Regen

Most TV versions of "Rain" look like an antique, since they are in desperate need of restoration. The video versions are restored with 20 minutes of footage that is cut on some of the TV prints. Crawford was loaned out by MGM to United Artists for this second adaptation of the famed Maugham novel. This was one of Joan's biggest commercial disasters when she was still big at the box-office before her decline in the late 1930s. By viewing it today, one may not be impressed by the story or performances, but this is actually one of Joan's finest from her early films. "Rain" has become overlooked through the years since it was a notorious bomb and Crawford herself hated this movie. It is not as excellent as Gloria Swanson's "Sadie Thompson," but not that bad.

Joan Crawford went on loan out to United Artists from her home studio of MGM to make "Rain" in 1932. The story had been a Brodway success. Some may feel Joan was miscast as the famed Sadie Thompson. I disagree. The film is not perfect, but Joan and the other actors make it worth watching. Joan is matched in the acting by the great Walter Huston, playing the preacher who is determined to "redeem" Sadie. Joan is made up heavily - almost outrageously - in the first part of the film, then softer make up and lighting after her "transformation" by the preacher. The softer make up shows what a real beauty Crawford was. Rumor has it Crawford felt out of her league with some of the other theatrically trained actors, and had some problems with the director Lewis Milestone. But she holds her own in the film. The print of the film I recorded from TCM is not the best, with some static in the sound and the picture quality rather poor. This is a film begging to be restored. Yes, it was made in 1932, but other films from this time do not look this bad.

For reasons that likely have much to do with her self-perceptions, insecurities, and desires for her screen image, Joan Crawford never liked her performance in this fine film. I do not know why; she was never better. The first talkie of the classic Jeanne Eagels' play "Rain", it was effective in every way even though it uses many old-time editing cuts and inserts. They actually worked, and I liked the direction very much, too. Huston was fine as the sanctimonious but sincere preacher trying to convert the "loose woman" Sadie Thompson - but in the end loses the battle, something I wish was shown, but then it wasn't in the play or book so I shouldn't expect it. A fine film, and the antique-type music adds to the effect. See the IMDb review of the serviceble Rita Hayworth version, "Sadie Thompson", and the horrid movie on the life of the actress, "Jeanne Eagels" which contains scenes with Kim Novak trying to recreate the stage play.

Joan Crawford was reportedly not happy with her performance in Rain although for the life of me, I can't figure out what she had to be ashamed about. In a few years Rain could not possibly have been made due to the imposition of The Code where no man of the cloth could be anything less than decent.

Perhaps Crawford was unfortunately compared to Jeanne Eagels on stage and Gloria Swanson in a silent film adaptation which starred Lionel Barrymore as the sex crazed Reverend Davidson. Still Crawford's Sadie Thompson need not take a backseat to anyone else's.

Somerset Maugham wrote the original novel and John Colton adapted it into a play performed on both the London and Broadway stages. Rain is a deceptive work, at first glance it appears quite dated, but in reality its quite relevant for today.

My favorite character in this is Guy Kibbee's Horne who runs the hotel/ trading post on that tropical South Sea Island where all the characters are stranded temporarily. Joan Crawford is there and in the same hotel are the Reverend and Mrs. Davidson played by Walter Huston and Beulah Bondi. Kibbee says he left the USA because he saw that 'reformers' like the Davidsons were beginning to dominate the body politic in America and he wanted out.

Two things made Rain such a big hit at the time both as a book and play. One was Sigmund Freud who was gaining great popularity talking about repressed sexual desires. Freud would have had a field day analyzing both the Davidsons. It's important to remember that Bondi is just as repressed and uptight as Huston. Freud's writings were not just confined to his profession, they were popularly read by the masses.

The second thing was Prohibition. When Kibbee talks about the reformers triumphing (and you have to get the sneer in his voice when he says reformers)he's talking about their greatest triumph, the 18th amendment. The Evangelical Moral Majority types of the day were the ones that brought Prohibition about and America went on its biggest hypocrisy binge because of it. Folks just like the Davidsons inflicted Prohibition and all that went with it on America.

Sadie Thompson represents everything the Davidsons say they despise, but what Reverend Davidson wants. It all leads to tragedy.

What Maugham is saying and being a gay man himself, knew what it was like to be repressed and show a different face publicly, is just live and let live. Such a simple concept, but one some today have a hard time wrapping their minds around.

As for Joan Crawford, she wouldn't have said what she supposedly said about her performance in Rain knowing in the next generation there would be a musical version with a dubbed Rita Hayworth singing with the island kids. Now that one was one for the books.

Try to see this on as big a viewing screen as you can, as the film is often quite dark, and Crawford is so beautiful in it you'll want a good look. I loved it!

In this second screen version of W. Somerset Maugham's morality tale, "Rain", Joan Crawford gives a performance that knocks the rest of the cast off the screen.

First made as a silent with Gloria Swanson, the stageplay "Miss Sadie Thompson" had been a controversial broadway hit, and young Joan Crawford fought hard to get the coveted role of Sadie. She shed her drawing room manners and designer gowns, researching the part by visiting the red-light district of San Diego to see what the street-walkers of the day looked and sounded like. Her appearance in the film was considered offensive for it's realism, and the film stiffed at the box office. Sadly, it's financial failure relegated Crawford to years of popular but light-weight "respectable" roles, before her Oscar-calibre performances of the 1940's and 50's.

But for audiences of today, the film is worth reconsidering. The other performers are wooden and stilted but Crawford's performance, embarrassingly natural in 1932, leaps off the screen. The topic matter that was so controversial, even offensive, in the early 1930's is not a hard sell to modern audiences: that bible-thumpers aren't always the good guys, and "sinners" aren't always so bad.

Further, the feminist aspect of the film is clearer today. As Sadie makes her way around the Pacific, a fun-loving free-spirit often one step ahead of the law, it's the fact that she's a female that draws the ire of the puritanical fire-and-brimstone missionaries: a young man would have gotten away with it.

And for us post-Woodstock viewers this touching story strikes a familiar chord: of the harmless, light-hearted kid who hurts no-one but whose very existence is offensive to the powers that be.

And it must fairly be said that when she was a young (I think she's about 25 when she made this) she is a strikingly beautiful babe, heavy make-up or not.

If you've ever written Crawford off as "man-ish" or "bitchy" because of roles she did later in her life, check out this movie and take a look at the sexy, vivacious girl who was once described by F. Scott Fitzgerald as "the personification of the American flapper"!

I found the film fascinating (that's why I went on to look up all the above information).