L'amour n'est pas un jeu

"In This Our Life" dared to point out some issues not discussed by the Hollywood of the 40s. It shows a great director, John Huston, working at the top of his craft on the interesting adaptation by Howard Koch.

Stanley, the girl at the center of the story has it all. She is the favorite niece of the man who was responsible for ruining her father, a gentle soul beaten by the Great Depression. Stanley is a spoiled woman who couldn't care less who she hurt, let alone that is her own sister the one that will suffer because of her actions.

On the other hand, Roy, the good sister, is all kindness; she is just the opposite of Stanley. When Stanley decides she wants Peter, Roy's husband, she doesn't hesitate one second. She takes him and runs away to a life that proves not to be all what she imagined it would be.

Life intervenes in Stanley's life in tragic ways. First with Peter, the man he shouldn't have taken away from her sister, and then when trying to get back with Craig, she causes the death of a young girl when driving under the influence. This would have been a sobering experience for anyone, but Stanley is beyond repentance. Stanley, is a coward who will do anything to get away with murder.

Stanley was a role tailor made for Bette Davis. Her take on this impudent girl is perfect. Ms. Davis shows how good she is in small details that convey her understanding of her character. Ms. Davis reflects all the emotions Stanley is going through with her expressive eyes. One look at her and we know what this woman is capable of.

Olivia de Havilland makes an impression by playing the good sister, Roy. Ms. de Havilland is an actress that always played convincingly in everything she did, as is the case here. Her inner strength is her best asset. Roy is loyal to the point of sacrificing her own happiness and lets her sister take what she loves most.

The strong cast behind the principals is equally excellent. Dennis Morgan is Peter, the man blinded by Stanley. He will leave his adoring wife for a woman he ends up detesting. George Brent, is the kind Craig, the man jilted by Stanley who finally finds love again with Roy. Charles Coburn plays Uncle William with his usual panache. Frank Craven is Asa, the man cheated out of his fortune. Ernest Anderson makes an impression as Parry, the young black man with ambitions to improve himself. Hattie McDaniel only has a couple of key scenes where she shines. Billie Burke and Lee Patrick are seen in minor roles.

The musical score by Alfred Newman enhances the film. Ultimately it's John Huston who shows a clear understanding for the material and who gets excellent performances out of everyone.

Wonderful performances by all concerned. And one of the very few films from the 40's that shows a black man who is actually not lazy or stupid--but just a man! Very interesting plot also. I would recommend!!

The family patriarch (Frank Craven), who has long since lost control of the business he himself started, and winds up only being an employee at, raises two distinctly different daughters. One (played by Bette Davis) is corrupted by her own personality defects and the attentions of her uncle (Charles Coburn), who has plenty of ability in business (it is revealed that he swooped in and took over the business that Craven started at an opportune time), but has a childless and cold marriage and presumably for that reason, showers money, gifts, and attention on his niece, foolishly believing he can buy her love and his happiness. This turns out to be probably Stanley's (Bette Davis) most formative relationship. Why De Havilland's Roy is so different we can only assume was because she came more under the influence of her father (Craven). That involved background story is actually more interesting than the story that is presented in the foreground, of Davis and sister Olivia De Havilland and their relationships with George Brent and Dennis Morgan. Nonetheless, Davis' relationship with Uncle William (Coburn) reaches a climactic point that ties in beautifully with the climax of the film.

I remember, in my former life, a long, long time ago, when a college professor told me that something that is created by another human being that gets your attention and stirs something inside you, and gets your visual attention, and captivates you, maybe is art.

Well, this motion picture got my attention. Yes, it captivated me. The story, the actors and the moral was superb. Many times when I see these movies of an older era, I try to imagine in my mind, what the adult audience was thinking then, as they saw the story, the emotion, the characters. All the actors did a excellent job. Bettie Davis did it to me again. Her character made me hate her, and feel pity for her at the same time.

I still don't understand why I still have a crush on her. Maybe it's that old false thinking that the right man, could change her, me! Through the years, the more I see her, the more I love her.

All too often, many reviewers pick a motion picture or the actors apart on some of the most insignificant and minuet details. The director should have done this or it wasn't true to the book, or she or he could have acted a little better, blah, blah, blah. Even I have done that-- more than once. But, if things are done "reasonably" well and it holds your attention... Well, that's entertainment. That is what you pay the ticket at the box office window for. If I had paid for a ticket at the old box office for this movie, I could say that I got more than my monies worth in entertainment. And, I am still thinking about it after the movie is over.

Fortunately, I stumbled upon this film airing early one morning on TCM. Bette Davis is quite wonderful, and contrary to what some posters have stated, she actually underplays what could have been an hilarious, scenery-chewing role. DeHavilland is, likewise, outstanding as the initially timid individual, who must cope with the devastating actions of her selfish sister.

Supporting performances are directed well by Houston, with young Ernest Anderson standing out as the wrongly accused black man. It is disappointing that the remainder of his career consisted mainly of parts such as waiters, doormen, porters, etc.

Max Steiner's score is a bit overpowering at times, but he was at the top of his game in the early 40s. The Warner back lot works effectively as Virginia, and the absence of fake/forced Southern accents actually lends credibility to the performances.

As others have stated, I will now seek out the original source material, especially after having learned of its honors. I am curious as to the source of a previous claim that the film was a critical and financial bomb on release.