"Kitty Foyle" is a lush, expertly done example of the "women's films" that were popular in the 1940's and are so rare today. The rather simplistic plot focuses on Kitty's choice of sharing her life with either a married scion of a mainline family or an impoverished doctor, both of whom love her. Pure soap opera, but lovingly done, especially those luminous closeups. The device of having Kitty talk to her own conscience is rather hokey, but does provide for an interesting touch. The spark in the production is the admirably natural but spirited performance of Ginger Rogers in the title role. She perfectly fits the role of a working girl surviving on her wits and gumption, and really shines when telling off her rich, patronizing in-laws. See it for her, and for a somewhat dated but still intriguing view of the travails of independent women during the first half of the 20th century.
Add a Review
-
LGevirtz4 January 2005
-
jem1327 April 2007Ginger Rogers won the Academy Award for Best Actress in KITTY FOYLE as the hard-working, stubborn Irish lass who learns more than a few lessons about life, love and the social strata in this affecting melodrama.
The film opens with a surmise of the changing role of women in Philadelphian society in the early part of the 20th century. The first five minutes switch from a woman daintily accepting a proposal, campaigning for suffrage and, finally, joining the workforce. This panoramic examination of changing social mores and conventions zooms in for a more personal look at one Kitty Foyle, a young working girl from the wrong side of the tracks who falls for her boss Wyn Strafford (Dennis Morgan), part of the Philadelphian social set. Kitty has to make a choice between her love for Strafford (who will never be her equal) and her relationship with a poor young doctor.
In an interesting technique, Kitty's conscience (through a mirror) narrates her story. The film is told mostly in flashback, while looking through a snow globe. This RKO production pre-dates CITIZEN KANE by one year! Was Welles parodying or paying tribute to KITTY FOYLE in the opening scenes of his film? Is it just pure coincidence? You decide.
Rogers, whose Oscar win is often hotly debated by classic film fans, is good, not yet entirely great in the role. Considering the quality of the performances nominated against hers in 1940- Joan Fontaine in REBECCA, Bette Davis in THE LETTER, Katharine Hepburn in THE PHILADELPHIA STORY- Rogers win seems undeserved. Was it undeserved? Honestly, yes. Rogers was far better in her musicals with Astaire (see SWING TIME and TOP HAT- Rogers is superb) in which she had to sing, act and dance- now that's versatility. Yet the Academy seems to shy away from rewarding comedy or musical performances, instead opting for drama. Rogers in KITTY FOYLE, with dyed hair, plain clothes and doing a lot of suffering at the hands of men, seemed a better choice than the luminous, cheerful Rogers of SWING TIME. Ginger is good as Kitty but I wonder why she was even nominated when Rosalind Russell (HIS GIRL Friday) and Vivien Leigh (WATERLOO BRIDGE) were both overlooked in the same year. Perhaps the Academy wished to award her for the magic she brought to the screen with Astaire?
Dennis Morgan and James Craig are decent in support as the two men who Kitty has to choose between. Morgan, handsome, charming and sharing more than a passing resemblance to Robert Walker, is effective as the attractive yet selfish and weak-willed Strafford, who is unwilling to forgo the comforts of his social position to make a married life with Kitty. Craig is perhaps a little bland yet he is still likable as the honest, good-hearted doctor who Kitty really should fall for. Gladys Cooper appears in a small role as Wyn's disapproving mother, and Ernest Cossart (sort of a poor man's Thomas Mitchell) is memorable as Kitty's father.
KITTY FOYLE possesses an average script that is lifted by it's interesting themes of social divide, women in the workforce, divorce and single mothers. Sure, it's nothing revolutionary now but it was in 1940. Rogers gets her best scenes when she learns she has had a miscarriage and, five years later, meets Stafford's son to another woman who could well have been her own. Wood's competent direction and storytelling draws emotions from viewers in all the right places.
Foot Note- One of my favorite poems, Tennyson's brilliant and unforgettable The Lady Of Shallot, is used symbolically and poignantly in KITTY FOYLE. Kitty herself could well be the The Lady ("I am half sick of shadows") in Tennyson's castle, waiting for Camelot to come rescue her from her working life. Unfortunately, Kitty's mirror is also "crack'd" when she realizes Strafford for the man he is, not the ideal she dreamt about. It's fun to speculate whether or not the film was reaching for a more high-brow intellectualism than the average soaper with Kitty effectively playing the Lady when she is conversing with her conscience in the mirror. Interesting stuff!
7/10. -
This film almost gets there, but not quite. It's an interesting portrait of a woman torn between two men, both of whom she ostensibly loves. Ginger Rogers, in the title role, is enchanting as always, but the screenplay comes up just a bit short in the end.
The problem is this: The entire picture focuses on Kitty's relationship with a rich Philadelphia aristocrat, and is very good at showing us why she should and shouldn't run away with him. On the other hand, we are left with very little on the other candidate -- a bare two or three scenes that give us very little of his character or personality.
In the end, the film seems to suggest that Kitty should choose the doctor for the simple reason that he's not the aristocrat. This despite the fact that she loves, passionately, the aristocrat, while she feels for the doctor, at best, a certain fondness. Despite Ginger Rogers's wonderful performance, I was ultimately unconvinced. -
rhoda-122 October 2007ALL THE FOLLOWING IS A SPOILER. True, Kitty Foyle is adapted from a novel, so much must be eliminated or compressed, and, also true, the Production Code of the time clamped down tight on any suggestion of immorality or even natural functions. Even so, this movie deserves some kind of a record for the longest gestation, shortest courtship, and quickest (non-Reno) divorce in movie history--and all in one scene! Ginger Rogers marries Dennis Morgan, but a few days later realises she has made a mistake when his snobbish family won't accept her as she is. Some unspecified time later, she gets her final decree but simultaneously finds out she is pregnant (a word that could not be used in the movies). So she would have had to file for the divorce, go through all the procedures, and receive her decree in less than the few weeks it usually takes to suspect and confirm pregnancy--unless we are meant to think that Ginger Rogers, a smart cookie here as in all her roles, doesn't know where babies come from. Rogers goes to tell her ex about the blessed event, but keeps mum when he tells her that he is going to get married. It's possible that he was going with this other woman and impulsively threw her over to marry Rogers, but we are told nothing and are left to assume he met, courted, and was accepted by this other woman in the past few weeks.
At the end of the scene, therefore, you are left thinking, What? Hello? Did I miss something? No, it's just very bad continuity.
Earlier, we see Rogers and her boyfriend on a sofa before a blazing fire "in the Poconos." Kiss and fadeout. Now, the Poconos, as most viewers will not realise, is a mountain resort in Pennsylvania, famous for honeymoons. But we are not told how they come to be there and what is going on. The k and f are the usual code for illicit sex, but this seems contrary to the insistence that Rogers and Morgan are, if briefly, married when she becomes pregnant. Once again, it feels as if the novel has been adapted by just filming a few pages here and there and ignoring the rest.
And what, anyway, is so terrible about Morgan's family wanting to mold Rogers so she doesn't embarrass them? What does she have to get on her high horse about, announcing no one will re-make Kitty Foyle? She's an ignorant shopgirl, for heaven's sake, and marriage to a wealthy man would give her the freedom to do what she wants, and discover who she is, a lot more than sharing a room with two other penny-pinching spinsters. Instead of flaring up and stalking out, anyone with an ounce of sense would have smiled, put up with the lessons in table manners or whatever, and then done whatever she liked. The whole thing is a patronising lie that tells its Depression audience being true to yourself, in even the most minor and superficial ways, is more important than money and a cute husband like Dennis Morgan. Hard to believe too many half-starved working girls would have agreed. -
zetes14 October 2001Oh, it's a good picture, but, well, it is just hairs away from being a great film. Actually, a lot of hairs. They're all small, individual problems, but there are tons of 'em. Just some small changes in the script, ones that wouldn't have been too difficult to make, and it could have been a Hollywood classic.
Ginger Rogers won an Academy Award for Best Actress for playing the title character, a Philadephian of a modest, Irish upbringing. Did she deserve it? I can't be fair in the matter. I'm totally in love with Ginger Rogers. However, in my opinion, this isn't one of her more memorable performances. She's good, to be sure, but I guess that she's not great for a melodramatic role. Basically, she won it because she died her trademark blonde locks red, akin to John Wayne wearing an eye patch in True Grit. Symbolically, that is, an actress who is perceived to play the same part time and time again went to a different genre. I hate to say that, because, as I said, I LOVE Rogers. I just worship her. I think it's horribly unfortunate that audiences, critics, and even actors themselves cannot accept comedic talent as equal to dramatic talent. I think that a comedic performer has a much, much more difficult job than his or her dramatic counterpart. Drama is easy in comparison. And who besides Ginger Rogers could dance like Ginger Rogers? Take a look at the musical actresses of the 1950s, to compare: Leslie Caron, Debbie Reynolds, Cyd Charisse. All great. I'd never say anything different. But they're no Ginger Rogers. They all let Gene Kelly do all the work (Jerry the mouse has more to do than they do), whereas Rogers "did everything that [Fred Astaire] did, except backwards and in high heels."
Everyone knows that Rogers was amazing in the RKO musicals of the 1930s. That's where you know Rogers from, and that's the direction from which I arrived at this film. However, I've seen at least one non-musical role that could be helpful here, very much so: Stage Door from 1937. It's about a boarding house for actresses, starring Katherine Hepburn, but there are many other great actresses involved, including Rogers, who is the second most important character in the film. She is enormously quick-witted in that film, sassy and brassy to the extreme, but she also has a lot of choice dramatic scenes in which she is great.
Let's talk about Kitty Foyle now. I love the structure: On the same day, Kitty's confronted by her two suitors, both proposing, Wynn, a Philadephia millionaire, and Mark, a doctor (yes, you read that right: Kitty has to suffer the pulls between a millionaire and a doctor, the poor thing). As she stands around trying to make her decision, she begins debating inwardly (actually, debating with her reflection in the mirror, which is pretty ingenious for the time). The whole film is constructed in flashbacks, a year before Citizen Kane. It also uses a snow globe symbolically, which is now getting spooky, a snow globe with a little girl on a sleigh in it. And it's an RKO film. I must be on to something! Were Welles and Mankiewicz making fun of this?
