When Ladies Meet

Hey, I like both versions of this film. Not into parsing them either. The assembled talent, story, parts, clothes, set. This is the kind of movie I like to watch multiple times. First, watch the movie through. Then, maybe follow separate characters through. There's a lot going on. Then, watch the clothes. Then, check out the house, furniture, etc. There was so much style put into these. All of these elements are what made these 30's and 40's films so special. I don't understand why all the comparisons and nitpicking. This film has a lot to enjoy. It's entertainment, folks. If you don't find something so, leave it alone. Simple enough.

.....that you can't help but like. Whether it's her unusual beauty, her sensuous speaking voice, her obvious intelligence - all together she has enormous appeal. She was extremely popular in the early thirties before fans tired of her "stiff upper lip" portrayals and they found favourites with more down to earth appeal. Her best known film is probably "The Animal Kingdom" and the cinema rivalry in that film between Harding and Myrna Loy was such a hit that they were paired again in "When Ladies Meet", a scintillating comedy adapted from Rachel Crothers play.

Mary Howard (Myrna Loy) is a best selling author who is seeing a lot of her publisher, Rogers Woodruf - for business purposes!!! Her dizzy friend Bridgit (Alice Brady) tells her she should "go for it" after all his wife is an "awful dub"!! "He's a married man" - "I know, the best ones always are"!! Unbeknownst to everyone they are having a very secret affair. Her new book is very close to her heart - it is about a woman, having an affair with a married man, who wants to confront his wife and have a heart to heart talk - her lover is against it, much the same as her real life situation.

Meanwhile, Jimmie Lee (an annoying Robert Montgomery), who spends a lot of his free time proposing to Mary, who rejects him just as frequently, starts spending time with Claire (Ann Harding), Roger Woodruf's wife, who is more darling than dub!!! Knowing that Mary is staying at Bridgit's for the weekend, he "accidentally on purpose" brings Claire for a visit. Even though their friendship is platonic, for a gag, Jimmie suggests they give the impression that they are... .... to make Mary jealous -"I'm dust under her feet - not the cream in her coffee"!!! Claire throws herself into her role with great gusto - "Jimmy-Jimmy, did I leave my handkerchief with you, when we were waiting to be alone!!!"

The film only picks up when Ann Harding appears - even though she didn't appear until almost half an hour into the film. MGM was just starting to realise what they had in Myrna Loy. Even though she is the second billed actress - she is the main character. But Ann Harding was a real delight, I agree with some of the other reviewers, she steals the movie with her elegance and sophistication, the scenes between her and Myrna Loy are riveting to watch. The first half hour was pretty "talkie" without much being said. Robert Montgomery, who has never been a favourite of mine, played his usual type, shallow playboy who never seems to have employment (he is supposed to be a reporter and he occasionally mentions deadlines, but never meets them)!!!! Frank Morgan plays Rogers Woodruf, the publisher both women seem to be crazy about. But apart from Alice Brady as balmy Bridgit, together Ann Harding and Myrna Loy wipe everyone else off the screen. The conversations they have "When Ladies Meet" make for essential viewing.

Highly Recommended.

Though dated by modern standards, When Ladies Meet carried a popular message in the early part of the 20th century. It also carried a controversial argument, and both sides are explored in the film: can a wife and a mistress calmly and rationally solve their differences? If that seems interesting to you, rent this version-not the remake.

Myrna Loy stars as a young, modern authoress who has fallen in love with her publisher, Frank Morgan. He's married, but Myrna's never met his wife, and from her point of view, he's unhappy at home. She decides to prove her point to the world by writing her next novel based on her current situation with a twist ending of wishful thinking; in the end of her novel, the young woman confronts the man's wife and explains how much she loves him. The wife is gracious and realizes the sensible thing would be to give her husband a divorce, and all parties are happy. The trouble is, no one likes Myrna's unpublished manuscript. Frank claims it's unrealistic, as does Myrna's ardent and often rebuffed suitor, Robert Montgomery.

