This Paramount adaptation of a Theodore Dreiser novel (whose "An American Tragedy" Sylvia Sidney had starred in two years previously) gives Sidney another juicy role in a well filmed melodrama, a classic "women's film". Donald Cook is also excellent as Jennie's life-long love and Edward Arnold too, in a smaller but key role. My only disappointment was that Mary Astor, who makes a vivid impression, has a relatively nothing part to play and her screen time is limited. Rarely seen, like many early Paramount films, try to catch this if you see it, especially if you are a fan of big, weepy 1930's female star vehicles, ala "Stella Dallas" or "Back Street".
10 Reviews
Soggy popcorn in the 1930's was caused by watching heroines like Jennie suffer.
mark.waltz16 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Oh the suffering Sylvia Sidney goes through in this film version of the Theodore Dreisser novel, a followup for Sidney after the success of "An American Tragedy". A poor girl who has the illegitimate daughter of Edward Arnold (sleeping with him would be suffering enough), she becomes the mistress to wealthy Donald Cook, causing him to be disowned by his family. Sylvia, former maid to his family, is snubbed by society, although his old flame, Mary Astor, goes out of her way to be polite, simply to worm her way in and push Sidney out, aided by Cook's evil sister (Dorothy Libaire). H.B. Warner, as Sidney's domineering father, and Louise Carter, as her understanding mother, are among the supporting cast, with Cora Sue Collins as her young daughter and Gilda Storm taking over that part as she ages.
Sidney's dignified performance makes this one acceptable soap opera, not quite the same gem as any of the three versions of "Back Street" or as mesmerizing as "An American Tragedy", although Sidney does get to wear some lovely period costumes. It's the episodic, not really strong plot that fills this with holes, although it's the perfect example of a depression era pre-code women's film. The movie structure has it moving by as sort of a time-warp calendar, but the story only hits bits and pieces of the many details surrounding her story. Cook really doesn't provide any spark, and the gorgeous Astor is completely wasted in a part that could easily have been filled by any minor actress. Another bizarre aspect had the film taking place over 20 years and Sidney not aging a day until the last reel.
Sidney's dignified performance makes this one acceptable soap opera, not quite the same gem as any of the three versions of "Back Street" or as mesmerizing as "An American Tragedy", although Sidney does get to wear some lovely period costumes. It's the episodic, not really strong plot that fills this with holes, although it's the perfect example of a depression era pre-code women's film. The movie structure has it moving by as sort of a time-warp calendar, but the story only hits bits and pieces of the many details surrounding her story. Cook really doesn't provide any spark, and the gorgeous Astor is completely wasted in a part that could easily have been filled by any minor actress. Another bizarre aspect had the film taking place over 20 years and Sidney not aging a day until the last reel.
She's just a girl who can't say no...just like so many Pre-Code ladies.
planktonrules26 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
"Jennie Gerhardt" is a Pre-Code film with story elements that simply wouldn't have been allowed once the tough Production Code was put in place in mid-1934. While the film often implies things instead of saying them outright, this still would have not been enough to allow it to be made only a year later.
Jennie (Sylvia Sidney) is a poor girl who has a rich Senator (Edward Albert) fall for her. He is an incredibly decent man and he does a lot to help her and her family and put no conditions on this. But feeling grateful (and perhaps in love) she sleeps with the man. Though the film never actually says it, she's soon pregnant and it's pretty certain it's not a virgin birth! This is a problem, as the man soon dies and their marriage never materializes.
Jennie is sent to Ohio to have the baby and spare her family the embarrassment. After the baby is born, Jennie takes a job as a servant in the home of a very rich family. However, she hides that she has a baby...especially because the son of her employer falls for her. She's afraid he'll dump her and for several years the child is cared for by another. When he does find out, Lester (Donald Cook) doesn't want to leave her but continues keeping her as his mistress. But he bows to pressure from his family and marries a woman of higher social standing. What's next? See the film and see what happens to Jennie and the baby...as well as Lester.
The author of the story, Theodore Dreiser, was impressed with the film, as he apparently felt the studio did his novel justice. They certainly didn't sanitize it nearly as much as it would have been had the film been made later. So is it worth seeing? Yes and no. I really disliked Jennie as a character. She seemed to have little in the way of personality and was very easily swayed by anyone...so it was hard to really care about her. I don't think Sidney's performance helped any...as she seemed almost comatose at times in this role. But the story itself wasn't bad and kept my attention. Not a great film but very watchable...and an interesting example of the sort of fare that folks watched before July, 1934...it could be a bit more racy than folks today might suspect.
