It seems Regis Toomey was born to play the male moral voice. He's such a square (and a poor actor) that directors probably only see one thing. I've seen him in many movies and I can't think of any role in which he was other than the moral voice, usually to a woman (see "Framed" and "Shopworn"). Now, again he is the moral voice, this time to Margie (Marion Marsh).
Margie Evans was like a lot of young girls, full of dreams. She wanted to get out of the low rent part of New York she was living in. She wanted nice things and she wanted love and marriage. But, like a lot of young people, she was fickle. By that I mean she was easily persuaded. One minute she wanted to be married and the next minute the idea of marriage repulsed her. When her beau Jimmie Slocum (Regis Toomey) was telling her he loved her and that the grass isn't greener on the other side she wanted to be married. When her sister Sophie (Anita Page) was on the rocks with her husband Alf (Norman Foster), she no longer wanted to be married.
Margie didn't think it was so bad for women to hook up with people like Raymond Harding (Warren William), a rich playboy. He treated his women really well, but poor Margie didn't know what was expected with the gifts he gave.
He caught sight of her one day when she modeled a fur coat for his latest lady friend. He wanted to add her to his list and he began with gifts. It seems like everyone knew what those gifts entailed except Margie.
This was the second Warren William/Marian Marsh movie I've seen. The first one was "Beauty and the Boss" (1932) and it was so much better. This movie was terribly trite and formulaic.
Girl wants finer things. Guy tells her that the finer things aren't important. Girl chases finer things. Something happens and girl realizes guy was right. They live happily ever after.
But the biggest crime of this movie wasn't even the simple story of Jimmie and Margie, it was the story between her sister Sophie and Sophie's husband Alf.
The two of them had to move in with Margie and her mother when he lost his pool hall. Sophie was mortified that they were imposing on her poor old mother and Alf didn't show any remorse. He seemed to relish loafing and he had no plans to do anything but bet on himself playing pool. If being a loafer wasn't enough, they got into a tiff and he punched her in the eye.
That was the last straw. Sophie wanted a divorce right away. She and Margie went to a lawyer who wanted $200 for his services.
I knew where the movie was going to go with this. There's no way it was going to promote divorce even if a man punched his wife. It was only once. And I'm not going to say that the movie should've had them divorce either, but the resolution was far from agreeable.
He won a pool tournament and all was well.
They never even revisited his shiftlessness or the spousal abuse. It was as if winning money magically solved all of their problems which was the total opposite of the movie's pervasive message. How cheap and shallow was Sophie that she'd love Alf as long as he had money?
Now, it could be that Alf gave Sophie a heartfelt apology before he won the money and she took him back. It could be that they had a long discussion about the issues between them and then buried the hatchet, but none of that was shown. All we got was: Alf won a pool tournament and he and Sophie are happy again.
I've said it before, if movies back then suffered from one thing it was lack of depth. Too many of the movies then lacked nuance and depth which made them very black and white (literally and figuratively). "Under Eighteen" was no different.
Free on YouTube.
Margie Evans was like a lot of young girls, full of dreams. She wanted to get out of the low rent part of New York she was living in. She wanted nice things and she wanted love and marriage. But, like a lot of young people, she was fickle. By that I mean she was easily persuaded. One minute she wanted to be married and the next minute the idea of marriage repulsed her. When her beau Jimmie Slocum (Regis Toomey) was telling her he loved her and that the grass isn't greener on the other side she wanted to be married. When her sister Sophie (Anita Page) was on the rocks with her husband Alf (Norman Foster), she no longer wanted to be married.
Margie didn't think it was so bad for women to hook up with people like Raymond Harding (Warren William), a rich playboy. He treated his women really well, but poor Margie didn't know what was expected with the gifts he gave.
He caught sight of her one day when she modeled a fur coat for his latest lady friend. He wanted to add her to his list and he began with gifts. It seems like everyone knew what those gifts entailed except Margie.
This was the second Warren William/Marian Marsh movie I've seen. The first one was "Beauty and the Boss" (1932) and it was so much better. This movie was terribly trite and formulaic.
Girl wants finer things. Guy tells her that the finer things aren't important. Girl chases finer things. Something happens and girl realizes guy was right. They live happily ever after.
But the biggest crime of this movie wasn't even the simple story of Jimmie and Margie, it was the story between her sister Sophie and Sophie's husband Alf.
The two of them had to move in with Margie and her mother when he lost his pool hall. Sophie was mortified that they were imposing on her poor old mother and Alf didn't show any remorse. He seemed to relish loafing and he had no plans to do anything but bet on himself playing pool. If being a loafer wasn't enough, they got into a tiff and he punched her in the eye.
That was the last straw. Sophie wanted a divorce right away. She and Margie went to a lawyer who wanted $200 for his services.
I knew where the movie was going to go with this. There's no way it was going to promote divorce even if a man punched his wife. It was only once. And I'm not going to say that the movie should've had them divorce either, but the resolution was far from agreeable.
He won a pool tournament and all was well.
They never even revisited his shiftlessness or the spousal abuse. It was as if winning money magically solved all of their problems which was the total opposite of the movie's pervasive message. How cheap and shallow was Sophie that she'd love Alf as long as he had money?
Now, it could be that Alf gave Sophie a heartfelt apology before he won the money and she took him back. It could be that they had a long discussion about the issues between them and then buried the hatchet, but none of that was shown. All we got was: Alf won a pool tournament and he and Sophie are happy again.
I've said it before, if movies back then suffered from one thing it was lack of depth. Too many of the movies then lacked nuance and depth which made them very black and white (literally and figuratively). "Under Eighteen" was no different.
Free on YouTube.