Live, Love and Learn (1937) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Silly but harmless
LadyJaneGrey9 February 2006
I can imagine Robert Montgomery's quandary circa 1935. "Here's a script where I am a handsome boat builder who refuses to live off his rich theatrical agent wife's money! Here's another where I am handsome artist who refuses to live off his rich socialite's money! How about this one, where I am a handsome advertising executive who refuses to live off his madcap heiress wife's money! Which one should I choose? God, they're all so exciting!" And so it was with "Live, Love, and Learn." Rosalind Russell is a socialite who gives it all up for bohemian artist Montgomery, because he has nonvulgar ideals and his idea of success is more than just making money, and it doesn't hurt that he's a full-on hottie. They meet cute (she flies off her horse and directly through his canvas) and in the next scene are standing before a justice of the peace while Bob tries to talk Roz out of it. Clearly, some time has gone by, but wouldn't it be funny if this were just hours later? Maybe in 1930 but not 1937.

I saw some in-jokes here that I must comment upon. Bob brings Roz home to his starving-artist garret. His drunken friend comes by to pay his matrimonial respects and passes out. They bundle him onto a couch, push him out into the hall, and cover his face with a painting rag. Bob says, "Now he looks like a decapitated corpse," which, in fact, was much the plot of "Night Must Fall," which Bob and Roz played the next year (I wonder which was filmed first?). Later, the couple sneak behind a group of journalists trying to get an interview with the now-infamous artist. They are listening to his blustering friend (Robert Benchley, mostly wasted here). When the journalists notice, Benchley says "He wants to be alone," which even in 1938 was associated with Garbo. Helen Vinson is good fun as the "friend" who promotes the artist's work but also wants him in the Biblical sense.

I did love the scene where the trio, tired of reporters trying to get an interview with the artist (who caused a riot in Central Park), mistake Monty Wooley (great here as he always would be), a genuine art critic, for one of them and proceed to play comic assault upon him. Later, when Bob gets true success, Roz still wants him to play the foolish zany and start cutting suspenders at a showing of his work, where all the people seems fake to her. He resents her implication that his work is not legitimate enough to be truly good. He feels his success will enable him to finally support her in the style she deserves. She thinks he's sold out for a quick buck and is quite happy to live in the garret and put up with his continually dropping-in friend. (By the way, I can also imagine Roz's complaints to the makers of the picture: "Women don't clean in heels and a dress. Please! Can't I wear something more appropriate?" "Roz, baby, people don't pay good money to see Rosalind Russell clean her hubby's hovel in rags! They want to see her in a dress, even when it doesn't make sense! After all, this is MGM!") Somewhat disturbing to our 21st century minds in the scene where Bob arranges with a flower seller on the street to take her son home to paint him. Of course, she's Italian (must have those stereotypes) and she says, "What color?" He takes the kid home and attempts to capture his free spirit by dressing him up in a fig leaf configuration and posing him with a lamb. The pedophilic overtones of this are truly shudder-inducing. I suppose in 1937 this was not given another thought…

Anyway, the central theme of this picture is, I suppose, that one can live and love easily but it is somewhat harder to adjust to the expectations of those we do love. This isn't a bad film but a mediocre one, and the actors are simply hampered by the inane story. Roz would later go on to great success in sharply written screwball comedies and I suppose this was a baby step in that direction. Bob, though, was continually hampered by the noble, handsome lover roles he did so well in the early 30s and was still playing in the late 30s. He must have fought hard to play the psychotic killer in "Night Must Fall," but it didn't seem to lead to other worthy roles. It is truly lamentable that he didn't latch on to, say, a role like Nick Charles in the Thin Man series. He would have done smashingly in something like that. Getting back to this film, he and Roz have great chemistry together and make it a pretty enjoyable 90 minutes.
18 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Unlikeable Characters
traceywilliamson-4169828 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Although I'll watch anything with Rosalind Russell, and I like Montgomery too, I just couldn't get past my dislike of these characters to enjoy the film. Somehow we are supposed to think Bob is living an honest and better life at the beginning because he only paints what he wants. While he also buys everything on credit without a care, stiffs his landlady, and acts like an odious ass to anyone who doesn't share his high ideals.

