Of Human Bondage (1946) User Reviews

Bound by the critics

[tomsview · 7/10 · 12 June 2013]

Of the three film versions of "Of Human Bondage" this is probably the least known. Critics at the time found it dull and compared it unfavourably with the 1934 version starring Bette Davis and Leslie Howard. On the contrary, I think that this version is more complex, more interesting and ultimately more satisfying than that earlier film.

All versions chart the course of the destructive, one-sided relationship between medical student Philip Carey, played here by Paul Henreid, and working class waitress Mildred Rogers played by Eleanor Parker. But after his self-esteem reaches its lowest ebb, two far more caring women enter his life, one he rejects almost as cruelly as he himself was rejected, while the other provides him with the happiness he has searched for.

For anyone who has read Somerset Maugham's novel, the film versions all share the same drawback; they only concentrate on one aspect of the novel - the unrequited and obsessive love of Philip Carey for Mildred Rogers. This is the most fascinating part of the novel to be sure, but it doesn't take place until about half way through the book. By the time it happens, we know a lot about Philip Carey - we have followed him from childhood, understand the sensitivity about his clubfoot, and identify with him totally. When he encounters Mildred Rogers and is rejected by her, we are as shocked as he is at the effect it has on his sense of self-worth and his life from that point on. No one has ever described the anguish that such a one-sided affair can unleash better than Maugham in this extraordinary novel - Sigmund Freud couldn't have done a more insightful job.

And therein lies the challenge for the filmmakers because they all want to leap straight into the Philip and Mildred affair; there is no real build up, we are only vaguely aware of the vulnerabilities, and even the vanities that have been nurtured in Philip that could lead him into so destructive a relationship.

With that said, after a slow start, this version of the story does become quite compelling. However it could have done without the narration, which doesn't even start until after Philip meets Mildred. The filmmakers should have worked a little harder to explain things without resorting to narration, which both the 1934 and 1964 versions managed to do.

Paul Henreid was too old for the part - it's almost as though he was going through mid-life crisis - and his accent needed explaining. Fortunately, he had a strong enough screen presence to carry it off.

Critics considered Eleanor Parker's performance weak when compared to Bette Davis's showier one in the 1934 version, but she handles it pretty well on the whole. She is possibly a little too strident, and like Davis struggled to deliver a decent Cockney accent. For anyone who has seen the 1964 version, it's interesting to compare her with Kim Novak who gave a very subdued performance, which didn't seem right at all. Possibly the forced, slightly neurotic quality in Parker's performance actually caught the spirit of Mildred Rogers all too well.

Although not without fault, this version of Maugham's great novel is better than the critics would allow, and is certainly a film that rewards at least one viewing.

Not as compelling as the novel...too many faults...

[Doylenf · 5/10 · 12 November 2003]

OF HUMAN BONDAGE attempts to be an accurate re-telling of the Somerset Maugham novel set in the Victorian period (instead of modern times as in the Bette Davis-Leslie Howard '34 version). But there are some drastic gaps in the script that tend to omit scenes that are only talked about or used as exposition. For example, Philip's sighting of Mildred as a street-walker is only mentioned; her illness is never shown graphically (as it was in the Bette Davis version) and we see only the back of her head as she lies in a hospital ward. Other key scenes are dismissed in a few lines of dialogue instead of being portrayed.

And the weaknesses don't end there. Edmund Gwenn is much too cheery as Philip's friend, playing him as though he is the father again in 'Pride and Prejudice' pushing his young daughter (Janis Paige) toward him in scene after scene. And Paige herself is notably miscast as a virginal English lass. Alexis Smith is totally wasted in a few brief scenes. Patric Knowles doesn't bring much credibility to the role of Philip's doctor friend.

And then there are the two central performances: Eleanor Parker and Paul Henried. Miss Parker puts too much effort into her role and is uglified so that she looks the role of a low-class hussy but it seems more like a self-conscious acting job than anything else. Her Mildred is contemptuous in her willful actions (like demolishing Philip's apartment when in a tantrum) and to her credit she never tries to create sympathy for the character she portrays--but never really seems to be the cheap tart she portrays. Ida Lupino would have made a much more convincing Mildred with much less effort. Paul Henried plays his role with sensitivity but is clearly too old to play the young medical student.

The entire film has a dark, claustrophobic look that isn't helped by the low-key lighting of rainswept streets and dark alleys nor the interior set decorations of humble lodgings. For a really better understanding of the story, read the original novel. It's quite fascinating.

A quality note of distinction is the underlying mood music of Erich Wolfgang Korngold that should have accompanied a much better film.

Great cast in rare remake that is superior to the original

[krdement · 7/10 · 10 January 2008]

I do not think this is a movie about love. It is a movie that compares and contrasts MANY human emotions that hold us in bondage - most notably, love and obsession. I pity people who think that what Philip (Henreid) feels for Mildred (Parker) is LOVE! Of the 3 versions of this Somerset Maugham tale, this one is the strongest.