Jennie (Sylvia Sidney) is a poor girl who has a rich Senator (Edward Albert) fall for her. He is an incredibly decent man and he does a lot to help her and her family and put no conditions on this. But feeling grateful (and perhaps in love) she sleeps with the man. Though the film never actually says it, she's soon pregnant and it's pretty certain it's not a virgin birth! This is a problem, as the man soon dies and their marriage never materializes.
Jennie is sent to Ohio to have the baby and spare her family the embarrassment. After the baby is born, Jennie takes a job as a servant in the home of a very rich family. However, she hides that she has a baby...especially because the son of her employer falls for her. She's afraid he'll dump her and for several years the child is cared for by another. When he does find out, Lester (Donald Cook) doesn't want to leave her but continues keeping her as his mistress. But he bows to pressure from his family and marries a woman of higher social standing. What's next? See the film and see what happens to Jennie and the baby...as well as Lester.
The author of the story, Theodore Dreiser, was impressed with the film, as he apparently felt the studio did his novel justice. They certainly didn't sanitize it nearly as much as it would have been had the film been made later. So is it worth seeing? Yes and no. I really disliked Jennie as a character. She seemed to have little in the way of personality and was very easily swayed by anyone...so it was hard to really care about her. I don't think Sidney's performance helped any...as she seemed almost comatose at times in this role. But the story itself wasn't bad and kept my attention. Not a great film but very watchable...and an interesting example of the sort of fare that folks watched before July, 1934...it could be a bit more racy than folks today might suspect.
Sylvia Sidney and Donald Cook Are Excellent
drednm27 November 2012
Fast-paced film based on a novel by Theodore Dreiser, story centers on Jennie Gerhardt (Sylvia Sidney), a poor girl who gets a job scrubbing floors in a hotel. She catches the eye of a middle-aged senator (Edward Arnold) and become his lover. Tragedy intervenes and changes the course of her life.
After she moves to Cincinnati, she gets a job as a maid in a wealthy household and catches the eye of the maverick son (Donald Cook) but the family opposes his marrying a common maid. They set up housekeeping and are happy despite the secret Jennie hides from him.
When he eventually learns the truth, he bolts and marries another woman (Mary Astor)but they are never happy. Jennie continues her life until another tragedy occurs and she is reunited with her true love but it's too late for happiness.
Sidney, Cook, Astor, and Arnold are all terrific here, and the supporting cast is also very good: H.B. Warner and Louise Carter as Jennie's parents, Greta Meyer as the cousin, Walter Walker as the tycoon, and Dorothy Libaire as the acid sister.
Sylvia Sidney is stunningly beautiful in this film. Hard to find but well worth the search.
After she moves to Cincinnati, she gets a job as a maid in a wealthy household and catches the eye of the maverick son (Donald Cook) but the family opposes his marrying a common maid. They set up housekeeping and are happy despite the secret Jennie hides from him.
When he eventually learns the truth, he bolts and marries another woman (Mary Astor)but they are never happy. Jennie continues her life until another tragedy occurs and she is reunited with her true love but it's too late for happiness.
Sidney, Cook, Astor, and Arnold are all terrific here, and the supporting cast is also very good: H.B. Warner and Louise Carter as Jennie's parents, Greta Meyer as the cousin, Walter Walker as the tycoon, and Dorothy Libaire as the acid sister.
Sylvia Sidney is stunningly beautiful in this film. Hard to find but well worth the search.
Very Good but Very Sad
ldeangelis-7570826 November 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This was one of the few movies from the first years of talking films that wasn't acted the wrong way. No one over dramatizes, as if they're on stage, nor do they give a stilted performance, as if they've turned to stone. Sylvia Sidney is excellent in the starring role. She wasn't a weeping, woebegone heroine, nor do we get a prototype feminist. She came across as human, and likeable at that.
Edward Arnold is himself (and that's a compliment), though he had very little screen time, and the leading man - Donald Cook - was very good and had great chemistry with Sylvia. Her rival in the story, Mary Astor, played the society lady to perfection.
