Winter Meeting

It takes good critiquing skills to fully appreciate the surprisingly seductive subtleties of Bette Davis during her motion picture making prime. Winter Meeting is an intellectual's & critic's delight. Davis doesn't ever step out of her leading role as an extremely constrained character, Susan Greive. I can't find a flaw in her meticulous performance. The story is also of interest to the period when it was filmed.

Bette Davis at 40yo & 59 films into the height of her acting career, stars as an accomplished, upscale poet, Susan Grieve. Although Grieve is well traveled from soliciting her literary work, she resides in a posh brownstone in NYC. Her closest friend & confidant is an old-monied dapper gentleman, complete with the social graces of exquisitely good taste, Stacy Grant (43yo John Hoyt).

Believing that his secretary Peggy Markham (Janis Paige) will seduce a visiting war hero, Slick Novak (James Davis), Grant arranges a dinner party for the foursome, including the very reserved & demure Grieve (Davis). Instead, Novak instantly falls for the ever so proper poet who has no romantic interests.

After Grieve & Novak engage in a private romance, she's romantically awakened in a way that she's never been before. As such, Grieve is falling in love with Novak. Something has to go wrong to upset as fine a romance as theirs, doesn't it? It always does....

This film offers no exception. Novak has a closely guarded secret that he discloses to Grieve that changes everything between them.

I found the best on-screen chemistry to be between Davis & Hoyt. Davis comes off as the kind of woman who enjoys being around elegant men who aren't hounding after women; perhaps even gay men. Hoyt fits that image to a T. Their ultra close friendship is worth more than any romance~

The first thirty minutes may repel some.It's very talky ,it's filmed stage production style.This is a film which grows on you,you 've got to be patient for the "action" is minimal,and most amazing thing, in what is pure psychological drama ,there's not the easy way out : the flashbacks.Another director -it's the first film I've seen by Bretaigne Windust-would have at least enlivened things by introducing two very long flashbacks dealing with the two characters' past.Both have a secret to conceal .This is the very long conversation between them which reveals us that the poetess was demanding,idolizing her father,displaying no compassion for a mother who did not live up to her /their expectations;the soldier is a hero but someone told him something that has completely changed his way of seeing things .

People who expect a mushy romance ,a melodrama ,a love triangle (with the secretary) will be disappointed."Winter Meeting" shows the way to compassion for the others,be they hopeless.

First off you get Betty Davis who can deliver films up like a chocolate treat. Then the story is one to ponder and takes its place in the genre as part of lifes big picture and our personal journeys along the way. Two people meet and instead of selfish pursuits of which some takes place, they discover the true purpose of the meet to begin with but only after they have lived through it all. This concept can apply to all of our wanderings and gives us a reason to pause and ponder while pursuing things and going from point A to point B. Nicely done talkative film and acted out to perfection this leaves you with afterglow for watching it. For those that like to eat while watching (I do), nice scene with bacon and pancakes with hot maple syrup and delicious coffee. Have yours ready and join in or choose your own delight and go for it. Listen to the dialog, watch the scenes and receive this...

"Winter Meeting" is a film that doesn't add anything to Bette Davis' distinguished career in the movies. The melodrama is undermined by a completely miscast Jim Davis, who makes the picture worse than it deserved to be. The part of Slick Novak should have gone to another actor that could have added a few more sparks to the movie.

As directed by Bretaigne Windust, "Winter Movie" is a dull attempt to bring the novel in which it's based to the screen. The adaptation leaves a lot to be desired.

The basic problem with the film is one of credibility. We don't believe, for one second, Slick Novak, the hero Navy lieutenant would even look at Susan Grieve at all, let alone be romantically involved with her. It's easy for us to understand why Susan would make a fool of herself in letting Slick come into her life. After all, plain Susan was no competition for gorgeous Peggy, who is all over Slick at the night club, and clearly wants him.

Stacy Grant, the man about town, kept reminding us of a subdued Waldo Lydecker, from "Laura", in the way he tries to get Susan under his influence. He wants to expose her to a society that she doesn't care to belong. This role was one of the ways Hollywood dealt with the subject of homosexuality in those days. Everyone knew about them, but the movie making people wanted to keep Stacy and his ilk in a permanent closet.

Bette Davis underplays Susan with mixed results. Obviously, Ms. Davis had no influence for getting out of this second class melodrama unworthy of her talent. Then again, one questions her wisdom in letting a light weight actor like Jim Davis play opposite her, when it's clear he is not in her league.

The wonderful John Hoyt makes the best out of Stacy Grant and Florence Bates, one of the best character actresses of that era, is fine as the housekeeper who knows a lot about the mistress of the house. Janis Paige, in all her beauty and youth, doesn't have much to do.

This is a film to be seen as a curiosity more than a Bette Davis signature vehicle.

Possible *Spoiler*

What I liked about this film was the dialogue. Yes, the dialogue. To me, this film was about two people who were struggling with their inner desires, disappointments, hurts and longings. Both main characters were somewhat stiff in social situations. The uneasiness between them was understandable to me because of their past experiences.

The romantic scenes were awkward in my opinion because of a spinster who is within her shell; and a man struggling with his inner desire to be a priest. Plus it appears the characters were two introverts.

Yes indeed, the film was slow moving, just like real life is sometimes. I do not mind slow moving films, for films should not always be about speed and excess of excitement. There were some really good moments in this film. If you do not mind a story unfolding slowly, with an emphasis on dialogue, check out this film.