Onward. The film actually uses symbolism decently, but it can never solidify the abstractions that the symbolism raises satisfactorily. Flowers, a specific type of alcohol, perfume, presidential elections, children. They work metonymically, which means that we're reminded of a previous scene in which, say, that particular type of alcohol is ordered. Sometimes it works, often it doesn't. Maybe when it doesn't, it's because the script (by Dalton Trumbo, but it was also a novel first, which is probably the source of the symbolism) uses it too often.
The film's biggest problem is that it goes overboard with its melodrama too often. Scenes grow silly. Take the scene where Wynn, seeing Kitty for the first time in a long while, hires an orchestra to play until 5 AM so that they can dance alone (and not Astaire and Rogers dance, mind you!). If that weren't silly enough, when he is kicked out of the orchestra hall, he hires the orchestra to come to Kitty's appartment to play there! There's even a scene where Wynn has to argue with the hotel clerk about it, promising him that the orchestra won't wake anybody!
Another scene that should have been great but faltered is one where (SPOILERS) Kitty runs into Wynn's new wife and son (Kitty's own son by him was stillborn after she annulled their marriage). The son, who should be hers, forgets his toy and has to come back. Kitty has a conversation with him that should be enormously touching, but, for God's sake, is that kid a terrible actor! My Lord, he completely craps on the scene.
To make the film a bit harder to take, the rival for her love is despicable. In another cringeworthy scene, Kitty pushes the burglar alarm in the department store where she works instead of the stock call button (seriously, they're RIGHT NEXT to each other; whoever designed the system should be hit with a bat!). In order to avoid getting fired, a friend tells her to pretend to faint, something that I couldn't understand. The doctor who comes to help her is Mark, and he realizes that she is faking it (apparently he can tell why, too). He demands that she go out with him or he'll tell on her. When she refuses, he threatens (joking) that he'll prick her with a syringe if she doesn't agree. Jeeze, and some people have a problem at Fred Astaire's ploys to get Rogers! When he shows up for the date, he keeps her in her apartment, telling her he has no money to take her out. When he reveals that he was lying, the reason is because he wants to make sure his dates aren't gold-diggers. He must have seen Gold-Diggers of 1933, too, where Rogers sings "I'm into Money" with paper coins attached to her costume! Luckily, Mark has enough of what it takes to get along. 7/10. -
Ginger Rogers gives a good performance as "Kitty Foyle", making it worth seeing even though the film is otherwise a mostly average production. The story is worthwhile, but much of it is rather ordinary material, and it is somewhat slow. The rest of the cast is good enough, but most of the time does not come close to Rogers's level. There is nothing wrong with any of it, but not much of it really stands out.
Kitty, the main character, must make a number of choices during the course of the story, and is forced to weigh her options and her priorities. Rogers is believable and generally effective in portraying Kitty's thoughts and personality. The others in her life are mostly likable, yet most of the time they do not come to life in the way that Kitty does. Fortunately, Ginger is able to carry the load.
Many of us would have loved to see more Astaire-Rogers musicals, but you can see why Ginger wanted a chance to perform more dramatic roles, to show what she could do. This movie as a whole is generally pleasant and always watchable, but nothing special, and a number of her musicals were certainly better films. Nevertheless, it did give her a chance to do something different, and she did it well. -
whpratt19 February 2008Enjoyed this film starring Ginger Rogers, (Katherine "Kitty" Foyle) playing the role of a young girl who works for a magazine in Philadelphia and was hired by a man during the great depression. This man was Wyn Strafford, (Dennis Morgan) who is very good looking and started to fall in love with her. Kitty loses her job and finds other work selling cosmetics and perfumes and this couple do not see each other for over a year until Kitty meets up with Wyn Strafford who comes from a very wealthy family and they get married. Things quickly change in their lives and because Kitty was a girl who came from a rather poor Irish family this created a problem for the stiff shirts of Philadelphia. There are many flashbacks in this story and there is a great deal to this film which will hold your interest right to the very end. Excellent film and a wonderful old film to enjoy with old songs from the past.
-
A wonderful story of a young woman caught between two worlds, what she wants and what she needs. This has got to be one of the best stories of all time. Ginger Rogers gives an outstanding performance of a young woman from the wrong side of the tracks that stands up to society and makes her way on her own.
It is incredibly forward thinking for the time period and yet it deals with struggles that seem to be timeless.
I give it as many stars as can be given.
Ariana Eirlys -
JamesHitchcock15 October 2015The title character of this film is described as a "white collar girl", but in 1940 it would appear that this expression referred to a shop assistant rather than a clerical or secretarial worker as it would today. (The expression probably derives from the lacy white collar which served as a sort of unofficial shop girl's uniform; a dress in this style became known as a "Kitty Foyle dress"). As the film opens Kitty has to make a choice between the two men who are in love with her, Mark Eisen, an idealistic young doctor, and Wynnewood ("Wyn") Strafford VI, the scion of a wealthy Philadelphia banking family who are so grand that for at least six generations they have been adding Roman numerals after their names as though they were royalty.