Jennie's two "faults": being an unmarried mother (after just one indiscretion) and becoming the mistress of a man she loved, but who was way ahead on the social scale, emphasize how unfair society can be, and how difficult it is to break away and live life on your own terms.
But I have to ask (as I did after reading the novel): Why did Vesta have to die????? It was even more heartbreaking in the movie, and personally, I don't think it was necessary!
Very good film, but also depressing.
Edward Arnold is himself (and that's a compliment), though he had very little screen time, and the leading man - Donald Cook - was very good and had great chemistry with Sylvia. Her rival in the story, Mary Astor, played the society lady to perfection.
Jennie's two "faults": being an unmarried mother (after just one indiscretion) and becoming the mistress of a man she loved, but who was way ahead on the social scale, emphasize how unfair society can be, and how difficult it is to break away and live life on your own terms.
But I have to ask (as I did after reading the novel): Why did Vesta have to die????? It was even more heartbreaking in the movie, and personally, I don't think it was necessary!
Very good film, but also depressing.
Wonderful, sad, long lost movie
bolangirl13 October 2003
This is probably one of the better movies you'll never see. It's a poignant "old timey" movie about a poor girl who falls in love with a Senator. She finds herself pregnant but in love with him and about to marry, but fate intervenes in tragedy. This is one that used to be shown on AMC, but probably will never be aired again, which is a shame. Ms. Sydney is hauntingly beautiful and Mr. Arnold as her lover is very good. Maybe if your lucky, TCM or another station will air this gem and you'll see what I mean.
The Real Message Was Missed
view_and_review14 December 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I so loathe the female characters of the thirties which basically means I loathe the men who created them. Even if women created them, the women creators were going to have to follow the accepted portrayal of women of that time. They were such caricature cardboard cutouts. So weak, so pathetic, so simple. Right when I thought the movie "Jennie Gerhardt" was going to insert some truth and honesty into the picture they balked and gave me the same old crap every other thirties movie was shoveling.
The eponymous Jennie Gehardt was played by Sylvia Sidney. The movie began with her as a poor young woman scrubbing floors alongside her mother. If I knew one thing, I knew she was too pretty to stay poor. She would move up the socio-economic ladder one way or another. This is not a sexist observation, this is a 1930's trope observation.
Jennie was noticed by Senator Brander (Edward Arnold). He was an older portly man so you knew this wouldn't be a romance, but he had money and could help her, which he did. Brander was a nice enough guy and he had no illusions about his relationship with Jennie. She was with him out of gratefulness and he was fine with that so long as she didn't verbalize it. She gave herself to him one night after he pulled some strings to get her siblings out of jail (they got caught stealing coal). You could tell that she didn't truly want to have sex with him, but she felt indebted to him. And if he was to be credited with one thing, it was that he wanted to marry her.
Brander never got the chance to marry Jennie because he died in a train crash on the way back from Washington D. C. That was more catastrophic than it would seem because Jennie was pregnant. She was going to have to leave her home because her father was going to definitely kick her out once he found out.
She went to Cincinnati to stay with her cousin Ada (Greta Meyer) and raise her baby girl Vesta. While there she landed a job as a maid for the Kane family. She kept her child a secret from them because they didn't need to know anyway.
Here's where I thought the movie would pull the curtains back on relationships between men and women, especially rich powerful men and working class women.
Lester Kane (Donald Cook), son of Thomas Kane, was salivating over Jennie. He wanted her in the worst way and he was going to have her. He cornered her in a linen closet at one point and began harassing her. He told her he wanted to see her to which she responded she couldn't. She looked very distressed as though she knew what was about to occur.
Lester grabbed her and said, "You and I may as well understand each other right now. I like you. You like me?" as though he needed the reassurance.
This was an unanswerable question. If Jennie said yes, she was going to have to start doing more than just cleaning house for the Kane family. If she said no, she may have lost her job.
She didn't answer, she just looked away worriedly. You could see her brain churning as she processed all of the different outcomes of this scenario and their consequences.
"Say it," Lester commanded.
"I don't know," Jennie answered, which was probably the safest answer she could give.
"Do you?" he asked again.
"I don't know," Jennie responded one more time.
"Look at me," Lester ordered in a voice that was part loverboy part master so that she could see that he wasn't playing.
She looked at Lester then looked away and said, "Yes I do," in a resigned manner. It was clear she knew that there was no way out of the situation. She had a baby at home she had to feed, Lester had her hemmed up in a locked closet, if she was going to get out of there anytime soon AND keep her job she was going to have to give in to Lester's desires.
He then turned her to himself and forcibly kissed her--something that I've seen dozens of times in movies of this era. It seemed to me that "Jennie Gerhardt" was trying to show how these relationships between powerful men and their subordinates really happen. It's not sentimental women who fall in love with powerful men, or scheming women who want a man for his money, it's men who subdue the women with the physical, social, and economic power they wield.
I was beginning to like this movie even though I hated Lester.
Lester wasn't done with Jennie. Not by a longshot. The next time he saw her she was on her way home. He encroached upon her asking why she'd been avoiding him. He let her know that she wasn't going to be able to avoid him forever, and he was right.
"I'm driving you home," he matter of factly stated.
"Oh no. Please," Jennie pleaded.
"Afraid your family won't like me?" he asked, though he couldn't care less.
"Yes, I..." she began to say.
"Alright we'll drive somewhere else," he chimed in before she could finish. He wasn't going to be rejected.
"I don't want to go anywhere else," she cried.
"Well, if you're not going to get into that carriage I'll have to pick you up and put you in," he said with a touch of playfulness, but mostly seriousness.
Jennie made a move as though she were going to walk away when Lester quite literally picked her up. Jennie didn't resist. I'm sure she realized that resistance was futile.
Lester took her to his boathouse. Jennie followed along meekly and despondently. Lester was going to have her and he didn't care how disinterested and sad she looked.
"There's no use fighting against this. It's stronger than either of us," Lester said. He was referring to the attraction between them, but the truth was that the power structure that was set up to allow him to do what he was doing was stronger than either of them.
"You belong to me," he continued with the confidence of a bullfighter. He didn't need her consent because he was a rich white male, and when did they ever need consent?
"We mustn't see each other anymore," Jennie continued to adjure him.
"There's no use saying that, I'm going to keep on seeing you," he told her.
"Please listen to me. I can't do what you want. I don't want to. I couldn't even if I wanted to. You don't know how things are," Jennie said, seemingly trying to offer anything that he would accept as a reasonable reason for rejection.
Lester responded, "You told me not so long ago that you cared for me. Have you changed your mind?" No doubt he was referring to that day in the closet.
He didn't wait for an answer. He gently grabbed her chin and said, "You haven't, have you," in more statement form than question. And like that, she was all his, but this time she was willingly his. Jennie DID like Lester, he only needed to take charge to tear down her natural defenses and inhibitions for her to realize how much she truly liked him. They kissed while an orchestra played music of passion, then the movie cut away to scenes of a window blowing in the wind then the open skies with wind driven clouds.
I was disgusted and disappointed. Hollywood had the chance to reveal a hidden aspect of thousands of relationships, yet they opted for romance. I could spit on this movie and it would be an improvement.
It only got worse as the two became happy secret lovers. It wasn't proper for Lester to date the help, so they saw each other surreptitiously. "How many servants have fallen in love with their employers, yet had to keep it hidden?" is what Hollywood was asking by showing this drivel, when the real question was "how many servants have been preyed upon by their employers but haven't had a voice with which to retaliate or expose said employer?"
Jennie fell deeply in love with Lester and continued to be his secret lover. What's more, when Lester got her a home for him to play house with her in, she had to leave her child with her cousin Ada lest Lester find out about her and leave her. At one point Jennie's daughter asked, "Are you my mother?" because she saw so little of her. Jennie's love for Lester overshadowed her love for her own child. Her child played second fiddle to her paramour. She was willing to partially abandon her own child just to keep a man. It was beyond reprehensible, yet Hollywood tried to make it romantic.
I hated Jennie's guts and I shouldn't have. Jennie should've been the sympathetic figure in all of this yet she wasn't. Very easily, with a word or two, Jennie could've, and should've, been the victim--the victim of a broken and tilted power structure, but instead they made it seem she was a victim of social mores. If only rich people would do away with their prejudices, then Jennie and Lester could be happy together in the open. That was the message they pushed and it couldn't have been more off the mark. This movie was a travesty written, directed, and produced by blind individuals who were too stupid or too unwilling to see the truth in it all.
Free on YouTube.
The eponymous Jennie Gehardt was played by Sylvia Sidney. The movie began with her as a poor young woman scrubbing floors alongside her mother. If I knew one thing, I knew she was too pretty to stay poor. She would move up the socio-economic ladder one way or another. This is not a sexist observation, this is a 1930's trope observation.
Jennie was noticed by Senator Brander (Edward Arnold). He was an older portly man so you knew this wouldn't be a romance, but he had money and could help her, which he did. Brander was a nice enough guy and he had no illusions about his relationship with Jennie. She was with him out of gratefulness and he was fine with that so long as she didn't verbalize it. She gave herself to him one night after he pulled some strings to get her siblings out of jail (they got caught stealing coal). You could tell that she didn't truly want to have sex with him, but she felt indebted to him. And if he was to be credited with one thing, it was that he wanted to marry her.
Brander never got the chance to marry Jennie because he died in a train crash on the way back from Washington D. C. That was more catastrophic than it would seem because Jennie was pregnant. She was going to have to leave her home because her father was going to definitely kick her out once he found out.
She went to Cincinnati to stay with her cousin Ada (Greta Meyer) and raise her baby girl Vesta. While there she landed a job as a maid for the Kane family. She kept her child a secret from them because they didn't need to know anyway.
Here's where I thought the movie would pull the curtains back on relationships between men and women, especially rich powerful men and working class women.
Lester Kane (Donald Cook), son of Thomas Kane, was salivating over Jennie. He wanted her in the worst way and he was going to have her. He cornered her in a linen closet at one point and began harassing her. He told her he wanted to see her to which she responded she couldn't. She looked very distressed as though she knew what was about to occur.
Lester grabbed her and said, "You and I may as well understand each other right now. I like you. You like me?" as though he needed the reassurance.
This was an unanswerable question. If Jennie said yes, she was going to have to start doing more than just cleaning house for the Kane family. If she said no, she may have lost her job.
She didn't answer, she just looked away worriedly. You could see her brain churning as she processed all of the different outcomes of this scenario and their consequences.
"Say it," Lester commanded.
"I don't know," Jennie answered, which was probably the safest answer she could give.
"Do you?" he asked again.
"I don't know," Jennie responded one more time.
"Look at me," Lester ordered in a voice that was part loverboy part master so that she could see that he wasn't playing.
She looked at Lester then looked away and said, "Yes I do," in a resigned manner. It was clear she knew that there was no way out of the situation. She had a baby at home she had to feed, Lester had her hemmed up in a locked closet, if she was going to get out of there anytime soon AND keep her job she was going to have to give in to Lester's desires.
He then turned her to himself and forcibly kissed her--something that I've seen dozens of times in movies of this era. It seemed to me that "Jennie Gerhardt" was trying to show how these relationships between powerful men and their subordinates really happen. It's not sentimental women who fall in love with powerful men, or scheming women who want a man for his money, it's men who subdue the women with the physical, social, and economic power they wield.
I was beginning to like this movie even though I hated Lester.
Lester wasn't done with Jennie. Not by a longshot. The next time he saw her she was on her way home. He encroached upon her asking why she'd been avoiding him. He let her know that she wasn't going to be able to avoid him forever, and he was right.
"I'm driving you home," he matter of factly stated.
"Oh no. Please," Jennie pleaded.
"Afraid your family won't like me?" he asked, though he couldn't care less.
"Yes, I..." she began to say.
"Alright we'll drive somewhere else," he chimed in before she could finish. He wasn't going to be rejected.
"I don't want to go anywhere else," she cried.
"Well, if you're not going to get into that carriage I'll have to pick you up and put you in," he said with a touch of playfulness, but mostly seriousness.
Jennie made a move as though she were going to walk away when Lester quite literally picked her up. Jennie didn't resist. I'm sure she realized that resistance was futile.
Lester took her to his boathouse. Jennie followed along meekly and despondently. Lester was going to have her and he didn't care how disinterested and sad she looked.
"There's no use fighting against this. It's stronger than either of us," Lester said. He was referring to the attraction between them, but the truth was that the power structure that was set up to allow him to do what he was doing was stronger than either of them.
"You belong to me," he continued with the confidence of a bullfighter. He didn't need her consent because he was a rich white male, and when did they ever need consent?
"We mustn't see each other anymore," Jennie continued to adjure him.
"There's no use saying that, I'm going to keep on seeing you," he told her.
