Not what I expected
25 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I wasn't sure how to rate this film, so I didn't put a star rating.

At first, I wanted to give it a ten, because I felt that it should be rated higher than it is (worse Crawford films like Mannequin and Johnny Guitar have higher ratings), but it's not a ten film, and even though I AM a fan (admittedly quite an obsessive one), I don't tend to give pity stars (even to Joan Crawford). It's not a bad film, however, and rates higher than Laughing Sinners (which gets a solid 6 from me and was made this same year).

Basically, Joan Crawford's character is rich, and she has a brother, and they are carefree youth who love to party (actually, most silent and Pre-Code Joan Crawford films feature her as a carefree youth who likes to party, but Metero-Goldwyn-Mayer realized she could act and responded to that by typecasting her as a shopgirl). The stock market crashes, and they lose all their money. Then, their father dies and they must get jobs.

A fairly popular theme in 1930s and 1940s films was the "Women can be newspaper people too!" female journalist character in a roomful of ever so slightly sexist men (think Front Page Woman with Bette Davis or His Girl Friday), and that is what Bonnie (Joan Crawford) becomes. Her brother gets into the shady business of selling alcohol during prohibition and becomes part of a gang (by accident). But, oh, Joan shows them she's every bit as good a journalist as any man. She also dances almost the exact same dance she was given to do in Laughing Sinners and Dancing Lady (M-G-M really liked to stick her in ruts, didn't they?), but it works for the part, and Clark Gable notices her. My goodness, Gable is slimy in this film. He was basically stuck in awkward roles (usually slimy gangsters) until he had developed his on-screen persona.

So, after Gable the gangster notices her, she attempts to seduce him to get a lead on her story. She runs into her brother, who is in a lot of trouble by this point, and she gets exposed. Gable and another guy threaten to kill them both, and then there is a three-way shoot-off. If this were a later Gable-Crawford film, Crawford would run to Gable in despair, but seeing as this was their first film together and he wasn't her romantic lead, she rushes to her brother. They all die, but Crawford gets her story and she is hailed as a hero. Of course, this wouldn't be a 1930s film without a stupid happy-sappy ending, and Crawford quits her journalism to go off with the jerky guy she was supposed to be in love with (he was a jerk, they had no chemistry, and Crawford was a rather good, if slightly unethical, journalist).

The nighttime swim isn't honestly that saucy, or risqué, but I'm looking at it through 2021 eyes. And, for the record, I do not find this film as dated as other films I've seen from 1931- and I was born in this century. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned.

All in all, I liked this film, even if Gable was underused. It's good if you want to see young Joan. And no, there is no slapping, I think that became a Crawford trademark in the mid '30s. With the advent of the production code- she slapped Robert Montgomery in No More Ladies (1935).
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed