I've seen this film a few times, and, perhaps because I'm an admirer of Miss Davis, I've always enjoyed it. Her performance of the long scene in the country house is really magnificent. Brilliant, thrilling acting, of the highest order. I enjoyed the dialogue very much, because, unlike many films, we really get to hear someone let out their innermost thoughts and it's very much like such a scene would be in real life. I think you have to be in the mood for this picture, and it will not strike everyone the same way - but it would be sad not to be able to identify or sympathize with characters trying to come to grips with sad facts in their past, because that's all of us, at one time or another.
45 Reviews
What I Liked About This Film
Jalea26 November 2001
Possible *Spoiler*
What I liked about this film was the dialogue. Yes, the dialogue. To me, this film was about two people who were struggling with their inner desires, disappointments, hurts and longings. Both main characters were somewhat stiff in social situations. The uneasiness between them was understandable to me because of their past experiences.
The romantic scenes were awkward in my opinion because of a spinster who is within her shell; and a man struggling with his inner desire to be a priest. Plus it appears the characters were two introverts.
Yes indeed, the film was slow moving, just like real life is sometimes. I do not mind slow moving films, for films should not always be about speed and excess of excitement. There were some really good moments in this film. If you do not mind a story unfolding slowly, with an emphasis on dialogue, check out this film.
What I liked about this film was the dialogue. Yes, the dialogue. To me, this film was about two people who were struggling with their inner desires, disappointments, hurts and longings. Both main characters were somewhat stiff in social situations. The uneasiness between them was understandable to me because of their past experiences.
The romantic scenes were awkward in my opinion because of a spinster who is within her shell; and a man struggling with his inner desire to be a priest. Plus it appears the characters were two introverts.
Yes indeed, the film was slow moving, just like real life is sometimes. I do not mind slow moving films, for films should not always be about speed and excess of excitement. There were some really good moments in this film. If you do not mind a story unfolding slowly, with an emphasis on dialogue, check out this film.
Dull romantic melodrama
AlsExGal24 August 2020
Bette Davis stars as lonely NYC poetess Susan Grieve. Her best friend Stacy (John Hoyt) asks her to accompany him on a blind double date along with visiting war hero Slick Novak (Jim Davis) and Stacy's secretary Peggy (Janis Paige). The sparks are immediate between Susan and Slick, and they spend a snowy weekend together in the country where they both confront deep-seated issues.
Bette Davis is dependably good, but Jim Davis is one of the worst regularly-employed actors in Hollywood history. Watching him struggle through his lines is almost as painful as it is humorous. When his character finally reveals his "dark secret", it elicited a chuckle rather than a gasp, which I don't think was the intention. The film's high point is a surprisingly open performance by John Hoyt as the proverbial "gay best friend" from countless future romance films. Of course it's never explicitly stated that Hoyt's Stacy is gay, given this is still the production code era. It's not a mocking or condescending performance, either, which is doubly surprising for the time. Some of the dialogue between he and Davis has a pre-Code vibe, rich in double entendre. If only his character had been in service of a better story and movie.
Bette Davis is dependably good, but Jim Davis is one of the worst regularly-employed actors in Hollywood history. Watching him struggle through his lines is almost as painful as it is humorous. When his character finally reveals his "dark secret", it elicited a chuckle rather than a gasp, which I don't think was the intention. The film's high point is a surprisingly open performance by John Hoyt as the proverbial "gay best friend" from countless future romance films. Of course it's never explicitly stated that Hoyt's Stacy is gay, given this is still the production code era. It's not a mocking or condescending performance, either, which is doubly surprising for the time. Some of the dialogue between he and Davis has a pre-Code vibe, rich in double entendre. If only his character had been in service of a better story and movie.
Bette Davis' Poet Susan Greive & John Hoyt's Stacey Grant
phd1216621 February 2008
It takes good critiquing skills to fully appreciate the surprisingly seductive subtleties of Bette Davis during her motion picture making prime. Winter Meeting is an intellectual's & critic's delight. Davis doesn't ever step out of her leading role as an extremely constrained character, Susan Greive. I can't find a flaw in her meticulous performance. The story is also of interest to the period when it was filmed.
Bette Davis at 40yo & 59 films into the height of her acting career, stars as an accomplished, upscale poet, Susan Grieve. Although Grieve is well traveled from soliciting her literary work, she resides in a posh brownstone in NYC. Her closest friend & confidant is an old-monied dapper gentleman, complete with the social graces of exquisitely good taste, Stacy Grant (43yo John Hoyt).
Believing that his secretary Peggy Markham (Janis Paige) will seduce a visiting war hero, Slick Novak (James Davis), Grant arranges a dinner party for the foursome, including the very reserved & demure Grieve (Davis). Instead, Novak instantly falls for the ever so proper poet who has no romantic interests.
After Grieve & Novak engage in a private romance, she's romantically awakened in a way that she's never been before. As such, Grieve is falling in love with Novak. Something has to go wrong to upset as fine a romance as theirs, doesn't it? It always does....
This film offers no exception. Novak has a closely guarded secret that he discloses to Grieve that changes everything between them.
I found the best on-screen chemistry to be between Davis & Hoyt. Davis comes off as the kind of woman who enjoys being around elegant men who aren't hounding after women; perhaps even gay men. Hoyt fits that image to a T. Their ultra close friendship is worth more than any romance~
Bette Davis at 40yo & 59 films into the height of her acting career, stars as an accomplished, upscale poet, Susan Grieve. Although Grieve is well traveled from soliciting her literary work, she resides in a posh brownstone in NYC. Her closest friend & confidant is an old-monied dapper gentleman, complete with the social graces of exquisitely good taste, Stacy Grant (43yo John Hoyt).