Bette Davis' performance in the original may have been groundbreaking, but neither the film nor her performance is great. Davis' performance leaves indelible impressions; it earns my respect and admiration. However, it is not very nuanced; she is nothing but a shrew. Also, she is simply not pretty enough to inspire Philip Carey's obsession with Mildred. The original film and the portrayal by Davis are classic not because they are great, but because they are groundbreaking.

For my money, both of the remakes are better movies. Eleanor Parker and Kim Novak both portray a Mildred who is prettier and less shrewish - and consequently more believable. Mildred becomes both more understandable and more pathetic. Also, because they are both prettier than Davis, obsession with either one of them is a great deal more conceivable.

Also, I like Paul Henried in this version much better than Leslie Howard (or Laurence Harvey). He may not be as sensitive or intellectual, but neither is he nearly as weak. I think a woman is more likely to feel sympathy or pity for Howard, NOT love. Henried seems much more "lovable." After all, 2 women actually do love Philip!

I am a big fan of many character actors of the 30's and 40's, including Edmund Gwenn. This is a great Edmund Gwenn role, and his presence is a real plus for this version.

Although her appearance is brief, I also love the beautiful, sympathetic Alexis Smith.

The neat surprise for me in this version is Janis Paige. I didn't really notice her until this, my 2nd or 3rd viewing, but it is fun seeing her as such a young actress in this very wholesome role. One of her more memorable roles is the blonde vamp who is first insulted by David Niven and then tries to seduce him in Please Don't Eat the Daisies.

But for me Eleanor Parker steals the show. I barely recognized her as a brunette. Neither had I ever seen her play such a loathsome character. Seeing her display such range was fun. Plus her performance is far superior to Bette Davis' in the original.

Eleanor Parker is the main reason to see this.

[Davalon-Davalon · 6/10 · 21 October 2019]

I have not yet seen the Kim Novak version of OF HUMAN BONDAGE, and until I do, the jury is still out.

That said, Eleanor Parker seems to embody what Somerset Maugham had in mind when he created the character of Mildred Rogers. Even though I loved Bette Davis in the original version of OF HUMAN BONDAGE, something about Mildred seemed very real. She seemed tragically lost. You could see her thinking, "If I go with this man, maybe my life will be better." She didn't seem to think too much about tomorrow. She wanted to laugh and have fun and wear fancy clothes and be taken care of. All of which were understandable.

And then she meets Philip Carey (played by a completely miscast Paul Henreid). For some reason Carey becomes quickly obsessed by her (but why? There is no reason under the sun). The story then follows somewhat the plot of the book. That said: the only part that was truly interesting was when Eleanor Parker was on the screen. She went into some deep place in her soul and she "created" Mildred -- and although I am not an expert on accent and dialects, she spoke as I imagine Mildred would speak.

Mildred is cheated out of her big death scene, because all that happens is Carey visits her in a hospital. Her face is turned away from the camera -- how were we supposed to know who it was? It was a terrible ending. And then, we are supposed to believe that some 17-year-old daughter of a casual friend of Carery's has been harboring a crush on him? For what reason? It was all insane.

The amazing thing about OF HUMAN BONDAGE is that if you read the book, you will see that Mildred only comprises a small part of the story. But it was definitely the most interesting part. The problem is that the book is vast... it is much bigger than a movie and should be a series.

At any rate, if you are a fan of this story and have at least seen Bette's version, you might enjoy Eleanor Parker's performance. Paul Henreid was too old, too wooden and could not speak clear English. He had a good, masculine face and he was tall and in the right light he looked fine. But English was obviously not his first language and why they cast him is beyond me. He was not at all the right choice.

The movie also drags and there is way, way too much music. But Eleanor Parker was something to behold. She did her homework and her performance was excellent.

Slave of love

[jotix100 · 7/10 · 11 January 2006]

W. Somerset Maughan wrote a great novel about the complexity of human relations. It's amazing how a person can lose his soul when possessed by a passion that will consume everything. Which is why one feels such compassion for Philip Carey, the man whose love for the tragic Mildred Rogers will almost destroy him.

In comparison with the John Cromwell's 1934 version starring Bette Davis and Leslie Howard, this 1946 take on the novel, as adapted by Catherine Turney and directed by Edmund Goulding, pales somewhat. Not that this is a terrible film, on the contrary, it has some good points, but the essence of the novel is not as poignant as the other film made clear. In fact, Hollywood in the early version was freer from the censure that the second film, shot under the Hays Code, had. It sort of makes the action lose reality.

The other thing that is notable in the movie is the different interpretations of Englis accents spoken by most of the actors. Another failure of the film was to have Paul Henried cast to play Philip. He was a man much older to play the character, as Neil Doyle has pointed out in his comment. Eleanor Parker, who plays Mildred, was not in the same league as Bette Davis, although she struggles to make a go with the role.

