MovieChat Forums > Of Human Bondage (1934) Discussion > Dangerous vs. Of Human Bondage

Dangerous vs. Of Human Bondage

posted 18 years ago by sarahelizabethii
4 replies | jump to latest

Ok, I know Mildred was a groundbreaking role for Bette Davis, and I know she perhaps should have received an Oscar for it, BUT...

I much prefer her role as Joyce Heath in Dangerous, for which she did win her first Oscar. To me, Dangerous is a much better film, and has weathered the test of time better than Of Human Bondage. OHB still stands as a piece of film history, but I'd argue that Dangerous is less melodramatic, more realistic, more accessible and just plain more enjoyable to today's audience.

Thoughts?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Harold_Robbins 17 years ago

Joyce Heath is obviously a distant cousin to Mildred, albeit a lit-tle nicer, but still in the pattern.

"I don't use a pen: I write with a goose quill dipped in venom!"---W. Lydecker

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] arman0612 13 years ago

I completely agree with you, I think the only good thing about Of Human Bondage is Bette Davis' performance, the rest is just bad, boring and I think the direction and screenplay could have been so much better, more focused at least, everytime Davis was out of the screen I was bored and couldn't wait for her to come back. Howard was good and I think he did his role justice but he was so slow and dumb it was annoying, he was so lifeless and I think this helped Davis because she was the complete opposite and was so much more interesting, I just wished she had had more screentime. I think Joyce Heath (the character) and Dangerous (the film) were both better because she was the real leading character instead of the boring Philip Carey (Leslie Howard), and also the Franchot Tone character was more interesting as well.

Of Human Bondage (1934) 6.5/10.
Dangerous (1935) 8.5/10.