Believing that his secretary Peggy Markham (Janis Paige) will seduce a visiting war hero, Slick Novak (James Davis), Grant arranges a dinner party for the foursome, including the very reserved & demure Grieve (Davis). Instead, Novak instantly falls for the ever so proper poet who has no romantic interests.
After Grieve & Novak engage in a private romance, she's romantically awakened in a way that she's never been before. As such, Grieve is falling in love with Novak. Something has to go wrong to upset as fine a romance as theirs, doesn't it? It always does....
This film offers no exception. Novak has a closely guarded secret that he discloses to Grieve that changes everything between them.
I found the best on-screen chemistry to be between Davis & Hoyt. Davis comes off as the kind of woman who enjoys being around elegant men who aren't hounding after women; perhaps even gay men. Hoyt fits that image to a T. Their ultra close friendship is worth more than any romance~
The Two Davises.
nycritic16 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Stories of emotional restraint between two people who meet on a chance encounter and have a shaky chance of developing have been done numerous times with fantastic success. Acting styles in more recent times have allowed actors to convey their passions brimming just beneath the surface with minimal dialogue than to talk without pauses and have the background music express more dramatizing than a Beethovian concerto.
WINTER MEETING is one of these earlier efforts. It tells the story of war hero Slick Novak (Jim Davis of "Dallas" fame) who returns to American soil and is introduced to famed poet Susan Grieve (Bette Davis), a woman who is faintly cynic about relationships. Though at first she seems indifferent to Novak, once he stays over it becomes clear that both share an attraction to each other. The following day they drive off to Connecticut where she used to live and on the way they discover their inner baggage.
What should have been a better movie is reduced to a flat drama that starts off well during the first thirty minutes (and this includes Janis Paige stealing her scenes as Peggy Markham who is also attracted to Slick Novak) but slows down to a standstill once Susan and Slick start interacting on their own (and they're the only ones on screen for much of the film). A scene inside Susan's kitchen, though trying to convey commonplace events, just doesn't feel right. However both actors have an unspoken chemistry that in the hands of a less stagy and more cinematic director would have brought out better, more involved performances. I think of the possibilities of Susan telling her tragic story as the camera maintains a constant movement and ice rain falls, or if more hints on Novak's ultimate intentions would have been peppered throughout. Or if less on screen talk and more body language would have been shown, incorporating synchronized cuts and long takes during key moments, all leading to a crescendo which would make the viewer really care for the characters. For this, the actors would have had to been of the type who would smolder even when repressing their emotions and neither of the Davises were known for this kind of screen presence. Also, this kind of film would only surface about 10 years later under the form of Hiroshima MON AMOUR and used to perfection as IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE. As such, WINTER MEETING remains confined to its stage and production values and while it's far from perfect, it has more pluses than minuses.
WINTER MEETING is one of these earlier efforts. It tells the story of war hero Slick Novak (Jim Davis of "Dallas" fame) who returns to American soil and is introduced to famed poet Susan Grieve (Bette Davis), a woman who is faintly cynic about relationships. Though at first she seems indifferent to Novak, once he stays over it becomes clear that both share an attraction to each other. The following day they drive off to Connecticut where she used to live and on the way they discover their inner baggage.
What should have been a better movie is reduced to a flat drama that starts off well during the first thirty minutes (and this includes Janis Paige stealing her scenes as Peggy Markham who is also attracted to Slick Novak) but slows down to a standstill once Susan and Slick start interacting on their own (and they're the only ones on screen for much of the film). A scene inside Susan's kitchen, though trying to convey commonplace events, just doesn't feel right. However both actors have an unspoken chemistry that in the hands of a less stagy and more cinematic director would have brought out better, more involved performances. I think of the possibilities of Susan telling her tragic story as the camera maintains a constant movement and ice rain falls, or if more hints on Novak's ultimate intentions would have been peppered throughout. Or if less on screen talk and more body language would have been shown, incorporating synchronized cuts and long takes during key moments, all leading to a crescendo which would make the viewer really care for the characters. For this, the actors would have had to been of the type who would smolder even when repressing their emotions and neither of the Davises were known for this kind of screen presence. Also, this kind of film would only surface about 10 years later under the form of Hiroshima MON AMOUR and used to perfection as IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE. As such, WINTER MEETING remains confined to its stage and production values and while it's far from perfect, it has more pluses than minuses.
It's got some interesting story elements but they all don't seem to work well together
planktonrules30 December 2007
In many ways, this film is a nice departure from the typical Bette Davis film. Having her play a not particularly attractive spinster who is reluctant in love is a nice idea. For once, the "plain Jane" in the film gets the man while the sexy vamp is left in the cold--and I appreciate this. Plus, the film talks a lot about psychological motivations and struggles--as both leads are extremely screwed up and are emotionally "stuck". However, despite these decent story ideas, the film manages to never really hit the mark. This is possibly due to the film packing in too many plot points, or it might be because the film ends on a down note or it could be because the male lead was an unknown and didn't especially distinguish himself. All I know is that the film did keep my attention but I just never felt satisfied by much of it--except the final phone call Bette makes as the film concludes.
For huge Davis fans like myself, it's worth seeing. For those who aren't, please try some of her great films first--she was an amazing and great actress and this movie might give you the impression she was just ordinary.
Two final observations. First, in a cliché that I hate but is present in so many films, a round of drinks is bought and no one really drinks any of it! If I were paying about $5 a drink, I'd be sure to drink mine AND I might be tempted to drink all the other drinks--after all, this costs money!! Second, if you see the film, watch John Hoyt's performance and then ask yourself if this role didn't seem exactly the sort you'd normally see Clifton Webb play. It's got "Webb" written all over it!