I won't tell you exactly what happens next, but I will say that Myrna gets a chance to test her theory with Frank's wife, Ann Harding. Before I saw this version, I tried watching the 1941 remake but couldn't get through it; now I know it was because the film was badly cast. In place of him who's so innocent she doesn't really know what she's doing is Joan Crawford. In place of the man so in love with her he refuses to look at another woman is Robert Taylor. In place of the married publisher who gets caught up in his emotions and isn't capable of rationality is Herbert Marshall. In place of the discarded wife who couldn't keep his interest at home is Greer Garson. How are any of these choices believable?

The 1933 original is very well cast and very believable. Myrna nails the attitude of a young person certain in her convictions without knowing what they are, and yet she's not so irritating you can't forgive her for her ignorance. Frank Morgan seems troubled, and it's totally believable he might not know exactly what he wants. Ann Harding is plain enough to make you understand why Frank has strayed, but she's strong enough to make you believe she'll put up a fight. This version is very good, so if you want to watch a representation of a bygone era check it out.

This first film version of the Rachel Crothers play finds Robert Montgomery as the irrepressible playboy who will do just about anything to win Myrna Loy back from the clutches of married publisher Frank Morgan. Even if that means bringing Morgan's wife Ann Harding into the picture. And When Ladies Meet, watch out.

A later version was done by MGM but with more of an emphasis on the mistress than the wife. Joan Crawford had Myrna Loy's role and Ann Harding's part was done by Greer Garson.

Robert Taylor played Montgomery's role and the difference between the two films is the quality of their performances. Taylor had developed a real gift for light comedy, but for Robert Montgomery this kind of part was what made his reputation.

Frank Morgan was far better than Herbert Marshall because he played the role as the two timing rat he was. You watch Marshall's performance and you'd think he was the wronged party. As for Morgan, no one loved him more than I in the role of the inept bumbler he usually played, but parts like in When Ladies Meet and also in Hallelujah, I'm a Bum do show him to good advantage in other kinds of roles.

It's hard to choose between Garson and Harding though. Both of them have the best part in the film and both make equally good use of it. Each are the best in their respective casts.

Eliminated from the second version is a great deadpan performance by Sterling Holloway as the allergy prone golf caddy who destroys Montgomery's game as he's playing with Harding.

The original play ran on Broadway for 191 performances in the 1932-1933 season and starred Walter Abel, Frieda Inescourt, Herbert Rawlinson and Selena Royle. Ironically all of these folks had substantial film careers, but could never be classified as any kind of box office.

When Ladies Meet is witty and bright and a great example of the sophisticated type comedy that's just not being done any more.

I saw and reviewed the 1941 remake of "When Ladies Meet" almost three years ago. I was a bit cold on the film--and thought it should have been much better considering the star-filled cast. However, when I saw the 1933 version today, I really appreciated it. This leads me to wonder--is the original version that much better or has my taste just changed over the last few years? I am not sure which--but I can highly recommend this earlier film.

The film is about adultery--a common topic during the Pre-Code era (up until mid 1934 when the new Production Code tightened the moral code within Hollywood's films). At first, it appears to actually endorse it or take a judgment neutral view--as Myrna Loy and Frank Morgan prepare to run off together even though Morgan is married. However, Loy's friend (Robert Montgomery) inexplicably loves her and wants to split the pair up because he feels this relationship is wrong. So, he connives to have Loy meet the wife (Ann Harding). What happens here is what makes the film so good--the women don't know who the other one actually is and they become friends. Only later do they discover the truth. I loved this final portion and I'd say more, but I don't want to ruin it. Suffice to say, it handles this moral quandary in a responsible and satisfying manner.

Aside from a few quibbles (such as why Montgomery wants Loy is she shows such selfish behaviors), I really enjoyed the film. Fine acting and a nice script make for an adult film that really is as good and hard-hitting today as it was back in 1933. Well worth seeing.