Le sacrifice de Stella Dallas

A good tearjerker of a movie is one where the handkerchiefs applied are being used in rapid fashion. The eyes swell up, the nose becomes runny and the mouth flutters uncontrollably. Women aren't embarrassed to let the tears flow, but men try to hide their emotional state. In a darkened theater it's easy to do until the lights are turned on.

One of the all-time classic tearjerkers in cinema is the original and the remakes of Olive Higgins Prouty's 1923 novel 'Stella Dallas." The first version to make the big screen was November 1925's "Stellas Dallas." The film doesn't just pack an emotional wallop at the end of the movie, it contains a constant series of cry-your-eyes-out moments. The story of a mismatched couple with a small child has all the ingredients of becoming a Hallmark Movie weeper. When the husband, Stephen Dallas (Ronald Colman) is transferred to New York City, his wife, Stella (Belle Bennett) refuses to go. The husband succumbs to her wishes and leaves without the two of them. One important detail to the plot is Stella is far less refined than Stephen, and the cultural differences play a huge role in the future events, centered mainly around the child, Laurel (Lois Moran).

Film producer Samuel Goldwyn sold his personal share of his studio to a group of investors led by Joe Godsol in 1922, two years before the MGM merger. He then formed his independent Samuel Goldwyn Productions, renting out the Pickford-Fairbanks (United Artists) Studios to make his own movies. Goldwyn was known to have an exceptional eye for the type of stories that could potentially be blockbusters in the theaters. Once "Stella Dallas" premiered, the reviews poured in with a slew of very positive write-ups. Following the buzz on the street, "Stella Dallas" became the sixth highest box-office movie in 1925, a very strong year for movie releases.

Goldwyn signed reliable director Henry King to handle a cast where acting was so crucial to the emotional plot. The glue that held the entire production together was actress Belle Bennett. As a veteran in film since 1913, she lied about her age by ten years to secure youthful roles, which were the most numerous in the industry. During filming of "Stellas Dallas," her 16-year-old son William Howard Macy died. She had always said William was her brother to hide her true age. When it came out she was 34 rather than 24, Bennett was relegated to mother roles after "Stella Dallas." With the loss of her son, however, Bennett became especially close to the movie's 16-year-old co-stars, Lois Moran and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.. Bennett's film career lasted six more years before, tiring of playing the mom, returned to vaudeville. During one performance in Philadelphia she collapse on stage, a sign she was not well. She recovered, acted for a short time again, before dying in late 1932 of cancer at the age of 41.

"Stella Dallas" also proved to be the high point in young actress Lois Moran's career. In just her second movie, critics predicted this could be the beginning of a long, successful stardom. She had a short affair with F. Scott Fitzgerald, affecting the writer so much he rewrote the central character in 'Tender Is The Night' from male to female to closely resembled Moran. But her screen appearances ended in early 1930s when she married the United States Assistant Secretary of Commerce, Clarence Young.

Despite sharing a name with arguably the most famous star in silent movies, Douglas Fairbanks Jr. Career in acting was no guarantee. Born in 1909 to Douglas and his first wife, Anna Beth Sully, he pursued an education until Paramount Pictures signed him at 13 to play a proposed Tom Sawyer movie, over his father's objections. The project never panned out, and he returned to school. A year later, he was seen in small roles earlier in 1925 before appearing in "Stella Dallas" towards the end in the wedding scene, his first visible role.

Prouty's sentimental book wasn't retired in the dustbin after the success of the 1925 movie. The story was brought back to the screen two more times: the 1937 classic with Barbara Stanwyck, and the 1990 with Bette Midler as Stella.

It was a very moving experience for me to finally view this movie. It is definitely, without, a doubt superior to the already great 1937 version. Belle Bennett is absolutely brilliant in this role. It is only the second silent film that, not only brought tears to my eyes, but overfilled them, until almost bawling. It is that good. Even without the spoken word, the actors were able to display the emotions even better than actors whom had spoken their words.

I have been begging TCM for a couple of years, now, to please, air this movie. Mainly, because, I would love to know more people out there would get the chance to see this movie. If you haven't had the pleasure to see this movie, try to find a way. It won't be a waste of your time.

In the schedule of Cinema Zuid this was one of the films I had never heard of before. Looking at the ratings here, on RYM and on Letterboxd, the cinephile audience has too. Quite a shame as this may be the first film that criticises the American dream, more specifically the hardships one of the lower class experienced when trying to assimilate with those of the upper class.

At first I held no sympathy for the protagonist Stella as I found that the troubles she was creating were of her fault. At the midpoint of the film I had to accept that the screenwriter and maybe the author of the original novel, Olive Higgins Prouty, was of the mindset that people of certain classes cannot change their tastes or habits; this reminds me of Pierre Bourdieu's theory of class distinction, based on aesthetic taste and habitus. The film has a deterministic view on these acquired dispositions; Stella grew up in a poor family, therefore she will never understand the ways of the upper class. She can strive to meet the high standards of the upper class, but everything she tries (especially the way she dresses) comes out as kitsch for which she is laughed at by the people she wants to accept her.

