One of my guilty pleasures


Look, I know the movie is awful. Really awful. An insipid script, loaded with manipulative cliche after manipulative cliche, utterly predictable plot and music that screams, "We're joking! Don't take this seriously!" Oh, and that deer at the end! I don't know whether to howl with laughter or reach for my shotgun! Come on, now. ..

And yet, I can't stop watching it.

Why?

I know that visually, it is extremely beautiful. The colors are extraordinary and add much to the atmosphere and overall affect of the film. Lots of muted gold and reds contrasted with icy blues and grays -- very effective.

I LOOKS like the 1950's as I remember it, like no other film. It is very "real" in that sense. I feel like I'm there which is very appealing.

But beyond this, I cannot explain my attraction to this film. I'm not gay, by the way and how good Rock Hudson looks means NOTHING to me.

Please share your thoughts along these lines.

reply

You nailed it perfectly- it is a guilty pleasure. Yes, it's sappy at times, the music is tooooo dramatic and heavy, and yet......like you, growing up in the 1950s, I like the re-creation of that era. The fashions, the simple moral principles, the snootiness of the country club set, all this adds up to a slice of life of that time. Every town had a gossip like Mona and wasnt she delicious to listen to????

By the way, you don't have to be gay to realize how handsome Rock Hudson was! It's a fact! Such a presence on the screen and such a versatile actor, playing dramas to comedies with ease.

Don't apologize for liking to watch this movie. There are scads of other soapy type movies like this that when I see them on the schedule, I watch them. Movies like Diamond Head, Peyton Place, et al. are diversions that require nothing from you other than 2 hours of your time. No heavy thinking involved, no what ifs, just a bit of sugar.


"Sympathy doesn't butter the parsnips." - Mrs. Patmore

reply

Thank you. Well spoken!

reply

I love the film and, yes, it is sappy. But it deals with issues that remains very pertinent to this day: Can love overcome all? Should you sacrifice happiness for what your children want? Can you marry someone from a different "social" class? Does it really matter what other people think?

It's gorgeous looking film.

reply

Jennie_Portrait,

We seem to watch a lot of the same things.

I had never seen this before, but I have to say that her "friends" really made me angry. As for the "children," they were really young adults, so I don't see why their opinions should have entered into it. Had they really been minor children with years more to live with their mother, that would have been different.

reply

I agree- her "friends" made me very upset. It would be many many years down the road before the perfect word would be coined to describe them: "frenemies." I had a little easier time with her children because I can think of comparable situations within my own circle of friends and relatives. I've heard it said that children just don't care whether their widowed parent is happy again, they just want to preserve as much of the family unit as it existed. I have a cousin in a very similar situation as the Jane Wyman character. She has a boyfriend who is 12 years younger than her. But as she married very young in life, her son is only 8 years younger than her boyfriend. Needless to say her son is a total jerk to her boyfriend. It's very unfortunate.

The movie has a happy ending and I like that. But even if I didn't know about Rock's orientation, I still wouldn't detect any chemistry between Rick and Jane Wyman. Now, in his films with Doris Day, there was chemistry--you could sense a lot of affection between the two.

reply

"I still wouldn't detect any chemistry between Rick and Jane Wyman"

His was a strange character. When he was around the friends near his house, he was very friendly, but anywhere else he seemed rather cold, including when he was with her at her house.

reply

I DVR'd it because I was falling asleep while watching it last night. Yes, he was a strange character, very underwritten. It was never clear what he saw in her. I mean she was a nice person, but again there was no chemistry.

reply

Thank you! I never felt any sizzle between the two either.
I did love the story though. I felt bad for her. Her "friends" couldn't relate and her children would prefer that she shrivel up in front of her TV surrounded by all of the family mementos.
I loved that she didn't cave in at the end.
Yes, it was sappy at times but a good story all the same.

reply

Her friends were awful (except for Agnes Moorehead, who seemed genially concerned about her). They were co-dependent jerks. It's odd how the society very much resembles the same type of society in Jane Austen novels. But at least Jane Austen looked at this type of dynamic with a jaded eye.

reply

Magnificent Obsession is another one that Rock and Jane starred in around that time. It's another melodrama much like this one. It's actually a remake. i didn't care for it nearly as much as this one.

reply

Magnificent Obsession (which was also on TCM last night) has one of the most STUPID story lines ever. Really. Rich, reckless playboy causes accident that results in woman's blindness. Guilt-ridden, he studies and becomes a doctor to cure her. Give me a break.

reply

It was really awful. Why it was remade I will never understand!

reply

Check out the NYTimes review when it came out. They panned it.

reply

For all the reasons you give, it's pure escapism, period. Good to have a go-to for that!

reply