The film makers "cleaned up" the basic problem with Mildred's character. Nothing is ever mentioned about her prostitution. Her outburst in thrashing Philip's apartment should have been more effective as a confrontation where all her venom should have bee directed at the man she deeply hated, in spite of all the kindness she received from him.

While the film holds the viewer interested, we always found ourselves thinking how much better it could have been.

Just a slave to lust

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 6 January 2014]

Now that I've seen all three filmed versions for Of Human Bondage, no doubt about, Bette Davis leaves both Eleanor Parker and Kim Novak in the dust.

Still Parker gives a good performance as the amoral and tart tongued protagonist in W. Somerset Maugham's novel who for some reason turns on medical student Philip Carey like no one else can. Not a lot different from the way Sadie Thompson gets the Reverend Davidson's libido in overdrive in Rain, another of Maugham's female literary creations.

Amazing how three American actresses, Davis, Novak, and Parker all got to play a cockney tart. No one ever thought to hire an English actress like Vivien Leigh who in her personal life was far more Mildred Rogers than any of the three who played her.

Paul Henreid is out of place as a continental type Philip Carey. His is much inferior to the justice done this part by both Leslie Howard and Laurence Harvey. Carey is the man with the club foot and the inferiority complex because of that. Odd that both Howard and Harvey who never had trouble getting dates played a man who couldn't get one and gravitates to Mildred because she's looking real easy and sexy. Henreid's accent is way out of place here.

Good performances by Parker, Janis Paige, and Alexis Smith as the three women who enter Philip Carey's life at different times. But you have to see Bette Davis as the real Mildred deal.

Parker is dynamite!

[verna55 · 27 November 2000]

This retelling of Somerset Maugham's classic is very handsomely "got up", and features a wonderful performance by the gifted Eleanor Parker as the heartless heartbreaker Mildred Rogers. But Eleanor's go at the role didn't produce quite the same results as it did for Bette Davis twelve years before. However, if it weren't for Davis' triumphant performance, the 1934 version would be just as forgettable as the others that followed. The 1964 take with Kim Novak/Laurence Harvey is certainly the weakest.

Good movie but none are close to the novel.

[marbleann · 7/10 · 4 October 2008]

A lot of people must not have read the book. None of the versions of this movie is close to the book simply because Mildred does not even show up in the book until the middle. She is a important character but not the main character. I believe people misread the Philip character because they leave so much out about his life before he met met Mildred. And there is the flaw of all of the versions. Someone mentioned that Bette Davis was not pretty enough for Philip to be obsessed with. Well in the book it mentions she was not pretty. Actually Davis is the one character out of all of the versions that comes close to the character in the book. The way he describes Mildred is the way Davis looks to a tee.

In the book Philip was not a nice guy. He had a chip on his shoulder because of his foot and he treated people badly. He treated the family with contempt who took him in as a child. He would make nasty remarks about people who wanted to befriend him. One woman even commits suicide over him. We see none of this in the movie. So I see Mildred differently. And his obsession makes sense because of the book. He is not the sympathetic man we see in the movie.

I believe Henried is better in the role then Howard. Parker is way too pretty for the Mildred part. Even though she is a good actress here her good looks get in the way. Henreid is age appropriate for the film because in the book he took a lot of years off discovering what he wanted to do. He even spent time in Germany. Sally is the character that betrays the book the most. In the book she much more outgoing and she sleeps with Philip even though were just good friends. She was the only woman in the book that Philip had a relationship with that he did not destroy even though he almost did. I like Janis Paige in the role. I believe this is a better version then the 34 version, even though Davis is better in the Mildred role. But once again I must mention if people are looking for something that is close to the book none of the versions are.

Five reasons why the 1946 movie is the best version

[spotted-owl · 9/10 · 20 July 2013]

"Of Human Bondage" (1946) is a moody tale of romantic obsession, set in Victorian England. Philip is a sensitive gentleman who becomes passionately obsessed with Mildred, a beautiful lower-class vixen who is selfish and ill-tempered. The film is based on the classic novel by W. Somerset Maugham.

There are five reasons why the 1946 movie is the best version. First, Eleanor Parker is perfect as Mildred, the beautiful, shrill vixen. Second, the film is set in the late 1800s and has Victorian costumes and sets. Third, the lighting of the night scenes is dark and moody. Fourth, the musical score is excellent. Fifth, the film was directed by Edmund Goulding, known for his elegant and refined films. He directed classics including "Grand Hotel" (1932), "Dark Victory" (1939) and "The Razor's Edge" (1946).

Other versions of "Of Human Bondage" include the famous 1934 version with Bette Davis, and a 1964 version. The 1934 version was set in the 1930s.

The 1946 film has great atmosphere, with Victorian costumes and sets. Horse-drawn carriages travel along the cobblestone streets. Women wear elegant gowns with hats. Philip and Mildred spend a gloomy, misty day at Brighton beach. The entrance to the elaborate amusement pier is shown in the background.

Mildred's costumes are in a tawdry-chic glamour style. Her jackets, skirts and hats do not match, and are decorated with sequins and feathers.

The lighting is generally dark. Most of the scenes occur at night. There is high contrast between dark and light. The narrow, dark cobblestone streets are lit with gaslights. In one scene, Mildred appears in a tiny bright window wearing a black gown, looking out at the vast night. The darkness of the scenes gives the film a moody look.

Eleanor Parker gives a superb performance as Mildred. She is alternately flirtatious and mean-spirited, and is prone to shrill outbursts of anger. Paul Henreid is also excellent as Philip, the gentleman who loves the wrong woman.

The film begins in the Latin Quarter of Paris in 1897, at an artists' masquerade ball. One partygoer wears a skeleton costume, which is symbolic of death. Philip lives in an artist's garret. He is morose, because he wanted to be an artist, but his art instructors informed him that he is not talented. Philip leaves for London to attend medical school, and moves into a Victorian flat.

Philip is a gentleman who is looking for passionate love. He is not charming or handsome, and is afflicted with a clubfoot, but he is kind, intelligent and well-mannered.

When Philip meets Mildred working as a waitress at a Victorian tavern, he is completely obsessed, and wants to marry her. However, she does not love him, and is often scornful and derisive to him. Mildred consistently chooses the wrong men, handsome charmers who use her and then leave.

Nora Nesbit (Alexis Smith) is an accomplished writer, and she loves Philip. However, she is too ambitious for Philip, and she does not understand his love of art.

Mildred's affairs with other men makes Phillip's passion grow cold. When Mildred becomes pregnant and is abandoned by a callous lover, she resorts to prostitution to survive. Philip feels sorry for her, and tries to help her by giving her room and board, in exchange for domestic duties.

There is a dramatic scene on Christmas Eve. Philip plans to spend Christmas with his friends, the Athelny family, instead of with Mildred. When Philip rejects her romantic advances, she becomes enraged. In a whirlwind of fury, Mildred screams as Philip departs, wrecks his apartment, burns his money and leaves.

Philip later hears the tragic news that Mildred and her baby are dying. He sadly visits Mildred in the hospital. When Mildred dies, Philip's strange obsession also dies.

In the springtime, Philip finds true happiness with the Athelny family, and plans to marry their young, proper daughter Sally. He has found joy in marriage, work and family.

This film has interesting themes. Romantic obsession. Unrequited love. Social class structure. Falling in love with the wrong person. The tragic consequences of bad choices and selfishness. The happiness of family.

The 1946 film "Of Human Bondage" has been underrated, and deserves more recognition. This movie has excellent acting, outstanding Victorian sets and costumes, moody night lighting, a great musical score, and skillful directing by Edmund Goulding. It should be on DVD. Highly recommended.

Better Than the Original

[gamay9 · 7/10 · 4 March 2013]

What I find fascinating is that two of my 12 favorite (most alluring) actresses starred in different versions of the same film: Eleanor Parker and Kim Novak.

In an era where lousy remakes of good films are made once a month, 'Of Human Bondage' improves with time. Kim Carnes might have idolized 'Bette Davis' Eyes' but I think Bette was homely. Eleanor Parker was (and still is, at 90) a scintillating, wholesome looking beauty, as I also rate Cathy O'Donnell ('Best Years of Our Lives') and Margaret Sullivan ('Shop on the Corner,' amongst others). Problem is, they all were divorced several times, so they may not have been as wholesome and charming as they appeared on-screen. Then, again, they may have been 'unlucky' in love; perhaps they had cheating husbands. I can't imagine Cathy O'Donnell being anything but the eternal virgin.

Kim Novak was (is?) sexy and flaunted it. That's why she was best cast in 'Of Human Bondage.' I have always been a fan of Laurence Harvey (my middle name is 'Harvey').

I would recommend watching all three versions of 'Of Human Bondage' and judge for yourself.

Enduring drama's second screen incarnation merely a nice try...

[moonspinner55 · 4/10 · 4 October 2008]

Second round on the screen for W. Somerset Maugham's tragic story has a medical student in late-1800s London used and abused by a coarse, common waitress--one who has a habit of flirting with the wrong kind of men (she gets used, too). These two characters take turns debasing themselves and insulting each other, but a persistent question is never really answered: just what does the future doctor see in this woman? As played by Eleanor Parker, mercurial Mildred is childishly trampy and silly instead of dangerous. Parker switches her snarling anger on and off at whim, and when she pouts she sticks her chin out like a punished adolescent; as her would-be paramour, Paul Henreid (probably too old for the part, but not bad) has two expressions: a beaming, boyish smile and a thin-lipped, painful sort of incredulity. When he's chatting up a patient at the hospital or getting to know womanly authoress Alexis Smith, Henreid seems right at home, but his scenes with Parker don't quite come off. The story, most successfully filmed in 1934 with Bette Davis, was remade again in 1964 with Kim Novak. This is the weakest version, filmed with very little visual style and a skittering narrative. *1/2 from ****

A Revelation

[Fluffytoo · 8/10 · 23 July 2013]

***slight spoiler*****

I just finished watching Of Human Bondage on TCM. I kept thinking throughout as Paul Henried limped around how that man can wear the hell out of a suit.

