A one-night fling during World War I results in a young girl getting pregnant. Years later, she meets him again. Now a successful businessman, he doesn't even remember her, but tries to sedu... Read allA one-night fling during World War I results in a young girl getting pregnant. Years later, she meets him again. Now a successful businessman, he doesn't even remember her, but tries to seduce her.A one-night fling during World War I results in a young girl getting pregnant. Years later, she meets him again. Now a successful businessman, he doesn't even remember her, but tries to seduce her.
Edna May Oliver
- Leona
- (as Edna Mae Oliver)
Jimmy Butler
- Jim Jr.
- (as Jimmie Butler)
Jay Whidden
- Orchestra Leader
- (as Jay Whidden and His Orchestra)
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaFilm debut of Margaret Sullavan.
- GoofsThe film begins in 1929, flashes back to 1917-1918-1919, then forward to 1929 again; yet, all of the women's clothes are strictly and undeniably in the uncompromising styles of 1933.
- ConnectionsVersion of Valkoiset ruusut (1943)
Featured review
Only Yesterday (1933) :
Brief Review -
Goes through the same mistakes as Max Ophüls's official adaptation "Letter from an Unknown Woman". Stahl's soap is relatable but absurd. When I saw the 1948 film version of Stefan Zweig's novel, I couldn't resist slamming it in my review. I don't know what critics and even some moviegoers liked about it, but for me it was an absurd idea completely. John M. Stahl's film is almost the same with a few changes, such as the positive climax and World War I conflict, but it couldn't score passing marks for me. I would like to mention those blunders so that the people who liked them should understand that they were fools. First, the film doesn't show you any concrete reason why and how the man forgot the girl. It doesn't even show when those two got time to make enough love to get a girl pregnant. I remember Mervyn LeRoy's "Random Harvest" (1942), starring Ronald Colman and Greer Garson, which had the same basic idea in its script. But the film explains the man's condition as being an amnesiac patient. Here you have a man who is completely healthy physically and mentally. How can he forget the girl after sleeping with her and making so many promises? The second big flaw is the girl's thinking about her life. At one moment, you know she has left it all behind and is ready to move on, but then suddenly she goes on to spend a night with the same man who has made her life miserable, and he is a great playboy too. She knows that he has had many girls in his life as he tries to seduce her despite being a married man, yet she is okay with kissing him. Wow, what a characterless woman. Suddenly, she is ill, and all of a sudden, one letter makes the man remember everything. Hands down for such intelligent writing. The only reason why I watched it was Margaret Sullavan, and she was good, and so was John Boles. Rest, it was a childish affair. I even doubt if children will find it logical. If I had seen it yesterday, I would have had it fade away from my memory right before going to sleep.
RATING - 5/10*
By - #samthebestest.
Goes through the same mistakes as Max Ophüls's official adaptation "Letter from an Unknown Woman". Stahl's soap is relatable but absurd. When I saw the 1948 film version of Stefan Zweig's novel, I couldn't resist slamming it in my review. I don't know what critics and even some moviegoers liked about it, but for me it was an absurd idea completely. John M. Stahl's film is almost the same with a few changes, such as the positive climax and World War I conflict, but it couldn't score passing marks for me. I would like to mention those blunders so that the people who liked them should understand that they were fools. First, the film doesn't show you any concrete reason why and how the man forgot the girl. It doesn't even show when those two got time to make enough love to get a girl pregnant. I remember Mervyn LeRoy's "Random Harvest" (1942), starring Ronald Colman and Greer Garson, which had the same basic idea in its script. But the film explains the man's condition as being an amnesiac patient. Here you have a man who is completely healthy physically and mentally. How can he forget the girl after sleeping with her and making so many promises? The second big flaw is the girl's thinking about her life. At one moment, you know she has left it all behind and is ready to move on, but then suddenly she goes on to spend a night with the same man who has made her life miserable, and he is a great playboy too. She knows that he has had many girls in his life as he tries to seduce her despite being a married man, yet she is okay with kissing him. Wow, what a characterless woman. Suddenly, she is ill, and all of a sudden, one letter makes the man remember everything. Hands down for such intelligent writing. The only reason why I watched it was Margaret Sullavan, and she was good, and so was John Boles. Rest, it was a childish affair. I even doubt if children will find it logical. If I had seen it yesterday, I would have had it fade away from my memory right before going to sleep.
RATING - 5/10*
By - #samthebestest.
- SAMTHEBESTEST
- Jul 2, 2022
- Permalink
- How long is Only Yesterday?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime1 hour 45 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content