Lydia (1941)

Very well executed

Thanks for the memories!

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

The acting in this movie is really good.

The film begins in the present day. Several of Lydia's old suitors have come for a reunion. The folks talk about old times and the film then jumps back to the late 1890s when Lydia was young a vivacious. Each man's involvement with the lady as well as Lydia's eventually calling as a social worker unfold through the course of this movie.To me, "Lydia" is a very uneven film. Some portions, such as Lydia setting up a school for the blind, are well done and touching. As for her loves, sometimes (especially with Richard) the dialog seems 100% fake--like a movie and not at all like real life and, at times, very tedious. A very odd blend of sentimentality and romance...along with some rather poor old people make-up (the seams on the faces are quite evident on some of the actors). Overall, it's not a bad film but it's also one that comes off as amazingly over-polished and the dialog just seems oddly unreal.

Well, as soon as we see that Joseph Cotten and Edna Oliver are in this, we know it won't be a bad film... it was nominated for best Music in a drama, but The Devil and Daniel Webster won it that year. Lydia (Merle Oberon) and Michael (Cotten) meet up in their later years, and reminisce about the past, which we always seem to remember as better than it was. Edna Oliver is (once again)the overbearing, frumpy grandmother who is very set in her ways, and is determined that Lydia will only be with a proper gentleman.Lydia and her old beaus talk about "the grand ball" they had attended in their youth, with the harps, mirrors, and chandeliers, which everyone remembers differently. Then, we flash back to the glorious football game, on which they also disagree. We flash forward, then backward, and forward and backward, and its all a lot of work to keep up with where we are now. It's all done competently, but there are no sparks between her and the men from her past, and its a little like reading a history book. It just seems to be a lot of talk about being in love way back when. Then, about halfway through, Lydia meets up with a little boy who changes her life. Then we find out how Lydia got to where she is today. It's entertaining enough, but not one of my favorite films. Produced by Alexander Korda, who happened to be Oberon's hubby at the time.

Merle Oberon (Lydia) is invited to a reunion where 3 of her former suitors are waiting to meet her once more. Everyone is now old and the 3 men - scientist Joseph Cotten (Michael), blind pianist Hans Jaray (Frank) and sporty George Reeves (Bob) - are dying to find out why she never entertained any of them. The reason is that there was a 4th man - sailor Alan Marshal (Richard) - who Lydia was always in love with and he arrives at the end of the film and delivers a bombshell. Before this, Merle Oberon recounts the story of her life during the time that they all knew her. The film is told in flashback and wrapped up with Alan Marshal's arrival.It sounds interesting but it's not. Unfortunately, the cast are terrible. Merle Oberon is annoying and I'm afraid that we are just not interested in her life at all. This makes the whole film quite tedious as we just don't care about what happens in her love live. The story introduces four other bland characters - Cotten is likable but dull - Jaray is sickly sentimentally blind and so we have to have a rubbish boring section about blind kids which will make you want to heave with it's political correctness (although at least in those days blind children went to a special school for the blind instead of being integrated into a classroom with sighted children) - Reeves plays for comedy and is terrible at it. He's just not funny at all - and Marshal is both bland and blind (to love).The story is further ruined by a soundtrack that has been turned up disproportionally high so that every time there is any music or sound effects, the audience can't hear the dialogue as it is completely drowned out. As a result there are many complete sections that we can't hear and therefore we cant follow the plot. Who the hell let this go through! We hear more of people's footsteps than actual talking.A final word goes to the ghastly idea of making everyone look old. We have 5 gruesome looking characters who are all impossible to identify with coz they look like freaks, and Merle Oberon makes the fatal error of thinking that she can act old by shaking her head a lot every time she speaks coz that's what old people do. What a ham.The only good thing about this film is Edna May Oliver (Lydia's grandmother) who does provide some comic moments. If you like this film, you are a very boring person. It's sh*t.

An unexceptionable pleasure to the primary senses of the eyes and ears. This results from a combination of Oberon's lush eyebrows and the pillowy opulence one imagines from a director with a surname like Duvivier. The film is a 'refashioning' of his French-language 'Un Carnet De Bal' from 1937, in that the basic plot is Oberon's portmanteau recollection of 4 past loves. Cynics may understandably dive for the sick bags, but it's a pleasant surprise therefore to find that for all the typical Fox emphasis on visual scrumptiousness, this romantic opus turns out to be a narratively literate affair. It's lent considerable dramatic weight by an excellent cast, including an uncharacteristically unhistrionic Oberon.