One More River

Today, 1930s director James Whale is best remembered for "Frankenstein", "The Invisible Man", and "The Bride of Frankenstein", as well as for being probably the only openly gay person in cinema at the time (Ian McKellen played him in 1998's "Gods and Monsters"). Lesser known are Whale's dramas. There was "Waterloo Bridge", about a relationship strained by World War I, and "One More River", about a woman who flees an abusive marriage and hooks up with someone else. Not something usually depicted back then, so I wonder if it would've even been possible once the Hays Code went into effect the following year.

It's not a masterpiece, but passable. I find these fetishistic looks at the British ruling class weird (especially considering Whale's dirt-poor childhood). I suppose that nowadays, such a movie - whether focusing on the working class or ruling class - would probably come from Pedro Almodovar. Diana Wynyard, Jane Wyatt, Colin Clive (Dr. Frankenstein in Whale's more famous movies) and Frank Lawton all turn in fine performances.

I enjoyed this film, but must be nearly alone in not particularly finding Diana Wynyard appealing in any real way, in her role as the unhappy, abused wife. Jane Wyatt on the other hand, as her sister, is sophisticated and lovely, very Myrna Loy.

Having read lots of books set in Edwardian England, I am familiar with the often ludicrous plots involved in setting up divorces and cases of criminal conversation. If you accept that the laws were limited and often ridiculous, you can overlook what seems so old-fashioned.

It is amusing to see Mrs. Patrick Campbell in action; she is a grand ham. The part of the abusive husband is a stereotype; he is oily and creepy and cruel. The new love is the opposite of course, charming and kind and gentle.

Overall a well-made film; just wish it had been made a year earlier before the draconian production code took over.

This is a superior film, but its impact is attenuated by the great changes in social attitudes toward sex and divorce which have occurred since the time it was filmed. The conflicts and tensions in the story could only occur today in third world nations or very religious communities. Thus, most American viewers can wonder what all the excitement is about.

Diana Wynyard is a revelation. When the film began, she appeared a bit on the plain side. However, she became enchantingly beautiful as the movie progressed. Her soft, pleasant, kind features and the exquisite shape of her head and body impressed me more and more, as did her calm manner and then her assertive testimony in court.She became irresistible.

Universal gave this a veneer of a prestige production. It looked like it was shot in England, except that most of the English performers were already old Hollywood hands. Jane Wyatt wisely didn't try for an English accent. Whales' direction was seamless, but not as flashy as his more famous horror productions. He kept things moving briskly.

"One More River" is a film that was adversely affected by the New Production Code. This is because the movie came out in 1934 instead of before, it would have been closer to the sordid novel. But because sadism was taboo now in movies, it was only alluded to and this, at times, made the story rather confusing.

The film begins with Claire (Diana Winyard) leaving a cruise ship. Along the way, she obtained a very fervent admirer, Tony (Frank Lawton). However, while she liked having him as a friend, she has just left her husband (Colin Clive) and was in no mood of beginning a love affair. And, through the story, Tony tries in vain to take their relationship to the next level.

The problem here is that when Claire returns to her father's home, she tells them that her husband was abusive. The whole sick sexual aspect of the violence was ignored. And, later, when the husband accuses Claire of having an affair with Tony, the reasons the wife left are NEVER discussed in court...something that really makes no sense.

So, despite this, is the film any good? Yes...mostly because the acting is so nice. Also, James Whale's direction and the cinematography were gorgeous. But with chunks of the original story missing, you can't help but wonder how good this MIGHT have been had it just been made the year before.

One More River (1934)

*** (out of 4)

This James Whale directed melodrama is technically good and the performances are fine but I'd still rank it rather low in regards to the director's filmmography. A woman (Diana Wynyard) goes to England to try and escape her abusive husband (Colin Clive) and on the ship ride over has a nice man (Frank Lawton) fall in love with her. Even though her husband is abusive, she refuses to go any further with the new man and it doesn't take long for the husband to show up and cause trouble. ONE MORE RIVER was based on a very popular novel that of course had to be trimmed down for the big screen due to the production code going into full swing during this period. For the most part I thought the film featured some very good performances from its excellent cast and there's no question that it's rather impressive on a technical side. The biggest issue I had with the film was actually the pacing, which just seemed extremely slow to me and it really took forever for the film to finally pick up some speed. There's no question that the material is old-fashioned but this isn't the reason it goes so slow. Again, the best thing going are the performances with Wynyard really standing out as the abused woman trying to do what's right. Lawton is also good in his role as the man who loves her and Clive proves what a talent he was in just a few scenes. Jane Wyatt appears in his first role and we get good support from Reginald Denny, Henry Stephenson, Lionel Atwill and C. Aubrey Smith.