Holiday

First off, as other reviewers have observed, I totally disagree that Ann Harding sounds like Katharine Hepburn, who played Linda Seton in the remake, and who also understudied the actress in the original stage play.

Harding has a more refined smooth voice whereas Hepburn has her usual clipped, brash New England accent. Were these reviewers really listening?

Additionally, the pert and poised Mary Astor also outshines the actress who played the subsequent Julia. Astor and Harding truly seem like sisters whereas Hepburn and the other actress have no chemistry as the Seton sisters.

Finally, one of my favorite character actors, the adorable Edward Everett Horton, originated and later reprised Nick Potter in the remake. He also narrated the Fractured Fairy Tales segments in the popular Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon series in the late 50's and early 60's.

I will say that I prefer Cary Grant (in the remake) as Robert Ames lacked Grant's charm and was a little too milquetoast. Plus he looked shorter than Mary Astor in most of the original!

One more thing that I noticed in this and other movies of that era, what is with the pronunciation of "at all" as "at tall?" I recall Walter Pigeon pronouncing it like that and others that I cannot recall at this time. I find it annoying.

See both movies and compare for yourselves.

Contrary to popular belief, Depression audiences enjoyed romantic comedies depicting the rich. It gave them a chance to imagine themselves in another world, escaping the desperation they were in for a few happy hours. Romantic comedies generally featured men or women who were spoiled, rich, and bored with their wealth. This was supposed to make the masses feel lucky they had a purpose in their lives......to find their next meals and keep looking for a job. Despite this fact, escapism still triumphed over reality for most audiences. After all, didn't you imagine you might be rich and/or wildly successful someday?

A one location film (The Seaton's Grand Estate), "Holiday" (1930) and "Holiday" (1938) are based on the 1928 play of the same name by Philip Barry. It is difficult to compare the two, because although they both follow the original play very closely and therefore can be loosely matched line for line for much of the runtime, their storytelling approaches are quite different.

Edward Griffith's 1930 version is a slower paced, more austere telling, with subtle nuances and more subdued performances. One could almost call it a more peaceful ride, as the leading characters love to call their adventures in life. George Cukor's version 8 years later with much higher ticket stars does add much humor and vigor. This is not to say that Griffith's version is not funny or playful, because it is. Cukor's 1938 adaptation is simply more ostentatious and maybe pretentious. This is due mainly to Katherine Hepburn's performance. Like all the characters she plays, her acting always seems too unnaturally forceful and often overdone. Cary Grant fans will not be disappointed, however, and the Potters- with Edward Horton reprising his role from the 1930 version- are better this time around. Likely because, in one of the few differences, the couple is working class rather than wealthy socialites- making the characters far more lovable and their scenes that much more entertaining without the slight prudishness of the haughty rich.

Therefore, forced to recommend one over the other, the updated 1938 version starring the popular Hollywood pairing with Grant & Hepburn is given the slight edge. With its more humorous and faster paced interpretation. Not only a slight one. It is highly recommended that audiences watch both versions to decide for themselves- on account of the fact that sometimes we actually need to turn it down a notch and appreciate more subtle and subdued performances.

Ironic how this entire "Holiday" takes place in one place. A stately mansion, no less. The ultimate staycation, maybe? In all seriousness, whichever version (preferably both) audiences choose, the general message and story are the same, and Philip Barry's narrative, with both insightful and witty dialogue, is an entertaining way to tell it. Well, what is that oh so important and very true message? Be true to ourselves, for compromising can only go so far in personal relationships before it becomes inadvisedly harmful, and money isn't everything in life- you can't take it with you!

... given its subject matter. This is not a precode at all. Rather it is the filmed version of a 1928 play that made perfect sense in the roaring 20's. This film could not be made before 1930 because sound films hadn't evolved to the point where dialogue and movement could be shown as they are here. It could not be made after 1930 for several years (It was filmed again in 1938) because depression era audiences would simply be befuddled at a young woman (Ann Harding as Linda) who is so unhappy and bored with her rich lifestyle while many in the audience would just want to know when they are going to eat again.

The story revolves around a rich young woman, Julia Seton (Mary Astor), who is returning home with her fiancé (Robert Ames as Johnny Case), whom she has known for only ten days. The Setons are terribly rich - I mean how many homes have elevators in 1930? - and they are divided into two groups. The stodgy business centric part of the family that runs things headed by patriarch Edward Seton (William Holden - no not THAT William Holden), and the unhappy Setons who seemed trapped on a merry go round from which they cannot get off. These are Julia's two siblings, Ned (Monroe Owsley) who drinks heavily to deal with the fact that he has no say in his own life, and Linda (Ann Harding), free in spirit but not in deed.

Johnny has a strange idea of how to live his life. He has been buying some stocks and as soon as he gets enough money together, he wants to go on "holiday". He wants the retirement part of his life to be when he is young, not just to have fun but to make sure that what he does for the rest of his life is what he really wants to do. Linda thinks this idea is grand, but fiancée Julia just thinks this is a goofy notion from which she can eventually distract him.

You'll notice that from the moment they arrive, Johnny seems to spend all of his time conversing with Linda and that Julia spends most of her time conversing with her "bucks on the brain" Dad. Complications ensue.

Ann Harding does have some dialogue and over the top moments that only someone as regal as she could pull off. Lots of actresses would have looked silly going on and on about how the playroom was the only place in the family mansion in which she was ever happy. Plus, she is making a BIG leap of faith in her final decision in the film. It is easy to see why Katharine Hepburn was cast to play Linda in the 1938 remake - they have very similar acting styles.

Let me also compliment Mary Astor's acting here. As both Johnny's fiancée and her father's daughter you are never quite sure where she is coming from up to the very end.

Edward Everett Hornton and Hedda Hopper have a small but crucial role as a couple who are friends of Linda and have a sense of humor that most of the stodgy Setons do not appreciate, but are needed to show that Linda does at least have some allies in her life. Highly recommended.

A young man finds that his free-spirited nature is at odds with the more serious attitudes of his fiancé and most of her wealthy family. An early version of the more famous 1938 adaptation of Philip Barry's stage play which featured box office heavyweights Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn in the roles taken here by lesser lights Ann Harding and Robert Ames. Harding is very good, but Ames is too bland for a role that calls for a big personality. It's all very dated, but quite engaging nevertheless. Rather bizarrely, three of the four lead males in this movie would be dead before the '38 version hit screens just eight years later