Watch The Old Maid For Free

Very Cool!!!

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

If there was a hit play on Broadway, you know that in the mid to late 1930's and 40's that Bette Davis was looking at as a potential vehicle for herself. There was "The Petrified Forest", "Jezebel", "Dark Victory", "The Little Foxes" and "The Man Who Came to Dinner", and one that received the Pulitzer prize, this play by Zoe Atkins, gloriously filmed in the greatest year that the movies have ever known. Not all spinsters start off as old maids, and in the case of Bette's Charlotte, she was a lovely young woman who made one "mistake" with the now deceased civil war hero George Brent. Only the audience is aware that she has had a baby by him, taking care of her as a foundling, but only to stand by as her cousin Delia (Miriam Hopkins) arranges to adopt the little girl. Forgetting who raised her growing up, the young Tina (Jane Bryan) grows to hate her "Aunt Charlotte", now sour looking and stern, while Delia hasn't seemed to age at all.It's obvious that the egotistical Hopkins cared more about image than reality, while Davis doesn't give a crap, only wanting to play the part as written. That's not to dismiss Hopkins, giving a sincere performance, only changing her hair style slightly to indicate the passage of time. Donald Crisp as an old family friend is superb, while Louise Fazenda's old nurse delightfully loyal.This is excellent on every level, and I mark Davis's performance as even better than the one she managed to be nominated for in a year of hits, "Dark Victory". Davis doesn't even mind a shadow covering half her face, as if during this scene (where she practices disciplining Bryan) to indicate the shadow of a life her existence has become. I could watch all of Davis's classics back to back with only a break for sleep, and never be tired of them.

... and George Brent as Clem Spender is that kind of guy. We don't see much of Clem himself except at the beginning, but the film is pretty much about the aftershocks of him being the love of the lives of the two main characters, cousins Delia (Miriam Hopkins) and Charlotte (Bette Davis).The time is the beginning of the Civil War, in the north, far enough away from the battlefields to the extent that if this war will ever touch the lives of the characters it will be through death on those battlefields. Clem has apparently gone off to make his fortune so he can marry Delia, whom he claims to love - heck I think he believes that himself. But Delia is practical. After waiting for two years she decides to marry "a Ralston" - Jim Ralston to be exact, good provider from a family of bankers, not hard on the eyes, and probably so predictable Delia will spend the rest of their mutual lives with her feet asleep.Clem comes back on the wedding day, and Charlotte, who we are told is several years younger than Delia, goes down to the station to try to get Clem to stay away from the wedding, that Delia says it is too late. When Delia and Clem meet, at her house before the wedding, you understand she did not want to see Clem because she still loves him, she will always love him, although she doesn't say that. When an allegedly broken hearted Clem exits the house, Charlotte, also secretly in love with Clem goes after him. Now remember this is the production code era and so you see NOTHING in the way of passion between them. But they did have sex because suddenly Charlotte is going out west for her health, and when she returns she is running a home for war orphans, with her own child by that one night with Clem, Tina, hidden among the bunch.Delia being told about the existence of the child, and that it was Clem's is the undoing of both cousins. Delia, in the jealousy that she cannot even admit to herself, sabotages Charlotte's wedding by telling a lie to the groom, gets Tina and Charlotte to move into her house after her husband dies, gets Charlotte to let her adopt Tina, and in the end the once vivacious beautiful young Charlotte turns into an "old maid", somebody that even her own daughter has no use for other than to pity her. The person she ultimately calls "mummy" is Delia.Now Davis' acting here is raw, everything is out there. She IS that vivacious young woman at the beginning of the film, she IS that bitter spinster in the end - partly because she knows what Delia has taken from her and that Delia refuses to admit her own motivations. Hopkins plays her part more subdued, as though Delia cannot admit to herself that all of this has been about Clem, that it was he she has always loved, whose child she wanted and has managed to maneuver herself into a position where she gets her.Now being an "old maid" was considered a horrible fate for a woman until about 1970, but these two women are living on the fumes of a memory, of the adventurous handsome but broke Clem as a young man. His death as a soldier in the Civil War freezes him in time in that state. They neither ever seem to get that had either of them got their wishes they would have ended up married to an emotionally ambiguous man, a man who just can't seem to succeed, and prolonged poverty never made anybody happy.This is a great film even if it is full of overdoing the punishment of sin production code style for everybody involved. Case in point, Bette Davis' Charlotte ages to the point that she looks ten years older than the actual age of her character for the sin of one night of out of wedlock passion with somebody she tragically loved, while Miriam Hopkins' Delia has hardly aged a day over the film's course, even though all the while she's been taking a wrecking ball to her cousin's life.

It's interesting to read our reviews of this film here at IMDb. Interestingly, most of our reviewers give it pretty decent marks, which was not what most reviewers said at the time of the film's original release. And I must concur with those reviewers some 70 years ago. Stodgy is a good descriptor for this film, and it seemed like it went on forever. And I say that as a tremendous fan of Bette Davis. And I note that this film was made at the beginning of what one might call "the golden age of Bette Davis". By this film was not gold, rather bronze.Many viewers will be disappointed in the demise of legendary Bette Davis costar George Brent very early in the film. As stodgy as this film is, particularly during much of its early scenes, it was rather daring that Davis' character had an illegitimate child, which she then raises as a foundling.I recently read that with Mariam Hopkins, you either thought she was wonderful, or horrible, with very little room in between. I tend to dislike her as an actress, though she had some roles that were tremendous. This is not one of them, though she is passable here.To be honest, it's the last 20 or so minutes of the film where you will find the best scenes by all the actresses, particularly some strong scenes by Davis. Before that, there are occasional strong scenes, with lots of pap in between. But that last 20 minutes...mmmmmmmm.The only other actor worth mentioning here is the great Donald Crisp, who is superb as the doctor and family friend.This film is worth watching, but I doubt it'll find its way to many home DVD shelves. Some of Bette Davis' films I can watch over and over and over. But not this one. Once is fine. Perhaps if the writers had totally redone the plot it might have been a great film...as great as its initial premise.

This is a well made film but despite everything, I felt a tad disappointed. I think some of it might be the inconsistencies in the characters and another is probably due to the low energy level in the film. In real life, the film's stars (Miriam Hopkins and Bette Davis) hated each other and getting these divas to work together was a major ordeal. I really wish that the energy from this volcanic relationship had somehow been translated to the screen. Instead, you have two characters who have reason to dislike each other (in particular, Davis's character really had every reason to want to kill Hopkins' character), but spent the movie quietly seething--so quietly that the only sparks came out near the end and even these were quite muted. Perhaps this very controlled manner was more realistic than a histrionic relationship but it certainly was a lot less fun to watch. And, as I said at the beginning of this review, the characters were inconsistent and not especially believable. Hopkins generally played a decent person in the first half of the movie when, out of the blue, she stabbed Bette (figuratively) in the back. Then, in a subtle way she spent the rest of the film undermining Bette until the end when she repents and shows some decency. It was like the character had a case of Multiple Personality Disorder ("Dissociative Identity Disorder" for all you psychotherapists out there). And Bette was very decent in the first half of the film, only to become bitter and cranky. I understood why the writer chose to do this with Bette--showing how a disappointment in love can change a person's personality radically. But how could they explain away Hopkins' strange and inconsistent actions? Despite all this, the direction and entire production was first-rate Warner Brothers entertainment. And when Warner pulled out all the stops, their films were amazing--even if a bit flawed as in the case with this film. A bit of a disappointment, yes, as I am a HUGE Bette Davis fan, but still well worth seeing even if sparks don't fly.