I kind of liked him when he got noticed and started making what I felt were positive changes in his life. What is wrong with wanting to provide your wife with a real house, not a studio apartment that you have to share with another man? And what is wrong with making a living at something you are good at? If you have talents and skills and can use them to support yourself, I see that as a good thing. But we are supposed to see Bob as having lost his ideals. Maybe he did get a bit carried away, but it's stupid for them to go back to the studio apartment at the end. I guess he'll go back to painting what he wants and buying everything on credit again. I'd hate to be his grocer, tailor, or landlady.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
An idiotic screenplay sabotages the stars' efforts.
Art-2212 December 1998
Although Robert Montgomery and Rosalind Russell are two of my favorite performers, I couldn't accept most of what was happening onscreen. The writers tried hard to make this a zany romantic comedy, and it starts out that way, as artist Montgomery meets socialite Russell when she takes a spill while on a fox hunt, right into his easel, and faints after some exchange of words. In the very next scene they're at a justice of the peace getting married! The writers didn't believe in long (or even short) courtships. They are both penniless (Russell throws her purse out of the window of a bus to be at Montgomery's poverty level) and have to extort groceries from grocer Charles Judels, by threatening to yell from the rooftops that he overcharges his customers. So what do they do when her rich uncle sends a $2,000 check, afraid she could not cope with poverty? They frame it and use it for a dartboard. What starving artist would do that? Robert Benchley is sort of a hanger-on, seeming to live with them and drunk most of the time. He's in the film for his witty comments, but seems witless most of the time. After Montgomery's painting causes a riot by sailors and marines in Central Park, gallery owner Monty Woolley (in his first film) becomes interested in Montgomery's work and goes to see him. But the trio has been so inundated by reporters because of the riot, they think he is one of them. In perhaps the funniest scene in the film (if you can ignore its viciousness), they snip his tie, cut his suspenders and pour a pitcher of water on his head. Still, Woolley makes him famous with a special showing of his work, and Russell's friend, Helen Vinson, gets him commissions to make him rich. Russell, however, is unhappy at the change she sees in Montgomery. I winced (as did Montgomery) when she suggests at the gallery showing that they start snipping ties of the patrons. He doesn't paint anymore for pleasure, she complains, but sold out his principles for crass commercialism. She asks for a divorce and leaves him, but they are both unhappy. Well, Montgomery lived and loved, but will he ever learn that making money is not as important as doing what you enjoy most?
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Thoroughly charming...
moonspinner5526 July 2008
At first, the kooky tone of "Live, Love and Learn" seems like a put-on with no place to take its collection of carefree characters. Long Island gal from a wealthy brood (whom she apparently finds boring) meets and marries a penniless artist from Greenwich Village in record time, and doesn't seem to mind his "fire trap" apartment nor his jovial, half-sloshed roommate. But when the artist is discovered and has a showing of his work, he immediately believes the complimentary palaver delivered by the idle rich, soon alienating his spouse and best friend. It's at this point the tone of the picture sneakily changes, and one sees it isn't all about cut-ups living the Bohemian lifestyle. George Fitzmaurice's direction is smooth--and his trio of players (Robert Montgomery, Rosalind Russell, and an adorable Robert Benchley) are a cute comedy team--but when the edge in co-screenwriter Charles Brackett's script creeps in unexpectedly, it braces the viewer for more than just crazy laughs. This is one picture that promises something extra, and then delivers on that promise. There are some wayward moments that take the plot off track (too much in there about a little boy sitting in as Montgomery's model), but the running gags are funny and the writing is smart and stylish. Does it capture the real Greenwich Village of 1937? Probably not, but the sheer attempt at a scratchy-yet-slick scenario reaps its own rewards, and the performers understand the material and make it substantial. *** from ****
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Probably a casualty of the production code...
AlsExGal18 September 2016
...because some of the possible bawdier aspects of this situation could not be explored due to that production code. Nevertheless, the cast is really good in this one and marks Monty Woolley's first film appearance at age 49 as an art critic. Let me tell you, Wooley's screen persona in his later films would never have taken lying down the shabby treatment he got when being mistaken for a reporter like he pretty much did here.