At first it seems obvious whom she will choose. Mark is single, and therefore in a position to offer her honourable marriage, whereas Wyn is an unhappily married man whose wife will not give him a divorce and who can offer her no more than a clandestine elopement to South America. And in the moral climate of the forties no Hollywood heroine ever ended up as the mistress of a wealthy sugar-daddy, did she? (One or two Hollywood actresses might have done in real life, but that's another story).
The film then flashes back to Kitty's youth- in fact most of the story is told in one long flashback- and we learn that matters are not quite as straightforward as we thought. We learn how Kitty first met Mark and Wyn and discover that, far from being a sleazy sexual predator enticing young girls into immoral relationships, Wyn was actually the first great love of Kitty's life. In fact, he is her ex-husband. Their marriage broke down largely because of the opposition of his family to his marrying a woman from a different social class, but despite their divorce, and his subsequent remarriage to the daughter of another rich family, Wyn and Kitty have remained in love with one another. When the flashback ends, we learn which of the men she chooses.
In its structure, "Kitty Foyle" is a typical "woman's picture". Such films were popular in the thirties and forties and were so called because they were aimed at a predominantly female audience and because they generally featured a strong female character in the leading role, with the male characters being defined in terms of their relationship to her. "Woman's pictures" could often be intensely melodramatic, "Mildred Pierce", for which Joan Crawford won the Academy Award for "Best Actress", being a good example. Although there are a couple of tragic moments, overall "Kitty Foyle" is much lighter; in fact, at times it resembles a romantic comedy in tone, if not in structure. (Cinematic rom-coms normally place as much emphasis on the main male character as on the woman).
I have generally thought of Ginger Rogers as being either Fred Astaire's dancing partner or the star of inconsequential comedies like "Tom, Dick and Harry" or "The Major and the Minor". "Kitty Foyle", for which Ginger won her own "Best Actress" award, would suggest that she was an actress of rather more substance than her present-day reputation might suggest. Yet, although there is nothing particularly wrong with Rogers' acting, I think that she was very fortunate to take "Best Actress" ahead of Joan Fontaine in "Rebecca", Katharine Hepburn in "The Philadelphia Story" and Bette Davis in "The Letter", three better performances in three better films in what was a very strong year in cinematic history. Rogers is perfectly competent here, but she lacks the extra spark which those other three actresses possessed (or, for that matter, which Crawford was to show in "Mildred Pierce").
The film itself was also nominated for "Best Picture" and "Best Adapted Screenplay", although it doesn't really belong in the same class as the three films mentioned above, or as "The Great Dictator" and "The Grapes of Wrath" (which eventually won "Best Picture"). As a romantic comedy it is a reasonably good one, a cut above something like "Tom, Dick and Harry" which also deals with a girl who must decide between different suitors. (In that case three rather than two). When it strays into more serious territory, however, and tries to deal with weighty topics such as class differences in American society, the treatment is rather superficial. 7/10 -
none-8520 December 1998A love story, mostly drama, some comedy, set in the backdrop of Philadelphia main line society in the 1920s/1930s. Rogers is great as the working girl heroine- Kitty Foyle, but so is Morgan as the wealthy socialite, Wynn Stafford. Rogers won the Oscar for her role. I don't know why Morgan doesn't get more recognition for his role; he was always underrated. James Craig is perfect as the other man in the triangle- the earnest, struggling young doctor. A warm, romantic movie- the kind which is rarely made today.
-
perfectbond18 December 2003Ginger Rogers, as the titular character, gives a very moving performance, for which she won an Academy Award, as a woman torn between two men. The two male leads, Dennis Morgan and James Craig, are also excellent. The message of the movie seems to be that one should forsake passionate romantic love and settle for stability. Of course there are extenuating circumstances in Kitty's situation, notably her class status and the Depression, but the message doesn't seem to be very idealistic. I guess in those more religious times unmarried women cohabiting with men was frowned upon quite severely. I heard this movie was based on a book. I wonder, what does Wyn do in South America without Kitty? Does he still pursue his divorce? Great film, 9/10.
-
Kitty Foyle9 August 2000And not just because my name is kit. The chemistry between Ginger Rogers and Dennis Morgan is unlike any other screen romance I've ever seen. Total smolder city. Rogers mixes idealism and cynicism has stunningly as it can be done. Morgan nicely tightropes between strength and fecklessness. The supporting cast, in entirety, is magnificent. Just a tremendous movie. In fact, I just got inspiration -- following the recording of this review -- I will change my IMDB handle to kittyfoyle.
-
jotix1005 January 2005"Kitty Foyle" is a curious film. On the one hand, it wanted to point out the wrongs in the society of the time. The book, in which the movie is based, made an impact in the 30s. Its author, Christopher Morley, discusses things that perhaps the director of the film, Sam Wood, wanted to tackle, but the result is that it doesn't offer any solution to the problem it presents. In a way, "Kitty Foyle" is one of the typical melodramas of the era that called for a more experienced leading lady.
