De Mulher Para Mulher

Joan Crawford plays Mary Howard, a novelist in love with her publisher who can't seem to finish her latest manuscript about a woman in love with a married man. In a case of art imitating life, Mary much like her literary heroine believes Rogers Woodruff will leave his wife and forge a future together with her. To make things complicated, Mary is relentlessly pursued by handsome Jimmy played by charming Robert Taylor. Although she likes Jimmy, Mary turns down his marriage proposals saying she prefers to remain friends. Instead, Mary arranges a getaway weekend at the home of ditsy friend Bridgi (wonderfully acted by Spring Byington) so she can see Rogers. The plot thickens when Jimmy accidentally runs into Woodruff's wife (played by Greer Garson) and invites her on an outing where they "get lost" and find themselves at Bridgi's cottage. The story is an interesting one as Jimmy fails to tell anyone about Claire's true identify. Claire Woodruff is also in the dark about the woman, Jimmy is trying to make jealous. Throw in a thunderstorm and Jimmy's plan that inevitably sends Woodruff away on a wild goose chase so that the two women can meet, makes this film worth seeing. Both Joan and Greer Garson turn in solid performances. The acting is a bit stylized, characteristic of the 1940s but both women are appealing in their roles. Spring Byington almost steals the show with her funny character portrayal of Bridgi. The dialogue is crisp and Bridgi provides comic relief and helps the story flow. Stranded at the cottage, Mary and Claire strike a friendship and genuinely like each other. It doesn't take Mary long to know that Claire is married and confesses Jimmy is only trying to make her jealous."When ladies meet" has powerful scenes and the viewer is in on the secret of their connection as it cleverly unfolds to the two women. The dialogue is honest and the reveal ultimately helps Mary's writer's block to help her finish her novel. I highly recommend "When Ladies Meet."

"When Ladies Meet" is the story of a married couple, a lady author and a charming single journalist. Joan Crawford, the author, considers herself a "modern woman" freed from tiresome conventions and moral imperatives. Despite the movie's 1941 date, the author's relativistic attitude toward marriage and fidelity would be right at home in today's left-wing intellectual circles. Her gradual evolution towards a different attitude is the meat of the movie. Mirroring the situation in her book is the situation of the married couple, Greer Garson and Herbert Marshall. The fourth member of the group is Robert Taylor as a journalist whose surface gaiety hides a serious moral foundation.

The four actors make the movie much better than the script. Garson and Crawford strike sparks off each other in every scene they share. Herbert Marshall is suitably smooth and sleazy. But it's Robert Taylor in a role involving physical comedy whose work is the most impressive. As it turns out, he is the person most grounded in reality--and the hidden hand behind everything.

Everything has the expected MGM gloss--extravagant costumes, beautiful sets, excellent photography. Highly recommended.

"When Ladies Meet" stars Joan Crawford, Greer Garson, Robert Taylor, Herbert Marshall, and Spring Byington.

It's a talky film obviously based on a play that starts out somewhat typically: A woman falls for a married man, but her boyfriend still loves her. The film turns to something else altogether "when ladies meet," i.e., the other woman and the wife.

Greer Garson is the wife, married to Herbert Marshall, who plays Crawford's publisher, Rogers Woodruff, Crawford is Mary, the author/other woman, Taylor is the boyfriend, Jimmy, and Spring Byington is Bridget, a friend, in whose country house the big confrontations take place.

Like Norma Shearer's vehicle, "Her Cardboard Lover," a year later, this film looks and plays like a '30s leftover. Everyone is very good, and if Robert Taylor's broader attempts at comedy are a little forced, his physical comedy is quite funny, the scene in the boat being one of the best.

Unlike his 20th Century Fox counterpart, Tyrone Power, Taylor was uncomplicated and not very ambitious. Devastatingly handsome, he was content at MGM for over 20 years - his big complaint once he was out of there was that he didn't know how to make dinner reservations.

MGM would force Crawford out with bombs such as "Under Suspicion" two years later, but here, she gets top billing and does a good job as a woman who still has her romantic illusions.

While Crawford and Taylor have comic moments, Herbert Marshall's role has none - he's deadly serious and oh, so sincere as he breathes his love for Mary.

But the show belongs to Greer Garson,. She has the best and the most sympathetic role as a woman who, despite numerous affairs, has loved and clung to her man.

This and the constant talking make the movie somewhat dated - what woman would put up with such a serial philanderer after all (or, rather, admit to it) - but her character is extremely likable, her words heartfelt, her pain palpable, and she's stunning to look at as well.

Definitely worth seeing for the wonderful stars but not up to the usual quality of films these actors did.

MGM was obviously going through a transition and recycling old material when the '40s hit. I think the 1933 version of this was probably superior if only due to it being more of its time.

Very seldom is the remake of a film better than the original, but this film is pleasantly one of the few exceptions. First of all, it is unknown to this reviewer why this film was remade so soon. Generally, film remakes are done after a generation of time has passed (20 years), but this film was remade just 8 years after the original in 1933. In addition, the original film cast was led by a cadre of Hall of Fame performers in their own right - Myrna Loy, Alice Brady, Frank Morgan, Ann Harding, and Robert Montgomery. You'd figure with a cast this good, how is any remake going to improve on those performances? Logical question. Yet, remarkably the five leads in this remake, pound for pound, improve on each of the original performances.

Hey, I like both versions of this film. Not into parsing them either. The assembled talent, story, parts, clothes, set. This is the kind of movie I like to watch multiple times. First, watch the movie through. Then, maybe follow separate characters through. There's a lot going on simultaneously. Then, watch the clothes. Then, check out the house, furniture, etc. There was so much style put into these. All of these elements are what made these 30's and 40's films so special. I don't understand why all the comparisons and nitpicking.

In both versions, the lady of the country house is something of a wonder - Spring Byington here. I like the Jimmy part a lot, and thought both actors did him well. He's the kind of guy who makes a wonderful friend, though he could get on your nerves at times. He's a young man who will settle down and make a good husband, reliable and good company along the way. Woodruff was an older man who hadn't settled down, self-centered, made a bad husband and rather a dullard actually.

I think the sorting out between the women worked for both of them. The wife shook off the dead weight or drew her line anyway; the "girl friend" woke up from her naive daydream. We hope the husband woke up as well. Looks like Jimmy has a chance to come out on top as well!

What's there to be so cynical about?