Excellent but underrated film

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

It's clear that Warners was attempting to repeat the same success they had with "Four Daughters" right down to casting a number of the same actors. Rolland Young and Fay Bainter (along with the wonderful May Robson) are among my favorite character actors of the era.Priscilla Lane is just fine, but Jeffrey Lynn really isn't a particular good actor. Yes, he was fine in "All This and Heaven Too", but he's dull as dishwater in "A Letter to Three Wives". Joseph Mankiewicz referred to him as a "leaner" - a weak actor. He was right.All in all, it's a very watchable Warners programmer of the late 1930's. I can think better ways to waste my time.

Yes, this movie is dated and yes, it has plot holes and ridiculous moments. But that doesn't matter. When I watch this movie I just go along with it and enjoy each moment.May Robson, as always, is a delight. She is one of my very favorite supporting actresses and she does not disappoint here. Her funniest moments in this movie aren't even spoken...they are her reactions to all that is going on around her.Priscilla Lane played the role of a sweet, innocent girl very well. (Random side note: at times her voice reminds me of Ginger Rogers.) The character of Ellen was a tad annoying at times (come on, what do you think Doug wanted to do in that cabin) but for the most part I enjoyed Ellen. The character of Doug was not well developed at all. I suspect that was intentional since the focus of this movie was on the relationships between the women. I would have liked to see a bit more to Doug, though. All we really know about him is that he's going to Belgium to sell razors.I did enjoy the side plot of the previous relationship between Ann and Jay. The character of Jay seemed out of place at times, but Roland Young was his usual marvelous self.Yes, My Darling Daughter is a thoroughly entertaining movie. The subject manner is dated, but the movie kept my attention and even made me laugh out loud more than once.

Jeffrey Lynn gets a real bum rap by one reviewer on this site. He has an impossible part to play here, in which he's subjected to Priscilla Lane's endless platitudinous chatter. It's certainly refreshing to see a liberated woman in an old movie, but Lane's character is positively emasculating. Under the circumstances, Lynn does very well. Based on a popular play, this film was considered racy in 1939. Seen today, it's so innocuous, it's almost offensive! Needless to say, Lane retains her virginity even though she goes away for the weekend with boyfriend Lynn.Forget the sociological implications, however, and you have a reasonably witty entertainment, successfully "opened up" from its stage origins.

While this story of an unmarried couple's weekend together is obviously tame by today's standards, Yes, My Darling Daughter does have a moment or two that is a bit on the racier side. Well, at least for the time it was made.Led by the beautiful and unfairly underrated 'Lane, Priscilla' (qv), this movie has a good ensemble cast, with maybe the exception of Jeffrey Lynn.While Lynn has been likable in his other movies with Priscilla Lane, i. e. _Four Daughters (1938)_ (qv) and _Roaring Twenties, The (1939)_ (qv), he doesn't come across as the most likeable character. Or the brightest, either. In other words, if Priscilla Lane asked me to spend a weekend with her, platonic or otherwise, I think I would show a little more enthusiasm than he did!Anyway, Yes, My Darling Daughter is worth watching, thanks in no small part to the aforementioned Miss Lane.