Thanks for the memories!

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I find it rather amazing how some people actually like O'Neil's performance as it is to me the only flaw in an otherwise poignant and beautiful film. I literally scream at the screen when O'Neil's Countess is on because her acting is so ignorant, her motivations so demented and puerile, and I really, really want Boyer's character to finally just kill her already! How was she nominated for an Oscar for inflicting this cinematic torment on the audience? Thankfully death is a mercy and we are spared in the last half hour of the film of her existence because Barbara O'Neil being cast in this film in the first place was just stupid even Anatole Litvak's otherwise magnificent direction couldn't save her (Boyer's mental snap in the murder scene is just SO juicy). Otherwise, I find the chemistry between Boyer and Davis to be amazingly beautiful and the scenes with the children and Bette are just so wonderful and adorable, as is the score, and the sets and literally every other element of this film experience other than O'Neil. The film also has the wonderful ability to be long (2h 22mins) while feeling only about 90 minutes. It is just a shame that the Countess had to exist (as in was a real person who actually lived and was thankfully killed) because otherwise this would be the most perfect black and white film ever made.

. . . makes up the vast majority of the French population, as proved yet again in the true story, ALL THIS, AND HEAVEN TOO. Supposedly eating bread beyond its "sell date" inspired the French rabble to thin their gene pool by beheading the most educated and accomplished members of Society during their Reign of Terror (see A TALE OF TWO CITIES). But even before that they sold off their patron saint, Joan of Arc, as firewood for 30 pieces of silver, as you can view in at least a dozen feature films. If you need evidence from the 20th Century, watch PATHS OF GLORY, in which French generals honor their war heroes during WWI with execution by firing squad (to cover up their own total ineptitude); or peruse the WWII tale SARAH'S KEY, documenting how eagerly the French hauled their brother Jews to Hitler. To mention yet another true story that won a "Best Picture" Oscar, THE LIFE OF EMILE ZOLA recounts the sordid Dreyfuss Affair, in which a German double agent hoodwinks French High Command by falsely accusing a Jewish patsy. I cannot think of a single fact-based movie that portrays the French in a positive way. As in SARAH'S KEY, a bilingual woman must flee France for America to save her sanity in ALL THIS, AND HEAVEN TOO. Here in Texas we get "Freedom Fries" in our burger baskets. Enough said.

I am having a hard time finding the words to explain just how much I detested this movie. The historical trial of Henriette Deluzy-Desportes and the Duc de Praslin is a tragic and compelling story that, I feel, had the potential to be a fantastic film, but failed. Although the cinematography certainly had something to say for itself, it in no way could make up for the terrible structure of the film, the badly written script and most of all the horrendously overacted characters. The worst of them were the Duc's children who were so over-the-top-corny and sickeningly fake that it was almost painful to watch.In conclusion, this film left me feeling nothing more than irritated and profoundly disappointed.

How do you give a character charisma? Make her go through a preexisting scandal, but don't reveal anything about it other than it being bad and compare it to gossipers who show no tolerance towards the person because of it. This movie has one of the most emotional introductions I have ever seen in a movie. If there was any scene where Bette Davis shined as an actress, it was in the first 10 minutes. I knew nothing about her by that point and I was ready to cry. You can tell that this is a tragedy because it starts out after something bad apparently happened, but what sets this above tragedies like Grave Of The Fireflies and Romeo And Juliet is that it doesn't say that they die or it doesn't say what happens other than something bad happened. It builds suspense, but once it becomes clear how it happens the viewer waits for it to happen with no more surprises. All This And Heaven Too only says something really really bad happened, which can really mean anything. So it can get to a point where you think it couldn't get any worse and you assume that there is only resolutions left. Then something happens to make things even worse. It's brilliant how the movie creates such great plot twists that are as quick as they are comfortable with good lead-ins which start with a great introduction that makes you love Bette Davis's character almost instantly.One of the best things besides the plot points is the dialog. It's one of the most interesting screenplays I have heard from the 1940's. The dialog feels structured, but not too structured like a free verse poem. It falls somewhere between William Shakespeare and Joss Whedon with its cookie cutter dialog that draws the viewer in by believing that every bit of dialog is as important as the rest. With so many small details in movies, it is nice to feel compelled to focus on them. It also makes anyone look like a good actor, no matter how good or bad that actor truly is.Another good thing about the movie was great us of fade-ins and fade-outs. It also did a great job of using lighting. There was one specific shot where Bette Davis was trying to help a sick child and the light shined on her brightly in contrast to the background which was completely black making the scene feel like it was her being an angel protecting the child from the bad scenario surrounding them.The framing also focused on people by zooming in or zooming out to get the viewer ready to feel like they are seeing things from one person's perspective.There was so much I loved about the movie, there couldn't be anything wrong with it. Right? I didn't give it a 10. It has two flaws I can think about.1-The movie felt like it was too much. It needed to be 2.5 hours, but I felt like there was so much movie I was experiencing in each minute that I was getting tired by the end. I still loved it, but I would've been very satisfied with 1.5 hours.2-The biggest flaw in the whole movie was the sound editing. It was bad! I know in 1940, it wasn't easy for people to edit sound exactly to one frame, but there were at least 20 times when dialog was off by 1 second. It was like watching a kung fu movie. I was waiting for Bette Davis to beat up the Duchess with some Chinese Boxing moves. It was disappointing because I found so much to love about the movie, but the sound editing became distracting.I still would recommend this movie to a lot of people. It's rare I find a movie with this good of a narrative and story as well. The end was good too.