Very well executed

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

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

This is by far the best performance Mary Pickford gave in a talking film; in fact, it is one that needs no apologies from anyone for it. If she was a bit too old for the early scenes, well so was Leslie Howard (actually he and Pickford were the same age, but nobody seems to mention him in this respect), she still carried them off very well and, indeed, if you didn't already know she was 40 at the time from outside sources, you really would not know it while viewing the film.The film suffers badly from a lack of continuity. All kinds of things appear to have happened at various stages of the story - most especially the husband's adultery - and we never know it until someone comes upon the scene and practically bellows it forth - but as others have said, this film is very much in the tradition of the old three-act play, where one act may not have very much to do with what comes before or after that act, especially when encompassing a half-century of story. Anyway, it does appear that an entire film might have been structured out of all the important story lines pretty much left out of this one. Still, old-fashioned or not, it holds the interest throughout, played first for comedy, then for drama and tragedy, and finally for pure sentiment, and both Pickford and Howard are perfect throughout the fifty years the story covers.James Agee, a film critic many consider a great one (I do not, but will hypocritically reference him here when it suits my purposes) made one of his most memorable comments on acting when, in reviewing moments of John Wayne's trek across the parched desert holding a newborn baby in his arms, determined to save its life because of a promise he made to the baby's dying mother, a total stranger to him (THREE GODFATHERS, 1949), he said that you could read pages out of all the great acting manuals and never begin to describe what Wayne achieves in those moments, and that constitutes great screen acting. That came to mind immediately in the scene of the cattle rustlers' attack on the Howard/Pickford home in this film, one that results (without our realizing it at first) in the death of their infant baby. The scene of Mary finding the baby, thinking it is asleep, slowly realizing it is not breathing, sitting down drained of every emotion except grief, suddenly getting an idea and going over to get a face mirror to bring back, put in front of the baby's mouth in the hope that she is wrong and that it is still breathing, the ultimate realization that her child is indeed dead, her combination of both stoical and expressed grief, and then her placing her baby back in its crib and going through the door into the next room to help load ammunition for her husband's continuing fight against the rustlers, must be one of the greatest 'silent' acting moments in the history of the screen, and it should be shown in acting classes to demonstrate what silent acting, even in a talkie, could encompass. Just wonderful!

In director Frank Borzage's 1924 original version of this film, the character "Mary Carlton" (played by a matured Norma Talmadge) looks back on her life, and its "Secrets". For this re-make, Mary Pickford (as Mary Marlowe) is initially photographed to appear as young as possible. Later, Ms. Pickford is "aged" (although, she is photographed in soft focus throughout). So, the entire "framing" of the film - as about an old woman looking back on the "Secrets" of her life - is lost. Moreover, the movie misses an opportunity to startle audiences by opening with an "aged" Pickford."Secrets" is not a bad film - but, it is frustrating to look at a miscalculation, in this last career appearance for Mary Pickford. Both Pickford and Borzage should have had the storytelling wherewithal to go ahead with the "old age" framing. Borzage had success with Talmadge's version, and Pickford supported Charlotte Smith (her mother) in Thomas H. Ince's similarly structured "Sweet Memories" (1911). Without the framing, the story blindly lurches, uncomfortably, through the years.Pickford surely knew audiences weren't responding well to her recent features, and likely made what she thought were wise decisions about the filming of "Secrets". So, it is a first class production. This shows in Pickford's selection of director Borzage, photographer Ray June, and co-star Leslie Howard (as John Carlton). Mr. June's photography is beautiful. Mr. Howard, a stage star close to Pickford's own age, is a smart choice for leading man. Ironically, Howard looks much younger than his years.Pickford's choice of vehicle and co-star reveal her continued belief in "stage" acting as a way to succeed in talking pictures. To her portrayal, Pickford adds some of the cutesy mannerisms which came to be expected by fans, but plagued much of her later work. These factors help mar her overall performance. Yet, watch for a stand-out scene featuring Pickford and a baby, played silently, during the film's "western" portion. Pickford and Howard would never appear on film into their 70s, which makes the ending of "Secrets" a sweet farewell.****** Secrets (3/16/33) Frank Borzage ~ Mary Pickford, Leslie Howard, Mona Maris, Allan Sears

This movie is like three one-act plays -- the Mary Pickford and Leslie Howard characters appear in all three of them, but it doesn't add up to a cohesive story with believable character development.The opening act is played broadly. Mary P. is too old for the part -- certainly too old to play C. Aubrey Smith's daughter! And she plays the entire movie on the same note.The middle section is a Western. Leslie Howard isn't a likely cattle rancher.The final segment leaps the story forward by 20-some years -- much has happened to the characters, but we didn't get to see any of it.All in all, not much to recommend.

SECRETS is one of director Frank Borzage's lesser-known romantic dramas. It's essentially a three-act play divided by artfully shot poetic montages, much more interesting than the usual succession of newspaper headlines used in cinema of the time (though this film too resorts to headlines near the end). We follow Mary Pickford and Leslie Howard from east- coast mansion to rough-and-tough cattle ranch and finally to west-coast mansion through 50 years of tender loving marriage. Pickford shines, especially in sequences without dialogue, as when she discovers that her baby has died as her house is under attack by cattle rustlers; she is at her most visually magnificent later in the film as the mature mother of grown children with hair swept high on her head giving her a regal aspect and framing her face in the most flattering way. Borzage seems to have been drawn to economy of shots. Much information is telegraphed by the perfect close up. ***POSSIBLE SPOILER***For instance, at one point Howard leaves the ranch house to pursue the cattle rustlers who have stolen his herd. The next shot shows the shadows of the legs of three hanged men. ***END OF POSSIBLE SPOILER*** Although the surface of the film is that of a sweeping saga, the core of it is the loyalty of the lovers, a type of story that Borzage directed often. Despite the beautiful cinematic touches, the result is not terribly gripping. There is a packaged, formalistic feel to it, probably because of the episodic structure that too often breaks our connection with the main characters.