How sad is this?

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Anne Shirley was utterly captivating; I had never before seen her work. I had seen Claude Rains as a child but had forgotten him. It was quite enjoyable to see his portrayal of a goofy, yet devoted father. I thought the movie was quite interesting. This is quite amazing as I do not usually enjoy movies from that era. I consider this a holdover from the 1930's; it has "depression and coming war" written all over it. The questions the movie raised, however dated the movie, were familiar: how do young marrieds survive financially? Should men marry before they have achieved their financial goals? When, or if, should young married women drop out of the work force in order to raise a family? These are questions as difficult today as they must have been nearly 7 decades ago. The most interesting aspect was that these problems existed at all: we tend to think today that these are merely modern questions.In spite of its "1930 style" I found it riveting; all the more so when one realizes that its stars are all gone, like the era it portrayed.

It should go like this: Monday's child is fair of face Tuesday's child is full of grace Wednesday's child is full of woe Thursday's child has far to go Friday's child is loving and giving Saturday's child must work for a living and the child that is born on the sabbath day is bonny and blithe and good and gay. I'm not sure why Jack Warner didn't catch this. It seems that to use the title to begin with presumes knowledge of the poem (I for one have to run through the entire thing in order to make sure myself. "Work for a living" also seems to fit better with the theme of the movie-- not that it matters though since the author came up with the title to begin with.

This wartime movie about the struggle of a family in a still economically depressed New York environment, tries hard to entertain with its Neil Simonesque dialogue. Then comes the bombshell. When father Halevy (Claude Rains), a failure by anyone's, including his own, standards, realizes that his adored daughter Bobby (Anne Shirley) is headed for an unrealized life of failure not unlike his own for want of a mere one thousand dollars, he decides to give her this money the only way he still can, by staging a potentially suicidal elevator crash. The scene of Halevy's leaving home before going through with this scheme is very close to Willy Loman's corresponding scene in "Death of a Salesman." According to the credits, "Saturday's Children" is based on a Pulitzer Prize winning play by Maxwell Anderson, which a young Arthur Miller surely must have seen. If it suggested the end of his major masterpiece "Death of a Salesman" to Miller, that alone would redeem this otherwise schmaltzy play/movie.

This very entertaining film is directed flawlessly by Vincent Sherman and based on a Maxwell Anderson play. Top notch script providing laughter, sympathy and reflective determination.A lovely young woman(Anne Shirley) ends up tricking a hopeless schemer/inventor(John Garfield) into marriage. Is it tricked or trapped? The young couple struggle to the point of almost breaking up. They earn $101 a month, but spend $108. The poor lovers try to prove two can live as cheap as one...maybe if one doesn't eat!My favorite scene is when Garfield and brother-in-law(Roscoe Karns)come home drunk. Also funny is when Garfield is told that he was tricked into the marriage.Claude Rains is the young woman's father and plays the part cool and witty with his own brand of humor. Lee Patrick is sister Florrie, who is quite obnoxious from the get go.A very touching movie. Being poor is no fun, but it isn't the end of the world. Someone always has it worse. More than likely another Saturday child.