Avis des utilisateurs

It's a little disconcerting to have a character named Gig Young in a movie...played by Gig Young. But this film is where Gig got his name and also a nice career boost after playing small parts under another name.

I'm going to go against the majority of the other comments and state that I really enjoyed this film, mainly because of the vibrant performance of Barbara Stanwyck as Fiona. She was funny, angry, vulnerable, caring, and feisty as the oldest of three daughters whose mother died on the Lusitania, and whose father was later killed during Woar War I.

As the "man" of the house, Fiona has stood steadfast for years against settling her father's will which would therefore allow a Donald Trump type named Charles Barclay to get the family home. But Fiona's keeping a secret as to why she hates Barclay so much. Geraldine Fitzgerald is the middle, flirty sister, who is married to an Englishman but craves her youngest sister's boyfriend (Gig Young).

If you're a Stanwyck fan, this is a no miss.

Three girls, the youngest descendents of the Gaylord family, one of America's most royal families, are orphaned at a young age. Right before he goes off to France to fight in WWI, their father tells the oldest, Fiona, never to sell the land. By the time the sisters have become adults, they have had to squander most of their money to pay for lawyers to defend their property. Through certain loopholes in the father's will, a man named Charles Barclay stands to gain possession of the Gaylord land, on which he wants to build a complex called Barclay Circle. Barclay is actually based on John D. Rockefeller, who was buying up land and buildings from affluent families in New York so he could build Rockefeller Center.

This film deals mostly with the melodramatic concerns of the three sisters. Fiona, well played by Barbara Stanwyck, although it's certainly not to be counted as one of her best roles, seems like a cold, domineering woman, and it becomes clear that she has some skeletons in her closet. Susanna, played by Nancy Coleman, is a little ditsy and completely in love with a young modern artist named Gig Young. Coleman's was my favorite performance in the film. Evelyn, played by Geraldine Fitzgerald, is a rather pretentious seductress with a monocle who married into noble blood in England, but that doesn't stop her from trying to steal Gig from her sister. The three sisters are developed quite well but, as is the major trend in The Gay Sisters, never well enough. Charles Barclay is played by George Brent. He isn't very good. Well, he would be satisfactory if the story had played out the way it should have, but he always seems like a scumbag in the film. When we're asked to sympathize with him late in the film, it's impossible. Gig Young is played by, huh?, Gig Young. No, he's not playing himself. What happened is that the actor, who had acted in several movies previously under his real name, Byron Barr, was pressured by Warner Brothers to change his name to something more catchy. I'm not sure who made the final choice, but he eventually changed his screen name to Gig Young, after the character whom he plays in The Gay Sisters. Weird, eh? Young is quite good through most of the film, but the script does some unfortunate things with his character late in the film which ultimately harm the audience's sympathy for him. In two other supporting roles, Helen Thimig and Gene Lockhart are quite good.

The Gay Sisters had great potential to turn out to be one of the great cinematic family sagas. The characters are all interesting, as are their situations. Unfortunately, the script never strives for anything more than the simplest melodrama. If it had made the interrelationships of all the major characters more complex, fleshed out, for example, the rivalry between Evelyn and Susanna or made the flashback more intricate, the film could have been fantastic. It also could have fleshed out the prologue more, let us know more about the Gaylord family. We need to care more about the characters and we need to sympathize with them more. And the ending needed some major fixing. It basically just gives up at the end. Fiona's problems are solved so poorly that it hurts. Whatever sympathy her character had gained as the film progressed falls apart. It's also far too happy. This story seems moving towards tragedy, or maybe just a sense of historical significance or loss. And we still hate Barclay. And the conflict between the two sisters and Gig is never solved. As bad as Fiona's story ends, Susanna's, Gig's, and Evelyn's is even worse.

I still liked the film. It's thoroughly watchable, even if it doesn't involve us like other great films of the era. 7/10, mostly for its potential. It should have been remade, or the novel should have been re-adapted, at some point during the studio era. It is too dated to be remade now. The 1950s would have been the best time, during the time of films like Giant.

Most of your reviewers certainly had an aversion to this film. One of them even asserted it had no music despite an excellent score by Max Steiner. I thought Barbara Stanwyck with all her emotional storms and plottings really sizzled. This must have been one of her best roles ever. I couldn't stop watching it though I came in somewhere in a courtroom scene after the beginning and missed all the prologues. I thought the emotional relationships of everybody involved were strong and fascinating. In contrast to most of your reviewers I thought the plot lines got wrapped up satisfactorily and clearly and I was quite happy with how everything finally turned out. Especially with Stanwyck and Brent trying finally to make a go of it basically because of their child. Call me soft hearted and sentimental but I felt for them and their final solution. Though this film rubbed most of your reviewers the wrong way I loved it and thought it was great.

