"Four Mothers" on 4/21/2024 @ 3pm ET / 1pm MT
Apr 22, 2024 14:00:12 GMT
topbilled, Andrea Doria, and 1 more like this
Post by BunnyWhit on Apr 22, 2024 14:00:12 GMT
I found Four Mothers to be rather frustrating. I do my best to remember the context within which a film is made (read: culture at the time of filming), but this film stretched things beyond comfort for me.
Aunt Etta, as Topbilled said, spent most of this film “barking orders and melting down.” She did not seem to have the same humor about her as she did in the previous films, especially the first one. It did not seem reasonable that she would be so domineering around the house yet so totally beside herself over the house sale. If she had maintained the same character as was presented in the first two films, she would have disliked the move, but she would have understood that it was a means to an end.
The four women could have continued to be the focus of the film even with the story line about Adam losing everything. This is where the writing really comes up short. Surely there was some strain in the girls’ lives when their husbands decided to completely upend their personal and professional goals to bail out Adam. There could have been some discussion of this with each couple, showing what the sacrifice would mean for them. In so doing, the characters would have more depth. Instead, the husbands make these monumental announcements matter-of-factly to Ann who in turn is shocked. So was I, Ann. Are we to believe these decisions were made without discussion with the wives? I realize the film takes place in 1941, a different time and place in male/female roles, but I do not believe how casually this whole scenario developed. What this film tells us is that the sisters all went from blissfully doing what father says to blissfully doing what husband says. I know this was quite true then, and even now, for many. This failure to develop the female characters is the societal unfairness author Fannie Hurst strove to illustrate in her books and stories, but I am not sure it really hit home in this fashion. If the films were truly intended to take this bent, I'd have liked some glimmer of it in the films. As it turns out, I suspect it is my own knowledge of Hurst's sensationalism and feminism that leads me in this direction, coupled with a healthy dose of my own personal cynicism.
Kay finally tells Ann about her kiss with Felix. Ann listens, prompts, understands, and smiles through the confession then tells her sister she’d have been disappointed if Kay hadn’t kissed Felix given the circumstances. I am glad the sisters did not fall out over this, since as Felix indicated “it didn’t mean anything,” but I don’t believe for a second that Ann would have accepted it so gleefully. If she was not going to be outraged, at the very least she would have been hurt and disappointed. Showing this emotion with her sister would not have weakened their bond but strengthened it, and it would have made it more real. If the kiss happened in the first place as a means to illustrate how much Kay and Felix missed their respective spouses, the same could have been achieved with a conversation between the two. They’d have been depressed about missing their spouses and commiserated over drinks. They would have related how they missed the little things about their spouses, the gestures and characteristics that mean the most to a spouse. End scene with the two resting their heads together and sighing over their shared loneliness which they are willing to bear, rather than acting out in weakness. It would have helped to show the depth of the sacrifices the family members were willing to make for their father/father-in-law, and this would have further developed the characters.
I can understand if no more mention was to be made of Mickey, but I did expect to see a photograph of him somewhere in the house. Did I miss that, or was there not one present? It is wonderful that Ann and Felix will raise Ellen as if she is theirs, but I wonder what will happen later with the child. I can understand the absence of dialogue about Mickey in this film, but if there was a visual cue illustrating that Ellen will be made aware of her real father’s identity and influence in the family, I’d feel better about it.
The subplot with Clint’s research and Ann’s interest in it carried too much weight in the film. Frankly, I was worried that those two were going to share a kiss….or more. Ann continually telling Kay that Clint’s work was more important than their marriage really landed poorly for me. It is not Ann’s place to be so involved in her sister’s marriage, and she only invalidates Kay’s feelings of abandonment and insecurity. Clint doesn’t have to take any heat over it because Kay doesn’t firmly confront him, and Ann constantly defends him. Is this really Clint’s film?
I agree that all sisters having babies the same age is a bit much. I like the idea of Emma and Ernest adopting an older child. It would be a good way to show the fullness of their hearts. But if they really wanted to drive home the point in the end that everything is fine among the couples and that the sisters were all at the same place in their lives, Kay would not have been the only one pregnant – they all would have been. If we’re going over the top with kids, let’s really go.
All in all, I see a lot of missed opportunities for character development in this film. I had hoped and expected to see this development as the sisters moved into this next phase of their lives. Rather than becoming more mature, they seemed to lose any ground they’d already made in the first two films.
This one smacks of a money grab by the studio, to me.
Aunt Etta, as Topbilled said, spent most of this film “barking orders and melting down.” She did not seem to have the same humor about her as she did in the previous films, especially the first one. It did not seem reasonable that she would be so domineering around the house yet so totally beside herself over the house sale. If she had maintained the same character as was presented in the first two films, she would have disliked the move, but she would have understood that it was a means to an end.
The four women could have continued to be the focus of the film even with the story line about Adam losing everything. This is where the writing really comes up short. Surely there was some strain in the girls’ lives when their husbands decided to completely upend their personal and professional goals to bail out Adam. There could have been some discussion of this with each couple, showing what the sacrifice would mean for them. In so doing, the characters would have more depth. Instead, the husbands make these monumental announcements matter-of-factly to Ann who in turn is shocked. So was I, Ann. Are we to believe these decisions were made without discussion with the wives? I realize the film takes place in 1941, a different time and place in male/female roles, but I do not believe how casually this whole scenario developed. What this film tells us is that the sisters all went from blissfully doing what father says to blissfully doing what husband says. I know this was quite true then, and even now, for many. This failure to develop the female characters is the societal unfairness author Fannie Hurst strove to illustrate in her books and stories, but I am not sure it really hit home in this fashion. If the films were truly intended to take this bent, I'd have liked some glimmer of it in the films. As it turns out, I suspect it is my own knowledge of Hurst's sensationalism and feminism that leads me in this direction, coupled with a healthy dose of my own personal cynicism.
Kay finally tells Ann about her kiss with Felix. Ann listens, prompts, understands, and smiles through the confession then tells her sister she’d have been disappointed if Kay hadn’t kissed Felix given the circumstances. I am glad the sisters did not fall out over this, since as Felix indicated “it didn’t mean anything,” but I don’t believe for a second that Ann would have accepted it so gleefully. If she was not going to be outraged, at the very least she would have been hurt and disappointed. Showing this emotion with her sister would not have weakened their bond but strengthened it, and it would have made it more real. If the kiss happened in the first place as a means to illustrate how much Kay and Felix missed their respective spouses, the same could have been achieved with a conversation between the two. They’d have been depressed about missing their spouses and commiserated over drinks. They would have related how they missed the little things about their spouses, the gestures and characteristics that mean the most to a spouse. End scene with the two resting their heads together and sighing over their shared loneliness which they are willing to bear, rather than acting out in weakness. It would have helped to show the depth of the sacrifices the family members were willing to make for their father/father-in-law, and this would have further developed the characters.
I can understand if no more mention was to be made of Mickey, but I did expect to see a photograph of him somewhere in the house. Did I miss that, or was there not one present? It is wonderful that Ann and Felix will raise Ellen as if she is theirs, but I wonder what will happen later with the child. I can understand the absence of dialogue about Mickey in this film, but if there was a visual cue illustrating that Ellen will be made aware of her real father’s identity and influence in the family, I’d feel better about it.
The subplot with Clint’s research and Ann’s interest in it carried too much weight in the film. Frankly, I was worried that those two were going to share a kiss….or more. Ann continually telling Kay that Clint’s work was more important than their marriage really landed poorly for me. It is not Ann’s place to be so involved in her sister’s marriage, and she only invalidates Kay’s feelings of abandonment and insecurity. Clint doesn’t have to take any heat over it because Kay doesn’t firmly confront him, and Ann constantly defends him. Is this really Clint’s film?
I agree that all sisters having babies the same age is a bit much. I like the idea of Emma and Ernest adopting an older child. It would be a good way to show the fullness of their hearts. But if they really wanted to drive home the point in the end that everything is fine among the couples and that the sisters were all at the same place in their lives, Kay would not have been the only one pregnant – they all would have been. If we’re going over the top with kids, let’s really go.
All in all, I see a lot of missed opportunities for character development in this film. I had hoped and expected to see this development as the sisters moved into this next phase of their lives. Rather than becoming more mature, they seemed to lose any ground they’d already made in the first two films.
This one smacks of a money grab by the studio, to me.