Ginger Rogers, in my humble opinion, was an excellent actress in lighter fare and musicals. She left her mark as the partner of one of the most successful dancers in Hollywood, Fred Astaire. In undertaking the title role of this picture, Ms. Rogers was attempting something that she probably didn't have the range for, even though, she is effective as the lead.
Time, alas, hasn't been kind to this movie. Some of the taboos of the times have been conquered and resolved. More than sixty years later, this movie serves more as a curiosity piece than a great picture. In fact, that year, in the Oscar race, Ms. Rogers won against some of Hollywood's best actresses, which doesn't say much about the award, itself. Sometimes the Hollywood Establishment has a way for rewarding some people for the wrong kind of film, but in recognition of excellent contribution to the American cinema.
"Kitty Foyle" is basically a soap opera about a strong woman who makes the mistake of falling in love with a society man, which has served as the plot for other, better done movies. The prologue, while trying to be politically correct and explain how Kitty has achieved a certain status, doesn't add anything to the movie. Ms. Rogers is shown trying to pass for twelve, as she watches the Philadelphia aristocracy enter the Assembly ball, is not credible, she looks like Ginger Rogers!
Ginger Rogers was a talented actress; she makes a great appearance in the film. Dennis Morgan was an excellent actor who had the ability to make his leading ladies excel when playing with him. His Wyn Strafford is a rich boy in love with someone from the other side of the tracks. James Craig makes a good appearance as the doctor who falls for the woman who probably will never love him.
The movie will probably resonate a lot of women that love the genre. It's easy to see why this film has pleased, thanks to the personality of Ms. Rogers, who dominates the movie. -
moonspinner5523 November 2006This story, adapted from Christopher Morley's novel, about a working girl stuck on two different suitors--one with old-generation money and the other no less than a doctor--comes dangerously close to mawkish soap opera. Fortunately, director Sam Wood has a firm grip on the narrative, keeping it from lapsing into suds and guiding Ginger Rogers to a Best Actress Oscar. Wood's attempts to show the various roles women have played throughout the years are weakly-handled, and the shapeless script by Dalton Trumbo (with assistance from Donald Ogden Stewart) seems intent on making the same points over and over again. Still, there several funny, cynical sequences and some sharp dialogue. Rogers hits a few clanging notes, but her energy and enthusiasm are unmistakable. ** from ****
-
Ripshin28 August 2004While I am quite fond of Ginger Rogers - both her performances and her personality - "Kitty Foyle" is not an Oscar-worthy film. Yes, she does a great job, but not superior to Hepburn ("The Philadelphia Story"), Davis ("The Letter"), Fontaine ("Rebecca") or Scott ("Our Town") - all nominated actresses in the same category.
The book upon which this film is based was somewhat controversial at the time - abortion, extramarital affairs, etc. - all verboten by the Production Code of the 40s/50s. Yes, they "cleaned up" the story for the screenplay, but it is still somewhat risque for 1940. Most likely, the subject matter contributed to Rogers winning the Oscar. (Of course, "The Philadelphia Story" is a bit suggestive as well - and certainly more sophisticated.)
Distracting to me are the unnecessary "prologue," and Rogers portraying (briefly) a twelve year-old! The scenes with her two female roommates are a welcome comedic interlude. Unlikely is the prospect of Foyle secretly giving her ex-boyfriend's engagement ring to his young son, and expecting the child's mother to never see it.
This is worth viewing, of course, but the Oscar went to the wrong person. -
BrandoOnTheWaterfront2 August 2020Classic old Hollywood formula. A beautiful lady torn between two men who are heads over heels in love with her. Will she go for the guy she's adored for years or a new acquaintance who happens to be a doctor with no strings attached?
Rogers plays the title role in "Kitty Foyle" which kicks off with her packing her bags to run away with one of the two men. Will it be her hometown sweetheart (who is married) or the committed, yet struggling, but available doctor? Before we discover Kitty's decision, the movie takes us on a romantic trip down memory lane - with all of Kitty's high and lows in between - exploring how she met and fell in love with the two men.
Even though the plot is slightly predictable, and you know what's going to happen in the end, it doesn't really matter. The movie is a definitive '40s romance which was incredibly popular in its day and is, generally, worth investing your time. Romantic escapism at its finest.
You can't take away the fact that Rogers steals the movie as a forthright, no-nonsense New York career woman. The on-screen romances Rogers has with her leading men (Morgan and Craig) are so convincing; you feel like you're in the wine bar eavesdropping on their conversation or a passer-by in streets of New York enthralled by the madly-in-love couple(s). Having won the Oscar for this movie, I don't think Rogers' performance is on a par with two of her fellow nominees that year: Katharine Hepburn for "The Philadelphia Story" and Joan Fontaine for "Rebecca". In my book, Hepburn and Fontaine's performances have stood the test of time and, if I had to choose, Hepburn seals the deal for me.