"Please listen to me. I can't do what you want. I don't want to. I couldn't even if I wanted to. You don't know how things are," Jennie said, seemingly trying to offer anything that he would accept as a reasonable reason for rejection.
Lester responded, "You told me not so long ago that you cared for me. Have you changed your mind?" No doubt he was referring to that day in the closet.
He didn't wait for an answer. He gently grabbed her chin and said, "You haven't, have you," in more statement form than question. And like that, she was all his, but this time she was willingly his. Jennie DID like Lester, he only needed to take charge to tear down her natural defenses and inhibitions for her to realize how much she truly liked him. They kissed while an orchestra played music of passion, then the movie cut away to scenes of a window blowing in the wind then the open skies with wind driven clouds.
I was disgusted and disappointed. Hollywood had the chance to reveal a hidden aspect of thousands of relationships, yet they opted for romance. I could spit on this movie and it would be an improvement.
It only got worse as the two became happy secret lovers. It wasn't proper for Lester to date the help, so they saw each other surreptitiously. "How many servants have fallen in love with their employers, yet had to keep it hidden?" is what Hollywood was asking by showing this drivel, when the real question was "how many servants have been preyed upon by their employers but haven't had a voice with which to retaliate or expose said employer?"
Jennie fell deeply in love with Lester and continued to be his secret lover. What's more, when Lester got her a home for him to play house with her in, she had to leave her child with her cousin Ada lest Lester find out about her and leave her. At one point Jennie's daughter asked, "Are you my mother?" because she saw so little of her. Jennie's love for Lester overshadowed her love for her own child. Her child played second fiddle to her paramour. She was willing to partially abandon her own child just to keep a man. It was beyond reprehensible, yet Hollywood tried to make it romantic.
I hated Jennie's guts and I shouldn't have. Jennie should've been the sympathetic figure in all of this yet she wasn't. Very easily, with a word or two, Jennie could've, and should've, been the victim--the victim of a broken and tilted power structure, but instead they made it seem she was a victim of social mores. If only rich people would do away with their prejudices, then Jennie and Lester could be happy together in the open. That was the message they pushed and it couldn't have been more off the mark. This movie was a travesty written, directed, and produced by blind individuals who were too stupid or too unwilling to see the truth in it all.
Free on YouTube.
Tormenting Sylvia Sidney
boblipton27 May 2021
Sylvia Sidney is a poor girl who gets a marriage proposal from retiring senator Edward Arnold, but only on condition that she have some real feelings for him. While she's considering this, her father, H. B. Warner, tells her that's she's disgracing him by thinking about marrying a senator, so she doesn't. Instead she gets a job as a housemaid, and hooks up with scion Donald Cook, who's also madly in love with her. His father insists he dump Miss Sidney, so they get married and run off to Europe.
I'm sure the novel by Theodore Dreiser made more sense when it was published in 1911, but as it stands, it's a Pre-code movie meant to run Miss Sidney through the wringer, but not have her cry. She's excellent of course, but as it exists, it simply seems to be thoroughly mean-spirited, and only reinforces my belief that the weeper queens of Hollywood needed to be in more comedies.
I'm sure the novel by Theodore Dreiser made more sense when it was published in 1911, but as it stands, it's a Pre-code movie meant to run Miss Sidney through the wringer, but not have her cry. She's excellent of course, but as it exists, it simply seems to be thoroughly mean-spirited, and only reinforces my belief that the weeper queens of Hollywood needed to be in more comedies.
Sylvia Soaper
GManfred13 August 2023
Warning: Spoilers
It seems Sylvia Sidney made a living in the 30's in weepy soap operas, playing (take your pick) fallen women, jaded women, compromised women, jilted women - usually as victim of a smooth talker. She excelled in these roles and she does not disappoint as Jennie Gerhardt. Of course, she is from the 'wrong side of the tracks' but her lover(s) have nobler intentions this time. First is a U. S. Senator (Edward Arnold) who dies in a train crash on his way back to marry her, leaving her preggers.
Next is Donald Cook, her rich employer who genuinely loves her and does not know about her child. They run away together, leaving her child with her cousin, and they traipse around Europe until he meets and old flame, the recently widowed Mary Astor. He decides he loves the widow and marries her. Sylvia now becomes the 'forgotten' woman.
But throughout their lives they did not forget one another, and on his death bed sends for her. They confess their love for one another before the final fadeout.
