Imitation of Life

source: Imitation of Life

This film is historically significant, but come one, you guys. It's an embarrassingly racist drama that pretends to be racially progressive. Louise Beavers' character, Delilah, is one of the dumbest and most marginalized movie characters ever. Audiences in 1934 hailed this role as a breakthrough for black actresses, but a modern audience should see right through it. The really terrible thing about this movie is that it pretends to be solving the world's race problems, but it actually is making them much worse. (spoiler) Bea basically steals Delilah's pancake recipe, uses her image to sell pancakes, and makes a load of moolah, while Delilah, like a good slave, doesn't mind and turns down a cut when offered. A few scenes and shots are interesting, but unless you're a writing a dissertation on films of the early 30s (or you enjoy getting angry), don't bother.

Having seen the 1954 remake first with Lana Turner and Mahalia Jackson sining, I can definitely understand why the plot was changed away from "Aunt Delilah's pancake mix" in the original "Imitation of Life." I couldn't believe it when I saw the original. I decided it was more of a laugh than anything else. Can you believe the white woman drawing up a contract giving herself 80% of the profits and Delilah only 20% of the profits from Delilah's own pancake mix? The only thing more ridiculous was Delilah's response -- that she didn't want the money, that she was just satisfied being the white woman's maid and taking care of that woman's daughter. Delilah nor her daughter could use the front door of the mansion the white family just moved into which was purchased from the profits of the pancake mix. But yet Delilah's own daughter is portrayed as "bad" for rejecting the life of a poor black maid's daughter! What was Delilah thinking? ... certainly not about the welfare of her own daughter. Why would Delilah's only child want to be poor, working as a maid for whites while her mother's white employer was rolling in wealth from Delilah's own pancake mix? It makes no sense! What a laugh!

John M. Stahl's 1934 melodrama "Imitation of Life" stars Claudette Colbert as Bea Pullman, a young widow with a young daughter, Jessie who struggles to carry on her husband's syrup sales business after her husband dies. One morning, as she is trying to get her two year old ready for day care before setting off for work, her doorbell rings and she finds Delilah Johnson (Louise Beavers) and her young daughter Peola at the door. Delilah has mistaken Bea's household as the one advertising for house help, but when she sees Bea struggling, she offers to help her out for no wages, only room and board for she and her daughter. The two women strike up a friendship, and eventually begin a pancake house business, with Delilah making her famous pancakes and Bea selling them and her syrup. Throughout the next fifteen years, their business becomes a small conglomerate, with Delilah continuing to care for Bea and her daughter simply because she wants to, despite her now great wealth. Complicating matters is the fact that Peola is very light-skinned, and often passes for white, which develops hatred within her for her race which manifests itself as contempt and disdain for her mother. Additionally, Bea's boyfriend Steve (Warren William) finds himself the object of the now 18 year old Jessie's affection, which causes strife among the three of them. "Imitation of Life" is simply a great, rich story that we so rarely see in cinema today. Certainly an unusual topic in the 1930's, the subject of race relations is very prominent throughout the film, without being remotely preachy. The acting was good, though I did feel like Delilah's role was more of a caricature than a character at times. I also didn't really see the appeal of Steve's character, who also has probably one of the most unusual occupations that I've seen in a classic film (fish scientist). I of course couldn't help comparing this version to its Douglas Sirk remake from 1959 that starred Lana Turner and Juanita Moore. I think that the high melodrama of the story is much better served in the highly colorful Technicolor and Lana Turner's histrionics. I also felt a little uneasy with the treatment of African-Americans in this version because it was continuously teetering on a racist line; just a little more caricature and certain moments would have fully gone over the edge. The film was not disrespectful, but it got close to being eyebrow-raising. Granted, it was a different time, but I was expecting a little more from a film that would address the subject in the first place. Having said all that, I really did enjoy the film as a whole – I just enjoyed the remake a little bit more. I did find, even without Mahalia Jackson singing at the end of the remake, that I bawled like a baby at the end of this version almost as much as I do at the end of Sirk's version, which is no small amount. I'm not sure what it is about this story, or these movies, but when I was in film school, specifically in my Films of the Fifties class where I first saw "Imitation of Life" (1959) I remember sitting in the classroom just sobbing (and wasn't the only one). It takes a good story, regardless of its presentation, to have that kind of impact regardless of how many times it is viewed. This version gets a solid 6/10 from me. --Shelly

I found this version of the movie inane. Even though the whole tragic mulatto concept is quite ridiculous, I find the 1959 version a much easier one to take. Whenever there has been a movie about a black person "passing" for white to enjoy a better life, the character is punished for being duplicitous. How primitive.

This is probably one of the first films that dealt with race relations in this country. While "Imitation of Life" centers around the business created by two women, one black and one white, it also take a hard look at the struggles minorities face -- something very rarely seen on the big screen at that time. Most of the films at that time showed blacks as domestic servants and pictured them as "happy" in those roles. This is a classic in that it's one of the first times any medium tackled the issue of black-white relations. It's a must-see, both from an entertainment perspective and, most importantly, a historical one. I think a lot of African-Americans in the entertainment business can look at this film as a trail-blazer in terms of "serious" roles for blacks instead of being cast as "entertainers."

