rc_brazil
Joined Apr 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews9
rc_brazil's rating
I watched this without great expectations and figured I'd comment on it here since there are no reviews available as of this writing. The story is rather simple; Joan Bennett is a chorus girl engaged to a rich playboy. The playboy is threatened with disinheritance if he marries her. In order to gain the playboy's guardian's approval, she starts to work for him as a secretary/telephone operator. The guardian happens to be Franchot Tone, and the rest, as they say, is history. It's predictable, but Eve Arden is fun (as always) as Bennett's best friend and room mate and Bennet and Tone have nice chemistry. Overall, it is not a bad way to spend a lazy afternoon.
I was not planning on making a comment for this unimpressive effort, but I felt obliged to after noticing that only one other person had bothered to write something. First of all, I must say that although I never really cared for Charles Boyer "debonair" style of acting, Margaret Sullavan has always been one of my favorite actresses. Whenever I see her in a drama I am sure of the ending (one of the main characters, usually hers, will find a way to die in the end) but in comedy she tends to be more light and fun to watch.
In a plot that strives to make sense in some sort of Lubitsch-like battle of the sexes, we have a writer and a woman- doctor who find love and marriage rather quickly. In a unique way, we soon learn that Sullavan's doctor has a rather open view of her relationship with Boyer's womanizing writer, one that allows separate apartments and separate lives as well. The direction by Seiter is uninteresting; unlike Lubitsch he doesn't permit his audience to imagine what is happening. Not that he receives much help from the script department, since that seems to be dwelling in the creation of its main characters and not too sure of which direction it should take its story. With all that in mind, I felt a bit sorry that one of Sullavan's few attempts on comedy failed, having seen her shine on the wonderful Shop Around the Corner. Perhaps if Lubitsch had helmed this one as well we could have had a classic.
Either way I just feel that I have to clarify the fact that, even though this will hardly ever be in anyone's top ten, it's not disgraceful and can be quite fun to watch once one accepts its defects. If you like 1940's style of comedy, I see no real reason that would keep you from enjoying this one, even if you can easily come up with a better movie to watch. A guilty pleasure as they say, specially if you are a bit of a fan of either one of the two main actors.
In a plot that strives to make sense in some sort of Lubitsch-like battle of the sexes, we have a writer and a woman- doctor who find love and marriage rather quickly. In a unique way, we soon learn that Sullavan's doctor has a rather open view of her relationship with Boyer's womanizing writer, one that allows separate apartments and separate lives as well. The direction by Seiter is uninteresting; unlike Lubitsch he doesn't permit his audience to imagine what is happening. Not that he receives much help from the script department, since that seems to be dwelling in the creation of its main characters and not too sure of which direction it should take its story. With all that in mind, I felt a bit sorry that one of Sullavan's few attempts on comedy failed, having seen her shine on the wonderful Shop Around the Corner. Perhaps if Lubitsch had helmed this one as well we could have had a classic.
Either way I just feel that I have to clarify the fact that, even though this will hardly ever be in anyone's top ten, it's not disgraceful and can be quite fun to watch once one accepts its defects. If you like 1940's style of comedy, I see no real reason that would keep you from enjoying this one, even if you can easily come up with a better movie to watch. A guilty pleasure as they say, specially if you are a bit of a fan of either one of the two main actors.
I like Carole Lombard. I think she's one of the most talented, funny actresses ever - and, although this one could not be considered one of her classic movies, it still is fun to watch. A lot of people complain about Preston Foster's role in this movie. It's true that the chemistry they're supposed to have doesn't always work, but I don't think it's the actor's fault - the script is just not that good. It seems to me like we land into the middle of a film. Carole's fiancé is going away to Japan because Preston wants her to himself - and, because he wants her to himself, he keeps finding selfish, annoying ways to get closer. To some up, no one gets why Carole is supposed to be in love with a self-centered, egotistic man. And yet I still like this movie. I pop it up whenever I can't find anything better to do. It's easy-going, if not perfect, and it's amusing. The scene where they're taken in and we discover that Preston's punched Carole is a treat. In conclusion, Carole has made a lot of better films and some of them can be easily found now a days thanks to that great invention that is the DVD (what would we old-movie lovers do if it wasn't for that?), but this one is still worth checking out. I guess anything with her is.