MovieChat Forums > Letter from an Unknown Woman (1948) Discussion > SPOILERS: Ridiculous

SPOILERS: Ridiculous

posted 9 years ago by rob-949
12 replies | jump to latest

Riddled with plot holes.

So he says he'll be back in two weeks and forgets her presumably?

Are we to assume he's a mercurial artist who flits from here to there at whim, then later realizes he's lost the love of his life?

She ends up pregnant and unmarried, then marries someone else.

A chance reunion and he doesn't recognize her years later, yet she looks pretty much the same? They really should have emphasized that she had grown up and was now a wealthy woman with a completely different style to have this be credible on any level.

In fact, it really says more about her than about him, that she idealized the brief fling out of all proportion and so was able to overlook so many of his character flaws.

How do you care about a cad and a naive woman when they're this stupid?

[–] AcademyAwardWinnerJordy 9 years ago

I agree with most of what you say except

The part about leaving for two weeks. You seem to be in shock that men do that to women. Men today are just like they are today. The sleeping around parts were just more hidden. He was not planning to contact her again. He was a playboy. He was always with a different girl. She is no exception.

The thing that got me is how in the hell did he not recognize her? I could dee from a kid to an adult but after they had sex she looked exactly the same. She even had the same hairstyle.

Ruin is a gift. Ruin is the road to transformation (Eat, Pray, Love)

[–] jobseeker95479 9 years ago

I have read a lot of people’s complaint about the implausibility of Stefan not recognizing Lisa when they reunite ten years later. It is implausible only if you see it from the movie’s narrative, i.e. from Lisa’s point of view. Her entire life, at least the one depicted in the movie, revolved around Stefan. Of course the impression of him would never leave Lisa’s consciousness. But if you see it from Stefan’s perspective, she is just someone he had a one-night stand over ten years ago. Put yourself in his position, do you actually recognize someone you met by chance for one night ten years ago? There are plenty of people who went through the entire four years of high school together but didn’t recognize one another years later. If you want realism, *THAT* is realism!

[–] AcademyAwardWinnerJordy 9 years ago

Someone I met and did SEXUAL things with? YES! Someone I met 10 years ago and ALMOST did sexual things with? YES! This was not them meeting at a bar and making out and going behind the bar for a screwing session and he leaves right after he busts a nut. They spent the whole day together.

[–] jobseeker95479 9 years ago

> This was not them meeting at a bar and making out and going behind the bar for a
> screwing session and he leaves right after he busts a nut

Was it not? They met at the corner of a street, ate at a restaurant, roamed around the city all night and then fooled around at his apartment till the next morning before going each other's own way, involuntarily perhaps in Lisa's case. Consider the social mores of the time that is about the same as hooking up at a bar in modern days. She did see him off at the train station but that was only after she left work early enough to catch him just in time. By all account it *is* still a rendezvous, some rendezvous are more memorable than the other but more often than not they are forgotten, just the period setting makes it look more romantic only

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 9 years ago

I agree that he had no intention of coming back to her. Once he left, he likely had affairs with multiple women. She was just one of many. He meant the world to her, but she meant nothing to him.

I agree that she should have been made up a bit differently at the end there.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) and Ellery Queen = 

[–] IEatWords 9 years ago

Yeah, it's a horrible movie. It's like a cheesy play, where nothing comes close to resembling any sort of realism, not that I need realism, but when the plot relies on the dramatic in pseudo conflict it simply turns cheesy and pretentious. Gross.



[–] lisztnet 9 years ago

I think it shouldn't be take as outermost real, it's condensed, accentuated, bold.

A whole life resumed to 1 hour. It's a psychological portrait, some traits are enhanced, exaggerate. But you can find women who never forget someone, fall in love and it's for ever and suffering their whole life, or even not but think they will.

It's coherent, even if biographically incredible. He is amnesic, or something in him is mute, as his servant, the part of him which is knowing can't speak, - knowing you won't get pretty much more as 1 love in a life.. one true love.

It's a little sad story trying to make each of us a better person, listening, being careful...

[–] jobseeker95479 9 years ago

> Are we to assume he's a mercurial artist who flits from here to there at whim, then
> later realizes he's lost the love of his life?

Stefan is the love of Lisa's life but the movie never suggests Stefan feels the same way about Lisa.

Having said that I don't necessarily think Stefan in the movie is exactly the cad so many people think he is. In fact a point the movie tried to make is Stefan spent his entire life looking for his soul mate but the problem is he keep on hoping that the next one will be a better one than the one he found:

Lisa: Why do you like to climb mountains?
Stefan: Well, I suppose because no matter how high you climb, there's always a higher one.
Lisa: And you like to imagine that the other one is even more wonderful. Like the spring in the park.
Stefan: You know far too much about me already...

Even though Lisa fully believes she herself is the one person Stefan searches for in his life it is no use to force it upon Stefan if he himself doesn't realize it. So she actually has the inner strength to walk away from Stefan (she didn't try to find him once she got pregnant) hoping that he will one day figure it out himself

Lisa: if only you could have recognized what was always yours, could have found what was never lost. If only..

[–] HarlowMGM 8 years ago

So he says he'll be back in two weeks and forgets her presumably?

Totally believable, he's a longtime playboy and she's just one of the many dozens, perhaps hundreds, of women this concert pianist (ie: 19th century rock star) has bedded. He was touched by her sincerity at the time but when he got away from and to his regular life - surely he bedded another gal by that second week - she was easy to for him to pass off as just another fling.

Are we to assume he's a mercurial artist who flits from here to there at whim, then later realizes he's lost the love of his life?

We certainly are however I question that she was ever "the love of his life", he was always touched by her deep feelings but there's no real indication that it was fully mutual even if he hungered from something like she felt for him. He goes off to his death at the end because he realizes what a cad he has been in his life and how others have suffered, that she "could have been" his great love, not that she was.

She ends up pregnant and unmarried, then marries someone else.

A chance reunion and he doesn't recognize her years later, yet she looks pretty much the same? They really should have emphasized that she had grown up and was now a wealthy woman with a completely different style to have this be credible on any level.

Ten years have passed, it was just a one night fling, and he never even knew her name! Yes he slept with her but he slept with countless women no doubt many of them also spouting pretty words to him if with less sincerity. These women never reached him on a deep level. Why would he remember her? Would you remember somebody you met just once a decade ago? The fact that he slept with her didn't add anything for him because he was that kind of love 'em and leave 'em guy without ever looking back.

In fact, it really says more about her than about him, that she idealized the brief fling out of all proportion and so was able to overlook so many of his character flaws.

How do you care about a cad and a naive woman when they're this stupid?

In many ways, she used him as much as he used her. He was this Prince Charming romantic figure who happened to cross her path and she fell for the illusion of him rather than the real man who she never knew any more than he knew her. I wouldn't call her stupid, just a foolish young girl who never let go of a fantasy, or rather didn't realize that's all of was until it was too late.

[–] NewtonFigg 8 years ago

This movie gives chickflicks a bad name.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 8 years ago

Sure she idealized their brief affair. It meant the world to her. He saw it differently and she just couldn't grasp this concept.

Of course he had a lot of character flaws. For example, he was cheating on his wife. She should have smartened up after the affair and she should have been more than grateful that this other man was willing to marry her even though she had an illegitimate child (a big issue in those days). Her husband was a very good man and she should considered herself lucky to have him. But she didn't see it that way. Unfortunately her poor judgment resulted in her son's death, followed by her own death.

There was also that decent young soldier who wanted to marry her when she was a young woman. I think she was crazy to give him up, too.

Nope, Stefan didn't recognize her years later because she was just one of very many women in his life. Why should he have recognized her? At least she looked familiar to him...better than nothing, I guess.

~~~~~
Jim Hutton (1934-79) & Ellery Queen 🎇

[–] prplayer 8 years ago

the person who pitched this movie to the studio should have been fired on the spot

so many movies, so little time