To add to what others have said, I was surprised by this version of the film. I was expecting a dull rendition, especially after the tours de force by Davis and Howard in an earlier rendition. Despite lukewarm reviews, I loved it! An elegant film overall and well crafted, beautifully decorated and photographed in high contrast black and white, full of angled looming shadows, almost oppressively so, and small pools of light, sometimes unkind light, a manifest expression of Philip Carey's inner life. Gestures and movement are also important, often more so than words.

I thought Paul Henreid was fantastic in it as well as Eleanor Parker; I think he gets short shrift relative to the star power of the female role. He seemed like a man trapped, who knew he was trapped and was helpless to do anything about it except to careen between cruelty and kindness. His experience has a compelling immediacy, of the moment and so does his story. I never had seen Paul Henreid in such a different role, where he lacked confidence and could be awkward and despairing, coarse and primal in a way that made me uncomfortable to see such naked need and helplessness. And still, the character had a grace, a redemptive quality that would peek out in spare, quiet moments.

I especially loved the simplicity of his wordless visit to Mildred at the end; it was as if he were carressing a dying animal. And then he was quietly, without fanfare, released. His obsession is never explained because it doesn't really matter. His experience matters. The director captures this beautifully.

This film and the crafting of its themes reminds me very much of the 40's version of A Razor's Edge with Tyrone Power. It turns out Edmund Goulding directed both.

8.5 stars out of 10

remake

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 29 August 2020]

It's 1897. Philip Carey (Paul Henreid) abandons his artistic pursuit in Paris to be a medical student in London. He falls for mean-spirited waitress Mildred Rogers (Eleanor Parker).

I made an early mistake and assumed this to be the 1934 version. I kept thinking that it's not Bette Davis. I probably need to see that version. I can't imagine remaking it after only 12 years. On the other hand, I can imagine that everybody saying that Eleanor is no Bette Davis. She's a fine low class trashy person but the flip side needs to be why he is so obsessed with her. Bette Davis would have the appeal despite her meanness. I don't see it and Philip is rather bland. I'll finalize the comparison after seeing the older version.

Stood Up

[wes-connors · 5/10 · 12 June 2013]

In a London tea shop, young medical student Paul Henreid (as Philip Carey) meets ill-tempered waitress Eleanor Parker (as Mildred Rogers). Lacking in love due to his club-foot (defined online as, "a deformed foot that is twisted so that the sole cannot be placed flat on the ground"), Mr. Henreid is smitten with Ms. Parker. He wins a date, but is stood up on the second. Parker dumps Henreid for a more handsome man. The situation repeats and we wonder if and when Henreid will learn his lesson and hook up with beautiful writer Alexis Smith (as Nora Nesbitt) or pretty 16-year-old Janis Paige (as Sally Athelny)...

The black-and-white photography, by Peverell Marley, is the film's main strength...

This re-make of the more famous "Of Human Bondage" (1934) gets off to a bumpy start with a scene involving Henreid and Ms. Smith. Someone should have noticed Smith copying the phrasing of Bette Davis - for example, accenting the last word of sentences. After about 30 minutes, Smith does a Joan Crawford impression. This makes is more difficult for Parker. She's too perfect and proper-looking for the role, anyway. The story (or, this part of Somerset Maugham's larger novel) would work well (better) with Henreid's character aged - unfortunately, this alteration was not made; instead, his youth is firmly noted.

***** Of Human Bondage (7/5/46) Edmund Goulding ~ Paul Henreid, Eleanor Parker, Alexis Smith, Edmund Gwenn

A worthy remake featuring a terrific performance by Edmund Gwenn

[jacobs-greenwood · 6/10 · 6 December 2016]

Directed by Edmund Goulding, this second adaptation of W. Somerset Maugham's novel was adapted by Catherine Turney. Paul Henreid plays a clubfooted, failed artist, gentleman who becomes a medical student that's obsessed with a low class waitress, played by Eleanor Parker. Alexis Smith plays a novelist friend who wishes her relationship with Henreid could develop into something more. Patric Knowles and Marten Lamont play fellow medical student friends of Henreid's, Henry Stephenson one of their professors. Edmund Gwenn plays a father who's family befriends Henreid in his time away from Parker; Janis Paige plays Gwenn's comely young daughter who's infatuated with Henreid's character. Una O'Connor appears for less than a cameo as a landlord's wife; her principal purpose seems to be to glare disapprovingly at Parker when she turns up at Henreid's.

