Ann Vickers

To call Ann Vickers a women's picture may technically be accurate--it was, indeed, adapted by Jane Murfin, also responsible for 1939's The Women--but it's much more than that. Quite simply, this is one of the best dramas ever produced in Hollywood. Written with delicacy and tenderness, yet planted firmly in the cruel realities of life, Ann Vickers includes a tour de force performance by Irene Dunne, ably supported by the wonderful Walter Huston as her lover, and Conrad Nagel and Bruce Cabot as would be paramours. There are some incredibly powerful moments here, especially during the prison scenes, and Dunne and Huston are magical whenever they're on screen together. Certainly daring by the standards of the time, Ann Vickers is a refreshingly honest and still topical masterpiece.

"Ann Vickers" is an adaptation of Sinclair Lewis' book about an unwed social worker who becomes pregnant during World War I and is subsequently abandoned by her lover. It is a valuable social commentary on the mores and folkways of the time (1933) and explores the double standard then existent that condemned a woman for `loose living' while exonerating a man. The most interesting aspect of the film to me was the fact that it was almost a mirror's image of the sea change that took place in morals during 1920's in the aftermath of World War I.

RKO couldn't have picked a better actress to play the part of Ann Vickers. Irene Dunne was young, sensitive, brave, intelligent – everything the `modern woman' of the day was supposed to be. Her early professional career was marked by a series of skillfully done tearjerkers of which "Ann Vickers" is one of the better ones.

I highly recommend this movie. Walter Huston did a fine job as Ann's second love, and the man who restored her faith in a loving relationship. It's well directed and filmed and is a wonderful insight into life in the U.S. from just after World War I up until the middle of the Great Depression.

Only three years into her Hollywood career (after the initial misstep of "Leathernecking" (1930), Irene Dunne shines in this pre-Code drama. Her portrayal of Sinclair Lewis' "Ann Vickers" is complex, layered and multi-faceted. She is a modern woman and she is determined to change the world as Edna Mae Oliver's character states "if it takes her all winter". But the world almost breaks her. She is impregnated and then emotionally abandoned by Bruce Cabot's cad "Lafe", sent to work in a Purgatory of a women's prison, and finally saved by the love of Walter Huston's Judge Barney Dolphin. In him, she has met her equal--morally, intellectually, and emotionally. Their love is here to stay, as we see when she not only proudly bears their son out of wedlock but stands by him when he is sent to prison on political corruption and graft charges trumped up by his opposition. She too suffers in that she loses a top-tier professional post and must makes ends meet by writing freelance newspaper articles. However, she is undaunted and toughs it out until such time that Barney is paroled and reunited with her and their young son. It is so refreshing to see Dunne in this early role, so far removed from both the screwball comedy and perfect wife and mother roles she would play in the middle and latter phases of her long career. We mourn with her the loss of her first child, the death of whom is ambiguously depicted as coming about by abortion. We rejoice in her finding her soulmate, Barney and cheer them for their unaffected love and affection and the joy they express over their impending parenthood. While this is a "weepie", the Queen of which she would become, Dunne's performance is superior to that of her similar roles of this era. Her talent is just as complex and strong as that of her character and she inhabits the role exquisitely.

Is anyone in the mood for a cross between Back Street and Night Court? Following those 1931 and 1932 dramas, and combining the stars, comes Ann Vickers, a drama about a strong woman who falls in love with a married man, a judge who doesn't let the law rule his personal life. If you liked both of those precursors, I know what you're renting tonight.

This is an extremely racy movie, and it's a miracle it received a seal of approval from the not-yet mandatory Production Code. The beginning of the film follows Irene Dunne as she has a romance with a soldier, Bruce Cabot. She gets pregnant, and while it's not explicitly spelled out, it's made extremely clear that she goes to Havana to have and recover from an abortion. She's seen resting, wincing, and crying, and no further mention is made of her impending pregnancy. If you don't know how much of a big deal that was to include in a 1933 movie, you're probably not ready to watch it yet.

Her best friend, Edna May Oliver, is another strong female figure from the silver screen, so it's no wonder Irene gets back up on her feet and takes another stab at life. This time, the strong feminist takes a job at a women's prison. This is one of those great silver screen flicks that show how terrible prison conditions were, as well as the interactions between female prisoners and the process of becoming a hardened criminal. Irene tries her hand at drastic prison reform, but since she's a woman and she's trying to improve conditions for women, she's ignored, belittled, and dismissed. This is Irene Dunne, so don't think for a second she'll take that treatment lying down.

Where does Walter Huston come in? you might be asking. I'm sorry to tell you, you're going to have a very long wait ahead of you until he shows up. Keep in mind the movie is called "Ann Vickers" not "Judge Dolphin". He has such talent, it's too bad he doesn't take up more screen time, but since he is so talented, he adds a lot to the scenes he's in. Among the supporting cast, you'll see Conrad Nagel, Mitchell Lewis, Rafaela Ottiano, and J. Carrol Naish. Check this forgotten drama out if you like Irene Dunne, racy pre-Code movies, or early feminist pioneers. This movie is screaming for a remake, so don't be surprised if one of the top modern actresses takes on his powerful role in the future.

It seems ridiculous to us now that this was so controversial at the time and put the censors into a wild uncontrollable rage. Perhaps that's because it doesn't quite feel like an early thirties movie. The acting, the production and certainly the story seem much more modern.

Taken out of the context of its age, it's a fairly ordinary plot. There's no doubt it is extremely well made and but at the end of the day, it's just a story about an ordinary social worker. It's not something that you can get too excited about or want to watch again. Plenty of early thirties pictures are still entertaining as stand alone movies today - this however is one of those which is only interesting as a presentation of the morality, the attitudes, prejudices and constraints of the time.

Unlike some other "social injustice movies" of the time, this doesn't use an emotional sledgehammer to get its point across. Whilst that makes this feel more modern, if you love that old sensationalist approach such as used in NIGHT COURT or SAFE IN HELL you might find this a little bland and disappointing.