Yes, Madam? (1939) Poster

(1939)

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Fun farce
yrussell18 March 2021
This was an enjoyable film with a few laugh out loud moments. Bobby Howes appears to have been a popular musical comedian at the time and here he is a paragon of whimsy. The whole film is fun, even with a few laugh out loud moments. I particularly liked the slapstick musical number 35 minutes in. Another highlight is the boisterous performance by Vera Pearce as the opera singer. I enjoyed all of the actors, though. And who can forget the meowing song at 52 minutes? For those into 1930s British comedy, this film is recommended.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A success, despite major problems!
JohnHowardReid1 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
SYNOPSIS: Two potential heirs will receive a tidy sum if they manage to successfully hold down jobs as servants for a month. A third claimant will only inherit if both his rivals get the sack. Naturally he schemes to make this happen.

NOTES: Second film version of Browne's novel. A 1933 British Lion support directed by Leslie Hiscott starred Harold French as Bill Quinton, Frank Pettingell as Albert Peabody and Peter Haddon as Hugh (sic) Tolliver.

COMMENT: Movies (and novels) about heirs and missing fortunes and wills with eccentric conditions were exceedingly popular in the Depression era. The plot of this one is typical. What is surprising, however, is that not a great deal of it occupies center stage. Instead, a number of sub-plots jostle the main story-line from its central position. The first we don't mind, because that's the romantic sub-plot, ingratiatingly played by Bobby Howes as the diminutive valet/chauffeur and most charmingly by Diana Churchill as a spirited maid-of-all-work. When this duo burst into song, the effect is enjoyable indeed - in particular with the title tune. Both performers are very attractively photographed and their splend setting has to be seen to be believed.

Their initial encounter, inventively handled by the director in a series of rapidly cut fast tracking shots, is the acme of picture-going pleasure. However, one of the disadvantages of pairing the hero and heroine off so early in the piece is that there's little opportunity to develop this theme in the remainder of the movie. True, there are a couple of minor misunderstandings but fortunately both director and audience recognize that these tiffs don't amount to much.

Pushing both the romantic and inheritance plots aside is a rather tedious sub-plot involving - would you believe? - a husband's attempts to retrieve incriminating love letters from a former mistress. That hackneyed old chestnut was used by Bobby Howes himself in Third Time Lucky (1931) - and much more cleverly than it is here. Fortunately the husband is played by one of our old favorites, Wylie Watson, an actor who can do marvels with the weakest of material - witness his cat impersonation and the way he skilfully manages to inject a piddling running gag about foreign buttons with genuine humor. Even his somewhat too lengthy efforts to shoulder his own suspenders are tolerably amusing.

No, the blackmail plot comes unstuck not with Mr Watson but with Vera Pearce - a moderately amusing lady, it is true, but she far out-strips her initial welcome - and to a greater extent with Fred Emney who makes far too much heavy-going of what should be a smaller, less conspicuous role.

But far and away the biggest fly in the ointment is Billy Milton. Although supposed to be thoroughly obnoxious, Milton plays the part with such enthusiasm as to swamp the other players. His best scenes are at the beginning where Bobby Howes manages to out-maneuver him by kicking his hat around the room like a football. Alas, Milton allows far fewer openings for Howes in their later confrontations. Not only is the character the epitome of boorishness, he's incredibly stupid and tasteless besides. Here's one villain that absolutely nobody's going to cheer, as he's just simply completely lacking in appeal. He's boring as well as boorish.

Although Yes, Madam is something of a curate's egg, its enjoyable moments will send audiences away happy. Howes and Churchill deserve most of the credit. They play and sing with consummate finesse.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Photographed stage play
malcolmgsw18 February 2011
This film is similar to Brewsters Millions and is a precursor to Laughter In Paradise.the basic premise is that Bobby Howes and Diana Churchill are each left 80000 pounds in an uncles will on condition that they must go into domestic service for one month and remain with the same employer without being sacked.So 0f course there are plenty of pitfalls along the way.Lots of familiar faces doing familiar things.Fred Emney is a drunk friend,Wylie Watson,Bertha Belmore.The real problem with this film is that it is static.It is photographed so that you feel as if you are sitting in the stalls.The camera doesn't move and there is virtually no editing.It makes it rather dull to look at.Bobby Howes was one of those performers who fell out of favour with the coming of world war 2.Apart from a few bits he appeared in no more leading roles in films.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed