This Was a Woman

(1948) This Was A Woman PSYCHOLOGICAL THRILLER

Adapted from the play by Joan Morgan that showcases the Russell family of Sylvia Russell (Sonia Dresdel) her husband, Arthur Russell (Walter Fitzgerald; their adult son, Terry Russell (Emrys Jones) who is close to be a certified doctor and the adult daughter, Fenella Russell (Barbara White) who is already in love with Terry's best friend, Dr. Valentine Christie (Julian Dallas) who happens to be a biochemist. One day the family housekeeper, Mrs. Holmes (Marjorie Rhodes) decides she needs to take some time off to visit relatives and that she is leaving her 22 year old daughter, Effie (Celia Lipton) to take her place. And one of the first anti social examples the mother, Sylvia does is take their beloved family dog, Ace to a veterinary clinic and pay it to put it to sleep. And then as soon as the daughter, Fen announces her engagement to Terry's best friend, Valentine, Sylvia then tries to fill her head with paranoid thoughts. At the same time offer him to live with them after their marriage at the same time. And because the new housekeeper, Effie is single, Sylvia would then try to manipulate both Valentine and her together just so the daughter would have so much distrust with her new husband who does not give him any affection.

I was able to watch it straight through as the rest of the family had been tolerant of the mother's unethical and strange practices. And while I was watching it I could not forget about another movie that consists to have a somewhat similar scenario called "The Little Foxes" directed by William Wyler with the difference is that the time periods are different. Also, the mother Sylvia is a little more ruthless with the hero, Terry refusing to fall for his mother's lies, excuses and manipulation.

Sonia Dresdel always made a striking appearance. She did not make many films, but she is the dominating character in every one of them. Here she is a mother who is smitten by a power complex, she acquires a passion for power, and she feels her marriage is stifling her, so she looks for a way to escape the trap she feels she is caught in. She has two children, a son and a daughter, and the daughter is going to be married, while the mother instinctively feels her daughter must be spared that marriage, and when the marriage is a fact she starts intriguing to ruin it. Her son becomes a doctor, and gradually he sees her through. The intrigue develops into a tragedy, and finally the mother is forced to give up her struggle for absolute domination. Her taste for clothes is stunning in all of her films, and I will never hesitate to find a new one of hers.

1945's "Leave Her to Heaven" is a classic film about an evil and mentally disturbed woman who destroys people. It's a great film. "This Was a Woman" is a similar sort of movie, though not nearly the same quality....mostly because it lacked the subtlety of the Hollywood movie.

The story is set in the home of a well to do English family, the Russells. The mother, Sylvia, is vicious and it's strange that it takes everyone so long to realize this. It's odd, even after putting the family dog to sleep for no particular reason, folks don't seem to think she's a bit off! And why did she do this? Her daughter was getting married and Sylvia didn't approve...so she took the dog to the vet to put it down! Soon after, she does everything she can to ruin the marriage...though you're never really sure why. Later, for kicks, she poisons her husband...something clearly telegraphed in the film when she's caught reading up on that sort of thing.

As I already mentioned, Sylvia isn't exactly subtle and that's a problem with the story. Clearly, she's an awful person but oddly no one in the family seems to notice...until it's too late. Had the movie been more subtle and had Sylvia's actions been more covert, it would have improved it tremendously. Now I am not saying it's a bad film...but with a few minor changes, it could have been marvelous. Instead, it just had me wish I'd re-watched "Leave Her to Heaven".

The formidable Sonia Dresdel reprises her stage role as the monstrous Sylvia Russell, manipulative, sadistic, and finally murderous. Venerating power and success, she demoralizes her husband and schemes to break up her daughter's marriage, though it is not altogether clear as to what she stands to gain from the latter act. In the course of this she attempts to corrupt the maid, including lending her an under-the-counter edition of Lady Chatterley's Lover, then banned in Britain though available in English versions from France, and quite possible to get hold of if you had the money. (Had the prosecutor in the later obscenity trial, who famously asked the jury whether they would be happy if their wives or servants read it, watched this by any chance?). There is also a suggestion of lesbianism as Sylvia strokes the maid's hair, telling her how beautiful she is.

Though some these days could no doubt advance other explanations for Sylvia's behaviour, the original play opened in 1944, and with her cruelty and belief that the ends justify the means, she was surely intended as an embodiment of those evils we were supposedly fighting. It had been written by Joan Morgan, another remarkable woman, an actress in silent films turned playwright who lived on into the present century. In common with several other British films from this period, including Compton Bennett's Daybreak, and Lawrence Huntington's The Upturned Glass, there is a very dark and pessimistic outlook on human nature, reflecting a general mood of despair at recent revelations to the depths to which humanity could sink. Though there is some hope, in that Sylvia's nemesis comes partially through her son, whom has inherited something of her iron will, and as doctor will be caring for rather than destroying others.

The film's main weakness is the lack of any explanation of why Sylvia's poisonous character has never manifested itself previously during all those years she had been bringing up the family. There is no sign of rationing and few people post-war could afford servants so it is presumably set in the late Thirties. It does remain fairly theatrical, though this enables a great power and tension to build in the final scenes. And some of the acting from the younger members of the cast is remarkably feeble. Nevertheless, this is another British film of its time that deserves to be much better known. Not always an easy watch for dog lovers though.

Sylvia Russel is akin to Harriet Craig ,one of Joan Crawford's triumphs (1950) ; and Sonia Dresdel's impressive performance compares favorably with her American colleague's.

Sylvia is even more terrifying than Harriet: if eyes could kill ,hers certainly would."Mother's always watching us, her eyes are X rays ". She's a monster , a mentally-ill person , a frustrated woman who hates mediocrity (represented by her meek husband's world which consists of his dog and his roses),who wants power and uses the others as puppets .

She's got everything to live a comfortable bourgeois life: her son and her son-in-law are both doctors .But a routine life does not satisfy her ,the coming of handsome Austin makes her even more destructive .

But it had begun before: a woman asking the vet to put a good old dog to sleep? A mother who warns her daughter against her husband? Who urges her maid to seduce her son-in-law by making her read "lady Chatterley's lover",a book forbidden in the UK till 1960 (an under-the- counter French edition : the novel was first tranferred to the screen by Yves Allégret in 1955 in this country ,but in a chaste way)?

Sylvia gets her kicks by destroying her family's life ; you should see her sweetly smile when she sees her "power" on the others .

This is first-rate film noir ; Sonia Dresdel's piercing eyes (when she watches her sick husband , they will give you the jitters)will haunt you after the viewing .Try to forget them!