Although I liked the remake with Lana Turner, it does not compare with the original. The remake represents a slicker Hollywood formulaic version, yet, I really liked Juanita Moore's heartfelt performance in the 1959 version. Some may find it was hard to believe that a Beatrice (Cobert) in the 30's could make money from a Delilah's (Beavers) secret recipe. It would have been quite a challenge (but, not impossible) for Delilah; a poor, black woman the 30's to make a fortune as a business woman! Also, people make fortunes on other people ideas all the time. This is a well done soap opera. The cast was excellent. Not a beat was skipped in this movie. I am glad that I had the opportunity to see the original. I also think it was a brave move for the 30's. One of my favorite scenes was when at the end of their "girl talk," Beatrice goes upstairs and Delilah goes downstairs to the servant's quarters. That scene said it all. In spite of the fact that these two women were good friends and loved each other, they did not have equal status because of the color of their skin.

This film is a part of growing up black in America. I saw it as a kid and I don't know anyone who hasn't cried. But, it is what it is, a true testament to the times. There is not much you can say. Lana turner did a great job on the remake but to me this is a bit earthier and I prefer to see the original and then see the 57 version. However, the pancake recipe bit is a bit ludicrous i mean how many secret ingredients can you put into pancakes. geesh Louise! Wonderful, keep it in your library at home and show it to your kids. I haven't seen a teenager yet that isn't fasinated and somewhat appalled by this movie. Its like listening to Billie Holidays Strange fruit. You are shocked but find yourself listening over and over again. To assure you have not missed anything.

I find the movie aptly named. My motivation for responding is due to an earlier opinion on this movie, specifically: "the central character of Delilah is the worst kind of racial stereotype; a relentlessly cheerful mammy, perfectly satisfied to spend her life tending to the needs of her white employer". I am an American Black (African-American) and I do not find Delilah offensive. In fact I applaud the reflection of honesty that this 1934 film attempts. The "mammy" of that time period had very few choices. That she was happy to help her very nice white employer for the safety provided does not make for a hate figure by Blacks. It makes for a reminder of the intense level of crap Black folks went through and how they dealt with the pain of it to stay honest, kind and helpful people. Should Delilah lived in the streets and hated white people the rest of her life? Should she have not had the fortitude and insight to find a situation with another caring human being, albeit this other human was white? And for this she is lauded as a the worst kind of racial stereotype? No. The answer is a resounding NO. Now if Delilah was beaten and raped on a regular basis and still wanted to please her white employer while denying her race the previous poster would have had a point. Okay, I really didn't like the mournful gospel music, R&B would have made this movie perfect to me but that's just me. Live and Love. There is no shame in being a good person.

A black mother worries that her light skinned daughter will have only an IMITATION OF LIFE if she continually tries to pass for white. Let it be stated unequivocally that this is one of the most remarkable films of the 1930's - unique in that it deals squarely with aspects of the racial question decades before it became common to do so. After becoming accustomed to the casual racism of most Hollywood movies of the era, this honesty is quite astonishing. As the black mother, Louise Beavers is heartbreaking in the simple power of her performance. Joyously serving up love & pancakes, or devastated by her daughter's rejection of their race, Miss Beavers makes her audience feel her every emotion. This was the finest role of her film career, and she makes the most of it. However, the movie over, the studio system returned her to mammy parts. This is a tremendous blot on Hollywood's record. Beautiful Claudette Colbert is scintillating, as always. Playing a tenderhearted maple syrup saleslady who first employs Miss Beavers, and later befriends her, Miss Colbert adds a distinct touch of class to the film. But she is also sympathetic to the concerns of the story and helps to quietly push along the plea for racial equality. Elegant actor Warren William, he of the sophisticated profile, brings his considerable talents to the role of Miss Colbert's ichthyologist boyfriend. Refreshingly, he plays a solid, decent fellow - instead of the rake or cad which he portrayed so often & so well. His involvement is a definite asset to the film. The rest of the cast adds to the overall excellence of the production: acerbic Ned Sparks as Miss Colbert's business manager; lovely Rochelle Hudson as her ready-for-love daughter; Henry Armentta & Alan Hale as businessmen cajoled by Miss Colbert's charms; and especially Fredi Washington, memorable as Miss Beavers' daughter, a stranger inside her own skin. Movie mavens will spot Clarence Wilson as the pancake shop's landlord, Franklin Pangborn as a party guest & Paul Porcasi as a restaurant manager, all uncredited. IMITATION OF LIFE preached a powerful sermon on racial justice & equality, but the Hollywood congregation was not paying attention. It would be a very long time before black performers & black roles would be treated with the dignity they so desperately deserved.