Bette Davis said of this film: "I was...insulted to have to appear in such a cheap, nothing story..." Take her word for it. Bette Davis gets my vote as the greatest American actress, but not because of films like this. When watching it, I didn't know what year it was produced; I would have guessed very early 1930s, because the film is typical of the shallow scripts so common before...well...let's say 1933.
The plot is so shallow a tick couldn't drown it. Bette is hired to be an heiress to a corporation that uses her for publicity; in reality, she's just a small town girl. She chaffs at the role she is playing, and falls for a reporter (George Brent), quickly marries him...for all the wrong reasons. The marriage is a sham, which Brent intends to get out of at the earliest possible moment. But, they end up falling in love...which conquers all. Yawn.
Bette Davis does show some spunk here, so it's not a total waste. Brent is quite good. It's not the acting...it's the story line that is the problem. The supporting actors are pretty much wasted.
About the only reason to watch this film is if you're a tremendous fan of Davis'.
The plot is so shallow a tick couldn't drown it. Bette is hired to be an heiress to a corporation that uses her for publicity; in reality, she's just a small town girl. She chaffs at the role she is playing, and falls for a reporter (George Brent), quickly marries him...for all the wrong reasons. The marriage is a sham, which Brent intends to get out of at the earliest possible moment. But, they end up falling in love...which conquers all. Yawn.
Bette Davis does show some spunk here, so it's not a total waste. Brent is quite good. It's not the acting...it's the story line that is the problem. The supporting actors are pretty much wasted.
About the only reason to watch this film is if you're a tremendous fan of Davis'.