Foyle remains an incredibly likable character throughout despite stringing out the decision she's got to make. You warm to her even more towards the end where, years later, she meets her hometown sweetheart's wife and son and entrusts the boy to secretly return the family heirloom his father gave her.
If you're looking for a movie that beautifully yet subtly captures the starry-eyed romances of yesteryear, "Kitty Foyle" will be right up your street. -
atlasmb28 July 2019Ginger Rogers was looking for a script that would allow her to showcase her dramatic talents, a departure from the comedic and dancing roles her career had been limited to by RKO and others. The novel "Kitty Foyle" was too scandalous for her tastes, but her mother convinced her to wait for the studio's treatment, which would have to conform to MPPC guidelines. Besides, Dalton Trumbo was working on the adaptation.
When she read the script, she was pleased to accept the role. The film became RKO's biggest earner of 1940 and she won the Best Actress Oscar over some other notable performances, perhaps because her dramatic abilities were so underestimated.
The film, as a whole, is certainly not a classic. Its story is not so unique, being little more than the struggle of a woman to decide between two men, one of whom lives a privileged life that cannot accommodate her lower station. The ending of the film is anticlimactic. Still, Miss Rogers' role is the centerpiece of the film and she handles it with confidence and nuance.
Her two leading men, Dennis Morgan and James Craig, are solid in their performances, though their roles are not as demanding. -
masonfisk26 September 2018A vastly underrated actress outside the realm of song & dance, Ginger Rogers finally scored w/a best actress Oscar for her performance here. Rogers plays a working class perfume hawker torn between the blue blooded beau from back home in Philly & a struggling doctor she meets in New York. A good role in a flawed film, I chuck this one to the director since the script is on point from Dalton Trumbo (Spartacus/The Brave One) but the strength of Rogers turn is let down on an over reliance on flashbacks.
-
bkoganbing10 September 2006This must have been the year for the City of Brotherly Love. James Stewart wins his Academy Award for The Philadelphia Story and Ginger Rogers who he was going out with at some point, wins Best Actress for Kitty Foyle, a film also set in Philadelphia. Too bad neither the Athletics or the Phillies won the World Series that year, but neither of them came close.
Although Stage Door more than amply demonstrated Ginger Rogers's abilities at serious drama, this particular film cemented her as dramatic actress. Most of Ginger's films up to this point had been musicals, mostly with Fred Astaire. After Kitty Foyle she rarely did any musicals.
The story is told in flashback after Ginger engages in some dialog with her alter ego in the mirror. That one in the mirror is usually the one person you cannot fool. So the ego narrates the ups and downs of the life of Kitty Foyle.
Ginger's a working class Irish lass whose got two men going for her big time, young earnest doctor James Craig, and mainline millionaire heir Dennis Morgan. Morgan's family name is Stratton and no doubt the Strattons socialized with the Lords of The Philadelphia Story. But they're definitely not as fun a group.
Ginger's alter ego narration and her scene upon being told she suffered a miscarriage probably are what won her the Academy Award. She's very effective in those scenes and in her scene where her father, Ernest Cossart dies.
Kitty Foyle is good soap opera material, I'm surprised it's characters weren't used in one. It still holds up well after over 60 years.
As well as that other Philadelphia Story. -
Sometimes an actor established in a particular type of movie is rewarded with an Oscar for changing his or her pace, say, by tackling an entirely new genre or even looking different. Among the most famous examples are David Niven's ageing fraud/pervert in SEPARATE TABLES (1958) and John Wayne's initial appearance as Marshal "Rooster" Cogburn in the original version of TRUE GRIT (1969), but no less discussed (that is, for not being entirely deserving of the accolade!) is Ginger Rogers' dramatic turn here as a "white-collar" girl.
The film received a total of five nominations, the others being in the following categories: Best Picture, Direction, Screenplay (in the name of Dalton Trumbo, despite Donald Ogden Stewart's credit for "Additional Dialogue" – ironically, the award went to the latter regardless...for his sterling work on THE PHILADELPHIA STORY!) and Sound Recording. Having mentioned Stewart's double duty that year, as I lay watching this, I could not help noticing that several participants had more than one title in the Oscar race: director Wood also helmed OUR TOWN, Rogers herself appeared in PRIMROSE PATH, Eduardo Ciannelli (memorable here as the staunchly Republican owner of a speakeasy, which then has to go legit when Prohibition is repealed by the Democrats!) was featured in FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT, while Gladys Cooper and Florence Bates were both among the supporting cast of REBECCA (the eventual Best Picture winner)!
Anyway, it appears that the film-makers did not want to take any chances and, so as to not to allow the leading lady to be upstaged by her male counterparts (yes, this is the typical 'girl torn between two lovers' narrative), they chose two relatively new faces – namely Dennis Morgan (who at one point spoofs Ronald Colman i.e. Rogers' co-star in her previous movie, LUCKY PARTNERS {1940}!) and James Craig – to whom the epithet "nondescript" would seem to apply quite nicely! That is not to say that the film is without interest and, truth be told, it is not even as histrionic as I had been anticipating: indeed, it displays an admirable light touch every so often – especially during the 'women's emancipation' prologue and the fact that tale is told in flashback, with Rogers's mirrored reflection counselling her true self (surely the movie's most striking and imaginative touch). The actress is also seen at 15 years of age (for the record, she would again adopt this not-very- convincing childish countenance through much of Billy Wilder's THE MAJOR AND THE MINOR {1942}), while her would-be fiery Irish heritage is exemplified by repeated utterances of the expletive-substitute "Judas Priest"!
