Paraíso Proibido

In "September affair ",the real star is Italy :we are taken to a guided tour of Pompey (it was made before Rossellini 's "viaggio in Italia " starring Bergman and Sanders) , of Capri ,of Florence (so there are two David :Cotten's and Michelangelo's); what a pity it was not filmed in color :it would have been a feast for the eye,mainly the first part.

As for the story itself,it 's part soap opera ,part valid drama ; Dieterle is here on Douglas Sirk 's territory but less efficient than him in melos .The excellent cast is the main asset of a rather derivative screenplay , using hackneyed tricks (the plane crash) .Cotten is true to himself ,as good as a romantic man subject to the middle-age lust as he was the terrific wicked uncle in " shadow of a doubt" or the unfortunate deceived husband in "beyond the forest " ; Fontaine has always been the dainty heroine ,frail and coy ,but who hides a genuine strength under her angel face ("Rebecca" "suspicion" "letter from an unknown woman") ;and the French audience will be thrilled about Françoise Rosay's presence , an actress who played with the best French directors (Feyder ,Carné,Duvivier) and who played opposite both sisters (Joan in this movie, Olivia in "that lady") ;so did Cotten (see "hush hush sweet Charlotte ")

The title is well-chosen ;September is the end of Summer and indicates a new phase in someone's life ;Sinatra had an album called " September of my years" .Music plays a prominent part from Italian bel canto to American songs to classic music grand finale ;it recalls sometimes Borzage's "I've always loved you" (1946)

Eerily similar in storyline and backdrop to William Wyler's 1936 masterpiece, Dodsworth. It's not so much the script or the direction that doom this film, it's the premise and its execution. Don't get me wrong; I like the film. However, it could have been much better. As other reviewers stated, the actors, their chemistry were excellent. It's the character development that's faulty.

Whereas in Dodsworth the triangle is played out logically, along the lines of solid character development so that the hero ends up in Naples with the other woman; in September Affair (1950), love takes a back seat to 1950's morality, or "family values" which state that if you sin, you must pay.

To represent this on the screen, the screenwriter uses the deus ex machina device of having the wife morph from shrew to martyr, not by showing us, as a film should do, but by telling us, in a letter no less, that she won't agree to a divorce. But when we actually see her, she doesn't seem all that bad a person. She's not like the woman in the letter and she's not the woman Cotten makes her out to be. With Ruth Chatterton (star of Dodsworth), the character development progressed faultlessly. In September Affair, the wife's character arc is unbelievable. Which is she? A shrew or a noble, long-suffering wife? If the latter, the film couldn't end with Joseph Cotten walking away from that sort of woman. He would have lost favor with the audience.

That means forcing credibility to depend on us buying the unbelievable character arc of the wife who somehow morphs from meanie to martyr.

He goes back to his wife and I'll bet the first thing she does is revert to her original persona (you can't escape that easily) — her Ruth Chatterton ways, emasculating Cotten out of spite, and he'll end up with no way back to the woman he loves, who loves him because she's also foolishly played the martyr to the point of NO return.

The film is a cop out. No film should hinge on the changes in a minor character; it should be the leads whose actions set the course. In fact, the ending even goes against common sense:

1) the wife's new persona has accepted the split, so has the son. That he's alive is enough for her.

2) As for Joan, he loves her and Joan loves him. They've taken it to another level — like John Huston and Mary Astor in Dodsworth, a level the wife can't understand. They are clearly superior in their maturity, their lifestyles, their tastes.

Why not let them fade into the Florence sunset together, she with her piano, him with his engineering projects?

This is one of my very favourite films. It is about two people who are approaching early middle age having a chance at real unconditional love - and taking that chance. The casting is so wonderful and the setting is just beautiful. Although, it is an American film it has the ambiance of the post war realism of a an Italian film (Never Take No For An Answer also has this realism). The film is romantic and yet it is unsentimental. Both Joseph Cotton and Joan Fontaine are so very convincing as the lovers. On visits to Italy my wife and I have visited most of the films location. When there I just cant stop myself from singing September Song.

All the comments about this film are favorable except for Mr. Neil Doyle's. I wonder what grumpy pill he took when he watched this or maybe he just isn't a romantic guy. Not one person said his review was "helpful."

This film is well-acted, scripted, and an interesting premise. The music is fabulous and the setting great. Like another reviewer said, Joan Fontaine's facial expressions say as much or more than the words she was given to speak. She is one excellent actress and Joseph Cotten is a veteran actor who once again turns in a fabulous performance.

I unconditionally recommend this movie to all classic movie lovers to fans of Joan Fontaine and/or Joseph Cotten and to all romantics everywhere.

If anyone thinks that Walter Huston's singing is the memorable aspect of this film, they are mistaken or just dead emotionally.

Yes, a small amount of disbelief, some details not developed but such a context for a love affair. Very Beautiful. A simple post WWII romantic film shot with wonderful Italian backdrops.

Joan Fontaine is of course the jewel in this film. Beautiful haunting displays of emotion and thoughts. A wonderful performance in a thought provoking film. If you ever had the opportunity, would you leave the life you live now for the life you imagine that would make you blissful?