with Dennis Morgan as well as the weepy section that soon follows. The bottom line is that this is a complex, well written and acted film that might require you keep a box of Kleenex nearby--just in case. See this movie!