Following the break-up of her celebrated musical teaming with Fred Astaire, Rogers' solo (albeit only intermittently dramatic) career kept on flourishing for the next few years – encompassing such classics as Garson Kanin's BACHELOR MOTHER (1939) and TOM, DICK AND HARRY (1941), William A. Wellman's ROXIE HART (1942), Mitchell Leisen's LADY IN THE DARK and William Dieterle's I'LL BE SEEING YOU (both 1944) – before it went on an inevitable decline. -
planktonrules17 February 2007While I still prefer a Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire film like TOP HOT, this film is probably Ms. Rogers' best film because she is clearly THE star and the film gives her a good chance to show her acting ability. In fact, for this film she earned the Best Actress Oscar, though I really think that perhaps both Bette Davis' performance in THE LETTER and Katherine Hepburn's in PHILADELPHIA STORY were both a bit better. Perhaps she won that year because KITTY FOYLE is a very sentimental film or perhaps the other two actresses lost because they'd both already received that award. Or, perhaps Hepburn and Davis drew votes from each other. The bottom line, though, is Rogers is very good and compared to her other films, this one really stands out--even after all these years. My preferring the other performances in no way diminishes the fine job she did here. At the time, her winning was considered a big upset, though you can't deny all three performances were superb. And you really cannot be upset about her being chosen--she was deserving.
The film is a romance, though instead of being taught in the traditional linear fashion, it starts near the end and then is told in a long series of flashbacks. This really works well--especially because what you THINK Kitty is about to do at the beginning of the film isn't exactly what you might think. Additionally, these flashbacks are written and directed very deftly and so many little touches help to give this movie a heart. Especially touching were the ballroom dancing sequence with Dennis Morgan as well as the weepy section that soon follows. The bottom line is that this is a complex, well written and acted film that might require you keep a box of Kleenex nearby--just in case. See this movie! -
vert00118 June 2016You get the feeling that Orson Welles saw KITTY FOYLE while preparing his own first films for RKO. He himself said that he screened various movies to learn how they were put together, and named John Ford's STAGECOACH as a major influence, but KITTY was RKO's most important production at the time and RKO was Orson's studio so you have to believe that he had the chance to see it even before it was released. KITTY begins with a humorous history lesson meant to tie into the theme of the film proper and Welles's THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS would begin with a similar historical montage. KITTY FOYLE's story is told in flashback, not yet a common device in Hollywood cinema and not taken from the source novel, and CITIZEN KANE would use interlocking flashbacks to tell its story. Then there is the famous snow globe, startlingly used in KITTY FOYLE, albeit with considerably less expressionist splash than we'd see in KANE. Welles improved immensely on each borrowing, and no doubt he had already used similar devices in his radio work, but a radio drama is not a movie and RKO shaped the films that came out of it, even those films made by so idiosyncratic a talent as Orson Welles.
Odd though it may be to think of it that way, Ginger Rogers probably did more to pay for CITIZEN KANE and THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS than anyone. By 1940 she pretty much was RKO. KITTY FOYLE is a pure star vehicle for Ginger. She may have received more loving closeups as Kitty than she did during the rest of her career combined. KITTY FOYLE is a soap opera, a quintessential 'Women's Picture', and it may be the only picture of its kind that Ginger ever made. Her Kitty is one in a long line of excellent performances, but it's one of the few in a genre that the Academy likes to reward. She won an Oscar for it. Whether or not hers was really the best performance of 1940, the real scandal is that she was never nominated for anything else. As all actors know, dying is easy, it's comedy that's hard.
The weakness of KITTY FOYLE is in Dalton Trumbo's script, too often lugubrious, vulgar and confused. The confusion may have come from the censorship problems. In the novel (I'm getting this second hand; I haven't ever read it), Kitty's night in the Poconos with Wynn results in a pregnancy and subsequent abortion. The Hays Office would have ruled that out if it had ever gotten that far, and one suspects that the abortion at least would have ruled out the entire movie for Rogers. Trumbo keeps the sex part, elided in the standard practice of the time with a fade-out on an intimate kiss, and beautifully reinforces the point the next time we see the characters together by way of diction (instead of "Miss Foyle" it's now "Dear" and "Darling") and of body language (immediate embracing, hands on one another's thighs, etc.). I hear that that's the sort of thing that modern audiences no longer pick up on. If so, too bad. Anyway, Trumbo replaces that abortion with a seven day marriage and subsequent death of the child at birth. It's all absurdly rushed. Kitty walks out on the marriage for not that much reason so far as I could see, the divorce seems procured in a couple of months at most, Dennis Morgan jumps to his next bride in even less time. It just wasn't properly thought through.
