Reviews

TV movies get a bad rap in America. Dismissed as trite, cheesy, and predictable, as well as the haven of "has-been" actors, this respectable medium is neglected by Hollywood and audiences. For an original film, with a mix of veteran (Elisabeth Rohm of Law and Order & Angel and Brendan Fehr of Roswell & Bones) and new actors (lead Laura Breckenridge), the acting is convincing and the production qualities are surprisingly high. Best of all, the script balances the romantic elements with touching humor and the warmth of Christmas without dinging the aforementioned criticisms of the made-for-television movie. This was a pleasant way to pass two hours of my night, and for those who seek romantic films with plenty of heart, believable romantic development, and doesn't use strong physical attraction as a shortcut to love, A Christmas Kiss is highly recommended.

Based on Jean Arthur's definitive biography, The Actress Nobody Knew, critics, and apparently Oller, did not think much of this film or of Arthur's co-star, Lee Bowman. At the beginning of my foray into classic cinema I would have taken this opinion, and the opinion of other legitimate critics at face value. However, having since discovered many, many underrated gems (and underrated actors) that critics in the past and the present overlook, I decided to watch The Impatient Years and form my own opinion.

Jean Arthur is one of my favorite actresses and in "The Impatient Years" (which could also be the title of her fractious tenure at Columbia), she gives one of the best performances of her film career. In contrast to her independent, softly cynical characters of the 1930s, she played slightly befuddled "spinster" roles in the 1940s, but the role of Janie Smith Anderson managed to meld both attributes into an appealing and touching performance. Lee Bowman was equally wonderful in his role as Sgt Andrew Anderson, bringing an assured, low-key type of charm to the screen. I must also praise the supporting cast made up of the fantastic Charles Coburn, and lovely character actors Harry Davenport, Charley Grapewin, Phil Brown, and Grant Mitchell.

Clocking in at a well-rounded 90 minutes, "The Impatient Years" is one of those unsung gems full of humor, pathos, and romance, which also takes a good, hard look at the issue of a runaway marriage and the strain of war. I can only imagine how audiences reacted to this film during war-time, and hope that it brought as much joy and entertainment to them as it did for me.

I got chewed out for asking this over on the Classic Movie Board, but why oh why did Myrna take this dreck? Unlike her other MGM women peers, Myrna went straight from "Oriential" villaness to vamp to good-time girl to wife and mother. In the process, she rarely got the chance to do the witty, champagne romantic comedies given to Joan Crawford or Norma Shearer at MGM, or even Irene Dunne, Claudette Colbert and Jean Arthur at other studios. Her few stabs at it were, regrettably, very, very lackluster, as it seems the studio just didn't know what to do with Myrna if she wasn't portraying William Powell's sly wife or Clark Gable's ultra-feminine love interest (on that note, I recently watched Myrna in the pre-code "Penthouse" and she was an absolute DOLL. Her character was a call-girl, but Myrna was so witty and breezy and sexy; wish she could have kept some of that).

Man-Proof is one of those lackluster films given to Myrna when she wasn't paired with Clark or William or Robert Montgomery. Here she plays Mimi, who is in love with Alan (a stodgy Walter Pidgeon), and is the sparring partner of Jimmy (Franchot Tone). Alan breaks Mimi's heart by eloping with the wealthy Elizabeth (Rosalind Russell in her annoying "lady Mary" voice)--who in turn bizarrely invites Mimi to be her bridesmaid. Elizabeth wears this horrible wedding gown that looks like some sort of Medieval wimple and gown--and is completely serious! The film begins innocently enough, but it peaks during Myrna's wonderful drunk scene at the reception, where she'd struggled to hold it together as everyone gossiped about her being jilted.

After this scene, it seems as though the writer(s) just threw at the plot. One of the culprits is probably the Production Code, since adultery was not to be condoned, so the scandal of Alan and Mimi's meetings is muted and getting around the subject was even more awkward than Joan Crawford and Robert Montgomery's escapades in "Forsaking All Others." Jimmy spends the majority of the film drunk and dully witty, which is supposed to hide his true feelings, but comes across as obnoxious in scene after scene of his drunk nonchalance. However, the main culprit is the complete and utter lack of character motivation. Mimi we get, Jimmy somewhat, but Alan and Elizabeth not at all. As I watched the film I kept asking: why did Elizabeth invite Mimi to be her bridesmaid? Why did she condone Alan running around town with Mimi? What did Alan want from Mimi after his marriage? Who were they? And after Alan returns to the oh-so understanding Elizabeth, I still didn't understand the characters.

Needless to say, the only charm to this film is Myrna Loy. The script isn't at all good, and the direction was faulty, but Myrna and Franchot tried. Track this down only if you have a hankering to view Myrna's filmography.

Allow me to preface this review by stating that I've read the original source of this story (a play produced in 1912) as well as the 1930 Joan Crawford version, Paid. With this context, my review is equal parts a commentary on this movie alone and a commentary on an adaptation and remake.

I've grown to appreciate the talents of Ruth Hussey after tracking down her available films, and while I do see her as MGM originally saw her (a potential replacement for Rosalind Russell who was a potential replacement for Myrna Loy should either one get on Louis B. Mayer's bad side {as Myrna did when she went on strike after the success of The Thin Man for more money}), she more than proves herself capable of dependable acting and even great drama in the vein of Susan Hayward (too bad Hussey hadn't been born ten or fifteen years later) in Within the Law.

The plot is simple: shop-girl Mary Turner is falsely accused of theft from her place of employment and sentenced to three years in prison, vowing revenge on the man who sent her there--her employer. This version is much more brisk than Crawford's Pre-Code melodrama, which, as a Crawford vehicle, paid more attention to its star than the actual story. This is the result of the script for Hussey's version pulling the plot out of its stage-roots and casting an attractive and charismatic actor (Tom Neal) as Richard Gilder. Also, as amusing as Marie Prevost was, Rita Johnson's "Aggie Lynch" was suitably brazen and funny as the "Aggie Lynch" from the play. However, like Paid, Within the Law cannot escape its source material and I can see why the up-and-down drama of the last act can come across as stupid. The plot twists are very plausible and characteristic of 1912, but in 1930 or 1939, they are simply over the top.

But the acting is superb, even though I must admit that given a bit more of the MGM polish and a higher tier of actors and actresses, Within the Law could have been a perfect Myrna Loy vehicle (and I did see shades of Myrna in Ruth Hussey's performance). Though this is obviously a programmer and most likely a vehicle for testing audience reaction of Hussey, it is just as entertaining as MGM's "A" pictures of this period.

After reading that "Merrily We Live" was derived from the novella that inspired "My Man Godfrey," I had to view the former to compare. Needless to say, it paled considerably not only as a sort sibling to "My Man Godfrey," but as a screwball comedy. Oh we have the obligatory zany family, the one liners, the battle of the sexes, and absurd plot twists--but that's about it. It's a screwball comedy written with all of the tropes written in deliberately, rather than organically grown from the plot. Another strike against it is that I managed to track down the actual story both movies were inspired by ("The Dark Chapter" by E.J. Rath), and "Merrily We Live" took the social satire (the core element of the story) OUT and injected a terrible ending. Granted, it was unbelievable that Godfrey turned out to be more than a hobo-turned-butler, but the script pulled it off. Brian Aherne--and the script--were unable to, and I found the twist ludicrous. Constance Bennett was absolutely terrible here. I've seen her in about six or seven movies, and while her mannerisms were present in her Pre-Code dramas, she was over the top and fake in this comedy. I had the feeling that she knew her career had died down considerably when compared to her major successes of the early 1930s, and just threw at playing her role. The supporting cast, with the exception of Billie Burke, were bland versions of the top screwball supporting casts (like Virginia Weidler, Eugene Palette, Walter Connolly, Una Merkel, Roland Young, etc) and really dragged the movie down. I don't think I can say any more about this film than skip it unless you are a fan of Bennett or Burke or Aherne, or you feel obliged to view every screwball comedy made during the Golden Era of Hollywood.

This was actually a really good movie. So good, it would stand up against todays horror movies as well as easily translate into a remake (rather surprised it hasn't already). A further poignancy is lent to Ursula's confession of her motives--even though "crossing the color line" isn't exactly PC, her speech sums up the history of this country and its treatment of anyone who does not and cannot conform to "whiteness." The movie does resort to "yellow face" (Myrna Loy and the man who plays the Swami), as well as conforming to "Oriental" and "Shady Orient" stereotypes, but the heart of the story is surprising in its realism, and for such a short movie (just an hour), it packs a good amount of thrill.

This movie looks like it's an earlier version of the Boris Karloff movie "British Intelligence" which was released in 1940, ten years after this one. The Karloff movie was pretty good. In it, a nurse is sent to England to infiltrate the household of a British Cabinet member during the War and she is to make contact with the mysterious "Strengler", who has successfully smuggled information to the German Army about Allied troop movements before the British army even gets a hold of it. Over the course of the film, the nurse/spy must keep her true identity under wraps while spying, but then it turns out that everyone's loyalties may not be to whom they were introduced as being loyal to. While the suspense isn't as taut and thrilling as todays thrillers, it's a competent spy film set during WWI.---and these actors were actually British.