Olivia de Havilland won the Oscar for best actress in 1947 for "To Each his Own" a tearjerker, made in 1946. She was one of the great actresses of the day when movies were worth going to see. She made many good movies such as "Hush hush sweet Charlotte, Snake Pit are two good ones.They were released on DVD. But "To each his own is one of my personal favourites. 430 people on IMDb.com have rated this movie highly at 8/10 as of Sept./08, so why on earth has this good movie never been released on DVD. I am lucky to have it on video, but would rather have the DVD. In "To each His own", Olivia is Jody Norris, a small town girl working in her fathers store. She meets a handsome young air force pilot and they fall in love. He leaves to go to war and Olivia finds herself going to be a single mother. In those days young women were isolated and not supported when having a baby out of wedlock. Nothing like today. Olivia has a lot of heartache to go through, has the baby but faces further heartbreak. Her life moves on after she has the baby, who she was not able to keep, but I won't say any more. Get a hanky out for the ending. Studios, one of you need to get this movie out on DVD. If you can release a lot of junky movies on DVD, you can release this good classic on DVD. It would sell well. I'm tired waiting and getting older by the day. I've got about 100 good DVD movies, and need the DVD of this one as soon as possible.

Olivia de Havilland well deserved the Oscar she got for the lead role in this melodrama. In an astonishing display of virtuosity, she plays the character over the course of 20 years, being utterly convincing both as a sweet young thing with an innocent smile and a hard-bitten middle-aged business woman whose lips are hardened into a permanent grimace of determined refusal to feel anything. Rarely has an actress shown such a range of both age and mood in the same film. As always, Miss de Havilland's eyes positively glow like hot coals with the intelligence and high character which are so much her own personal nature. Having known Miss de Havilland somewhat during the 1990s in Paris, I can testify that even in her eighties she was mesmerising and perfectly spell-binding as a woman, and one of the most fascinating people I have ever met. She has such a fine, generous and loving nature, and such a sound character that she is simply a paragon of human goodness. All of these qualities shine forth in her movies, and were responsible for her turning Hollywood upside down with the famous 'de Havilland Decision' of the courts, which restricted the power of the Hollywod studios over their actors. She has always been as courageous as, presumably, her ancestor must have been who accompanied William the Conqueror when he invaded England. And yes, Miss de Havilland is connected with the once-famous de Havilland aircraft: that was the same family. She is British, which explains why she was able to speak like that in this film during the London scenes (one reviewer wondered how she did it). Another sterling performance in this film was by the wonderful Roland Culver, one of Britain's best-loved character actors. In this film, he showed such finesse and such an impeccably delicate touch that he acted circles round everyone but Miss de Havilland herself. John Lund made his film debut here, in a double-role, which called upon him to play two very different types of personality, which he did very well indeed. Mary Anderson was especially fine in her portrayal of a sweet girl who goes mad with jealousy and becomes a virago when her back is against the wall. But the main importance of this film was its social message, valid for the times although irrelevant now, of intolerance for the unmarried mother. Now they are everywhere, and we pay for them in their hundreds of thousands with our taxes. But in those days, it took rare courage to dare to have a baby and attempt to keep it if you had no husband. Social ostracism and vilification were so strong then, when humans were still acting with their 'herd mentality' of exclusion of anyone challenging the norms. This film helped to change the social picture, and it is well for us to remember that such films as this did not only have a message, they often delivered it too. But without Miss de Havilland in the lead, this film might well have fallen into a sentimental slop bucket. It was she who raised its tone to that of art.

