0001During the 1930s and into the 40s, MGM generally tried to paint a very rosy picture during the Depression. Additionally, Louis B. Mayer himself (the head of the studio) worked very hard to defeat the leftist, Upton Sinclair, during his attempt to win an election. Why? Because Mayer was dreadfully afraid of communism and socialism and fought hard to nip it in the bud. In light of this, how could a film like "We Who Are Young" get made? Could Mayer have missed this one? Surely he must, as it's progressive message clearly is NOT what 'Uncle' Louis wanted America to see!The plot of "We Who Are Young" is a lot like "The Crowd" and "Saturday's Children". The films are all about nice young folks who marry and try to grab a part of the American Dream but end up getting royally screwed. Again and again, things in the system seem to conspire against the couple as they try to just get by. At least that is the first 80% of the film--a strong Progressive message from the era...surprisingly strong. Unfortunately for the film, but perhaps fortunate for Mayer and his sentiments, the picture loses its way towards the end and degenerates too much towards sentimentality and lacks the hard edge you find in these other films. Overall, worth seeing but it just misses the mark. And, interestingly, although this is a Lana Turner starring vehicle, her co-star, John Shelton easily outshines her as the beleaguered husband.021

Unlike previous commentary here, I thought that both principal actors did a good job (Lana Turner and John Shelton), but even good acting by the principals and the bit players as well, can't rescue a terrible plot. Honestly, I think this had every cliché and/or hackneyed phrase in the book, and almost every plot point followed a tired (and very stupid) formula. Here's an example: The couple learns they are pregnant, but they don't have money for a private doctor to deliver the baby. Wifey says, "I'll happily go to a clinic," but husband, in pure idiocy, claims that "No wife of mine will be going to a clinic!" Which promptly causes him to take out usurious payday loans, which make for terrible troubles that cause them to hit rock bottom for a while. I am SHOCKED that Dalton Trumbo wrote the script! I mean - Jeez - that's the guy who wrote "Spartacus" and "Roman Holiday"! In any case, this is worth watching only if you're in the mood to see a young Lana Turner, an underrated male actor in the lead, and what must have been Dalton Trumbo's C- attempt at a script when he was in Middle School.

It's easy to see that MGM was grooming LANA TURNER for stardom around this time. She has the pivotal role of a young wife whose husband has a hard time keeping his job under the strict rules of employer GENE LOCKHART. JOHN SHELTON is the husband who ends up desperately looking for work while his wife is expecting a baby and they have had to have all their furniture repossessed.Shelton wasn't really a bad actor but MGM dropped him not long after the film was completed. But Lana shines as the sweet and wholesome wife who stands by her man during hard times. Shelton gets to spout off some dialogue that comes from Dalton Trumbo's slant on the Depression-era tactics and rules of the workplace.Obviously, one of Trumbo's lesser scripts has been turned into a film that is more of a programmer than an A-film, despite a cast that includes Gene Lockhart, Grant Mitchell, Henry Armetta and Jonathan Hale. Prices mentioned for wages, rent and furniture are hilarious by today's standards.

I don't agree completely with the other reviewer.I think this movie is a fine social documentary of the times. Although the movie was filmed in 1940, the scene is really the Depression 30s.Movies of that era were either 1) escapist, "fluffy" movies, about escapades among the rich and/or young, 2) musicals, or 3) gangster flicks. Mostly. None of these genres really reflected the tenor of those times.True docu-dramas of the era are rather rare; perhaps the people just didn't want to be reminded of how awful things were.This movie depicts the trouble a young couple has in succeeding (or even surviving) in a capitalist, Depression society. Both boy and girl loses jobs, and the girl is pregnant; one senses homelessness and breadlines around the corner. The angst felt by such couples in those days is poignantly portrayed here.True, some of the dialog is corny and dated, but one must remember that the thinking of the 1930s was vastly different than that of today's.The performances are spot-on, too; every one of the characters is believable.This movie is well worth watching for the social documentary that it is.