Two Against the World

What an Odd Ending. This Entertaining Poke at the Snobbish Elite who Go about Their Detached, Uncaring, Whimsical Ways in the Throes of the Great Depression and much Human Suffering is Average or slightly above.

Constance Bennett's Natural Acting is in full Command and the Supporting Cast Lead by Neil Hamilton are OK. The Film is Professionally Handled and the Social Concerns of the Time are Given Appropriate Due.

But, there isn't anything Outstanding here and it's kind of Pedestrian and the Ending is "Out to Lunch" at a Diner, Eating Beans. However, Fans of Bennett and Early Talking Cinema might Want to Check this one out. Just Don't Expect any Great Shakes. Pass the Ketchup.

I never cease to be amazed at how in the early 1930s they were able to pack twice as much plot, action, social comment and ideas in 70-minute movies than exist in today's movies that are twice as long.

This one was very loosely inspired by a contemporary scandal about a murder committed by a rich socialite "defending his sister's honor" as they used to say in the era of the sexual double standard that underlies so many plots in those days.

Yes, as some have pointed out, some of the main characters are spoiled rich people. So are some of the main characters in novels by Tolstoy, Henry James and Edith Wharton. If it bothers you, go back to your Spiderman movies.

The plot revolves about a budding romance between Constance Bennett, one of the more spoiled idle rich and a member of the family involved in the scandal, and Neil Hamilton as a socially conscious attorney formerly from her social class.

The pace is so fast that it takes some time to sort all the characters out, which may deter you at first but it all becomes clear eventually. The film takes jabs at sensationalistic tabloids, the double standard and our justice system's bias towards the rich, but like everything else in the movie, doesn't linger on these any longer than needed to make its point.

Not to say that the movie is at all preachy. There's plenty of comedy and snappy dialogue along the way.

If you seek uplift, Bennett's character gains much insight into her own nature and lifestyle as the film advances but, again, the point isn't belabored.

Bennett and Hamilton both charm in their roles and the whole cast is excellent.

While Carole Lombard would perfect the dizzy-socialite-gets-social-conscience shtick four years later in "My Man Godfrey," the sadly under-appreciated Constance Bennett does the genre fine in this film. She's matched with a surprisingly effective Neil Hamilton, probably best known to the world as Police Commissioner Gordon, from the "Batman" television series. Both give natural and believable (within the scope of the story) performances.

The payoff verdict will leave you unconvinced (and modern trial lawyers convulsed with laughter), but on the whole the movie is worth watching. Watch for it on Turner Classic Movies.

So, 1932 is the height of the Depression and millions of folks are out of work. And yet, despite this, Hollywood is cranking out tons of films where you'd never think a depression was on and the stars are all rich and happy...like "Two Against the World". And, you make the rich folks in this particularly self-absorbed and loathsome. This must have been a hard sell back in the day.

When the film begins, the Hamilton family is meeting with their lawyer. It seems that an employee in the company they own died and he is asking them how to proceed. Not one of the family asks if the family of the deceased has a valid claim...they just seem bored and instruct the lawyer not to accept a settlement. At this point, I really HATED the Hamiltons and wanted them to pay and pay dearly. Adele (Constance Bennett) is roused from her boredom about all this when the lawyer for the deceased family arrives. Dave Norton (Neil Hamilton) is handsome and instantly Adele is smitten and pursues him vigorously throughout the film.

Later, in a weird plot twist, Adele's brother murders someone. She witnesses it and she runs. Soon the murder case is dropped because they have no leads. But Norton pushes the Defender's Office to re- open the case...and he doesn't realize that Adele is caught up in it.

The bottom line is that Adele and her family are amoral jerks...so how is the audience supposed to care one bit about her and her brother?! The story is also completely unbelievable and rather silly. Because of this, I disliked the film intensely and see it as a seriously flawed movie. Nice production values but a seriously messed up story that should have left viewers storming out of the theater!

Although very vaguely based on the infamous (at the time) Francis Donaldson 'honour' murder case just like MGM's UNASHAMED was, this is nothing whatsoever like that other film. Whereas that MGM picture is a sombre and serious re-imagining of a disturbing true story, this is just a typical Warner Brothers romantic melodrama.

That's not to say this is inferior: it's not got the punch of MGM's offering but it's more enjoyable, entertaining and fun. If you like a madly contrived melodrama with all the trimmings then this is your cup of chai. The 'honour killing' aspect is essentially just a plot device that's quite cleverly used to give this story a happy ending. Besides being more enjoyable because it's a bit lighter in mood, thanks to Archie Mayo's non-spectacular but always reliably professional direction, it's one of those astonishingly short movies which still manage to pack in three hours of story into one hour of film.

Constance Bennett is rather lovely in this but the role hardly stretches her acting skills, she does however model a different dress every seven minutes - but why not, she's Constance Bennet! The characters are the ubiquitously lazily drawn stereotypes Warners seemed to put in so many of their pictures which intended to show their working class audiences that they were on their side, they were struggling with them through the depression....oh, and paying Constance Bennett $30,000 per week! We've got the usual spoilt rich heiress, the heartless rich folk in their top hats and the young working class hero fighting for justice. Corney - yes. Contrived - yes. But bad Picture - definitely not, it was a tried and tested formula which Warners had honed to perfection.

They did however miss a trick with this one. Considering the emotionally charged pictures Warners made campaigning for social justice, it is a little disappointing that they missed an opportunity for any social commentary with this. It's watchable, it's reasonably engrossing and surprisingly tense and exciting as it reaches its climax but it doesn't emotionally engage or enrage you like a lot of their films did. Maybe they simply thought that because the MGM film that was inspired by that murder case was so depressing, people simply needed cheering up?