When you accept this hypothesis (I found it quite hard as I saw Stella as a smart woman able to change), Stella becomes much easier to empathize with. In her mind upwards social mobility is everything and she will sacrifice everything to get it for her and her daughter.

Unfortunately, this progressive subject is the only interesting and strong point of the movie, the camera-work is fixed and theatrical, the acting is mediocre for all actors except Belle Bennett in the second half of the film. To conclude, it is a film that is more interesting than it is enjoyable.

I think Miss Stanwyck was a great actress, but when I look at the version of STELLA DALLAS that King Vidor directed her in twelve years after this silent version..... well, something always bothered me about it. WHY was she supposed to be such a monster? She was Barbara Stanwyck. All right, she wasn't dressed as beautifully as she was in THE LADY EVE, but being a little bit frumpy isn't against the law, especially when you look like Barbara Stanwyck.

But when Belle Bennett dresses up in this movie, she is a well-meaning horror, wearing stripes, frills, lace, feather, rings on her fingers, probably bells on her toes..... and a fat suit. You couldn't have gotten Miss Stanwyck into a fat suit. She had her eye on her career. But Belle Bennett had her eye on making this movie as good as possible, so she becomes a fat monster, loving her daughter and utterly clueless. It's a great performance.

Also great is the way Henry King directs the sequences that take place in the mill town. No one had a better eye for the details of small town life than Henry King, from TOL'ABLE David through WAIT TILL THE SUN SHINES NELLIE. Jean Hersholt also has a good role as Ed Munn, and a lovely comic turn on the train into the city. Ronald Colman is fine, exuding the melancholia that he used throughout the 1930s whenever he had to run away to the Foreign Legion or face the guillotine. Alice Joyce is sedate and charming, a fine counterpoint for Bennett. Lois Moran, as Stella's daughter is adorable, and Douglas Fairbanks Jr., in his first real role, is excellent.

There are a number of plot points that must be gotten through and which are better indicated in Frances Marion's script than in the 1937 version ... even though some points seem to be skipped over, they are butchered worse in the sound version. Something always seems to be missing from these weepers. It may be that it is simply that I am not able to appreciate the fine points of these things, but there you go.

However, despite these minor failings, the above-mentioned virtues, as well as the classic final shot of Stella watching the wedding through the window, make this is a great film, and it is only my annoyance at some of the minor failings of the translation from book to film that keeps me from considering this perfect.

But it is ten times the film that the sound remake is. Even if the voice I hear in my head when Miss Bennett moves her lips is that of Barbara Stanwyck.

"Stella Dallas" is a weepy film about a long-suffering mother who gives everything to do what's best for her child. This sort of picture was very common back in the day, with films like this, "So Big" and "Madame X". And, they proved popular enough that they were remade again and again. Apparently the public loved weepy movies about mothers!

As for me, I've seen the first remake of this. "Stella Dallas" (1937) was a very well made Barbara Stawyck vehicle and it was remade yet again with Bette Midler a couple decades ago. The 1925 version is the first...a pretty silent picture that might be best viewed with a box of tissues nearby!

When the story begins, Stephen Dallas (Ronald Colman) is rich and happy an looking to marry the neighbor girl. However, his father was apparently embezzling and when it made the newspapers, the old man killed himself. Stephen, wanting a fresh start, moved to a small mill town where he got a job as a lawyer for the company.

Stella (Belle Bennett) notices the handsome young man and invites him to dinner. Almost immediately after, they marry and have a little girl. However, all is not good, as the unsophisticated Stella never really fits in with society....and her new 'friends' do little to help her. She is, essentially, a bit rough around the edges...but you wonder why Stephen didn't help her with this.

Soon Stephen receives a promotion and when he returns home to tell Stella, he finds Mr. Munn in the house. Munn is a guy she met at the race track and she invited him home for dinner with them. Not surprisingly, Stella's not thinking about what others might think about her bringing a man home and Munn's beer drinking didn't do much to make Stephen like him! To make things worse, Stella refuses to go to New York for Stephen's new job...and so he goes alone...hoping that Stella and the baby will soon join him. But instead, years pass and Stella is still back in this small town with her child who will soon be a young lady. And, Stella is spending a lot of time with Munn...and local tongues are certainly wagging over this. And, Stephen was lonely as well and began seeing a local widow. Not surprisingly, although Stephen and Stella are still married, the days are numbered for that marriage. What's next and how does the child play into all this? See the film and find out for yourself.

I was surprised when I watched this film on the Criterion Channel. Why? Because usually silents are shown along with some incidental music but there is absolutely none here....just silence. It's not a huge problem, as some silents have had recent ill-fitting scores added to them....just something you might want to be aware of if you watch.

So is this version worth seeing? Absolutely. It's very well made...with a nice cast and production values. It was obvious that this was a prestige project for Samuel Goldwyn and it looks great. My only complaint, and it's small, is that you don't really totally connect with Stella, as she wasn't completely pitiable...and often made stupid choices.