I don't mind a couple of clichés, and I can handle outdated plot elements, but this film just went too far. I wonder who greenlighted this, but at the same time, look at the stuff that's being greenlighted now. It's not unwatchable, but it's not so unintentionally funny that it works as some sort of unintended comedy. It just leaves you wanting something more.🙃
Irene Dunne is //a bit// too old (42) to be playing a spinster-ish character. As well, her character is written to be a complete idiot. Why does she fall in love with a guy (Preston Foster) she spent ONE EVENING with on the train, even when us viewers can tell full well that he's a caddish cadsicle father of all caddish cads.
Why does she become so preoccupied with finding this guy, and she does she carry such a strong torch for him after ONE EVENING? I understand the marrying his brother (Robert Montgomery) on a whim (come on, it's Robert Montgomery) , but couldn't she just have learned to love him without having the slimy other brother interfere? And why does she keep telling Robert Montgomery after she leaves him that she loves him in a different way? The revealing of the fact that Irene Dunne's character had had a baby (fathered by Montgomery, I would hope), did little to make my heart thump. 😒
Dunne and Montgomery give below average performances (to think that this same year, Montgomery would star in such flicks as Mr. And Mrs. Smith and Here Comes Mr. Jordan). Irene Dunne seems to be playing up her usual annoying set of "Kentucky gal" mannerisms that she seemed to so often enjoy using, and Preston Foster plays his usual jerk but can't seem to make it worthwhile.
Maybe it was just the print I watched, but the sets in this film seem a little dull and washed-out. Scripts made of clichés can work, but only if there are actors cast in the principal roles strong enough to make them work. Not Not the quality of this film lies in the actors- the characters are so badly written that they couldn't have done anything with them if they'd tried.
Even if you're a Dunne/Montgomery/Foster completist, I'd skip this one. It's got nothing worthwhile in it, and it's not even fun to watch for a laugh. Just don't bother. 😅
Irene Dunne is //a bit// too old (42) to be playing a spinster-ish character. As well, her character is written to be a complete idiot. Why does she fall in love with a guy (Preston Foster) she spent ONE EVENING with on the train, even when us viewers can tell full well that he's a caddish cadsicle father of all caddish cads.
Why does she become so preoccupied with finding this guy, and she does she carry such a strong torch for him after ONE EVENING? I understand the marrying his brother (Robert Montgomery) on a whim (come on, it's Robert Montgomery) , but couldn't she just have learned to love him without having the slimy other brother interfere? And why does she keep telling Robert Montgomery after she leaves him that she loves him in a different way? The revealing of the fact that Irene Dunne's character had had a baby (fathered by Montgomery, I would hope), did little to make my heart thump. 😒
Dunne and Montgomery give below average performances (to think that this same year, Montgomery would star in such flicks as Mr. And Mrs. Smith and Here Comes Mr. Jordan). Irene Dunne seems to be playing up her usual annoying set of "Kentucky gal" mannerisms that she seemed to so often enjoy using, and Preston Foster plays his usual jerk but can't seem to make it worthwhile.
Maybe it was just the print I watched, but the sets in this film seem a little dull and washed-out. Scripts made of clichés can work, but only if there are actors cast in the principal roles strong enough to make them work. Not Not the quality of this film lies in the actors- the characters are so badly written that they couldn't have done anything with them if they'd tried.
Even if you're a Dunne/Montgomery/Foster completist, I'd skip this one. It's got nothing worthwhile in it, and it's not even fun to watch for a laugh. Just don't bother. 😅