Today We Live
Today We Live
NR | 03 March 1933 (USA)
Today We Live Trailers

Two lovers are living together and are not married; they had made a promise as children to get married when they grew up, but they "didn't wait."

Reviews
IanIndependent

This film was hopelessly miscast. Why have Americans playing Brits especially when none can master the accent? But, that is one of the reasons to watch especially as Miss Crawford often forgets, or doesn't even try to attempt to be English, in places... sometimes in mid sentence. You can also laugh at the stilted attempts at English Dialogue - "Sister, Mine". "Officer now. Navy. Now I can ask her.". "Feelings Anne. Can't change love.". There's also some clumsy scenes but this was made in 1933 so we were only just out of the silent age so some over dramatic, over egged, over acted scene's are to be expected.Yet, and despite this being a pot-boiler of a love triangle with war and Anglos-American relations as it's background, it is enjoyable for some still superb acting, the way the three main characters a loved by the camera and are give back warmth and honesty in return. Never been a big fan of Joan Crawford but she looks good and (if we forget she is supposed to be British) gives a good performance.The sort of film you watch to look at both the good and the bad of cinema at the time and it gives you plenty to talk about later. And remember Crawford and Franchot Tone met for the first time when making this film. he became her second husband two years later.

... View More
calvinnme

This film could have been great with some adequate dialogue and character development. For some reason the makers of this film seemed to believe that because three of the main characters were supposed to be British that it was necessary that they speak in incomplete sentences, usually missing nouns, and that they speak as though tranquilized. They all still sound American, they're just having half of every conversation.Bogard (Gary Cooper) is an American who takes over a British estate during World War I before the Americans enter the fray because the current residents can no longer afford it since the father is in the military at the time. The daughter, Diana (Joan Crawford) moves into one of the servant's quarters and her brother Ronnie (Franchot Tone) and their lifetime friend Claude (Robert Young) join up with the British forces and ship out to France. The development of the romance between Bogard and Diana consists (onscreen) of exactly one bike ride in which Bogard declares his love and Diana's one word sentences make her seem disinterested. However, at the end of the ride she says rather emotionlessly that she loves Bogard. The two might as well be using semaphores to communicate, the conversation is that wooden.Diana goes to France to help the war effort, with her brother and childhood sweetheart seeing action nearby. In France she gets news that Bogard is dead, although that news is incorrect. Based on that information she then makes a rash decision that she later regrets when Bogard shows up at her door.On the other hand, the action sequences, both in the air and on the sea, are extremely well done and photographed. It's just a shame when such a fine cast as this film had all have their performances put in a straight jacket. The one thing that even the director couldn't do was put a complete damper on the chemistry between Franchot Tone and Joan Crawford. This is the film where they fell in love, and their scenes together show it, even though they are playing brother and sister here.

... View More
bob-1070

My wife and I thought that with this cast and director, the movie would have to be at least worth watching. We were wrong. In fact, we gave up on it after 45 minutes. The idea that Crawford, Young and Tone are British but speak with American accents was, for me, impossible to get past -- hard to believe this is England when no one talks with a British accent. There is zero chemistry between Crawford and anyone, and to echo a previous comment, the idea that Cooper and Crawford suddenly declare their love for one another without any reason is ludicrous. There is no reason to care about any of the characters, which is why we threw in the towel halfway through. I found it hard to believe that Hawks directed this, as none of the actors spoke with the trademark Hawksian rat-a-tat delivery. So save your time, and skip this one.

... View More
Karen Green (klg19)

In what would be his first screenplay, based on his own short story "Turn About," William Faulkner delivers a bizarre story of loyalty, sacrifice, and really strange relationships. The story originally was about only the Tone, Young, and Cooper characters, but MGM needed to put Joan Crawford in another picture to fulfill her contract, and Faulkner obliged by creating a female role. Crawford insisted that her lines be written in the same clipped style as her co-stars' Young and Tone, leading to much unintentional hilarity as these three communicate in a telegraph-like shorthand that sounds like a Monty Python sketch ("Wuthering Heights" performed in semaphore). Seriously, the almost entirely pronoun-less sentences make Ernest Hemingway read like Henry James.The film also reflects some familiar Faulkner themes, with an almost unnaturally close relationship between brother and sister (as may be found in his "Sanctuary," and elsewhere). When Young proposes to Crawford, in Tone's presence, in lieu of an engagement ring ALL THREE exchange their childhood engraved rings with one another. The closeness of Tone and Young is also noticeable, especially as they go off to their Thelma & Louise fate. Frankly, it's creepy.Not as creepy to this New Yorker, however, as the recurring theme of the massive cockroach, Wellington, which Crawford cheerfully catches (and which is shown gamboling over her hands--I had to turn away!) and Young turns into a gladiator. Blech.That being said, there are some nice performances. Young is particularly engaging in a scene where he's taken up in Cooper's fighter plane, and Roscoe Karns is delightful as Cooper's flying buddy. Tone, despite his inability to express himself through realistic dialogue, has a nice moment, dashing away his own furtive tears over his buddy Young's fate. Crawford, stripped of meaningful dialogue as well, mostly comes across as either wooden or melodramatic, which is quite a balancing act for one role.The battle scenes--not surprisingly, for a Howard Hawks film--are the most exciting part of the entire picture. But not enough. As far as I'm concerned, this is 75 minutes of my life I'm never going to get back.

... View More