For huge Davis fans like myself, it's worth seeing. For those who aren't, please try some of her great films first--she was an amazing and great actress and this movie might give you the impression she was just ordinary.
Two final observations. First, in a cliché that I hate but is present in so many films, a round of drinks is bought and no one really drinks any of it! If I were paying about $5 a drink, I'd be sure to drink mine AND I might be tempted to drink all the other drinks--after all, this costs money!! Second, if you see the film, watch John Hoyt's performance and then ask yourself if this role didn't seem exactly the sort you'd normally see Clifton Webb play. It's got "Webb" written all over it!
Winter in New York
jotix10017 December 2005
"Winter Meeting" is a film that doesn't add anything to Bette Davis' distinguished career in the movies. The melodrama is undermined by a completely miscast Jim Davis, who makes the picture worse than it deserved to be. The part of Slick Novak should have gone to another actor that could have added a few more sparks to the movie.
As directed by Bretaigne Windust, "Winter Movie" is a dull attempt to bring the novel in which it's based to the screen. The adaptation leaves a lot to be desired.
The basic problem with the film is one of credibility. We don't believe, for one second, Slick Novak, the hero Navy lieutenant would even look at Susan Grieve at all, let alone be romantically involved with her. It's easy for us to understand why Susan would make a fool of herself in letting Slick come into her life. After all, plain Susan was no competition for gorgeous Peggy, who is all over Slick at the night club, and clearly wants him.
Stacy Grant, the man about town, kept reminding us of a subdued Waldo Lydecker, from "Laura", in the way he tries to get Susan under his influence. He wants to expose her to a society that she doesn't care to belong. This role was one of the ways Hollywood dealt with the subject of homosexuality in those days. Everyone knew about them, but the movie making people wanted to keep Stacy and his ilk in a permanent closet.
Bette Davis underplays Susan with mixed results. Obviously, Ms. Davis had no influence for getting out of this second class melodrama unworthy of her talent. Then again, one questions her wisdom in letting a light weight actor like Jim Davis play opposite her, when it's clear he is not in her league.
The wonderful John Hoyt makes the best out of Stacy Grant and Florence Bates, one of the best character actresses of that era, is fine as the housekeeper who knows a lot about the mistress of the house. Janis Paige, in all her beauty and youth, doesn't have much to do.
This is a film to be seen as a curiosity more than a Bette Davis signature vehicle.
As directed by Bretaigne Windust, "Winter Movie" is a dull attempt to bring the novel in which it's based to the screen. The adaptation leaves a lot to be desired.
The basic problem with the film is one of credibility. We don't believe, for one second, Slick Novak, the hero Navy lieutenant would even look at Susan Grieve at all, let alone be romantically involved with her. It's easy for us to understand why Susan would make a fool of herself in letting Slick come into her life. After all, plain Susan was no competition for gorgeous Peggy, who is all over Slick at the night club, and clearly wants him.
Stacy Grant, the man about town, kept reminding us of a subdued Waldo Lydecker, from "Laura", in the way he tries to get Susan under his influence. He wants to expose her to a society that she doesn't care to belong. This role was one of the ways Hollywood dealt with the subject of homosexuality in those days. Everyone knew about them, but the movie making people wanted to keep Stacy and his ilk in a permanent closet.
Bette Davis underplays Susan with mixed results. Obviously, Ms. Davis had no influence for getting out of this second class melodrama unworthy of her talent. Then again, one questions her wisdom in letting a light weight actor like Jim Davis play opposite her, when it's clear he is not in her league.
The wonderful John Hoyt makes the best out of Stacy Grant and Florence Bates, one of the best character actresses of that era, is fine as the housekeeper who knows a lot about the mistress of the house. Janis Paige, in all her beauty and youth, doesn't have much to do.
This is a film to be seen as a curiosity more than a Bette Davis signature vehicle.
Very dull
ksamms-9350327 December 2021
Bette Davis is one of my favorite actresses but I would not recommend this movie to even die-hard fans. I think what ruins her performance is the lack of a talented co-star. Jim Davis is so wooden in his role that he pulls everyone down who shares a scene with him, and since the movie is mostly dialogue between he and Davis it is insufferably dull. With an actress as outstanding as Bette, there had to be something that could have been done to enliven the performances, but even the conversations were stiff and uncomfortable. Alas, even the gifted Bette Davis couldn't move this one along.
Much more than your typical Bette Davis melodrama
kijii5 November 2016
This is a much more than your typical Bette Davis melodrama. Here, Davis plays a NYC poetess (Susan Grieve), who runs around in high social circles. One of her society friends, Stacy Grant (John Hoyt), invites her to dine with him as he entertains a navel hero, Slick Novak (Jim Davis, Jock Ewing from TV's Dallas) who is staying briefly in town. Stacy's idea was to make Susan his date while pairing Novak up with his secretary, Peggy Markham (Janis Paige). However, the evening doesn't go as planned, since Novak falls for Susan rather than Peggy and invites himself into Susan's house after the evening's entertainment.
In spite of Susan and Novak not hitting it off too well at first, they start to talk. They soon discover--after driving to Susan's family farm in CT--that they each have unresolved issues from their past. Susan's problem has to do with her dead father; how her mother had treated him which lead him to commit suicide.
Susan never forgave her mother for her cheapness. However, Novak's insistence that Susan had not tried to see her mother's side of the issue leaves Susan to question her own beliefs.
Novak's unresolved issue is spiritual in nature. Since he had been 16, he had always felt a strong need to enter the priesthood and had been discouraged from this by talking to a priest before entering the Navy.
