Je retourne chez maman

Some reviewers note that any couple thinking divorce should see this film and while that is good advice, the truth is few husbands about to leave are as conflicted as this one who really never wants to go and whose affection is demonstrated by the jealousy that is the last straw. I agree with those who say Judy is a charmer. That is a fact with which no one should even quibble. By the way, the accent was exaggerated here and elsewhere and could easily have been tamed had it not been in keeping with her roles. Aldo on the other hand is a revelation. He is natural, impressive and very believable. More's the pity that his career was so uneven but here he happens to be perfect. He is blond (not unusual in Hollywood's past, think Steve McQueen) but rare now for a macho star. It turns out that his look is perfect for this part and his manliness comes through just fine. In this role this reviewer thinks he was perfect and the facial expression when buying the whirly-gig is proof that had his career and persona been better managed he would have been a far bigger star. That said, watch, enjoy and remember how much love can survive and endure when people understood that divorce was the cowardly way out and usually bad for all concerned. Again, highly recommended.

This film is highly reminiscent of Judy Holliday's other film, PHFFFT! because both films concern a divorcing couple that down deep still love each other dearly. Also, in many ways it is reminiscent of THE WAR OF THE ROSES in that it appears to be a cautionary tale about marital discord, but unlike this Danny DeVito movie, THE MARRYING KIND is more upbeat and doesn't have the same dark sensibilities as WAR OF THE ROSES.

The film begins with a husband and wife in divorce court. Instead of just granting the divorce, the judge brings them both into her chambers to discuss why they want the divorce since it isn't readily apparent. Both Holliday and Aldo Ray (who plays the husband) then begin to recount their marriage through a series of flashbacks. The flashbacks are incredibly well-acted and realistic--like a real honest to goodness family. While most of their ups and downs seem pretty normal, great tragedy strikes later in their marriage (get out the tissues!).

All of this is wonderfully done, but also VERY tough to watch as things turn from bad to much worse. Plus, after a while, the tragedy and pain becomes a little too much and seems to drag on a bit too long. Shortening up the film by about fifteen minutes would have greatly helped the pacing. Despite these problems with the film, though, the film is marvelously realistic and great film-making. In many ways, this is a must-see film for young couples or anyone contemplating divorce, as it gives an unusual perspective and insights you just don't normally see addressed in films.

The story follows a young couple through courtship, honeymoon, parenthood and breakup.

The movie looks like a worthy experiment that doesn't quite work. The problem—as others point out—lies with the abrupt change of tone in the movie's middle that causes a radical re-adjustment on the viewer's part. To that point, the style is generally charming and light-hearted, appropriate to the couple's courtship and honeymoon period. I love the way each remembers the past the way he or she wants it to be, while the camera in flashback shows quite the opposite. It's pretty funny. This early part also provides Holliday with opportunity to show off her inimitable comedic style.

But then the tone goes deadly serious, befitting, I guess, the tragedy and troubles that enter the Keefers' life, eventually leading to a breakup. Note in this half how much of the staging has the couple in various stages of unglamorous undress while yelling at one another. Clearly, the idea is to show the other non-cute, deglamorized side of marriage that old Hollywood in its preoccupation with escapism didn't often show. In that sense, the movie's a rather daring stab, for its time, at marital reality.

The trouble, however, is that the two halves clash with one another in both style and content, creating the impression of two movies instead of one. I wish director Cukor had tried shaping the second-half material to the entertaining style of the first half. That might have worked, given his legendary level of expertise. But the way things stand, not even Holliday's talent can paper over the mis-match. Also, I noticed that the actress's comic book voice, so well adapted to comedy, becomes shrill and annoying in the heated exchanges with movie husband Ray. From that standpoint, she was wise to stick to laughs in what remained of her tragically short career.

This is not to say the movie's without compensations. It certainly has its funny moments, while actor Ray's boyish appeal looks just right for an engaging average guy. However, the central problem remains, despite the talent and gutsy stab at reality.

From 1952 director George Cukor (A Star is Born/The Philadelphia Story) directs Judy Holliday (who he reunites w/after her Oscar winning turn in his Born Yesterday) & Aldo Ray (in his screen debut) in this drama about a marriage fraying at the edges. Opening up at a divorce hearing at court, a judge takes the feuding couple into an office & there they lay out the genesis of their union & what led up to where they are now. We see their blue collar straits, he works at the post office while she's a stay at home Mom rearing a boy & a girl. She wants to move ahead & yearns for a chance to do so (in one episode she calls into a radio show to answer a question & Ray feeds her the wrong answer) while he seems to be happy at his status quo. Things take a turn when their son dies in a freak accident at a lake which causes all the recriminations & regrets to boil over into constant arguments which culminates when she receives a check from a deceased boss which stirs Ray to think the worst of Holliday figuring she was romantically linked to him. Will the union give up the ghost or save itself in the final moments? Cukor was wise to cast these earthy actors (in the heated throes of argument you can almost hear your neighbors going at it in any big city) dig into these meaty roles (a turning of the tide was on the horizon for the accurate portrayal of real people, working class American accents & all, to be seen on the big screen). Co-written by Ruth Gordon (the some time actress) & Garson Kanin, this yarn set in the boroughs of the Big Apple crackles w/authenticity & heart.

It's widely known that Judy Holliday was the greatest comic actress of all time, but did you know she was also a subtle and moving tragedienne? This movie begins as a screwball comedy about a sparring couple, and all I'll tell you is, it turns into something quite different -- and it pulls it off. Judy's beautiful playing has much to do with this, as does Cukor's deft direction. Aldo Ray is a revelation: You may not think of him as a leading actor of his generation, but with Cukor's touch, he hits all the notes of tenderness, childishness, and bewilderment written into his character. Husband-and-wife screenwriters Kanin and Gordon supply funny lines, ingenious dream sequences, a "Rashomon"-type narrative, and much hard-earned insight into marital discord. Also, unusual for a Hollywood film from the '50s, the kids come off as real kids, not synthetic little dears or bratty little monsters.

Despite all the high-priced talent, it's a cheap-looking movie, with almost verite glimpses of 1952 New York. And the abrupt shift of tone may be off-putting to some. Me, I appreciated the film for treating adults like adults, and for suggesting that life and marriage are not wrapped up in neat little packages. An offbeat movie, and very rewarding for those willing to accept it on its own terms.