It's clear that Warners was attempting to repeat the same success they had with "Four Daughters" right down to casting a number of the same actors. Rolland Young and Fay Bainter (along with the wonderful May Robson) are among my favorite character actors of the era.Priscilla Lane is just fine, but Jeffrey Lynn really isn't a particular good actor. Yes, he was fine in "All This and Heaven Too", but he's dull as dishwater in "A Letter to Three Wives". Joseph Mankiewicz referred to him as a "leaner" - a weak actor. He was right.All in all, it's a very watchable Warners programmer of the late 1930's. I can think better ways to waste my time.

Rounding up much of the cast of the popular, money-making film, "Four Daughters", Warners Bros. probably figured that it made sense to keep "teaming" Priscilla Lane with Jeffrey Lynn. In my opinion, they do play well opposite each other, as they did in the aforementioned film, and subsequent films in which they appeared together.The material is dated to us, so take it in the context of the time in which the film was made. Consider it a period piece as you do when you watch films like "Patriot" or "Marie Antoinette". You expect actors to behave as they did in the time, and the plot to be consistent with the thinking of that era.But, even taking all that into account, it's a so-so film. I suspect the Broadway play upon which the film is based, was toned down to meet censorship rules, and that must have weakened the story considerably.So,don't blame the actors if this film doesn't come off as great cinema. Nevertheless, it's worth watching if you like the particular actors appearing in this film.

Based on a stage play and it really shows. (The characters in this movie talk and talk endlessly.)The situation, with our plucky heroine going off for the weekend with a boyfriend who is soon to leave for an overseas job, just might be seen as racy for the late thirties. It is made pretty clear early on that Priscilla Lane would just never do that sort of thing and not return as pure as the newly fallen snow, but everybody in this movie has to talk about it - her mom, her aunt, her dad, her grandmother (the hammy May Robson), the mom's old boyfriend from way back when (played by Roland Young - and what is he doing here anyway? His character's presence makes no sense at all)- and the quality of the talk is moralizing and dreadfully dull. (The movie is not helped at all by the presence of Jeffrey Lynn, just about the stodgiest and dullest young leading man this side of Ronald Reagan.) Priscilla Lane could be genuinely charming at times, but she doesn't have a chance against a lousy script and heavy-handed direction. See it once, if you really have to see have see every movie that Priscilla Lane ever made....

While this story of an unmarried couple's weekend together is obviously tame by today's standards, Yes, My Darling Daughter does have a moment or two that is a bit on the racier side. Well, at least for the time it was made.Led by the beautiful and unfairly underrated 'Lane, Priscilla' (qv), this movie has a good ensemble cast, with maybe the exception of Jeffrey Lynn.While Lynn has been likable in his other movies with Priscilla Lane, i. e. _Four Daughters (1938)_ (qv) and _Roaring Twenties, The (1939)_ (qv), he doesn't come across as the most likeable character. Or the brightest, either. In other words, if Priscilla Lane asked me to spend a weekend with her, platonic or otherwise, I think I would show a little more enthusiasm than he did!Anyway, Yes, My Darling Daughter is worth watching, thanks in no small part to the aforementioned Miss Lane.