The two help each other to resolve these some of these issues. In the end, this is not so much of a romantic story between a man and a woman as it is a mutual guidance about leading each other to spiritual epiphanies (or sudden moments of soulful clarity) of how to proceed with their lives.
P.S. This is one of those movies in which the two leading co-stars stare the last name: Davis & Davis.
In spite of Susan and Novak not hitting it off too well at first, they start to talk. They soon discover--after driving to Susan's family farm in CT--that they each have unresolved issues from their past. Susan's problem has to do with her dead father; how her mother had treated him which lead him to commit suicide.
Susan never forgave her mother for her cheapness. However, Novak's insistence that Susan had not tried to see her mother's side of the issue leaves Susan to question her own beliefs.
Novak's unresolved issue is spiritual in nature. Since he had been 16, he had always felt a strong need to enter the priesthood and had been discouraged from this by talking to a priest before entering the Navy.
The two help each other to resolve these some of these issues. In the end, this is not so much of a romantic story between a man and a woman as it is a mutual guidance about leading each other to spiritual epiphanies (or sudden moments of soulful clarity) of how to proceed with their lives.
P.S. This is one of those movies in which the two leading co-stars stare the last name: Davis & Davis.
A very different kind of film
blanche-230 December 2007
Bette Davis and Jim Davis have a "Winter Meeting" in this 1948 film about a spinster poetess and a heroic soldier. Based on a novel, it's an odd choice for a film, as it concerns two people wrestling with their inner selves. Both of them are carrying baggage, and each tries to help the other. That kind of scenario doesn't lend itself to the big screen.
There is a Waldo Lydecker character, this time named Stacy Grant, played by John Hoyt. He's the classy closet homosexual full of wit and vinegar who first introduces Susan (Bette) to Slick (Jim Davis), though he has invited his secretary (Janis Paige) as Slick's date. A morose man who obviously doesn't feel much like a war hero, Slick is interested in Susan, and the two begin a romance. She takes him to her house in Connecticut, a place filled with bad memories for her. There, the two fall in love and each discovers what's really bothering the other.
This is a slow moving film filled with dialogue - the lines almost outnumber the cigarettes. We're not used to dialogue anymore - it doesn't leave enough time for the special effects. What's off-kilter in this movie is the direction and the inexperience of Jim Davis, who later would achieve great fame as Jock Ewing on "Dallas." People on this board have said Bette Davis cringed during their love scenes, why did she agree to have him as her co-star, etc. First of all, she was crazy about him as a person and wanted to help him in his career, though that never materialized. I think I remember reading he went to Korea or something and when he got back, she'd never heard of him, though he did have an autographed photo of her as proof that he knew her. Secondly, Bette Davis was not Katharine Hepburn. Hepburn liked to surround herself with the best of the best; Davis, as she grew older, became more insecure and eventually wanted people around her she could cow. She hadn't quite reached that stage yet in "Winter Meeting," but we can see the early signs. She was on her way out at Warners and wasn't given a strong director who really could have pulled this together.
Despite this, Davis gives a very restrained performance; she's excellent. The problem is, why would a returning soldier be interested in her when he has Janis Paige hanging all over him? It stretches credibility. Paige here looks like a cross between a young Jane Fonda and Teri Hatcher - she's gorgeous. Davis looks like the atypical 1940s spinster aka career woman - tailored clothes and severe haircut. Pre-code career women had so much more fun - they dated, they went to bed with men, and they looked good. Then somebody decided it wasn't moral, and all girls should be married, and if you aren't, you'll end up frustrated and wearing suits like Davis wears in this. One can understand a serious young man like Slick being attracted to Davis' intelligence, and if she had looked the way she looked later on in the film (apparently after they had sex), one could have bought it so much more easily.
"Winter Meeting" is worth seeing for a wonderful Davis performance and the thought-provoking character studies. Though awkward at times, it's nevertheless interesting, and one does care about both of the main characters. You can't say that about some of the films today.
There is a Waldo Lydecker character, this time named Stacy Grant, played by John Hoyt. He's the classy closet homosexual full of wit and vinegar who first introduces Susan (Bette) to Slick (Jim Davis), though he has invited his secretary (Janis Paige) as Slick's date. A morose man who obviously doesn't feel much like a war hero, Slick is interested in Susan, and the two begin a romance. She takes him to her house in Connecticut, a place filled with bad memories for her. There, the two fall in love and each discovers what's really bothering the other.
This is a slow moving film filled with dialogue - the lines almost outnumber the cigarettes. We're not used to dialogue anymore - it doesn't leave enough time for the special effects. What's off-kilter in this movie is the direction and the inexperience of Jim Davis, who later would achieve great fame as Jock Ewing on "Dallas." People on this board have said Bette Davis cringed during their love scenes, why did she agree to have him as her co-star, etc. First of all, she was crazy about him as a person and wanted to help him in his career, though that never materialized. I think I remember reading he went to Korea or something and when he got back, she'd never heard of him, though he did have an autographed photo of her as proof that he knew her. Secondly, Bette Davis was not Katharine Hepburn. Hepburn liked to surround herself with the best of the best; Davis, as she grew older, became more insecure and eventually wanted people around her she could cow. She hadn't quite reached that stage yet in "Winter Meeting," but we can see the early signs. She was on her way out at Warners and wasn't given a strong director who really could have pulled this together.
