7/10
Disappointingly uneven, but still worth watching
3 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Odd. A couple of our reviewers found this performance by Lionel Barrymore better than his usual. I found it to be uneven. Sometimes a bit of overacting whenever he assumed the part of a talking senator. But, after he begins his fall, he gets quite good. Overall, despite the unevenness, his performance is pretty agreeable, as always. It is interesting to note his arthritic hands in this film, although it was to be quite a while before he was confined to a wheelchair.

This film was made in 1932, and is very "old Hollywood". I couldn't help but think how much better a film it would have been had it been made perhaps five years later as pictures became more and more sophisticated.

The story rambles a bit. It's good early on and much later, but it the middle it drags a bit. It seems rather absurd that a man as dedicated as the lead character (Barrymore) would resign his Senate seat, even at the behest of his wife under these circumstances.

Aside from Barrymore, there are a number of decent performances here...and some not so good. Karen Morley as the schemer and wife who brings the Senator down is fairly good; I was not at all familiar with her from previous pictures. Diane Sinclair, as the adult daughter of the Senator...well, let's put it this way -- it's pretty clear why she had such a minimal career as an actress. Nils Asther. Hmmm...what did Hollywood see in him...perhaps just his good looks.

Instead of remaking successful films, I always thought that Hollywood should fix/remake movies like this one. Even today, it could be handled quite well. Worth a watch despite some disappointing aspects.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed