MovieChat Forums > Imitation of Life (1934) Discussion > Is the 1934 version better?

Is the 1934 version better?


Is the 1934 version better? I'm watching it on TCM right now,
so I can't say yet. They will probably have both versions on again soon
(again, thank god for TCM, and its not going commercial on us).

I will come back after seeing this 1934 and the 1959 version.

Van

reply

I truly believe both versions are great films for their time. Each one reflects the issues of their times. The 1934 has a bit more racism at play, which is relfected when Bea offers Dahlila a "whole" 20% of the profit for using her face, her mix, her work, and on top of it all she doesn't want her own house!Ya sure. The 1959 version obviously portrays the racial issue in a great way through Sarah Jane's confusion about being biracial and her rejection of her mother, but it also touches more on the mother vs. career issue. You have to remember the 50s was a time in which mothers were supposed to be in the home and most films tried to encourage that and punished for going out of the home. In reality the 50s was a time of change for women which is why society even through films tried to coerce the mothers back into the home. I saw the 1959 version first so I have a bit of a preference for that one. Only because I think the daughter Sarah Jane (Peola in the 1934) takes the emotional dramticism a level up. In the end her screams and remorse for rejecting her mother are felt to the core of your soul. In all fairness to the 1934 version they did it first and the actors in the 1959 version could look back and build on what had already been done in their own way. Both versions are great within their context. You should watch both and decide for yourself.

reply

I agree. There are 2 strong themes in old movies that drive one crazy:

One is racism, which still haunts us in spite of scientific results and
the creative achievements of others (I just saw Hail, Hail, Rock and Roll,
and the recent blues series on PBS). This, combined with DNA results, and the
fact that UV light produces light and dark skin, what can one say to those
who persist in a racist agenda?

Same goes for keeping women down--til recently it wasn't decent for women to
like sex, and they were supposed to be virgins when they married--
look at Shakespeare's "Much Ado about Nothing". They were called
witches and had all kinds of laws going against them, not to mention patriarchal
religious oppression--both Christian and Muslim. It wasn't so long ago that the
ERA failed to pass, thanks mainly to the religious right.

This stuff persists now. its like some people take on whatever they were
told 50 years ago, and expect there children to do the same.
That's how my family was.

Van

reply

I meant to watch this tonight but fell asleep--I have even given up
most taping. BTW, I joined Greencine which has movies you don't see on TV much,
and have found some good stuff. One can get a DVD player for as cheap as
$35 onlilne too.

Van

reply

Wow, a triggered atheist. 2000+ years later and Jesus is still intimidating people.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Turner Classic Movies showed them back to back yesterday. They are both excellent and a picture of their time. I cried the most at the ending of the 1934 BW one, probably because Delilah died holding a picture of Peola in her hands.

I was disturbed at how Delilah felt that her life was only worth serving white people and she was happy about it too! Maybe if she had more Self worth Peola wouldn't have felt ashamed of being black.

The Aunt Jemima Pose was offensive, but I guess those were the times.

reply

[deleted]

The daughter is NOT WHITE in either version or of mixed race!!! She is simply light-skinned.

The original is the better movie because the characters are all more sympathetic (and better acted besides). Peola is not a bad woman, she is simply passing because she refuses to live as a second-class citizen. Sarah Jane in the remake, on the other hand, is just a wild child, she is not interested in bettering herself through education and career like Peola, she is just passing so she can date white men. The women and daughters in the original all love and care for each other whereas in the remake there is more of a employee-employer relationship even if there affection.

reply

Actually I do not think Peola was wild in the remake. I think that even though she wanted to pass as white, she did not think very much of herself, and her choices reflected that. Although she rebelled against the idea of being a "second class citizen" she did not seem to feel worthy of living a respectable life.

I liked the 1934 version better because of the acting and writing. It was just a more heartfelt movie. The 1959 version is good in its own right, it just has a different flavor from the original. Generally, I prefer the writing and execution of movies in the 1930's and 1940s because of the writing and imagination that went into movie making back then.

reply

Actually, that's not totally correct. Fredi Washington (1934 version) was a light-skinned African-American, yes. But Susan Kohner (1959 version) was of Mexican and Jewish ancestry. I think the latter was and would be considered white. Or if "half" anything, half-Latino or something on those lines.

reply

[deleted]

In the 1959 version .... Sarah Jane was played by Susanna Kohner. Kohner is the daughter of Mexican actress Lupita Tovar and film producer Paul Kohner, who was born in Bohemia ... I do believe this does make her mixed!!

reply

Heh...I cried at the end too...in a class full of boys...good times.

reply

[deleted]

'Unfortunately, there are still "Aunt Jermimahs" out there cowtowing to whites. Even worse there are plenty of whites both accept as well as encourage such submission from blacks.'
-------------
Yeah, like blacks in general expect white to cowtow to them, due to excuses slavery, false-racism, and whatever else they can think of.
..I know, I can think such, but not actually say so, unfortunately

reply

The 1934 version of "Imitation of Life" is a much better movie, and frankly, much more politically progressive. I found the 1959 version to be shlocky, melodramatic (yes, I know that's Sirk's trademark, which is why I tend not to like Sirk), and politically regressive. Think about it. In 1934, you have a movie in which a white woman and a Black woman end up as partners together in business (my pet name for the movie is "The Aunt Jemima Story"). It's pre-civil rights movement and Black Power, so the whole light-skinned passing for white thing is much more of a relevant issue. Everything fits in that movie. Even Claudette Colbert's somewhat paternalistic attitude towards Louise Beavers seems born of genuine affection and love, instead of intentional racism. That's amazing for 1934. Even the ending moves you deeply, because Fredi Washington's character truly gives you a sense of how badly she feels. Painful. Not to mention the implied UNIA/Garveyite participation at the funeral. Did you catch that? It's 1934, and we've got Garveyites running around in a Hollywood movie. If I looked hard enough, I might have seen W.E.B. DuBois or Paul Robeson somewhere in the crowd (the Harlem Renaissance was still in full effect). :-)

