calvinnme ... 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.

bkoganbing If anyone knows which of Edith Wharton's novels was made into a play by Zoe Atkins and then filmed by Warner Brothers let us all know on this board. I searched Wikipedia on Edith Wharton and couldn't figure out exactly which of her works this could be. The screen credit doesn't tell as you see and it certainly isn't The Age Of Innocence or Ethan Frome or any of her more well known works. My gut tells me its quite a bit different from what Wharton originally wrote. By the way the Internet Broadway Database doesn't tell you anything either.It does tell you that The Old Maid ran for 305 performances on Broadway in the 1935 season and starred Judith Anderson and Helen Menken in the roles that Bette Davis and Miriam Hopkins play here. Davis and Hopkins are cousins. Miriam's the bright and pretty one and apparently gets first crack at the men. One she had on a string for a while was George Brent who as the story opens arrives back in Philadelphia expecting to take up where he left off with Hopkins. But Hopkins has decided she wants wealth and security and marries solid Jerome Cowan instead.Davis who's had a thing for Brent volunteers to meet him at the station and break the news. Of course Brent insists on a confrontation just before the wedding, but being the gentleman he always is on the screen, backs off and congratulates the bride. And before he goes off to war Davis gives him a grand send off.But Brent leaves the film early, being killed in the siege at Vicksburg and leaves Davis something to remember him by. Something she can't explain in proper Philadelphia society. Kindly doctor Donald Crisp arranges for a trip out west for her health where she has a baby girl and later comes back and starts an orphan asylum, the idea to build a forest to hide her family tree.The rest of the story is pure soap opera, 19th century style with Hopkins eventually adopting the girl and Davis coming to live with her as 'Aunt Charlotte' to her own daughter played when she grows up by Jane Bryan. There's a lot of tension in the air and the fact that Davis and Hopkins hated each other in real life probably helps the performances. But these two women have put across a lot worse than The Old Maid.What this board could use is someone who knows Edith Wharton and her work and can tell the rest of us what the original story was and how close this was to the story. My gut just tells me that this soap opera was far from what Wharton intended.

MartinHafer 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.

edwagreen A spinster named Charlotte giving up her life for a girl named Tina. Sounds like the great "Now, Voyager." It's not as good but is passable.Davis plays a woman settling down to a grim spinsterhood after having an illegitimate child. She stays with relative Miriam Hopkins and the two battle it out as the years pass.The film is hurt by the fact that the vast majority of scenes take place in the house where the two are residing.The child, Tina, refers to Davis as Aunt Charlotte and in her bitterness, Davis is highly critical of her. In response, Tina often says nasty things to her.The theme of women giving up their lives to keep a major secret of illegitimacy hidden has often been shown in films. This time it's adequately done to the fine acting of Davis and Hopkins.