Robert Montgomery plays a starving artist who impulsively marries heiress Rosalind Russell. He doesn't care if his art sells, but with her encouragement he becomes quite successful, and the success goes to his head. Now she must bring him back down to earth. Enjoyable comedy, good MGM production. The stars are always enjoyable to watch.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of it is that the comic possibilities inherent in a rich, society girl adapting to the bohemian life are left completely unexplored. Also, Robert Montgomery has the personality and manner of a banker in this one, not an artist. Roz Russell's good, as usual, and Robert Benchley, playing a mooch, is amusing. Mickey Rooney is in this for just one minute, but it's really funny, because as soon as you hear that Tarzan-yell, you know who it's gotta be! That voice is unmistakable!
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Watch, Yawn and Sleep
blanche-224 May 2008
"Live, Love and Learn" is a 1937 MGM film starring Robert Montgomery, Rosalind Russell, Robert Benchley and Monte Wooley. Surprisingly, it's not very good. Russell is an heiress who marries poor artist Montgomery, only to see him become successful and interested in money -the very thing she was trying to escape.

With better direction and a stronger script, this film might have had more of a "Holiday" feel to it, but it doesn't. It's part comedy, part drama, and because it doesn't know what it's supposed to be, neither does the audience. The two forms aren't integrated enough.

One scene that shows the innocence of the times is one in which Montgomery hires a little boy to pose for him in a loincloth. A very discomfiting scene when watched today, yet then, it was supposed to be funny. However, this is toward the end of the movie, which had dragged on too long, so the scene wasn't terribly amusing.

The acting was okay. Frankly, it's kind of a waste of time, despite the good cast.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Loose, flighty Bohemian film turns dull and sour by mid-point
SimonJack27 August 2020
"Live, Love and Learn" is a thoroughly wacky film, from start to finish. That doesn't mean it's all funny - it's just a wacky plot. The first half is all Bohemian with Robert Montgomery, Rosalind Russell and Robert Benchley setting up house together - which the first two don't mind. The last half departs from the Bohemian and seems to be a critique of the bane of the Bohemians - wealthy living and how it isn't really living. But this is a somewhat dark and meandering and much too long- lasting stretch of the film that loses the comedic touch of the first half.

Montgomery's Bob Graham is the ultra-Bohemian painter (although in his standard duds of the time, he doesn't strike one as Bohemian in dress). And, if his apartment is a bit too neat and tidy for such a lifestyle, let's just say that he is at least thoroughly Bohemian in his mind and way of thinking. Russell's Julie Stoddard immediately falls for the guy when she literally falls over a horse jump and lands in his painting setup. Benchley is his best friend, a perennial sot who comes to pass out in Bob's apartment when he's well into his cups. At least that's the message conveyed from the first and only time the film shows him that way. The rest of the time, he's the source of good barbs, jabs and witticisms. That provides most of the comedy.

It's hard to take Graham's sudden change in character once he comes into the dough. And, the film's long dwelling on him in that state is a downer. Monty Woolley has a couple of nice scenes as Mr. Bawltitude, and Mickey Rooney has a short part as Jerry Crump. Montgomery's Graham isn't very likable, and Russell gives the best performance in the film.

One can't say how many movie buffs might enjoy this film. It's borderline to think of it as being enjoyable. I stretched to give it six stars, but those are for Russell's, Benchley's and Woolley's contributions to the film.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Awkward execution of a not-very-good premise
xan-the-crawford-fan31 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This film could have been good, were it not for a shoddy screenplay and very choppy storytelling. Bob, a free-willed, caddish painter (Robert Montgomery- it's always funny when actors play characters with their own names) meets Julie, a rich woman not wanting to be rich (Rosalind Russell) after she falls into his canvas while he is painting. He gets mad at her, she gets mad at him, she (pretends to...I think) passes out and then...they're getting married.

Why are they getting married? How much time has passed since when she fainted? They don't tell us, but we can only assume that it's the same day. Only in the movies, folks. Yet, when Bob and Julie kiss, she's...magically in love with him? And of course, Roz being Roz, she's wearing a ridiculous hat in that scene. They move into Bob's modest apartment (modest for an M-G-M production), with his charming little (probably gay like homosexual) friend Oscar. Bob, Oscar and Julie live the gay (happy gay) life, ripping off grocers and painting pictures...but...

Back into Julie's life comes an annoying "friend" called Lilly. The actress who plays her speaks in an annoying, put-upon accent that sounds like a mix of Katharine Hepburn and Greer Garson- IT DROVE ME NUTS. I WANTED TO SLAP HER. She doesn't become evil until later.