Philip Carey (Henreid) meets Nora Nesbitt (Smith) in Paris just after he'd decided he wasn't good enough to continue to pursue being an artist. So he returns to London where his wealthy uncle had setup a trust for him that would pay his way through medical school. A fellow student named Dunsford (Lamont) has noticed that Philip appears to have little interest in women, but asks him to accompany him to meet a woman with whom he's found an interest anyway. Philip is surprised to learn that Dunsford has been admiring a common waitress from afar, and that he hasn't even been introduced to her. They both then meet her, Mildred Rogers (Parker), with Philip convincing his friend that the waitress is not only rude, but also not worthy of him. Though they leave, Philip's vanity gets the better of him and he returns to the restaurant the next evening determined to make her interested in him. She seems only to enjoy the company of a more regular customer named Miller (Richard Nugent), who makes her laugh. However, he persuades her to go out with him to a play. Briefly, because she doesn't seem to have anything else to do, Mildred allows Philip to spend what little money he has on her before Miller returns to town. She then breaks a date with him and an ugly argument throws Philip into a funk over the course of a couple of months which his fellow medical student friends notice. But when he learns that Mildred has apparently run off to marry Miller, his spirits brighten as if he'd been freed from his "bondage" to her.

Nora sends him her latest published work and then visits Philip in London. They spend a great deal of time together, but it becomes to clear to Nora that her love for Philip is returned only as friendship. She doesn't know it yet, but Mildred is still in Philip's blood, which becomes clear when he sees her again and breaks his relationship with Nora permanently. Mildred is pregnant with Miller's child, who wasn't ever her husband after all since he was a married man already. Philip helps her anyway and takes her away to Brighton, where there's a beach. He talks with her about the future, that he'll willingly adopt her baby and marry her, but then he makes the fatal mistake of introducing her to his other medical student friend Harry Griffiths (Knowles). Griffiths is a carefree, handsome womanizer who soon has Mildred laughing such that Philip's plans are ruined when she leaves him again for another man.

Fortunately for Philip, while listening to Dr. Tyrell (Stephenson) give a lecture about gout, he meets the patient Mr. Athelny (Gwenn). Athelny is a kind gentleman who's not willing to give up all the foods he loves just to allow him to walk without a cane; in that respect, he shares a limp with the clubfooted Philip. Athelny and Philip becomes fast friends such that Philip becomes a regular at the Athelny household every Sunday for dinner. Isobel Elsom plays Mrs. Athelny. His gentlemanly ways and pleasant (at least) facial appearance attracts the attention of Athelny's oldest (almost 17 year old) daughter Sally (Paige), though neither man notice her infatuation. Unfortunately for Philip, he sees Mildred once again, on the streets with rouge on her cheeks. Concerned for the health of her and her many months old child, he gives her a place to stay, as her cook & housekeeper, in his residence. Mildred tells Mrs. Foreman (O'Connor) that she's Philip's wife to set her at ease, but gets a scowling disapproving look from the landlady in any case.

Philip neglects his relationship with the Athelny's anyway, even though he refuses to maintain any more than a platonic relationship with Mildred. Mildred is enraged by Philip's lack of interest in her which comes to a boil at Christmas time when she tries to seduce him. After he spurns her, she chases him out of his own residence with a vicious diatribe and then proceeds to burn his only money and trash his apartment. Philip manages to make it to the Athelny's for some brief holiday cheer before he goes out into the rainy night to catch pneumonia. Ironically it's Griffiths that saves him, but when Philip is strong enough to return to Athelny in the spring, he is met with a cold attitude towards him which he doesn't understand. Sally greets him pleasantly and he seems to notice her for the first time. He then finds out that Athelny believes Philip has a wife and child. Leaving there, he returns to Griffiths where he tries to kill himself. Griffiths then takes him to a hospital where Mildred is breathing her last breaths in a ward for contagious patients; the baby had already died. Philip returns to the Athelny's where he learns of Sally's infatuation. After convincing her formerly reluctant father that he didn't in fact have a wife & child, and with his burden clearly lifted by Mildred's death, Philip kisses Sally as her approving father closes the door.

A MARVELLOUS SURPRISE !! Who withdrew this excellent version from circulation for so long ??

[mrobbins · 8/10 · 13 October 2001]

First of all to state the obvious, it must be said that the criminally underrated Eleanor Parker is not the great Bette Davis, who shot to fame with her stunning interpretation in the 1934 original. But then again WHO IS ? Parker should have received the same accolades for her own stunning performance, but the powers that be decided instead to withdraw this version from circulation for many, many years, and she would have to wait another couple of years to enjoy even a modicum of the same recognition. A box office flop on release, this film was one that I had always wanted to see just to make up my own mind. As Davis is my favourite actress, I was ready to agree with all the misguided so-called critics over the years. That is not to say that I wasn't aware of how good Parker could be: witness her outstanding performances in DETECTIVE STORY (1951); INTERRUPTED MELODY (1955) (as polio stricken opera star Marjorie Lawrence) and best of all, her mesmerising tour de force in CAGED (1950). All of these were Oscar nominated as well, so she wasn't without her admirers. With it's appalling reputation preceding it however, to my absolute astonishment, this version of W. Somerset Maugham's story is excellent in it's own right, and Parker's immersion into the role is the reason. Why has this woman never received her due credit. Why has she disappeared from the screen ? While Davis, Hepburn, Stanwyck, and mid period Crawford thoroughly deserve their legendary status, the likes of Parker and another forgotten great Susan Hayward, wait to be rediscovered. WATCH THIS AND SEE WHY.

