In This Our Life (1942)

Post Reply
feaito

In This Our Life (1942)

Post by feaito »

This film mainly belongs to the type of Woman’s melodrama that was expertly made back in the 1940s (I feel that the genre reached its zenith during that decade) and that surely is not being filmed anymore.

Here we have the queen of melodrama, Bette Davis in one of her most over the top performances, with all her mannerisms at full display, especially those exaggeratedly open eyes and the nervous tics that go with it.

She plays Stanley Timberlake, a spoiled, manipulative, whimsical, fiery southern belle who’s used to having her own way, especially due to the extreme pampering courtesy of her apparently weak, whining mother, Lavinia Fitzroy Timberlake (Billie Burke) and her no-holds-barred rich maternal uncle William Fitzroy, expertly played by that grand actor Charles Coburn -who had a big run of good parts in noteworthy films the year in which this picture was released (Kings Row, The Man Who Came to Dinner & George Washington Slept Here). Uncle William has no children of his own and Stanley is his absolute weakness; he does anything Stanley wants, just like mum Lavinia.

Olivia De Havilland plays her mature, subdued, modest, good natured sister Roy Timberlake (I wonder why both characters were given masculine names…was it on purpose?) who’s betrayed in one of the most terrible ways by her “dear” sister Stanley.

Dennis Morgan and George Brent play the men in the Timberlake girls’ lives, giving both good performances.

I was surprised that this melodrama tackled serious social issues for 1942, principally the discrimination of black people, especially in the South (the film is mainly set in Richmond, Virginia), where at the time they had little chance to improve their socioeconomic position in life. Ernest Anderson plays perfectly against stereotype the smart, ambitious Parry who wants to be a lawyer, in spite of being conscious of all the obstacles he will have to face. Hattie McDaniel portrays his mother Minerva, who works as a maid in the Timberlake Residence, playing a non-comic role for a change.

Lee Patrick is also in the cast as a dizzy lady who befriends Bette Davis’ character in Baltimore, after she flees Richmond to avoid public scandal.

Being a film directed by John Huston it shouldn’t surprise anyone that in spite of its predominant melodramatic elements it has also many moments of truth, especially in the scenes that involve the idealistic lawyer played by George Brent, the good natured Roy, beautifully played by Olivia De Havilland and the lovable, dependable Parry, played deftly by Ernest Anderson in one of the few non-stereotypical, truly dignified roles I’ve seen an African American actor during the 1940s. When Bette enters the picture though, we’re back in Melodrama’s Neverland.

Walter Huston, father of the director, plays a small cameo role as bartender in a Tavern.
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

You've picked a few good ones the past couple of weeks to discuss and this is another one. I saw it the first time last summer during a Bette Davis day. I agree with everything you say and I think the answer to the girls' names is old uncle Coburn. Clearly he handled the purse strings to the family and he probably wanted a boy to leave his money and businesses to, and most likely had the two names picked out before the girls were born, but in order to keep him happy, I suppose Mom and Dad just went ahead with the names anyway. I THINK, in the very beginning there is a brief explanation, but not positive, so I'm really guessing.

Have to admit, I almost cheered at the end when Bettes' pleas fell on deaf ears. Uncle had enough to think about without her foolishness, and I was glad when she got hers in the end.

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
feaito

Post by feaito »

Thanks for your insight Anne. I agree that the girls' names must have been on account of Uncle William. After all he was the powerful man in the family and the brother of the girls' mum.

And yes, Bette had it coming to her. I read in Bette's biography by James Spada that she was in a bad state of nerves when she made this film and that John Huston had a hard time trying to control her; and this is very apparent in her performance!
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

I think if you're a decent person with your own little kinks and quirks, but basically nice, you would find it difficult to say certain things to certain people, even if they are part of a role. e.g. If you have a certain respect for older people and have to call someone 'an old fool', would be hard. Also if you are happily married and have to go through the entire marriage ceremony, it would be difficult no matter how many times you told yourself "It's only a line in a script". No matter how great an actor you are, there has to be something inside you that cringes at things that are really against your inner beliefs.

As a parent, when my kids were little and now with my grandkids, I NEVER made a promise. I firmly believe you have to keep your promises, especially to kids, so unless I am 100% sure I can carry it through, I never promise. The few times I did, the child felt supremely secure that his wish would be accomplished. I will say I'll try my best, but rarely 'I promise'. My daughter recently told me how she felt when I promised her certain things because she knew it was going to happen. That's the kind of inner belief I'm talking about.

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
feaito

Post by feaito »

feaito wrote:And yes, Bette had it coming to her. !
I mean here Bette's character in the film, Stanley Timberlake, of course.
feaito

Post by feaito »

mrsl wrote:As a parent, when my kids were little and now with my grandkids, I NEVER made a promise. I firmly believe you have to keep your promises, especially to kids, so unless I am 100% sure I can carry it through, I never promise. The few times I did, the child felt supremely secure that his wish would be accomplished. I will say I'll try my best, but rarely 'I promise'. My daughter recently told me how she felt when I promised her certain things because she knew it was going to happen.
That's a good point Anne. Never promise a kid something you cannot or won't do. My two bothers, up to this day, remember when a relative of my parents promised to them a typewriter and never fulfilled his promise.
User avatar
mongoII
Posts: 12340
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 7:37 pm
Location: Florida

Post by mongoII »

No doubt that the Warner Bros. movie "In This Our Life" is one of the best melodramas of the 1940s.
With a talented cast, especially that of Bette Davis and Charles Coburn, we were pulled into a web of deceit and destruction.
Did I detect a bit of incest with uncle and his favorite niece?
Good support from Hattie McDaniel, Lee Patrick and Billie Burke. Lovely Olivia DeHavilland was too much like her Melanie in GWTW.
jdb1

Post by jdb1 »

feaito wrote:
mrsl wrote:As a parent, when my kids were little and now with my grandkids, I NEVER made a promise. I firmly believe you have to keep your promises, especially to kids, so unless I am 100% sure I can carry it through, I never promise. The few times I did, the child felt supremely secure that his wish would be accomplished. I will say I'll try my best, but rarely 'I promise'. My daughter recently told me how she felt when I promised her certain things because she knew it was going to happen.
That's a good point Anne. Never promise a kid something you cannot or won't do. My two bothers, up to this day, remember when a relative of my parents promised to them a typewriter and never fulfilled his promise.
This is why I've always felt that the appropriate response to a child's question "Promise?" when an adult is not sure of, or isn't really going to, meet an obligation to a child, is usually "We'll see." Not a flat-out "No," but not a definite commitment, either. I always had carrots dangled in front of me when I was a kid, and I certainly felt that my parents were lying to me about promises they never really intended to fulfill. After a while, I simply stopped believing most of what they told me. I would have vastly preferred a "Maybe" once in a while to the constant disappointments I had to face.

It's a truism when dealing with children (or with anybody, for that matter): don't make threats you don't intend to follow up on, and don't make promises you can't keep.
Post Reply