After an incident in the park between the navy and the "bellhops", which results in a massive brawl and Bob and Julie spending the night in jail, people suddenly become interested in Bob's work. There is a funny gag which involves them scaring off reporters and art critics *and slightly before that, an unexpected Garbo reference ("He VANTS to be alone.") But, after mistaking an important art gallery owner for another pesky reporter (more screwball), the film that was a light comedy takes a jarring turn into hokey melodramatics.

Bob lets the guy display his work, has a successful opening night, becomes rich under the guidance of Shrilly Lilly, leaves Julie in the dust, and becomes a caddish cadsicle father of all caddish cads. Julie, led back into the life she had wanted to escape, is unhappy, and not even Oscar can cheer her up. After a fight between her and Bob, in which she defaces an important portrait Bob is painting, Julie decides to get a divorce.

Bob can't paint after she's gone, he realizes, so he leaves his high-rise penthouse, his money, and Lilly in the dust *THANK GOODNESS*, and gets back with Julie. There is an amusing slapstick finale.

Robert Montgomery and Rosalind Russell do what they can with their roles, as do the supporting cast, but the main problem is that they're just too underwritten. Montgomery's character is especially unlikable, and Roz's character comes across as more pathetic than usual. The screenplay appears to have been written in the dark, changing from screwball to melodramatics every five minutes. Despite being less than an hour and twenty minutes, the pace drags badly.

More things I noticed:

Montey Wolley looks kind of like Emil Jannings did in Der Blaue Engel.

Robert Montgomery only wears one dinner jacket.

This same year (1937), Bob and Roz would co-star in the minor classic Night Must Fall.

The set of the modest home is nicer, versus the penthouse Bob and Julie rent later in the film. The penthouse is a good example of how NOT to make an art deco set.

That's all.

Not the worst way to spend an hour and twenty minutes, but these two have made better movies. Check out The Women or Private Lives instead.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Harmless fun
planktonrules26 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This film probably won't change your life, but it is a lot of fun and worth a look if you are a fan of 1930s Hollywood films. To me, seeing Monty Woolley in one of his first films as well as the adventures of a very likable cast was well worth my time.

Robert Montgomery plays a Bohemian artist whose ideals do not include money or even conventional success. When he meets rich society girl Rosalind Russell, they fall in love and Montgomery's odd ways and lifestyle don't bother Roz in the least--in fact she loves the simple life with Robert and his hanger-on friend, Robert Benchley. However, later in the film the worst possible thing happens--Montgomery's art is discovered and he soon becomes rich and well-heeled. Suddenly, instead of a low-rent apartment, they are living in a huge but sterile luxury suite filled with servants and Roz is miserable--after all, where is the sweet man she married? Unfortunately, he doesn't see this change as a bad thing, but it's obvious to those he loved that Montgomery has become a money-grubbing sellout!

As another reviewer pointed out, there is one small scene that today is quite disturbing. Late in the film, Montgomery gets the idea to paint a picture of a poor kid. The kid doesn't speak Engligh and the mother very willingly lets the child go with Montgomery even though they just met--no questions asked! He offers her money and the next scene he and the boy are alone in his studio! Pretty creepy!

Overall, this is a film that is best not to think through too much. The plot is a bit tough to swallow but the journey is quite fun and entertaining. Like all the other Rosalind Russell-Robert Montgomery films, this one is entertaining and well made--they certainly made a good team.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Chemistry and good looks only get you so far
HotToastyRag3 November 2019
Since I love Robert Montgomery, and since he has such great chemistry with Rosalind Russell, it's a cinch that I'd rent all five of their movies together. Live, Love and Learn may have given me terrific eye candy, but it ended up being so silly, it seemed like one of those terrible Doris Day comedies from the 1960s. You might want to just watch the first half hour and turn it off before it gets bad.

The first scene is incredibly cute. Bob is painting a landscape in the countryside, and a foxhunt passes him by. Roz is on horseback, and when she topples, she accidentally knocks over his canvas. They argue, and in the midst of their argument, the scene cuts to their wedding ceremony! Roz is giving him moony eyes, but all through their vows, Bob is constantly trying to talk her out of it, vowing she'll be sorry for ruining her life if she goes through with it. They do go through with it, and the rest of the movie follows their early years as he continues to be a starving artist and she gives up all her money and finery. They live in a studio apartment with loud, obnoxious neighbors and a live-in moocher, Robert Benchley, who refuses to leave even though he knows he's dampening their newlywed bliss.

