This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Expected more

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Bette Davis drips innocence and pathos in this romantic period piece as governess of four French children in an already unhappy household set in mid-1800's. Granted the acting is superb, the music swells back & forth with each (and many) unhappy moment, and the cinematography outstanding as well. Davis' takes a job as governess in an already unhappy household. Her innocent, loving presence brings a breath of fresh air & happiness to all except the wife who grows more convinced of shenanigans between Davis & Boyer who love one another without acknowledging it bound by their mutual love of the children. The wife is SO bad, the governess is SO good, the husband is SO honorable, the children are really only able to be truly the innocents amidst it all -- and ultimately they pay for it. Davis is supposed to be the true victim, as is Boyer, but it is the children ultimately lose their home -- father, r mother (albeit faulty), and doting governess... yet that is not the focus. Perhaps the film wants to prove how ugly gossip and innuendo can destroy purest of intentions, but well, hubby & governess ARE a bit too naive especially for that period. I found myself more dissatisfied than sympathetic w/those two clinging to their glaring naivete. If you're wondering what in the world I'm blabbing about, please do watch this film! Because it is so splendidly written, directed, acted, and overall packaged, I can give it at minimum four stars. One thing is for sure, it is quite entertaining and absorbing! I just don't buy the message I think it wanted to convey is all.

I have read the book and seen this movie many times. Potentially, Bette Davis was an inspired choice for the mademoiselle. Much is being made that Bette is playing against type, a "quiet gentle" character, but she's gone there before. I love this movie cause it gives me lots of Charles Boyer who practically shimmers in his romantic longing.Boyer being such a natural on screen only brings out the mannered and almost lazy approach of B. Davis. I've seen her speak naturally before without the clipping she developed and the hand which appears glued to her torso and folded in the most unappealing prissy way. Why oh why couldn't the director or Davis herself direct her properly for this role. The sour facial expressions (like she just drank a gallon of grapefruit juice) are annoying as heck.Despite these issues the potential was there. When she lets go of her acting ticks her luminous eyes and common sense manner work well as the intelligent governess. As it is, I overlook much of her and concentrate on the brilliant Charles Boyer and wonderful Barbara O'Neil who is right on target as the hysterical wife. In the book, Fanny De Praslin is even worse.

This movie has it all: a great cast, excellent direction, a powerful script, superb cinematography and beautiful sets. This movie stars Bette Davis and Charles Boyer and both give excellent, memorable performances. However, the strongest performance is given by Barbara O'Neil. She dominates this movie. Her portrayal of a scorned, rejected wife is one of the greatest performances ever witnessed by this reviewer. Anatole Litvak must have been overjoyed to direct such a great actress in such a great role. Take away her incredible performance and the movie would still be good but would lose much of its bite. One can only wonder why Ms. O'Neil's role was not expanded, indeed why she did not get top billing, for her performance was by far the strongest and most dynamic. Bette Davis's performance is subdued, controlled and polished. Charles Boyer's performance is somewhat more animated but he plays his role most convincingly. The movie is reportedly based on a true event which gives it a certain degree of credibility which is an important feature of this movie. Although the movie is long, it does not drag, it does not lag, and it hits no snags. This is a wonderful movie, definitely worth watching.

I thought I had seen every Bette Davis movie, but somehow ALL THIS AND HEAVEN TOO evaded me…until now. The review posted by nycritic is very good and find myself agreeing almost entirely. However, I would like to add some thoughts and take issue with a couple of things in that review. As I viewed it this is Bette Davis' movie from the first moment to the last. Barbara O' Neill may well have given the performance of her life, but I can't imagine anyone but her mother suggesting that she" walks off with the movie." It is simply impossible to take your eyes off Bette Davis whenever she is on screen, which is pretty much every scene. And not because she is Bette Davis. In this particular movie Bette Davis may play against character, but she inhabits the role of Mademoiselle Deluzy-Desportes completely, so the viewer can't help but absorb her every happiness and pain. I agree it would be easy to visualize Joan Fontaine in this role, but then we would have never had the opportunity to see this remarkable Bette Davis performance. ALL THIS AND HEAVEN TOO has elements of two of my favorite movies (each very different from the other, save the presence of Laurence Olivier). I felt the same sense of lurking tragedy for Mademoiselle Deluzy-Desportes as I did for young Heathcliff in WUTHERING HEIGHTS. And while Henriette and the Duc de Praslin never actually indulge their desires as Emma and Nelson do in THAT HAMILTON WOMAN, the inevitable fall from grace is very reminiscent of Lady Hamilton's fate.