The longest running case In New York County's Surrogate Court is the one about recent tycoon George Brent has going against the Gaylord sisters who were all quite young when their mom was lost in the Titanic and their dad killed in World War I. Now another World War is happening and the grownup sisters Barbara Stanwyck, Geraldine Fitzgerald, and Nancy Coleman.

Stanwyck and Brent have some serious if secret history and a product of said history is young Larry Simms. The two can't stand each other though obviously at one time they could.

A subplot involves Nancy Coleman and Geraldine Fitzgerald fighting over Gig Young. He's a modern artist keeping company with Coleman. Fitzgerald went over to Great Britain and married a title. Her husband is MIA with the Royal Air Force and she's come back to America.

Gig Young who was born Byron Barr apparently liked the character name and took it for his own. He got his first real notice in The Gay Sisters. It certainly worked for him.

Originally this was assigned to Bette Davis, but she rejected it the brothers Warner went outside the studio for Barbara Stanwyck. It's a great part for Stanwyck as she shows a whole range of emotions here. Gene Lockhart has a great part as a weasel of an attorney ready to sell out the Gaylords. He was so good in those type parts.

The Gay Sisters is a fine bit of drama that holds up well after over 70 years.

Barbara Stanwyck, Geraldine Fitzgerald and Nancy Coleman are the Gaylord sisters. when the parental units croak, they must find a way to hang on to the family compound. Right at the beginning, we see that mom Gaylord has died on the Lusitania, and dad is going off to war, certainly an ominous start to the film. Then we're at the court house for some reason. The co-starring men are Gene Lockhart, George Brent, Gig Young, and Grant Mitchell. some pretty big hollywood names backing up this film. Grant Mitchell is the head of the group fighting to gain control of ten percent of the family fortune. Eighteen minutes in, we finally hear from Barbara Stanwyck, one of the heiress sisters. and the strongest one. she clearly runs the show. she has fired the family lawyer, and now they are scrambling to find a good lawyer to help them in court. Turns out that someone knows a secret about one of the sisters, and that secret could be worth a lot of money. It's pretty good! clearly, secrets and things that might be shocking in 1942 are really no big deal today. it was a different time, and of course the film code was in full force in the 1940s. Directed by Irving Rapper; had made SO MANY films with perfectionist Bette Davis... he must have been a pro!

This was probably one of the most well-made films of the 40's - Warner Bros. at the very height of their style. The photography by Sol Polito is arguably his finest achievement - gorgeous compositions and lighting with delicate shadowing. Max Steiner contributes one of his most complex and beautiful scores - the epitome of his classical leit motif method. The music adds great emotion and excitement to the plot and is exquisite and memorable. It's interesting to note that the same production team that made this movie went right on to make "Now, Voyager" later that year - a fine film which won honors and awards and went down as a historical favorite, ciefly because it starred Bette Davis. IN my opinion, "The Gay Sisters" is a much better film - better made in all departments, and more interesting, complex and enjoyable. A most unusual film which entertains those who take it for what it is, rather than project their own modern creative sensibilities or their advanced and demanding standards of hyper-critical perfection. Each thing has to be judged in it's own time reference and for what it is trying to achieve on its own terms. Most of the complaints I've read in these reviews are so childish and totally missing the point. If you're hungry for a perfect filet mignon, don't go to the bakery counter and start whining and complaining about the fluff pastry. The art of film criticism is truly lost on a large segment of the population. Sorry folks - maybe if this movie had had a score by the Rolling Stones and a hundred intricate and soul searching subplots, you'd all be gleefully gratified. I'll take an old movie without modern intellectual pretensions an day of the week!

When you have three fine actresses like Barbara Stanwyck, Geraldine Fitzgerald and Nancy Coleman, plus an intelligent script, and a good director, you have a very watchable movie. What makes the film particularly good is, that it concentrates on lives of each of the three sisters. Yes, it is a chick flick, but as a man, I found it quite engaging. The one weakness of the film, is George Brent, he lacks sexuality. But, the important point is, that it is an interesting story line, with complexity, and sophistication.

The three Gaylord sisters (Barbara Stanwyck, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Nancy Coleman), lose their parents at an early age and fight to keep their family mansion. George Brent plays the guy after the mansion and when you find out why your eyes will roll so hard they'll fall out of your head. Stanwyck is feisty to the point of obnoxiousness and Brent is a prick. He's also a rapist, if I interpreted one crucial scene correctly. Very disappointing melodrama with a plot that's much ado about nothing. Inappropriate moments of humor don't help. Protracted opening with Donald Woods as the father who goes on and on about the family legacy and what it means to be a Gaylord has next to nothing to do with the rest of the movie. One little bit of interesting trivia: actor (and future murderer) Gig Young took his stage name from the character he plays in this movie. Before this he went by his real name of Byron Barr.

In the case of 1942's The Gay Sisters, more is supposed to mean better. The mansion set and the very epic-like nature of the sisters' story lines signify that it is a top-grade project from a top-grade studio (Warner Brothers). Barbara Stanwyck, as the older sister, Fiona Gaylord, seems to be particularly tough. She is never really a soft-touch, except in those moments where she undergoes a severe script-sanctioned transformation. But I think she is at her most real in this film, and it is more true to her off-screen self. Like the character she plays, she was also orphaned; and also, like the character she plays, she had one son, so in many ways, this project is tailor-made for Stanwyck. It is a treat watching her, and if modern audiences can get over the title, they will discover a classic gem.

I have to agree with the majority of other reviews posted here. This film gets off to a cracking good start. So good that I wondered how they were going to keep up the strong pace. They didn't!

Now I know why I had not heard of this film before seeing it on TCM. Maybe Warners buried it early after release, yet it did display some 'crowd pleasing' attributes.

So confusing was this film, we had to stop and re-watch parts over to see if what 'seemed' to be happening, actually was!

Great cast, great production values, great cinematography, great music, but oh, that overly odd, quite unbelievably resolved story!

Like so many movies that were produced in the B&W era, much of this one is filled with melodramatic scenes and lines written to carry along the diverging feelings of a family of three sisters whose lives intermingle merely because they are related, not necessarily because they agree. In fact, it is often difficult to see where the three blend as a family, except that they are guided by the commands of a big sister.

Barbara Stanwyck is that big sister who rules the roost, though not in a way that is intentionally abusive. She thinks she knows what must be done to keep things in line with the purpose she was given as a little girl. It is what her father would have wanted, a devotion to something above even God. He leaves to fight in Europe during WWI where he is killed, which places the house in the care of Barbara Stanwyck.

Do the sisters love one another? Yes, in an argumentative sort of way, as each one's desires cross the others'. Big sister wants no man in her life, doesn't trust them, considers them merely a means to an end. Middle sister is playing romantic games with her little sister's love, Gig Young, which causes the youngest to attempt a drastic solution.

In addition to a housekeeper, the three sisters share their home with a little boy who knows nothing of the secret that's been hidden for a number of years and whose future is a matter for the courts. The little fellow is one of the most polite boys I have seen on screen in a long while -- a refreshing breath when compared to today's norm.

I recommend this film despite the melodramatics. The lines are well written and well spoken. Don't be run away by the negative reviews. This one is worth the time whether you like the ending or not.

When I'd seen the name of this movie, I'd always thought it was a musical. Like "The Harvey Girls." It's not. It's a pudding that overcooked, hit the kitchen ceiling, and was pried off and cobbled together. No music and not a period piece but thoroughly improbable.

It starts with patriarch James Woods telling the eldest of his three daughters, a small child who grows to be Barbara Stanwyck, that she must maintain the family name and home.

We thus think it is going to be a historical intergenerational tale. And it is, for a brief time. Then it turns into the story of cold-hearted Stanwyck's fight against lawyer George Brent. Why is she so dead set against him? Well, why else? As we learn in a strange flashback sequence narrated by Stanwyck, she had once thought she could inherit some money (for her sisters as well as herself, of course) by marrying. She hit on someone she took to be a country bumpkin, who was in fact budding lawyer Brent.

Lest anyone think the child they had, a young man of eight or so at the time of the main plot, is -- well, you know ... They had a hasty marriage and during the very short time they were together, he was conceived.

One of her sisters is in love with a painter named Gig Young, who is played by Gig Young. The other sister tries to take him away. Etc., etc.

It is a shrill, unengaging mess -- well enough acted but without a shred of logic or plausibility.

Here is one of those movies spoiled by the studio's insistence on a happy ending. Conflicts which have stretched out for years are settled in a few minutes. It would have been far more interesting to inject a tone of ambiguity. The talented Barbara Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from independent and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her life. Brent, as usual, is well over his head and then there is the ludicrous situation of Gig Young playing a character named Gig Young. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the actor! Worth seeing though far below what it could have been.