I have omitted some details, but you get the picture. In fact, see the picture if you can. It is worth your while and well done, a cut above such soaps, and the cast makes it so as well as production values. I saw it at Capitolfest, Rome, NY, 8/23.
******* 7/10. Website no longer prints my star ratings.
Next is Donald Cook, her rich employer who genuinely loves her and does not know about her child. They run away together, leaving her child with her cousin, and they traipse around Europe until he meets and old flame, the recently widowed Mary Astor. He decides he loves the widow and marries her. Sylvia now becomes the 'forgotten' woman.
But throughout their lives they did not forget one another, and on his death bed sends for her. They confess their love for one another before the final fadeout.
I have omitted some details, but you get the picture. In fact, see the picture if you can. It is worth your while and well done, a cut above such soaps, and the cast makes it so as well as production values. I saw it at Capitolfest, Rome, NY, 8/23.
******* 7/10. Website no longer prints my star ratings.
Dignity and strength
jarrodmcdonald-19 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Author Theodore Dreiser is known for stories where the main characters lack a strong moral code. His acclaimed novel 'An American Tragedy' is a perfect example of this, and so is his later publication 'Jennie Gerhardt,' based on the lives of his sisters.
Paramount adapted these literary works as motion pictures with Sylvia Sidney prominently featured in both. What makes Miss Sidney's performance as Jennie Gerhardt so successful is how she is able to take the working class heroine from naive to mature in a relatively short period of time on screen.
Edward Arnold plays her first suitor, a wealthy senator much older than Jennie. He meets her at a posh hotel, where she is cleaning a stairway one day. He is instantly smitten with her. While Jennie's humble German parents are grateful to the senator for his assistance when things get tough financially, old Mr. Gerhardt disapproves of the unusual romantic relationship.
He instructs Jennie to break things off, which she does at first. But then the senator pursues her again. This is a recurring theme in the story, that Jennie is never able to fully say goodbye to those who matter to her.
Eventually Jennie agrees to marry Senator Brand. It is a precode drama, so we can be sure they have been enjoying a sexual relationship. However, before the wedding occurs the senator is killed in a train accident.
A short time later Jennie learns she is pregnant. It's interesting how the film conveys this without using the word 'pregnant.' After Jennie moves away to have the baby in secret with the help of a cousin, we have a unique birthing scene that occurs off-screen. She is experiencing the pains of labor while occupants in a boarding house eat their meal as if nothing exciting is happening!
Soon Jennie has taken work as a maid for the wealthy Kane family. In the novel, Dreiser has her work for an elderly woman who is visited by the Kanes. But in the movie, Jennie is able to interact more directly with the family's attractive son (Donald Cook) without contrivance. It plays like an American version of Upstairs Downstairs and the courtship scenes are done with sincerity.
Jennie is living a double life. During her off-hours, she spends time with her cousin and daughter. She hasn't told Lester Kane about the fact she has a child. Little Vesta (Cora Sue Collins) is precious and steals every scene she is in.
Eventually Jennie admits to Lester that she has a daughter. He accepts Vesta and sets up a home with them, though he doesn't marry Jennie. In a precode sense, she is his mistress but it seems as though they could marry at some point. However, Lester's snobby sister (Dorothy Libaire) has other plans for him, and pushes him towards a more acceptable match- society matron Letty Pace (Mary Astor).
Mary Astor had been in quite a few pictures during the end of the silent era, and at the beginning of the talkies, as a leading lady. Probably her role in this picture is one of her first real supporting character parts...and she is brilliant. She doesn't overplay her character's affectations, but Letty is certainly less likable and more 'villainous' than the virtuous Jennie.
Of course, this would not be a melodrama if Lester married Jennie. He makes the wrong choice and marries Letty. What follows are a series of scenes where both he and Jennie get older. Through the years that follow, she keeps track of his life as a successful industrialist by clipping newspaper articles and pasting them inside a scrapbook. She goes to watch newsreels at the local theater, in the days before television, so she can glimpse him on screen.
There is even more drama at this juncture, because Jennie's daughter Vesta is about to graduate from school but suddenly takes ill. Vesta dies from typhoid fever, and the death scene contains some of Miss Sidney's most realistic acting. In grief, Jennie reaches back out to Lester. However, he is now becoming infirm himself.
