Payment on Demand

It is hard not to expect a lot from a film with such a great title, 'Payment on Demand' promises such a lot, although somehow the story was not the story that entered my mind when reading the title before reading any synopsis. It is also hard not to expect a lot from a film that starred such a great actress like Bette Davis, in a role that sounded like it would fit her like a glove and one she would play to the hilt in a good way.

'Payment on Demand' may not be a great one, but it was gripping and well photographed, scripted and acted. Not to mention quite biting and ahead of its time. It may not be for anyone that doesn't like films that rely quite heavily on flashbacks, but anybody who loves Davis regardless of her character's purposeful lack of likeability will find it quite a treat and much to admire (even if not everything works), me being one of those people.

Beginning with what works, the shadowy photography is quite beautiful to look at and her wardrobe for Davis is fabulous and suits her. The music avoids being too melodramatic, which is amazing considering the type of film/story that it is accompanying. The script is snappy and intelligent and avoids being too soapy or cliched. Regardless of how the story may seem today, it was as said by others actually ahead of its time in its handling of its subject. Done so with truth and bite.

The flashbacks generally entertain and intrigue, even if there could have been less of them. Although Davis' character is as far away from likeable as one can get, the characters on the most part are well written and interesting. Curtis Bernhardt's direction handles everything skillfully. Most of the acting is very good, with Jane Cowl excellent in her part and Otto Kruger a strong presence in his. Best of all is Davis, who is magnetic as usual and attacks her role with gusto.

Conversely, the pace plods at times as a result of 'Payment on Demand' being a little too flashback-heavy. The ending had a running out of steam feel, felt forced and actually somewhat safe for a film that was unflinchingly ahead of its time.

Sadly there was an exception to the acting though through really in no fault of his own. Barry Sullivan has a character that is not as interesting as the rest and was a bit bland as a result.

Overall, pretty good though Davis' performance is better than the film. 7/10

Some well-known names in here... Bette Davis was in just EVERYTHING in the 1930s and 1940s. (You MUST see All About Eve, if you haven't already). Natalie Schafer was "Lovey" in Gilligan's Island. Richard Anderson will go on to be Oscar on the Six Million Dollar Man. The storyline is a bit maudlin and depressing ( and rather ordinary, by today's standards.) Back in the day, divorce was uncommon, and much more of a town scandal... which we see when even the newspaper calls the wife to get the sordid details. The jilted wife, being a Bette Davis character, tells him right off. SO many flashbacks. it's all a bit depressing, but was probably more fascinating and interesting back in the day. the irony of the husband's success as he climbs up the ladder, while the marriage slowly comes apart. Barry Sullivan is the husband.

Directed by Curis Bernhardt... had started in the silents in Germany. worked his way to hollywood and directed some good films. This wasn't his best. it's very okay. nothing too new or exciting.

"Payment on Demand" is a good film. It's well made and interesting throughout. However, it has two minor flaws--you really don't care that much about the two main characters and the ending seemed a bit difficult to believe. Still, the acting is nice and the film is worth seeing.

The film begins with a husband (Barry Sullivan) announcing that he wants a divorce. The wife (Bette Davis) at first is in denial, as she insists to herself and others that he'll be back. Here is where it gets interesting. So far, you really dislike the husband as he seems pretty selfish. However, as the wife sits at home contemplating her life, she has flashbacks and through these interestingly constructed vignettes*, you see that she herself has contributed to the coldness in the marriage through her insistence that he become successful at any cost. Through this, you see that the marriage falling apart is both their faults and the film ends on a very strange note--that you'll just have to see to appreciate.

*These vignettes were unusual because they looked like a filmed version of a play. The sets would light up and when they were complete, the lights would dim--just like in a play. And, it worked very well.

More than half a century later, I found this film still moving and still relevant. One can pretend that the world and women's lives have been transformed but even now, this rings true. Women who divorce often do not have an easy time with rebuilding and even though this film made the wife a bit too unsympathetic and the husband too "nice," plenty of forty-something men leave wives who helped them through school and difficult times to go find a younger, fresher edition. I lived it, without all the exaggerations and transparent walls, but with two daughters and a remarried ex-husband. This film spoke to me and I would say that with a bit of truth-telling, there would be a chorus of ayes from those who can do more than imagine feeling the wife's loss and hostility at the husband who betrayed their youth -- perhaps even more than she did by being ambitious. I would like to report that the present is a new world and for some it is, for many, it is not and the great Ms. Davis' eyes tell truth.

Bette Davis works her usual magic with a colorless role as a wealthy society matron whose miserable husband wants her to give him a divorce. Film's best moments are the flashbacks to the couple's happier times, which are filmed in a dreamy, surreal manner. Jane Cowl gives an outstanding supporting performance as an elderly woman attracted to gigolos, but the centerpiece here is Davis, and she's magnetic as always. Filmed just before "All About Eve"--but released afterward--the picture benefits greatly from the shadowy cinematography, but the pacing plods a bit. Not a bad melodrama, but one that is never mentioned when film-historians revisit Davis' illustrious career. ** from ****