Chester Kent lucha contra el tiempo, el romance y el espía de un rival para producir espectaculares "prólogos" en directo para salas de cine.Chester Kent lucha contra el tiempo, el romance y el espía de un rival para producir espectaculares "prólogos" en directo para salas de cine.Chester Kent lucha contra el tiempo, el romance y el espía de un rival para producir espectaculares "prólogos" en directo para salas de cine.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 3 premios ganados en total
- Chorus Girl
- (sin créditos)
- Chorus Girl
- (sin créditos)
Opiniones destacadas
First-rate Busby Berkeley musical from Warner Bros. with a terrific cast and the wonderful choreography Berkeley was known for. Most of the musical numbers are saved for the last half-hour but they're all great. James Cagney and Joan Blondell are lots of fun. They always had perfect chemistry. There's also a lot of snappy pre-Code lines, particularly from Blondell. Dick Powell and Ruby Keeler are also enjoyable. Nice support from solid character actors Frank McHugh, Guy Kibbee, Arthur Hohl, and Hugh Herbert. Fast-paced and highly entertaining. Essential for fans of Berkeley or the great leads.
Once more we have a film about a filmmaker fighting to stage a vision, here a preshow as opening act for the first talkies. He's a grunt, always storming in and out of rooms, yelling directions, now and then pausing to show the steps to the troupe or scream at a phone; but always fretting about new ideas to stage. He's played by James Cagney, whom we know best from tough-as-nails gangster roles. It's very apt casting. Cagney had many expressive talents, and a violent energy with the intuitive power to carry these into a performance.
But none of the ideas he comes up for the show seem like they've been very well thought out, they're all unfinished premises rushed with one foot out the door, so it's all a mystery how this strong-willed hack can give coherent shape to creative chaos. What kind of show he'll be able to put together. Money is staked on him, fortunes.
He's surrounded by three women, one for each number he's called to improvise. One is an ex-wife out for leeching money, another is his loyal secretary secretly in love. All three are fighting to seduce or be seduced, money is at stake again, and the art made with them.
It's all very enjoyable thus far, the rapid-fire banter and atmosphere of festive uproar. But it's not that it truly soars until we actually get to see on the stage how the various tribulations, that from our end so far seemed random and meaningless, were in fact shaping the vision that we get to see.
We drive back and forth around town to see these; the first number is about newly weds in the 'Honeymoon Hotel' with marriage slyly perverted as illicit sex that ends with bedroom eyes and mock happiness which we know will not last, and didn't for him, the other is a scene from everyday life on the street transformed on stage into the most gaudy spectacle with wood nymphs frolicking beneath cascading waters.
The third is the most stunning, because it substitutes for the internal processes that yield one happy end within another, both on the same stage. We knew our man was the author of these visions, the dreamer as it were, but was content so far to pull the strings from behind. Here an accident of fate forces him to get up on that stage and act out the part he was intuitively drawn to create: the number is about this man seeking out the woman of his dreams in a sort of smoky, semi-conscious stupor, and again the unforeseen circumstances - in this case, war - that keep love from them. Eventually he tricks both fates and us, the camera, to fulfill the dream.
So the happy end meant to take place in reality is pure Hollywood fiction, while the pure Hollywood fiction of the song and dance number reveals from machinations inside the soul a true purpose outside.
It is excellent stuff about the makings of images choreographed from the heart. Their power to articulate is this; art that reflects, salvages purpose from a life that appears incoherent, yet also reveals capricious fates of our own making that we have set in motion by simply living our part. Clearly this grunt could not have staged what he did, even with expert craft, if life around him had not seduced inspiration out of him.
The realistic, satirical treatment gives a fresh edge to the material and its pace and line delivery are breathtaking. To think that they only started making feature talking pictures 7 years before this! The brilliance of the dialogue cannot be matched anywhere today, especially considering that "realism" has taken over and engulfed contemporary cinema.
This film was made at a time when the Hayes code restricting content was being ignored and the result is a fresh, self-referential, critical and living cinema that spoke directly to contemporary audiences suffering through the depression and the general angst of the age. I'd recommend watching any film from this period, that is 1930-1935, for a vision of what popular cinema can potentially be.
Sure, Warner Bros. tries to cover the orgy with the fig leaf of two cheerful innocents played by a sappy Dick Powell and a virginal Ruby Keeler. But it doesn't work, because everyone else gets in on the fun, including that human buzz-saw Jimmy Cagney and everyone's favorite sassy dame Joan Blondell. Director Lloyd Bacon proves too he knows what to do, giving us an eyeful of Blondell endlessly rolling and unrolling her hosiery, while the writers pepper the conversation with suggestive one-liners. Yeah, it's a great movie-- good enough to help bring down the heavy hand of censorship the following year, and put an end to damp dreams like "Beside a Waterfall". But not even the Watchdogs of Public Morality could stop Berkeley's deliriously suggestive pageantry that would live on at even that most repressed of studios, MGM. Sure, Astaire-Rogers may have been more graceful and a whole lot more chaste, no doubt producing more sheer polish-- still and all, don't let this unabashedly pagan celebration pass you by. As they say around the owl cage, it's a real hoot.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaFirst film where James Cagney dances - showing off his vaudeville and stage experience as a song-and-dance man. Cagney lobbied Warner Bros. to play this role. He would show off these talents to their fullest in El canto de la victoria (1942).
- ErroresAfter the "By A Waterfall" prologue ends, the film cuts to the audience giving an animated and thunderous applause, but in the balcony there is no applause or reaction. In fact, there is no movement whatsoever. They are perfectly still which indicates that a photo or painting was used for the balcony audience and then merged with the live theatre audience. The same photo/painting was also used for the "Shanghai Lil" balcony audience.
- Citas
Nan Prescott: You scram, before I wrap a chair around your neck!
Vivian Rich: [Angrily] It's three o'clock in the morning - where do you want me to go?
[Nan starts to speak, but Vivian immediately cuts her off]
Vivian Rich: You cheap stenographer...
Nan Prescott: Outside, countess. As long as they've got sidewalks YOU'VE got a job.
[Shoves her out, gives her a swift kick in the rump, and slams the door behind her]
- Versiones alternativasThere is an Italian edition of this film on DVD, distributed by DNA srl, "VIVA LE DONNE! (1933) + AMORE IN OTTO LEZIONI (1936)" (2 Films on a single DVD), re-edited with the contribution of film historian Riccardo Cusin. This version is also available for streaming on some platforms.
- ConexionesEdited into Busby Berkeley and the Gold Diggers (1969)
- Bandas sonorasA Vision of Salome
(1908) (uncredited)
Music by J. Bodewalt Lampe
Played during the prologue scene in the movie theater
Selecciones populares
- How long is Footlight Parade?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 703,000 (estimado)
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 276
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 44min(104 min)
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.37 : 1