TO EACH HIS OWN is in that category of woman's films dealing with a mother who loses her child for social or economic reasons. So it is in the same group as MADAME X (in all it's versions) or STELLA DALLAS. But it is little better than a superior weeper. Mitchell Leisin was a director with taste and ability, frequently given run-of-the-mill assignments, and sometimes given important films that were taken from him and mangled (LADY IN THE DARK). But when given a sensible property like EASY LIVING or HOLD BACK THE DAWN he turned in one really good result of a film.In 1941 Leisin had directed Olivia De Haviland in HOLD BACK THE DAWN, a film about European immigrants in a Mexican/American border town like Tijuana, who were hoping to figure out how to finally achieve permission to come into the U.S. and become citizens. De Haviland played an American school teacher who is swept off her feet by a calculating gigolo (Charles Boyer) and ends marrying him (which is how he plans to become an American citizen). Her performance was well done, and she got nominated for the Best Actress Oscar of that year. Unfortunately, her sister Joan Fontaine was also nominated for SUSPICION.Fontaine was on a personal high at that time, as she had been the star of Hitchcock's film REBECCA the year before, and now that great director directed her in this second film. The news media built up the rivalry between the two sisters, probably out of nothing in particular. As it turned out, the result was good for Fontaine but bad for De Haviland. And a breach apparently did develop between the sisters (if it had not been there before).But in 1946 Leisin got a second chance to direct De Haviland. Here she was Jody Norris, the daughter of a pharmacist in a New York State small town. In 1917 her town is visited by a pilot (John Lund) who is on a bond selling tour for the war effort. Lund and De Haviland hit it off in the brief time they are together, and have a very passionate love affair. But he has to return to the front. He leaves and she soon finds she is pregnant. Then she hears he is killed in the war. De Haviland decides (with the advice of her father) to have the baby away from the town, and then to arrange for it to be deposited on the doorstep of a poor family who have too many children. Her intention is to come by with her father, find the family can't afford to have another baby to feed, and offer to adopt the baby so they can avoid a scandal and keep the child.Unfortunately the best laid schemes fall apart - De Haviland's rival, a wealthy snob (Mary Anderson) had married one of De Haviland's boyfriends (Philip Terry) but had lost their child. Terry hears about the foundling, and beats De Haviland and her father to the poor family's house. He and Anderson adopt the baby. And De Haviland's sad heartbreak begins. She can't (as her wise father - Griff Barnett - points out) make a scene about her rights to adopt the foundling without making everyone aware that she must be the mother. If she does it will bring shame down on the baby boy.In the course of the film, De Haviland tries, over the years, to remain as close as possible to the baby as she can. Unfotunately Anderson keeps thinking that Terry is actually keeping sexual relations with De Haviland. Soon she is forbidden the house. Later she tries economic pressures, but with even less success - the baby has grown into the loyal little son of Anderson, and rebels against De Haviland's encroachment.The script of Charles Brackett & Jacques Thery allows De Haviland to show more than heartbreak. She has been her father's assistant in the drugstore, and she puts this to use in building up a cosmetic empire (like Helena Rubenstein's). Also Anderson and Terry face financial problems, as Anderson's father manufactured player pianos - which are going out of favor in the depression. This briefly gives De Haviland her financial pressure on them to try to take Gregory ("Griggsy") - her son - back. And it does not work.Still, De Haviland keeps tabs on her son. She has moved to England as she got wealthier, and the surrounding framework of the film shows her as a fire-watcher with a nobleman, Lord Desham (Roland Culver). They narrowly have a fatal accident, and when they are together having dinner we learn the story - and that she has a chance (she thinks) of seeing her son again before he is shipped to the front. Will she see him or not? De Haviland's role gave her scope to show heartbreak and to show sense and to show overreaching. It was a marvelous part. Leisin's direction gave her every opportunity, and he brought out the best in the supporting cast - and the over-the-years review of events like the rise of women in business, prohibition, the Depression, and the Wars helped the film too. De Haviland got nominated for an Oscar for best actress for TO EACH HIS OWN in 1946 - and this time she won. She would repeat her success in a few years with THE HEIRESS as well.

The title of the movie was misleading,but as a huge fan of Ms. de Havilland, I watched this movie. It was a very tender story of the enduring and endearing love a mother had for her child.It brought to mind the contrast of today's societal views of unwed mothers(as it were).The story made me even more grateful to have 3 wonderful sons.I would love watch this movie with my mom and my five sister,on the day before mothers' day. What a good way to have your 'tears jerked'! What a celebration of motherhood!I will be happy when it is released on DVD. Hopefully very soon.