Another Part of the Forest

"Another Part of the Forest" is a prequel to "The Little Foxes" but made seven years later and it feels like an attempt to do a reprise of Wyler's classic with Ann Blyth, Edmond O'Brien and Dan Duryea trying to fill the shoes of Miss Davis, Charles Dingle and Carl Benton Reid. Actually O'Brien is very good and Duryea, who played the son of the character he's playing here in Wylers film, isn't bad. Only Blyth lets the side down. Their parents are a gruff Fredric March and a dotty (and excellent) Florence Eldridge.

The movie purports to show how the nasty Hubbards got to be so nasty but there really isn't anything here we haven't seen before. This is more like a remake than a prequel and under Michael Gordon's limp direction it's hard to tell if this would have been any good on the stage. What's fairly clear is that this is second-rate Hellman and Gordon does nothing to make it cinematic. Still, in its fevered bad movie kind of way it's actually quite entertaining. No family ever had so many skeletons rattling around in the cupboard and letting skeletons loose can be good fun. Of course, perhaps Hellman intented it all as a joke or maybe the humour was simply unintentional.

This is one of the most wicked and dysfunctional families ever to make it to the big screen during the 1940s. Of course, by today's standards they would seem a bit tame! This is the same sick, backstabbing, conniving family seen in little foxes. Some of the original actors are here (such as the slimy Dan Duryea) and some new ones are along for the ride (Edmund O'Brien, Ann Blythe and Frederick March). So why did I like the movie? Well, the evilness of the characters and how deliciously they scheme and change sides when it best suits their needs make it a very mesmerizing film. Also, because the schemes change A LOT, it's tough to predict where the movie will end.

This movie, though made AFTER Little Foxes, is the prequel. So after seeing this, see Little Foxes and hold on tight!

Another Part of the Forest tells the story of a patriarch of a very wealthy southern family & the constant powers struggles he endures within his own family.

There are some very interesting elements of this story that keeps one guessing. For starters, how did the family make their money is one. Two: why does the matriarch of the family keep herself locked away not only from the rest of the world but her family, too.

Another interesting plot is the relationship between the father & his only daughter. There are some incestuous overtones there.

I love this film. Screen writer Lillian Hellman was very good at dealing with human emotion, interaction & confrontation. For those of you that enjoyed "Little Foxes", you will enjoy this film because its the prequel to it.

This film has a very strong cast which is headed by Fredric March. All the cast members hold their own very well. Even though this film is play, it translates to the screen very well.

Now for the bummer:This film never made it to video for some odd reason. I only have it because I recorded it on cable one night. For those of you that have cable, I would check with your local listings.

If you love good drama, you won't regret it.

Avarice, backstabbing and conniving under a thin layer of gentility.

What an undiscovered jewel. A perfectly executed prequel to The Little Foxes. A grade A cast at the top of their game, well written and directed.

'Another Part of the Forest' has been compared often inevitably and for good reason to 1941's 'The Little Foxes', a great film with one of legendary Bette Davis' best performances. The reason for the comparison is that this is a prequel to that film despite being made seven years later. It sees a fascinatingly evil and ruthless family and the source material was shocking at the time and with the portrayal of such ruthlessness in just one household still has the ability to shock.

Have actually seen mixed reviews for 'Another Part of the Forest'. It is very positively received here and a number of classic/Golden Age film fans like/love it too. At the same time, there have been criticisms from some critics, mostly trusted ones from personal view but they're not without dubious opinions every now and again, of 'Another Part of the Forest' being static and that the stage origins are obvious. Actually lean more towards the former and it is great to see people here fond of it. To me, it was very good even if there is a preference for 'The Little Foxes'.

The direction could have been sharper in places, parts of it tend to be on the limp side and lacks William Wyler's imaginative use of camera and atmosphere a little.

Did think too that Ann Blyth's acting, though she does absolutely have great moments, didn't quite gel with that of the rest of the cast. She didn't quite seem monstrous enough and could have gone for it more, Davis was so toweringly monstrous in 'The Little Foxes' and there didn't quite seem to be enough here of how the character came to be the way she became.

However, the cast on the most part are wonderful. Fredric March is perfectly cast and he was never more chilling than here. Dan Duryea does calculating in a way that is very sinister and Florence Eldridge is effectively dotty. Edward O'Brien is a great and more sympathetic contrast to March, their conflict is not just ruthless but also very interesting. The father-daughter chemistry also unsettles and although the characters are with few redeeming qualities and very unsympathetic they are interesting and didn't come over as too over-written, motivations take a lot of unpredictable turns but they were at least buyable.

It, 'Another Part of the Forest' that is, moreover looks great. Very sumptuous and atmospheric, with eerie shadowy lighting and elegant costuming and settings. The music is haunting without over-shadowing or being over-bearing orchestrally. The script thought provokes and bites and doesn't feel too overly talky in the way a lot of other stage to film adaptations do, found it quite vicious too. Personally didn't think it was static or stagy at all, the character interactions were very believable, there were tension and chills in the atmosphere, it was darkly dull and it didn't feel that much of a filmed play or get too melodramatic again like some stage to film adaptations do and also considering the subject. If there was an improvement over 'The Little Foxes' it was the ending, it was the one weak spot in that film whereas it was unpredictable and didn't come over as abrupt.

On the whole, very good. 8/10