Despite this, Davis gives a very restrained performance; she's excellent. The problem is, why would a returning soldier be interested in her when he has Janis Paige hanging all over him? It stretches credibility. Paige here looks like a cross between a young Jane Fonda and Teri Hatcher - she's gorgeous. Davis looks like the atypical 1940s spinster aka career woman - tailored clothes and severe haircut. Pre-code career women had so much more fun - they dated, they went to bed with men, and they looked good. Then somebody decided it wasn't moral, and all girls should be married, and if you aren't, you'll end up frustrated and wearing suits like Davis wears in this. One can understand a serious young man like Slick being attracted to Davis' intelligence, and if she had looked the way she looked later on in the film (apparently after they had sex), one could have bought it so much more easily.
"Winter Meeting" is worth seeing for a wonderful Davis performance and the thought-provoking character studies. Though awkward at times, it's nevertheless interesting, and one does care about both of the main characters. You can't say that about some of the films today.
The only one who could ever reach her... was a son of a b*** Preacher-man
crispy_comments17 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Hmm, where have I seen this before? A lonely spinster blossoms after finding love, but nobly sacrifices it in the end. Unfortunately, "Winter Meeting" is no "Now Voyager". I don't care how many cigarettes Bette Davis smokes!
At first I was intrigued by how mismatched Susan (Bette Davis) and Slick (Jim Davis) are. She's a cosmopolitan intellectual, very much in control of her emotions, her every movement purposeful. He's a small-town boy, speaking bluntly, quick to indulge his feelings and impulses, and towering over her with his gangly, awkward frame. It could've been an interesting story of opposites attracting, and learning from each other - each supplying what the other lacks. Except, I never quite believed his attraction to her, and it seems she was the one who did most of the learning and changing. Sure, he got something out of their affair too - but it was primarily the knowledge that he helped *her*, thus giving him the confidence to become a priest and help other people. I don't think that counts.
I disliked the scene where Slick lectured Susan on her inability to forgive her mother. If MY mother cheated on my father with countless men, then left my dad and literally drove him to madness and suicide - well, gee, I don't think I'd forgive her either! For someone accused of lacking compassion, Susan is surprisingly forgiving of Slick, however. She's only a little offended that this man she just met is judging her and blaming her for supposedly driving her mother away - You see, Susan wasn't as loving and tolerant as she "should" have been. (Reminiscent of "The Philadelphia Story", where a daughter is held responsible for her father's philandering, and has to learn to forgive his failings and give him more affection so he won't feel the need to stray. I didn't like this twisted "moral" in that movie, and I don't like it here either).
Besides, where does this guy get off being so high and mighty and, well, *preachy* when he's far from perfect himself? If he was so dedicated to becoming a priest and abstaining from sex/marriage, he shouldn't have pursued this woman so aggressively and led her on. Big dumb oaf. Slick's feelings don't appear to run very deep, so I just can't see this movie the way we're meant to - as a bittersweet tale of soulmates who can't be together - oh what a tragedy! Rather, Slick had a nice holiday/sex-spree ...um, I mean, crisis of faith... before knuckling down to work. He's not hurting. Susan on the other hand... should be feeling very used. I worry about her. After all, heartbreak-induced insanity and suicide *does* run in her family.
Bottomline: Slow, soapy, unsatisfying romance drivel.
At first I was intrigued by how mismatched Susan (Bette Davis) and Slick (Jim Davis) are. She's a cosmopolitan intellectual, very much in control of her emotions, her every movement purposeful. He's a small-town boy, speaking bluntly, quick to indulge his feelings and impulses, and towering over her with his gangly, awkward frame. It could've been an interesting story of opposites attracting, and learning from each other - each supplying what the other lacks. Except, I never quite believed his attraction to her, and it seems she was the one who did most of the learning and changing. Sure, he got something out of their affair too - but it was primarily the knowledge that he helped *her*, thus giving him the confidence to become a priest and help other people. I don't think that counts.
I disliked the scene where Slick lectured Susan on her inability to forgive her mother. If MY mother cheated on my father with countless men, then left my dad and literally drove him to madness and suicide - well, gee, I don't think I'd forgive her either! For someone accused of lacking compassion, Susan is surprisingly forgiving of Slick, however. She's only a little offended that this man she just met is judging her and blaming her for supposedly driving her mother away - You see, Susan wasn't as loving and tolerant as she "should" have been. (Reminiscent of "The Philadelphia Story", where a daughter is held responsible for her father's philandering, and has to learn to forgive his failings and give him more affection so he won't feel the need to stray. I didn't like this twisted "moral" in that movie, and I don't like it here either).
Besides, where does this guy get off being so high and mighty and, well, *preachy* when he's far from perfect himself? If he was so dedicated to becoming a priest and abstaining from sex/marriage, he shouldn't have pursued this woman so aggressively and led her on. Big dumb oaf. Slick's feelings don't appear to run very deep, so I just can't see this movie the way we're meant to - as a bittersweet tale of soulmates who can't be together - oh what a tragedy! Rather, Slick had a nice holiday/sex-spree ...um, I mean, crisis of faith... before knuckling down to work. He's not hurting. Susan on the other hand... should be feeling very used. I worry about her. After all, heartbreak-induced insanity and suicide *does* run in her family.
Bottomline: Slow, soapy, unsatisfying romance drivel.
Movie With a Point
Richie-67-48585226 March 2018
First off you get Betty Davis who can deliver films up like a chocolate treat. Then the story is one to ponder and takes its place in the genre as part of lifes big picture and our personal journeys along the way. Two people meet and instead of selfish pursuits of which some takes place, they discover the true purpose of the meet to begin with but only after they have lived through it all. This concept can apply to all of our wanderings and gives us a reason to pause and ponder while pursuing things and going from point A to point B. Nicely done talkative film and acted out to perfection this leaves you with afterglow for watching it. For those that like to eat while watching (I do), nice scene with bacon and pancakes with hot maple syrup and delicious coffee. Have yours ready and join in or choose your own delight and go for it. Listen to the dialog, watch the scenes and receive this...
