Journey for Margaret

This is a very interesting film, because it was released in 1942--not long after America entered the war--but it takes place in 1940 and 1941, so audiences had just lived through the events that were the background for the film's action. And they knew some of what was to come after the final scene in the movie.

Robert Young and Laraine Day are a young married couple who have been "on the scene", we might say, as the Nazis have invaded and threatened much of Europe. As the film opens, they have moved to London, where the city is under constant threat of bombardment. Their greatest desire is to have a child. In essence, they seek normalcy in a world where people have become accustomed to war, i.e. they are perpetually afraid.

I can only imagine how much viewers in 1942 identified with the characters in this film. Wishing to bring children into a safe world is such a visceral, universal desire. Later in the film, Robert Young is confronted with an emotional choice that surely tugged at the heartstrings of all who watched. And the ending of the film is a scene that brilliantly involves the emotions of viewers via a graphic representation of the horror of war. No doubt it inspired many to buck up with its hopeful message--as films of the day were designed to do.

Robert Young is strong in his role as the husband who is strong for his wife. Laraine Day is inspiring as the wife, though her part is limited. The two children (including Margaret O'Brien in her first credited role) are delightful.

Margaret O'Brien did her first starring role in this film after only a bit part in Babes On Broadway. In fact in Journey For Margaret her troubles during wartime are the whole basis for the film.

She's not alone in her troubles, World War II left a lot of British and other children orphans. Newspaper correspondent Robert Young rescues young Margaret from a bombed out building during the London blitz. But unfortunately the experience leaves her an orphan.

A short time later Young is sent up north to a residence for war orphans and wouldn't you know it he meets up with Margaret along with the woman who runs the home, Fay Bainter. Of course a bond develops between Young and O'Brien.

Young's grieving as well, he and wife Laraine Day lost their unborn child during a bombing attack. Day's also suffered some post traumatic stress as a result and is in real danger of going off the deep end permanently. And still another orphan William Severn also manages to charm Young as well.

If this isn't enough plot ingredients for a real ten towel weeper than you have the soul of Medusa. There was tragedy behind the camera as well because director Woody Van Dyke was dying of cancer as he made this film. He would take his own life after completing Journey For Margaret.

Any committed film-goer knows exactly where this plot is headed. But the players are all capable enough and Journey For Margaret will still draw some tears from the most hard hearted of audiences.

How refreshing it is to come across a World War Two film minus the usual cliche scenes and ideas that infiltrated so many movies during the war years. Robert Young (as reporter John Davis) gives a consistent and profound portrayal surrounding a real concern for the human condition in terms of the effects of war on children. Margaret O'Brien (as orphan Margaret White)is haunting as the child with the magnesium bomb. William Severn's performance (as playmate Peter Humphreys) is addictive. But then there is so much good acting in this film by so many of the cast, especially that of Fay Bainter (as Trudy Strauss). The film makes it clear that war is the common enemy of all children, for, as Trudy says, "surely children must be allowed to cry for all they have lost."

... and unfortunately W. S. Van Dyke's swan song as a director, dying in 1943.

Robert Young was a great every man. You could just slip him into any non villainous role and he would be at least serviceable. And being serviceable works to his advantage here since his character, foreign correspondent John Davis, is meant to be a sympathetic place holder so as not to detract from the real attraction - the children at Trudy Strauss' home for war orphans. The back story is that John is looking for stories and helping out during raids in 1940 London when his pregnant wife (Larraine Day) is injured in one of them and as a result can no longer have children.

John and his wife, after the tragedy, become the eat, drink, and be merry type with an extra helping of drink, refusing to acknowledge their loss. Day's character decides to go back to the US, and afterwards, that is when John finds the orphanage. But these are no ordinary orphans. This is where things become weird for the modern viewer. Because it is obvious that what this film really needs is a touch of the sci-fi - for a therapist from after 1990 to come to 1940 London and treat all of these people for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder which they all have and which won't be recognized as a mental disorder for another 50 years.

The children will just scream out for seemingly no reason, O'Brien's character just wants to cry hysterically at times and be held. Other times, all is normal. It is insinuated that she has been beaten and returned by several foster families because she does this. So after a time, John becomes fond of both Margaret and Peter, a little boy he rescued earlier in a raid and who was orphaned by it. The children crave the stability they lost and John comes to represent that stability. So how can John adopt these kids and get his wife to snap out of her denial? And how exactly DO you safely transport two kids across the ocean in the middle of a war?

There are some odd and interesting things going on here. This Japanese diplomat keeps appearing and saying he must get to Washington by December (1941?). It seems to be played as a joke. Did wartime audiences find this funny after Pearl Harbor? Then there is the way that the orphanage decides between two children when only one can be adopted - an intelligence test? I never could figure if this was a law or just a bad idea.

Margaret O'Brien is very convincing for a five year old actress. She's not just a cute little waif, she genuinely projects the range of emotions required of her performance. Fay Bainter seems to excel at playing women who run orphanages. And Laraine Day as an American during the London blitz... Was I the only person who expected her husband to find a bunch of stolen jewels in the rubble? Well THAT is another movie entirely.

"Journey For Margaret" was one of the best movies regarding WWII I have ever seen. Did you know this was based on a true story? I read it in an old Readers Digest, and the original tale is much sadder as because of wartime regulations, only Margaret can be adopted and taken back to America. However, there is no way that ending would have played in 1942! Robert Young and Laraine Day, overlooked so often when discussing MGM/old Hollywood stars, really portray the pathos of would-be parents losing, then gaining their chance of parenthood. Don't miss this flick when it next plays on Turner Classic!