Probably the worst film I ever sat through - 1946 version

[alrodbel · 1/10 · 27 June 2019]

I knew of the book and the fame of writer, so expected a meaningful experience. The film is meant to show the tragedy of existence, especially among the lower classes of London in the 19th century. I knew it was not an upbeat comedy.

There is a word, "verisimilitude" that I don't often use, but this film seemed to have been from a first draft of a screenplay with a single run through of the scenes. And then there's the background music, only it wasn't background but the volume and coarseness of it drowned out any subtlety of words or expressions of the characters.

Another aspect of a cinema is continuity, that not only the main drama, but the supporting characters individual parts fit sequentially and logically. You only notice this when it doesn't, like the very young woman that the lead character finally marries, had been said to be engaged to another, who just disappeared out of thin air.

We caught the film on TMC, and so no major financial investment, and if it appears again, and if you are not already feeling down and can handle this, give it a try. It will make you appreciate other films for the effort to make them what this film was the antithesis of.

A Superb Version of a Classic Story

[nbott · 8/10 · 4 February 2002]

The acting by Eleanor Parker and Paul Henreid is superb in this classic story of love and sexual obsession. In some ways, it is truly a universal story of all of us. Who has not had, at least for a small period of time, such feelings for someone else. Most of us usually move on more quickly than our hero in this film, nonetheless it rings true. I was also genuinely pleased by the authentic period setting of this film and very impressed by the performances of all of the supporting cast, especially Edmund Gwenn.

I really do not understand why this version is so rarely shown anywhere. This was shown recently on Turner Movie Classics, otherwise it is never seen. I think it is important for movie buffs to have access to different versions of such a classic story as this.

A very sanitized version

[HotToastyRag · 3/10 · 18 November 2023]

The 1946 version of Of Human Bondage is extremely sanitized, so if you're a fan of the book or the seedy story you've learned about from the other versions, you won't like this one. I stuck with it to appreciate Eleanor Parker's acting. It took guts to try and fill Bette Davis's shoes, and while Eleanor was far too beautiful, sweet, and classy for the role, she did her best. This was early on in her career, and she tried all sorts of roles and accents to show Hollywood what she could do.

Paul Henreid took on Leslie Howard's role, again taking a risk since Leslie's death was probably still fresh in audiences's minds. While he didn't really do anything wrong, the script didn't give him enough to do. When you watch this version, you're very aware that everyone is walking on eggshells, trying not to upset the Production Code. His character is just a regular guy who has a few romances, rather than a tormented artist who enjoys being tortured by a cruel prostitute. Alexis Smith and Janis Paige are the other women in his life, and once again, everything feels very sanitized. There's no depth to the screenplay - but in 1946 it's understandable. At that time, no one had any idea when the Production Code would be dismantled (if ever) and so it wasn't practical to shelve the remake for another time. However, instead of doing a remake, why didn't Hollywood just make a movie about a mild-mannered fellow with three women in his life? You can check this version out if you want to, and you'll see Edmund Gwenn, Patric Knowles, Henry Stephenson, and Una O'Connor, but it's really nothing like the book.

I feel this 1946 remake is just as unforgettable as the incomparable 1934 masterpiece with Bette Davis.

[skinner-c · 9/10 · 19 June 2018]

The only negative I can find was casting Paul Henreid as Philip Carey. A very fine actor without doubt, but it just didn't seem to me that he was Philip Carey. But as for Mildred Rogers, I honestly don't think ANYONE could have handled the part better than Eleanor Parker - including Ms. Davis!

In fairness to the original classic (1934), one has to realize that there had been no precedent to build it on, nor the enhanced movie technology, equipment, and expertise that 12 subsequent years could bring to fruition. To not keep this is mind is simply unfair.

In very brief summary, I honestly would vote both the original of 1934 and Eleanor Parker's remake of 1946 equally remarkable and unforgettable.

We all love Nora, Thorpe Athelny and Sally for their kindness, benevolence and inherent virtues, yet - after it's all over and the curtain has dropped, "Mildred Lives."

In the end True Love conquers all

[sol-kay · 8/10 · 26 March 2005]

***SPOILERS*** Decent re-make of the 1934 film classic that stared Leslie Howard and Bettie Davis about a young man enslaved by the love that he has for a women who has nothing but contempt for him and uses him for her own greedy and selfish purposes.

Paul Henreid seems a bit too old as the young artist Philip Cary who gives up art after struggling two years in Paris without being able to sell a single painting. Philip goes back to his native England to take up medicine and become a doctor like his late father.

Eleanor Parker does a fine job of acting as the cold and unfeeling young waitress Mildred Rogers who rebuffs poor Philip and then uses him to help herself in the string of tragedies she gets herself into in the course of the movie.

Seeing Mildred at a local tea room in London Philip becomes infatuated with her even though she want nothing to do with him. Getting Mildred to go to the theater with him one Satuerday night Philip falls so madly in love with her. Philip is so crazily in love with Mildred that she tells him, just to get him out of her life, one evening thats she's getting married to one of the patrons at the tea room that she's been flirting with; Emil Miller, Richard Nugent.

Hurt and dejected Philip starts to overcome his fascination with Mildred and later meets Nora Nesbitt, Alexis Smith, a writer that he knew as a young art student in Paris and develops a loving relationship with her. With everything going fine for the two young lovers all of a sudden Mildred steps right back into Philip's life.

Having been thrown out of the house by Mr. Miller and left pregnant by him Mildred wan't Philip back and would do anything to have him accept her back as his lover. Which she never was in the first place. Philip takes Mildred back at the expense of the shocked and hurt Nora who he leaves out in the cold. As the days go by and Philip asks Mildred for her hand in matrimony she go back to her old ways. Mildred starts to abuse him so much that she flirts and snuggles up to his best friend Griffiths, Patric Knowles, right in front of the hurt and humiliated Philip at a neighborhood restaurant.

With all the abuse he takes from Mildred and the insecure feelings he has about himself Philips suffer every insult and put-down Mildred throws at him to the point where he at last loses the love that he had for her all this time. One cold and rainy Christmas Eve Philip leaves his apartment, as Mildred in an insane rage totally wrecks it, and goes to see the only people who showed any love or kindness towards him the Athenlys. Who's father Mr. Athenly he treated in the local hospital that he work at.

Invited to come back the next day for a Christmas Dinner Philip, broke and homeless, falls victim to pneumonia and almost dies. Later with the help of his friend and fellow doctor Griffiths Philip is brought back to health. Back on his feet and with Mildred out of his life Philip finds the true love that he searched for all of his life but never realized Mr. Athelny's young and beautiful daughter Sally, Jans Paige,who was always in love with him. Later together with Sally and her family Philip puts the broken pieces of his life, and heart, back together.

Mildred is later found by Philip at the very hospital that he's a doctor in dying from the lifestyle that she choose to live. Having already having lost her young daughter Mildred dies knowing that the person who could have saved her from this tragedy was the one that she treated like dirt all the time that he loved her.

Powerful drama by writer W. Somerset Maugham thats as moving and touching now as it was when it was first published back in 1915 that proves the old saying: "He has the strength of ten because his heart is pure" and thats exactly what Philip Cary had.

Edmund Gwenn & Eleanor Parker were Outstanding!

[whpratt1 · 8/10 · 9 January 2004]

If you love old great classic films in B&W and great actors, this is a must see film. This 1946 Film Classic had all time greats, like Paul Henreid,(Philip Carey),"Casablanca",'42 who was very handsome and had a handicap, and fell in love with the wrong lady, Eleanor Parker(Mildred Rogers),"A Hole In The Head",'59. Mildred took advantage of Philip's great love for her and wound up in many other men's beds. Edmund Gwenn,(Athelmy),"The Keys of the Kingdom",'44 came to the aid of Philip and gave a great supporting actor's role through out the entire picture. Athelmy even introduced his daughter, Janis Paige(Sally Athelmy),"Two Guys From Milwaukee",'46 to Philip, who seemed to warm to her beautiful good looks and warm and kind ways! A great actress Alexis Smith,(Nora Nesbitt),"Rhapsody in Blue",'45, also appeared in this film and gave a great supporting role. Edmund Gwenn and Eleanor Parker made this film into an all time film Classic for many generations to view and enjoy!

Good-But Don't Compare to Bette in 1934 ***1/2

[edwagreen · 9/10 · 27 July 2013]

Eleanor Parker did a very good job in this 1946 remake of the 1934 Bette Davis classic. Parker portrays an English waitress, Mildred Rogers, with passion, but not with the vigor that Bette Davis showed in the role. Her total rejection scene of Paul Henried was a good one, but again not with the torrid hatred that Davis showed.

Paul Henried appears to be stronger than Leslie Howard in the original version. He shows anger at Mildred and even rejects her.

Alexis Smith is wasted here as the widowed writer who falls for Henried (Philip) in Paris. She does seem to suddenly fade from his life and the film.

A story of a waitress, who not knowing what she really wanted out of life, is mean and vicious to the man who really loved her. He certainly was bonded to her.