Never heard of this one. Now I know why!
stan_c27 December 2021
First, I love Bette Davis. I thought I saw every movie she had been in. Loved her in Perry Mason sitting in for Raymond Burr (a big favorite of mine).
Second, I was a huge fan of James ("Jim") Davis when he was on the TV show Rescue 8. He went on to become a big TV star playing Jock Ewing in "Dallas."
The reason I never heard of this movie is because nobody ever talks about it. Jim and Bette just don't have the chemistry she has with her other costars. And James just isn't into it. Rather one toned throughout. The negative reviews here say it all.
I watched the movie because of my love for her. But this one can be missed if you're not a Bette Davis fan.
Second, I was a huge fan of James ("Jim") Davis when he was on the TV show Rescue 8. He went on to become a big TV star playing Jock Ewing in "Dallas."
The reason I never heard of this movie is because nobody ever talks about it. Jim and Bette just don't have the chemistry she has with her other costars. And James just isn't into it. Rather one toned throughout. The negative reviews here say it all.
I watched the movie because of my love for her. But this one can be missed if you're not a Bette Davis fan.
nothing to see here
MrDeWinter16 August 2021
Same old relational drama. Done multiple times before and after. For hard core BD fans. Love her but the stiff and charisma-less Jim Davis is spoiling the enjoyment of BD's acting. She does look good in this part, hair and costumes are top notch.
The hero and the spinster
dbdumonteil8 October 2007
The first thirty minutes may repel some.It's very talky ,it's filmed stage production style.This is a film which grows on you,you 've got to be patient for the "action" is minimal,and most amazing thing, in what is pure psychological drama ,there's not the easy way out : the flashbacks.Another director -it's the first film I've seen by Bretaigne Windust-would have at least enlivened things by introducing two very long flashbacks dealing with the two characters' past.Both have a secret to conceal .This is the very long conversation between them which reveals us that the poetess was demanding,idolizing her father,displaying no compassion for a mother who did not live up to her /their expectations;the soldier is a hero but someone told him something that has completely changed his way of seeing things .
People who expect a mushy romance ,a melodrama ,a love triangle (with the secretary) will be disappointed."Winter Meeting" shows the way to compassion for the others,be they hopeless.
People who expect a mushy romance ,a melodrama ,a love triangle (with the secretary) will be disappointed."Winter Meeting" shows the way to compassion for the others,be they hopeless.
Slow-moving, drab, perhaps Bette Davis' worst film
MnMG8125 April 2001
I caught 'Winter Meeting' the other day on Turner Classic Movies and decided to watch because I was interested in seeing a young Jim Davis, some 30-odd years before his famous Jock Ewing role. He clearly was in over his head. His acting style was wooden and awkward and he seemed uncomfortable playing the romantic lead. You could almost see Bette Davis cringing in their love scenes. His dismal performance dragged her down with him. You should have stuck to westerns, Jim. One of the film's few bright spots was the performance of John Hoyt in a sarcastic supporting role. He brought some comic relief (intentional comic relief) to this otherwise drab soaper.
Davis shines but leading man miscast
sdave759612 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
"Winter Meeting" was released in 1948 -- the waning years of Bette Davis Warner Brothers career. Davis plays Susan, a wealthy, cosmopolitan New Yorker. She has never married, choosing to focus on a life of having a career and mixing with like-minded friends, such as Stacy (John Hoyt). She meets a military guy whom she calls Novak (Jim Davis), a man fresh from WWII and a war hero. For whatever reason, he woos her and the two begin an odd relationship. After all, she is New York City all the way, he is an awkward, small-town guy. The two escape to the country, where both are forced to confront their own demons. Davis' demons have to do with her parents; her mother abandoned her father, causing his later suicide. Novak's are he always wanted to be a priest! Yikes -- this after leading Susan on throughout the entire movie. This movie, although unfairly maligned, has lots of problems. The biggest problem is the choice of Jim Davis to play Novak, the war hero. He seems out of place and acts it too. Being fair, his part is also terribly written, so I don't know what actor could have pulled this off with any credibility. Bette Davis fares better -- she never steps out of her character as Susan, a woman who has shut herself off from even the possibility of love until she meets this man. This part shows why Bette Davis was a real star; the script wasn't great, and it shows, but she shines regardless. There are two good supporting performances -- John Hoyt as Davis' friend, a man who clearly enjoys the good life, is terrific and adds some life to a film that drags a bit at times. We assume he is gay, although obviously this wouldn't be uttered in a 1948 film. A young Janis Paige plays a somewhat loose and bitchy woman, upset that the spinster Susan snared the war hero for herself. She seems to steal every scene she is in. Sadly, this film flopped when it opened. By this time, audience tastes had changed, and Bette Davis wasn't given better scripts as she aged at the studio. She would leave Warner Brothers the following year. But what a legacy of films she left behind.
winter meeting
mossgrymk20 January 2021
Catherine Turney's screenplay and Bretaigne Windust's direction are too melodramatic for an incisive character study of two discontented people in love and not melodramatic enough for a fun ladies weepy. Therefore, like most films that fall between two stools, this one is disappointing and easily forgettable. What does stay with you is the usual good work of Bette Davis, the absurd casting of Jim Davis, who excelled in western psycho villainy, as a tortured priest (kinda like Lee Marvin playing King Lear) and a chance to see the fine 40s and 50s character actor John Hoyt show his considerable skill in portraying jaded cynics (as he did with principal Warneke in "Blackboard Jungle"). Give it a C plus.
