Eine Dame der Gesellschaft

Many earlier reviewers have said the Crawford was "mis-cast" as Mrs. Cheyney. I have to disagree. It is not her best performance (for her best acting, see her small but scene-stealing role in The Women and for a Crawford feast, see her Oscar-winning turn in Mildred Pierce), but it is far from her worst. The blame cannot be entirely placed on Crawford either. Nor can it be placed on the director. It must be placed on the production code administrators who sheared Hollywood scripts after 1934, cutting out anything considered "risqué." The original play by Fredric Lonsdale is a surprisingly hilarious and fresh send-up of the class sytem in England. Butler and footmen who are actually thieves in disguise get to act veddy propper and then (when the guests leave) get to drop their phony apparel. Its really quite funny. In the play, when Crawford's would-be suitor catches her at robbery, he forces her to spend a night in the closet with him. This was wonderfully handled in the 1929 Norma Shearer original of this picture. But the production code said that thieves had to always be punished, and sexual actions could not be forced or blackmailed. Thus, this is an extremely bowdlerized version of the play. It is interesting to watch the stars interplay, and I'm a bit surprised that it flopped so largely in 1937. Seeing some of the junk that goes over big nowadays, one would think that with a cast like this and high production values, it would have at least made its mark. See the Norma Shearer version, if you can find it. Unfortunately, its very rare (there is a laser disc version of it on The Dawn of Sound Volume III), but totally worth it. It is risqué and hilarious. Or see Trouble In Paradise, another early pre-Code comedy about jewel thieves, who in that film, don't have to face punishment for their actions.

The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (1937)

Underrated! The dialog here is truly witty and hilarious. The play of types is of course old fashioned, and the drooling men chasing Joan Crawford (title character) around. But if you lighten up about any of that, you'll find it truly funny. So for the first half hour you have a model comedy, seemingly made up of British characters but all (but one) played by Americans. Such is Hollywood. What throws the movie into a bit of a tailspin is the big surprise twist that you can sort of smell coming after a stretch. It's a fun and funny idea, but the banter loses some sparkle and the pressure of the plot completely changes gears. Mrs. Cheyney is not longer the pursued (at least not in the same way). William Powell is terrific (he appears as a butler, of all things, one year after "My Man Godfrey") and Frank Morgan and Nigel Bruce are both fun. I was less familiar with the other female players, but they made a large ensemble work well. If you can click with the beginning, you might (like me) be really in stitches. It's that clever. Then if your interest fades a bit, that's okay. It's still an entertaining, farcical movie.

What a wonderful cast. Some of the best Thespians of the 1930's or any decade for that matter. William Powell, Robert Montgomery, Joan Crawford, Nigel Bruce, Frank Morgan, Jessie Ralph, Melville Cooper, to name the main ones. Then what went wrong? The answer is in the weak script and ho-hum direction. Based on a play, the movie is stagy, much too talky. There is little wit nor many clever lines in the wordy script. So all the viewer has left is a bunch of good actors talking themselves to death and putting the audience to sleep in the process. The script is also predictable.

The plot is actually a good one. The charming and mysterious Mrs. Cheyney woos rich eligible bachelors and one not so eligible to gain their confidence so she and her accomplices can fleece them. Unfortunately Mrs. Cheyney falls for one of the eligible bachelors. Will she go through with the fleece? The answer lies in the last half of the film. Since Hollywood today is remaking so many movie classics that don't really need remaking, why not remake some of the movies such as this one that could use a good make over?

As noted by critics there is a degree of miscasting involved as well. Joan Crawford just does not fit as an adventurer passing herself off as a social big-wig in England. William Power would have played Robert Montgomery's role better than the role assigned him. Robert Montgomery on the other hand is well suited for his role as is Nigel Bruce and the rest of the cast.

Even if you are a fan of the stars of this fluff and an admirer of 1930's Hollywood cinema, you may still find this movie slow moving and hoping that this is truly the last of Mrs. Cheyney.

Joan Crawford plays the title character. She's a jewel thief and partner of William Powell. She cons her way into a rich society family and romances Robert Montgomery. But then she grows to like the people she's supposed to be stealing from so she has a crisis of conscience. With a cast like this (Crawford, Powell, Montgomery, Frank Morgan, Nigel Bruce), there really is no reason this shouldn't have worked. But it doesn't. It's a little stagey and dry. Powell is not in it enough. When he is on screen, the script doesn't give him a chance to shine. As a matter of fact, it seemed to me like he didn't even want to be there playing second fiddle to Robert Montgomery. Can't say that I blamed him, if that's the case. I like Montgomery alright in certain roles but these movies he did with Joan were not among them. See it for the cast but don't get your hopes up.

Joan Crawford is a jewel thief trying to break into society in "The Last of Mrs. Cheyney," a 1937 film from MGM also starring William Powell, Robert Montgomery, Nigel Bruce, Frank Morgan, and Jessie Ralph. It's a remake of a 1929 film which starred Norma Shearer. Crawford is a sophisticated and glamorous woman we first meet on board ship as she's maneuvering and flirting her way into the company of a society crowd. While doing so, she meets Lord Arthur Dilling (Robert Montgomery). He and Lord Kelton (Morgan) pursue her. Once in London, she wangles the one thing that she and her gang of thieves (led by William Powell as her butler) have been waiting for - an invitation to Lady Ebley's country home, and a crack at Lady Ebley's fabulous pearl necklace. All doesn't go as planned.

Given the star power, the film has some interesting moments, but for the most part, it's played too straight. A lighter touch was needed. This is perhaps a directorial problem (there were several) or the fact that Joan Crawford was better at drama than at comedy, and William Powell better at comedy than at drama. Powell does a great job, but it isn't much of a role. Audiences probably left the theater disappointed - perhaps part of the reason the film flopped at the box office. He doesn't have a lot to play off of, and no chemistry with Crawford. Robert Montgomery is his usual self in one of those roles that fit him like a glove, but the star trio is too somber.

Joan Crawford looks fabulous, and with a strong director who had a concept of the script, she would have been fine. She didn't have a grasp of playing comedy, but she was a hard worker who seemingly took direction well. It's a shame MGM spent all that money on what was a first-class production only to have it just lay an egg. Apparently some of the racier parts of the play version had to be left out due to the code. At times, the film drags.

Several of the comments blamed Crawford, some the script, but I do believe with the right director, "The Last of Mrs. Cheney" could have been a lot better.