In general, the best part of the movie is the early romance between Kitty and Wynn. Rogers' best scene may be when she realizes that her father had been right, that Wynn's real idea of their relationship was keeping her on a payroll that no longer existed rather than marrying her. I'm not sure that she had any poor moments, but the script's worst may have been her first date with the good doctor. How there could ever have been a second date after that one I'll never understand!
KITTY FOYLE was a huge success at the box office and certainly touched the hearts of its targeted audience, the 'white collar girl'. This may have been as much wish fulfillment as it was realism since Kitty's big dilemma is whether to marry an idealistic doctor or instead to go off to South America with a good-looking rich guy. Probably a lot of girls wished they had that problem. But I am a man and no doubt just don't understand. KITTY FOYLE was a good movie that could have been a lot better. Ginger Rogers was a terrific performer who deserved an Oscar for something more than just about anyone. Film and actress proved a happy match. -
gbheron14 March 1999The movie opens with a young woman, Kitty Foyle, assisting her doctor-sweetheart in delivering a child in a ramshackle tenement. They are a very compassionate pair. Afterwards he proposes marriage, she accepts and agrees meet him at midnight to be immediately married by an all-night Justice of the Peace. But while packing back at her hotel room, in pops an old flame, a wealthy married man who Kitty still desperately loves. He announces he has left his family and is leaving that night at midnight for South America. He still loves her, and wants her to join him. Oh, Kitty, what to do?
The remainder of the film is a series of flashbacks prompted by Kitty's image of herself in the mirror (i.e., her conscience) as it attempts to direct Kitty to the proper decision. Starting with her teenage years growing up working-class Irish in 1920s Philadelphia we learn how poor Kitty met and fell in love with a rich Mainline aristocat, and got herself in such a predicament.
Ms. Rogers won best actress for her role as Kitty, but the rest of the cast is no less deserving. A real movie treat. -
Lejink15 February 2020An interesting and entertaining if flawed film which gives a good indication of Hollywood attitudes towards women at the time. Adapted and to some extent sanitised by Dalton Trumbo from a racy, hit novel of the day, it purports to tell the story of a "white collar girl" and the life choices she makes over marrying for love or money. There's an amusing little scene-setting history lesson prologue where we see a young and pretty, turn-of-the-century woman use her feminine wiles to trap her beau into marriage and a montage showing that if women want equal rights, such as the vote, they should expect a change in male attitudes towards them. So far, so deferential and then we're introduced to Ginger Rogers present-day title character, an attractive, sassy working girl who right away has to make a decision whether to run away to South America with the filthy-rich love of her life or make the more pragmatic choice to stay on in her native Philadelphia with a more loving, less selfish but more mundane young doctor.
The film then flashes back in time to flesh out the characters of the three principals and so inform her final decision at the end as we learn that one of the main themes of the film is class snobbery. Rogers' Kitty can have a luxurious life of ease with her dream man if only she will kow-tow to a little social refining otherwise her fiancé Wynn, played by Dennis Morgan will actually lose his inheritance. Her backstop is an earnest but dull budding doctor, James Craig, who can't promise her riches and comfort but instead a more modest existence where both will have to continue working. Matters are complicated further after she impulsively marries and then divorces the dreamboat only to find she's pregnant with his baby but which sadly dies in childbirth. She then years later suffers a revelatory chance encounter with her ex's new wife who has given him the son to continue the family name but from whom he now wants to run away and abscond with Kitty.
Director Sam Wood deftly handles the flashback-infused narrative, mixes in a little comedy and gets a fine performance from the Oscar-winning Rogers as the conflicted Kitty, especially when she gets her big rebellious scene in front of her new husband's fusty, censorious family. Personally though I think Kitty could do better than both of her suitors here and shouldn't have to feel that she has to settle down with either of them.
If you can get past the patronising sexual-politics of the day, no doubt strictly administered in deference to the prevailing Production Code, this is an amiable, old-fashioned melodrama which nevertheless mistakenly thinks it's being all modern and controversial with its focus on a poor shopgirl who is lucky to be pursued by two men, marries and divorces the rich one, has and then loses her baby and still gets the chance to escape her shop assistant life of drudgery and hard graft in the final scenes. Of course the film would fall apart in ridicule if the gender of the leads were changed but that film was never going to be made in 1940's Hollywood.
A big hit on first release and with the added lustre of Academy recognition, it probably thinks it's a "woman's picture" with serious messages to put across on a woman's role in a man's world and how the poor interact with the rich, but unfortunately it's let down by its too blatant anachronistic, clunky and cliched paternalist viewpoint. -
Ginger Rogers won her only Oscar for this overblown soap opera. Go figure. The morality ladled out in this tripe was outdated even when it was released, and Ginger's dialogue with Dennis Morgan seems forced and artificial. And Ginger's character goes from self-absorbed to "noble" so quickly, it begs more questions than she answers. For truly classic "women's films" of this era, see Stella Dallas, Mildred Pierce, Now Voyager, or The Women and leave this museum-piece of a film alone.