Big Disappointment
waldenpond882 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I am trying to watch every Bette Davis movie from the 1940's and 1950's.
If you expect something as compelling as "Now, Voyager!", "A Stolen Life" or "Beyond the Forest", you will be very disappointed from "Winter Meeting". It's over-loaded with dialogue and not a very witty one.
Bette Davis hair-do is not becoming at all (these very short bangs were a terrible fashion!) and she doesn't wear the slightest hint of eyeliner or eye shadow. I'm sure the make up department could have made her look prettier. So it's hard to imagine that Jim Davis falls for her instead of chatty Janis Paige.
The only good scenes which I rated with 2 stars were those outside of Manhattan when Davis and Davis enjoyed the sunny winter day in a horse-drawn sleigh.
I kept watching and watching, hoping at some point the story would pick up, but it never did. Don't waste your time with this one.
I kept watching and watching, hoping at some point the story would pick up, but it never did. Don't waste your time with this one.
Bette leaves the scenery unscathed
lolarites-6870122 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This was one of Bette Davis' most disliked films. It got bad reviews and didn't make any money but I can see why this appealed to her. It's all above the neck, somewhat ethereal. I'm sure she wanted to see if she can pull the audience in, bring the same emotional storm she has brought to so many other films with out any action. She succeeded beautifully. So did her co-star, but he has always been known for his deliberate delivery. The dialogue was quick, sharp and at times, very funny, due to John Hoyt's 40's imitation of a bitchy Queen. I laughed out loud when I saw Florence Bates dressed as caretaker's wife. I could also imagine the director screaming at her while she stumbles around the kitchen, a place she has never been seen before in a film. However, this film is not light and amusing, it's very sad, almost heartbreaking. To spend your whole life unloved and than to finally find the perfect mate only to be told he is married to a religious ideal that he will never obtain. I was hoping for a happy resolution but let me tell you, to have to accept reconciliation with ones mother in exchange for Jim Davis is not an even exchange. These people connected and communicated on a lever that neither one had ever experienced before and knew they never would again. I have one question. Why would Slick pursue her if he knew it could not lead to anything? Except there would not have been a movie without it. I wonder how the two got along during this shoot. I'm sure Jim was scared to death of her and his affect was stiff and unsure sometimes, but it was the dichotomy that also created the attraction. I hope more people will give this a try. You will never see Bette so quiet and so hurt, You ache for her.
Contemporary viewers may have seen a simple tale of a dysfunctional family . . .
oscaralbert21 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
. . . but We 21st Century Citizens of (The Then) Far Future can easily discern that the sage prophets of the always eponymous Warner Bros. are using WINTER MEETING to issue an ominous warning against a day when pervasive perverse nepotism percolates up to the top level of the U.S. Government. Throughout WINTER MEETING, film fans of ANY era experience a queasy, sinking feeling as the "Davis" siblings passionately kiss, and generally make out like a pair of randy rabbits. Though such raging nepotism kept WINTER MEETING from reaching the apex of box office success, the prognosticating seers at Warner were given free reign to place their duties as America's Extreme Early Warning System above mere mundane financial considerations. Therefore, "Slick" and "Susan" telegraph the coming perfidy of "Jared" and wife "Buy-her-stuff" when it comes to "family affairs" as outrageous as nepotism. "Slick" pulls double duty here, representing a conflicted U.S. Military during the course of WINTER MEETING, as well (just as in Real Life Today). Certainly this flick's title clearly references the bone-chilling news of THIS Winter's Solstice (i.e., 12/21/18), when the crime cartel "family advisors" are allowed to over-rule ALL of America's generals, dooming our Kurdish and Afghan allies to be slaughtered by the Turks and Taliban, respectively. This, of course, culminates with the U.S. Defense Secretary resigning, in anticipation of the imminent military coup upcoming in Washington, DC, as foretold in WINTER MEETING.
Boring film but fun to see Bette in a rarely seen movie
mrcaw125 January 2006
Most of the previous reviews have been correct. This is a boring, talky flick that feels like a filmed play for the most part. Maybe it was a play, I don't know.
Strange but I thought Davis' love interest in the film Jim Davis (later of TV Dallas fame...who I completely did not recognize) was way too young to play opposite her, but when I looked up both their ages, he was actually only a year younger than Davis! Davis was 40 in this movie. What I find strange too is the fact that in this movie, in 1948 she is very slim, as if she'd gone on a diet or something. Her next movie, in 48 as well, is June Bride. A great comedy with Robert Montgomery. In that film she's slim as well, and showing her age a tad bit more than in this movie, where she is just starting to show signs of 40ish-ness.
But then something must have happened to Davis in her personal life because the following year, in 1949, in that, little seen, Beyond the Forest (where she utters the famous line - What a dump) she seems to have aged 5 or 10 years instead of just 1. And her figure too has gone to the dogs too. She's all lumpy in Beyond the Forest! I've never seen someone go to pot in so short a time.
Then in 1950 she did her famous All About Eve in which she plays a woman who is 40 (when in real life she was 42). But in All About Eve she LOOKS like she could be 50! I'd be curious to hear from any fans out there, if they could shed some light as to what happened to Davis in those 2 years to go from a slim and attractive 40 in this movie Winter Meeting & then appear as she did only a year later in Beyond the Forest & one year more in All About Eve.
As for Winter Meeting, now that I've seen it, I can scratch it off the must see Bette Davis movie list and never have to see it again.
Oh, as for Mr. Davis' acting in this movie, he was HORRIBLE! Where oh where was George Brent (one of Davis' frequent Warner Brothers co-stars) when you need him? Don't THINK he was dead! I'll have to check on IMDb!
Strange but I thought Davis' love interest in the film Jim Davis (later of TV Dallas fame...who I completely did not recognize) was way too young to play opposite her, but when I looked up both their ages, he was actually only a year younger than Davis! Davis was 40 in this movie. What I find strange too is the fact that in this movie, in 1948 she is very slim, as if she'd gone on a diet or something. Her next movie, in 48 as well, is June Bride. A great comedy with Robert Montgomery. In that film she's slim as well, and showing her age a tad bit more than in this movie, where she is just starting to show signs of 40ish-ness.
But then something must have happened to Davis in her personal life because the following year, in 1949, in that, little seen, Beyond the Forest (where she utters the famous line - What a dump) she seems to have aged 5 or 10 years instead of just 1. And her figure too has gone to the dogs too. She's all lumpy in Beyond the Forest! I've never seen someone go to pot in so short a time.
Then in 1950 she did her famous All About Eve in which she plays a woman who is 40 (when in real life she was 42). But in All About Eve she LOOKS like she could be 50! I'd be curious to hear from any fans out there, if they could shed some light as to what happened to Davis in those 2 years to go from a slim and attractive 40 in this movie Winter Meeting & then appear as she did only a year later in Beyond the Forest & one year more in All About Eve.
As for Winter Meeting, now that I've seen it, I can scratch it off the must see Bette Davis movie list and never have to see it again.
Oh, as for Mr. Davis' acting in this movie, he was HORRIBLE! Where oh where was George Brent (one of Davis' frequent Warner Brothers co-stars) when you need him? Don't THINK he was dead! I'll have to check on IMDb!
A superb story only for authentic, intelligent people
marcusmsilver16 December 2005
Just as for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so in every court trial two parties come into judgment: the defendant and the jury. Having read the denigrating comments of those who reviewed this movie, I declare that they are the worst film jury I've ever encountered. Because Bette Davis is one of Americas greatest actresses, she chose to realize only great scripts from great writers. WINTER MEETING is a great film! It definitely is not for shallow adrenaline brats who crave titillation. This film is for sincere, mature people who wonder deep things about the purpose of life, the nature of God and man. I sat on the edge of my seat all through this film, astonished and inspired that way back in l948 Bette and her team were facing the very same questions that have haunted me all my life. Exactly what is the point of this movie that makes it so worth while? Through frustrated romance and fiery introspection, we see that even in the midst of our worst self-doubt and despair, each of us is filling a vital part in the creation of a magnificent human race. All bring priceless pieces of life's puzzle that others desperately need, even if we ourselves don't know the value of our contribution. Deeply encouraging, even redeeming!
poet meets a reluctant war hero
ksf-212 June 2022
A rarely shown, post war, bette davis film. But watch it for the fun supporting cast -- flo bates as mrs. Castle, woody herman and his band. Janis paige is tacky peggy, who puts her make-up on at the dinner table, and tries so hard. When a famous poet (b. Davis) meets a reluctant war hero (j.davis), they hit it off... kind of. They both seem to have issues keeping them from expressing their true feelings, but if they can face their own demons, they both might have a chance for love. As davis pointed out, the film censors wouldn't allow them to discuss the differences of the religions, so it wasn't as powerful as it might have been. Which is probably why they don't show it too often. Based on the novel by grace stone.... credited as ethel vance at the open. Directed by bretaigne windust, who died young at 54. Directed a couple films, and then some television. It's good... weaker premise than some of davis' plots, but it's watchable.
Yackety Yak, Don't Come Back
bkoganbing17 December 2005
One of the common criticisms of Bette Davis is always that without a strong directorial hand she'd start chewing the scenery. But that also has saved some mediocre films and made them entertaining. Davis's strong personality comes through in the clinch.
Here though I wish she had chewed some scenery, if she had the film might have become a camp classic. Instead it is unbelievably dull.
Bette Davis is a poetess, a 20th century Emily Dickinson, who meets and falls in love with a war hero played by Jim Davis. Yes, that's right, Jim Davis who later became Jock Ewing. He's a navy veteran, a war hero, who is considering the priesthood as a vocation.
But first before the curtain of celibacy falls, he wants to have a fling or two, so Jim is on the make for Bette and for the young Janis Paige. Bette wins out so they go to her late father's place in New England where they talk and talk and talk about all of their problems and the world's problems.
When you have engaging and likable characters even a plot less movie is entertaining. The best example I know is The Sundowners. But there is absolutely nothing in this film that makes you care an iota about the people here. A little Davis histrionics might have saved this film, but we'll never know.
John Hoyt has an interesting part. It's as though he's trying to be a poor man's Clifton Webb. We should have had more of him as well.
Here though I wish she had chewed some scenery, if she had the film might have become a camp classic. Instead it is unbelievably dull.
Bette Davis is a poetess, a 20th century Emily Dickinson, who meets and falls in love with a war hero played by Jim Davis. Yes, that's right, Jim Davis who later became Jock Ewing. He's a navy veteran, a war hero, who is considering the priesthood as a vocation.
But first before the curtain of celibacy falls, he wants to have a fling or two, so Jim is on the make for Bette and for the young Janis Paige. Bette wins out so they go to her late father's place in New England where they talk and talk and talk about all of their problems and the world's problems.
When you have engaging and likable characters even a plot less movie is entertaining. The best example I know is The Sundowners. But there is absolutely nothing in this film that makes you care an iota about the people here. A little Davis histrionics might have saved this film, but we'll never know.
John Hoyt has an interesting part. It's as though he's trying to be a poor man's Clifton Webb. We should have had more of him as well.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
