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."

Two MGM divas get to have at one another in a most civilized, clipped-consonant fashion in this remake of a livelier 1933 comedy-drama, adapted from a hit Rachel Crothers play. Joan Crawford is a best-selling authoress on the brink of an affair with her publisher, Herbert Marshall, who is married to Greer Garson; meantime, Robert Taylor pines, rather inexplicably, after Crawford. I'm sure Joan was an intelligent woman, but playing a New York smart-set intellectual (with a downtown apartment whose garden is the size of a city block), she's unable to project intelligence; you simply can't believe this clothes horse could come up with the smart one-liners Anita Loos puts into her mouth, or that she could pen anything more complex than "The Little Engine That Could." You sense that MGM is building up Greer as it tears down Joan; it's a much more sympathetic part, and though Greer doesn't enter the film till nearly the second half, she dominates it from there on. I find Greer's charms calculated and her acting style obvious, but she has the audience on her side and is more interesting to watch than the ever key-light-seeking Crawford. Why either should pine after the doughy, monotonous Marshall is never clear, and the fadeout is so plainly headed toward a conventional-morality-circa-1941 ending that the drama never runs very high. (For all that, it's resolved quickly and capriciously, and unconvincingly.) But Robert Taylor, at least, is relaxed and unaffected (especially compared to this diphthong-happy trio), and Spring Byington expertly indulges in a ditsy-rich-lady characterization you'd more likely expect from Billie Burke or Alice Brady (who, in fact, played the role in the 1933 version). The real star is the set designer -- I don't know about you, but I want that weekend house of Byington's, with its water wheel and clear lake and Better Homes and Gardens design.

Rachel Crothers was one of the United States' best playwrights for decades. "He and She" and "When Ladies Meet" are her two best-known works. There was a good earlier version of this work; this remake has the benefit of stars of the caliber of Greer Garson as the wronged wife, Joan Crawford as the girl who wrongs her, Herbert Marshall as Garson's husband and Robert Taylor as the young man who loves Crawford. Robert Z. Leonard directed the film, with his usual skill in getting first-rate performances from his actors. The screenplay, adapted from the fine play by Anita Loos and S.K. Lauren, seldom seems as if it had been a stage work; and the scenes are opened out to include sailing and other outside scenes. The film boasts another lovely set by Cedric Gibbons, and some dense B/W style provided by the photography team. Music is by Bronislau Kaper, and in the talented cast along with the aforementioned quartet of well-cast actors the director gave us Spring Byington and several other good choices. But it is the plot in this highly-intelligent and understated contest between two women that drives every action; the theme of this important look at personal relations and the rules of commitment in partnerships is honesty--to oneself, and to one's partner. Garson thought she had a good marriage; Marshall may not have thought so, but he had no real reason to cheat, except to pretend to be Crawfor'd infallible mentor--a very unhealthy misassumption. Crawford thinks she is modern because she does not care why she is making herself momentarily happy; and Taylor loves Crawford for what she should be, not what she is. Byington, older and wiser, has taken on a 'husband' who is content to be her husband, and she has settled for his good points and agreed to put up with the rest on equal terms. The gimmick that works as a plot device here, cleverly, is that the two women in Marshall's life have never met; and when they do, Crawford still does not know who Garson is--or that she know her for what she is... In their parts, Garson is powerful, wonderfully intelligent and strong; Crawford does her best but apart from matching her charisma she cannot begin to match Garson's ethical screen presence. Robert Taylor plays his part as callow, charmingly young, and it is one of his best in energy, approach and timing. Marshall is professional in his part, but a bit old or staid to play a part that really required a Warren William or Walter Pigeon. .The lighting, the set decorations by Edwin B. Willis and the costumes are a great asset also. This is a very underrated.and intelligent look at "modern marriage", c. 1941. The upshot of the film is that Marshall realizes what he about to lose and is smart enough to try to earn Garson's love again, and that Crawford realizes what she was about to do for momentary pleasure by pretense, without even having earned it--with the possibility that Taylor may become to her what she had been fantasizing Marshall might be. This is always an interesting narrative, a very compelling mix of dramatic and character- revealing screwball satire elements. Highly recommended

...but perhaps I don't know a lot of true ladies. I'm more shocked that Joan Crawford got top billing in this delightful little farce. Greer Garson stole the show and Robert Taylor's role was dashing and quite likeable. Spring Byington played the perfect hostess for the weekend "Dish of the Dames". The truly unbelievable thing was the casting of Herbert Marshall as Rogers Woodruff. Hard to imagine one woman, let alone two having such rapturous feelings for that character. Perhaps there's the reality in this story. After all, these things are rarely understood. I found, in this case, "When Ladies Meet", to be quite entertaining and being a die-hard Greer Garson fan, I highly recommend it!!

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?