On his deathbed a short time later, Lester asks to be reunited with Jennie. Their last scene together is very poignant and nicely played. After Lester's death, Jennie attends the funeral, standing along the sidelines since she is technically not his widow or part of his family. The final shots have her watching the casket loaded on to a train where it is taken off for burial.
This evokes the death of the senator by train earlier in the movie. Everything comes full-circle, with Jennie as survivor. While this production pours on the sorrow, it is a good indicator of how Depression-era audiences needed to see the working class heroine at the end. She loved and lost, a few times, but she still has her dignity. Jennie Gerhardt always has the strength to persevere and get through whatever happens next.
Paramount adapted these literary works as motion pictures with Sylvia Sidney prominently featured in both. What makes Miss Sidney's performance as Jennie Gerhardt so successful is how she is able to take the working class heroine from naive to mature in a relatively short period of time on screen.
Edward Arnold plays her first suitor, a wealthy senator much older than Jennie. He meets her at a posh hotel, where she is cleaning a stairway one day. He is instantly smitten with her. While Jennie's humble German parents are grateful to the senator for his assistance when things get tough financially, old Mr. Gerhardt disapproves of the unusual romantic relationship.
He instructs Jennie to break things off, which she does at first. But then the senator pursues her again. This is a recurring theme in the story, that Jennie is never able to fully say goodbye to those who matter to her.
Eventually Jennie agrees to marry Senator Brand. It is a precode drama, so we can be sure they have been enjoying a sexual relationship. However, before the wedding occurs the senator is killed in a train accident.
A short time later Jennie learns she is pregnant. It's interesting how the film conveys this without using the word 'pregnant.' After Jennie moves away to have the baby in secret with the help of a cousin, we have a unique birthing scene that occurs off-screen. She is experiencing the pains of labor while occupants in a boarding house eat their meal as if nothing exciting is happening!
Soon Jennie has taken work as a maid for the wealthy Kane family. In the novel, Dreiser has her work for an elderly woman who is visited by the Kanes. But in the movie, Jennie is able to interact more directly with the family's attractive son (Donald Cook) without contrivance. It plays like an American version of Upstairs Downstairs and the courtship scenes are done with sincerity.
Jennie is living a double life. During her off-hours, she spends time with her cousin and daughter. She hasn't told Lester Kane about the fact she has a child. Little Vesta (Cora Sue Collins) is precious and steals every scene she is in.
Eventually Jennie admits to Lester that she has a daughter. He accepts Vesta and sets up a home with them, though he doesn't marry Jennie. In a precode sense, she is his mistress but it seems as though they could marry at some point. However, Lester's snobby sister (Dorothy Libaire) has other plans for him, and pushes him towards a more acceptable match- society matron Letty Pace (Mary Astor).
Mary Astor had been in quite a few pictures during the end of the silent era, and at the beginning of the talkies, as a leading lady. Probably her role in this picture is one of her first real supporting character parts...and she is brilliant. She doesn't overplay her character's affectations, but Letty is certainly less likable and more 'villainous' than the virtuous Jennie.
Of course, this would not be a melodrama if Lester married Jennie. He makes the wrong choice and marries Letty. What follows are a series of scenes where both he and Jennie get older. Through the years that follow, she keeps track of his life as a successful industrialist by clipping newspaper articles and pasting them inside a scrapbook. She goes to watch newsreels at the local theater, in the days before television, so she can glimpse him on screen.
There is even more drama at this juncture, because Jennie's daughter Vesta is about to graduate from school but suddenly takes ill. Vesta dies from typhoid fever, and the death scene contains some of Miss Sidney's most realistic acting. In grief, Jennie reaches back out to Lester. However, he is now becoming infirm himself.
On his deathbed a short time later, Lester asks to be reunited with Jennie. Their last scene together is very poignant and nicely played. After Lester's death, Jennie attends the funeral, standing along the sidelines since she is technically not his widow or part of his family. The final shots have her watching the casket loaded on to a train where it is taken off for burial.
This evokes the death of the senator by train earlier in the movie. Everything comes full-circle, with Jennie as survivor. While this production pours on the sorrow, it is a good indicator of how Depression-era audiences needed to see the working class heroine at the end. She loved and lost, a few times, but she still has her dignity. Jennie Gerhardt always has the strength to persevere and get through whatever happens next.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