Now, try to bring that story to 1959. Doesn't work. Are the women still business partners? No. The Black woman is just the maid. Do they meet while the Black woman is out looking for work? No, the Black woman is sitting on her ass at the beach. Pathetic. Is passing really as much of an issue in 1959? The CRM is about to get large, anti-colonial movements in Africa are gaining steam, and these people are oblivious. The whole movie just stinks. Even the ending doesn't work. The only good thing is Mahalia Jackson, and for that, I can listen to her on iTunes or watch her on DVD. So, for me, it's 1934 all the way.

reply

I disagree. I like the 1959 version much better. Both mammys were great, but I like Juanita Moore a little better. And Lana Turner was MUCH better than Claudette C. I also liked Sara Jane better than Peola, I could feel her demons going on her head much more, as she was much more vicious to her mother than Peola. And the end when she screams and sobs at the funeral is more touching. I also never understood or believed in the pancake mix business success, and only giving Louise Beavers 20% when the whole recipe was hers, AND her image. And Claudette acts like it is a gift! I prefer the version where Lana struggles to become a star, while Juanita raises the kids; its just more believable and likable.

reply

The 1959 version is better, *beep* a pancake lady.

reply

Oh, I think the 1934 version is more appropriate... The later version, took too many liberties with the main gist of the story.

See, in the 1934 version, Claudette Colberts financial success was a direct result of delilah's "invention" and so, these two women are "equals" as much as could be told in 1934 (The fact that delilah only got 20% of the company based on a product she created, well, they just could not share it 50/50 with a white woman could they?)

But the later version, I do not know the relationship that exists there, other than is the delilah of the later version a SERVANT?

See, in the original, both women met on equal terms and survived on equal terms. And THAT was a good story.

I have not seen the 2nd version all the way through, but lots of changes had to be made, and the changes made, made it a less honest and realistic story.

Remakes should always, if possible, stay in the era in which they first occured. But sometimes they can't - So Ball of Fire became A Song is Born, both great moovies, even by the same director! For example I mean.

reply

I had never seen the original until a few days ago. I'd seen the remake more times than I can count. I think the 1934 version was so progressive for its time. Two women going into business together in 1934 - that was completely lost in the remake. The mother/daughter bond message was stronger in this version. The mother chooses her daugter's feelings over the love of her life. The commentator on a show I was watching said that the actor who played Peola hated saying the line "I want to be White" because she felt that Peola really didn't want to be White as much as she wanted the same opportunities that Whites had.

As for the remake, I cry at the end every time. The main thing that I liked about the remake is that there were more scenes between the mother and daughter so the impact of the ending comes across stronger. If the first one focused a little more on that relationship, there would be no doubt about which film should win. How could the remake completely leave out the business aspect? The race issue still gets to me but I just have to remember the times.

"smile. be happy"

reply

1934 version all the way!!!!.
The storyline felt more believable in every aspect. Yes, the story was a bit racist but remember, this is 1934 not 2006. This is a part of history that happenend. We cannot turn back the clock but we need to know our history so that it is never repeated. Remember, a wise man once said, "those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it".
The acting, in my opinion, is just so much better, the 1930's and 40's are truly the golden age of cinema.

reply

I'm watching the 1934 version right now, and in some ways I like it better. I agree with the person who said that the 1950's version is too melodramatic. However, I liked Susan Kohner's venomous portayal of Sarah Jane and her crying scene on Mama's casket at the end. Both have their good and bad points.






And now for something completely different.

http://tinyurl.com/mc6kg

reply

I just caught part of the 1934 film while on vacation in Colorado. Didn't have time to finish watching it (how I missed my Teevo!). Wasn't sure what I was watching at first, then told my husband it had to be Imitation of Life. I didn't even know there was that one! From what I saw, I liked it much better. I just love B&W films and loved the clothes, music, just all of it in general.
But wondering, was Delilah's daughter "mixed" or just light skinned? I don't remember hearing a reference to her father. Who he was or what happened to him.
Is this version available on DVD? Would love to finish watching it, though I think I got half way through it (Colbert's daughter comes back from school).

reply

The premises for the 1959 version was a bit farfetched. In 1934 African-Americans were not even people in the south. Jim Crow pervade in at least 2/3 of the nation. In the other third blacks were second-class citizens. Therefore, the idea of an Aunt Jemima striking up a relationship as was done in the 1934 version seems highly plausible. Both parties in this film display a high degree of talent and enthusiasm. What was done for the Aunt Jemima on the 1934 version was a far cry from what Quaker Oats did for the real model of Aunt Jemima, Anna Short Harrington. But that’s another story. Yet, the 1959 version doesn’t make a lot of sense. It’s about a European who met a black woman on the beach who had a very fair skinned child (if you remember the black woman said the child’s father was light skinned and not white) and the two made friends. The black woman became her maid and as the European became famous and rich, she brought her black servant along with her. Subsequently she enabled the woman to gain an amount of wealth for herself. But lets look at 1959. Jim Crow was in its last throes in the deep south. The Brown Decision found Separate but Equal unconstitutional in public education. Ralph Bunch had already won the Nobel Peace Prise. Blacks were making strides in all avenues of American Cultures. So if I’m a person of color in 1934 and watching Imitation of Life, I would feel that there was some hope living in America. But the 1959 version would make someone at that time think things will never change. Therefore, I would be depressed.

reply

I liked the 1934 on better.

reply

The 1959 version is much better.

reply

I like the 1934 version.

reply