The main problem with the movie is that although he's extremely handsome and charming, Bob's character isn't very likable. He never tries to better Roz's life, he pulls rude pranks on total strangers, picks fights when people don't like his artwork, and then, when he gets a whiff of success, he turns into an egotistical snob. There's only so far good looks can take a person, and unfortunately, his don't take him to the end of the movie. If you do decide to rent it, you'll see Monty Woolley as an art dealer, Helen Vinson as Roz's snobby pseudo-friend, and Mickey Rooney for about fifteen seconds as one of the neighbor kids. You'll also see that Bob and Roz could have easily been cast in the adorable Rag-winning comedy Third Finger, Left Hand.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
rushed marriage rom-com
SnoopyStyle30 January 2024
Starving artist Bob Graham (Robert Montgomery) is painting in the countryside when he almost gets run over by a fox hunt. Socialite Julie Stoddard (Rosalind Russell) gets thrown off her horse and into him. They get marry right away. She quickly adjusts to his bohemian lifestyle. Oscar (Robert Benchley) and Jerry Crump (Mickey Rooney) are some of their intrusive neighbors. Lily Chalmers (Helen Vinson) is her society best friend. A riot in Central Park turns Bob's art into an overnight success.

I would like more romancing before their marriage if only to see her home life as a socialite. That would make the class jumps more compelling. Their relationship needs more setting up and possibly a villain. More than anything, I love Russell and Montgomery is a pretty good match. Their relationship seems very matter of fact. It just needs a bit more heat during the first half and their marriage is so rushed. The drama only comes in the second half.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Art for art's sake
bkoganbing27 August 2015
It is someone amusing and ironical that MGM which had for its slogan Art for Art's sake in Latin did a comedy based on just that premise. Live Love And Learn stars Robert Montgomery as the Bohemian artistic type and Rosalind Russell as the society girl who falls for him. They marry and he goes about trying to get people to notice him.

When critic Monty Woolley does notice him Montgomery and his work get taken up by the rich and famous. In the process though he loses his muse and Russell. Around to catch him is Russell's society pal Helen Vinson playing one of her patented 'other woman' roles.

A cast of familiar players step into roles like Vinson that are easily identifiable. Such wit that is in the script is provided by Robert Benchley as the hero's perpetually inebriated friend who seems to have moved right in with them.

Today Benchley's character would be treated exactly as he is, gay. A closeted gay to be sure as this was the era of the newly adapted Code in Hollywood. His character seems to have deliberately been put in the film in order that someone get to say witty things. If you've seen the film Remember? that starred Robert Taylor and Greer Garson also from MGM Lew Ayres was playing a similar role to Benchley's.

Montgomery and Russell starred in Night Must Fall which won for Montgomery critical praise and an Oscar nomination. But the public stayed away in droves. I'm guessing that Louis B. Mayer wanted to showcase his stars in more traditional roles for them when he assigned them Live Love And Learn.

Tradition was preserved.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
As A Greenwich Village Native, I Know The Sets and Attitudes Here Are All Wrong
Handlinghandel7 June 2003
This begins with Roz Russell as a rich girl riding her horse near where Bohemian Robert Montgomery is working on a painting. She falls off the horse, twice, and next thing : They're getting married by a justice of the peace.

Was a whole movie scrapped and the ghastly goings-on that follow plugged in?

This is very possibly the worst "A" picture from the 1930s I've ever seen, wasting the two leads and such excellent supporting players as Robert Benchley and Monty Woolley.

(Helen Vinson comes through unscathed, as a viper.)

There is a strong secondary gay theme. First there are snide jokes about a decorator and his "partner." (This, of course, is not to mention that Benchley is living with Montgomery before Russell moves in.)

When Montgomery realizes he has sold out as an artist, he propositions a woman on the street to let him paint her little boy, whom we later see eating candy and wearing a loincloth as Montgomery tries to capture his image.

It doesn't seem as if the people behind this ever lived, loved, or -- very definitely -- learned.

How astonishing that Charles Brackett gets credit for the arch, smug screenplay!
11 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Should have been much better
wildbill-926968 June 2021
What a fine cast, what a shame how they were wasted. Charmless and tending towards moronic...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed