Tender Comrade

While it's true that this film isn't nearly the drama that SINCE YOU WENT AWAY was, it is still an exceptional view of the impact of WWII on the families at home. Despite a very minor problem (which I'll talk about later), the film has great emotional impact even today and I dare you to watch it all the way through and keep a dry eye!

The main character of the film is Ginger Rogers and is about her dealing with life without her husband, Robert Ryan, who is at war. While he does appear in the first 15 minutes or so of the film, he is primarily seen through a series of flashbacks interspersed through the movie. These all give background as to the life this couple shared before the war. As for Ryan, he came off very well in these vignettes, though Rogers' character seemed a bit too petulant to be believable and I was half expecting Ryan to slap her upside the head to shut her up (folks, I am NOT encouraging spousal abuse--relax)! Later in the film she had mellowed quite a bit and was indeed a very sympathetic and good character.

Ginger and her co-workers begin talking after Ryan goes back to the war and they mutually decide to rent a house together and share expenses. At this point, the story involved the the lives of these four other women--their motivations, back story and character. This is all told in a very effective manner and you really begin to care for the ladies.

The purpose of this tearjerker was to solidify the resolve for the war with the people left behind in the States and in this light, this was a super-effective film. Generally excellent writing, direction and acting make this a film that is easy to connect to and like. It also makes the movie a tough one to watch, as you tend to go through an emotional roller-coaster because of all the ladies' trials and tribulations. A wonderful time capsule of the era and a film well worth seeing.

Oddly, in later years, many of those responsible for this film were labeled "Communists" and the film was cited as an example of these left-leaning sympathies. Other than the fact the ladies live together and share their money, I really can't see how any sane person could construe this as Communism--and what's the matter with sharing a home and expenses anyway? I did that a while back and I don't THINK I'm a Communist!!

... but it was part of what got director Edward Dmytryk and writer Dalton Trumbo in trouble with HUAC in the early 50s when this film was considered Communist propaganda.

Four war wives who work in a munitions plant decide that if they pool their salaries and resources that instead of four individual run down rooms for rent that they can rent one spacious house with a bedroom for each, a kitchen, a living room, and a housekeeper. They sell one of the two cars they have between them and use the money to fix up the one remaining car and share it. Apparently this is Communism. Let's just ignore the fact that, at the time, movies were being made that were loaded with pro Russian propaganda because the Americans needed the Russians in the war effort. That was then this is now, as they say.

Other than that, it treads pretty traditional wartime material. One wife (Ruth Hussey) was a bit of a good time girl before the war and rather resents the fact that her good-time husband joined the navy before Pearl Harbor even happened. Another (Kim Hunter) got married on the spur of the moment and had to see her husband off that afternoon. Another (Patricia Collinge) has both a son and a husband in the war.

The central figure, though, is war wife Jo Jones (Ginger Rogers), and most of the film is about her relationship with her soldier/husband Chris (Robert Ryan) before the war as she flashes back to various scenes from their marriage. This part of the film uses a strange device. Whenever there is a scene in which Jo reminisces about Chris, the scene switches to a shot of the two of them in the distance, holding hands with clouds surrounding them, like they are in heaven, before launching into the flashback.

This gets pretty sentimental at times, and Ginger verges on hamming it up, but it did hold my interest for the rather long running time and is a splendid time capsule of the war years.

I disagree with the goof that Robert Ryan is not whistling when coming through the laundry. In close examination, you hear the whistling, see his feet walking toward the laundry line. Then see his face, lips slightly puckered, he draws a breath and continues, just through his lips, but without his lips all bunched up. It's of course possible to whistle this way. I do it all the time!

Jo Jones (Ginger Rogers) is heartbroken watching her husband Chris Jones (Robert Ryan) go off to war. She goes to work at an aircraft plant. She befriends fellow workers Doris Dumbrowski (Kim Hunter), Barbara Thomas (Ruth Hussey), and Helen Stacey (Patricia Collinge). They decide to rent a house together.

The war propaganda is obvious and completely expected. There isn't anything that compelling. They have made each lady do something different. The German housemaid gives voice to all the underlying politics and warnings from Europe. The flashbacks are hit and miss. A better use of the time could be Chris writing letters from the war. Maybe it could show him being heroic. That would be great war propaganda. Barbara hearing about the Yorktown sinking is probably the most compelling moment. The most compelling Hollywood history has to do with the writer Dalton Trumbo who would fall victim to the Red Scare.

I found it an interesting movie because I was just old enough to be aware of what was what during the war years. Rationing, shortages, worrying about husbands, fathers, brothers, uncles, etc. who were overseas fighting. It may seem "hokey" or outdated to those under thirty or forty, but it's fairly representative of what life was like. I agree with a previous commentator - Dalton Trumbo is/was a vastly over-rated writer, in fact if it hadn't been for the fact that he was "black-listed" I doubt if he would be remembered, let alone lionized as he is today. A classic case of creating a martyr. He's heavy handed and lacks subtlety. His mediocre writing is usually compensated for by the talent of the players or directors. View it with a mindset that allows for the ethos of the period and I think you will find it entertaining. Ginger Rogers is almost always terrific, and this movie is no exception.