The Royal Family of Broadway

THE ROYAL FAMILY OF Broadway is a fascinating snapshot of movie history. The worthy Edna Ferber and George S. Kaufman stage play retains its crackling dialogue but is presented in a stilted, amateurish film. After the sound era was ushered in with the blast of THE JAZZ SINGER, the studios dumped many of their writers in the rush to hire playwrights who could write dialogue. Yet, while the Ferber and Kaufman play, adapted for the screen by Herman Mankiewicz, is sturdy and fun, the film seems to have been made right after THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY.

This is interesting. After the sublime beauty and sophisticated techniques of silent films such as SUNRISE, THE CROWD, THE BIG PARADE, even TOL'ABLE David ten years earlier, the medium seems thrust backwards as the filmmakers grapple with sound. Shots are poorly framed, some out of focus; scenes are static with few camera angels as they play out, often in one wide shot. This was George Cukor's third film, still paired as a co-director, but Rouben Mamoulian has already made an inventive and dazzling musical, APPLAUSE, as his first film, and Lubitsch has already demonstrated all one would need to see in how to put together a snappy sound comedy with THE LOVE PARADE.

But this should not deter anyone from seeing THE ROYAL FAMILY, this farcical spoof of the theatrical Barrymore family trying to manage their professional and personal lives. The play still works like a charm and the actors deliver gloriously. Though the great stage actress, Ina Claire, never had much success on film, one wonders why. The movies are the worse for it as she is a very funny and enjoyable comedienne playing the diva torn between her love of adulation and guilt for not settling down. Frederic March displays a flair for comedy, in the John Barrymore role, that I am hard pressed to think he ever equaled. (DESIGN FOR LIVING? NOTHING SACRED? Not quite.) You've rarely been served this much ham, but it is a delectable treat.

All in all, THE ROYAL FAMILY OF Broadway is a very enjoyable comedy and a fascinating look at the movies learning to walk again after the freight train of sound has pulled into the station.

Well the Print I watched this motion picture was scratchy and a little bit blurry I could barley hear most of the actors talk at time but I and persevered continue watching the film. While I have admiration for early talkies this film was intriguing when it came to film history I watched solely on it portraying the Barrymore family. Ina Claire and Fredric march make the movie entreating as it may seem slow at times. Fredric solely steals the show and the film becomes more fast paced and is no wonder he was nominated during the 4th academy awards in 1931. While Not a spoiler I was taken back from the first few minutes of the film of a piano reciting "Sobre las olas" a mexican piece.

The Royal Family Of Broadway whom everyone in America knew to take as the Barrymores was a successful play on Broadway written by George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber of the Algonquin Round Table. It ran 345 performances in 1927-28 and was immediately snapped up by Paramount once it was decided sound was here to stay. The wit of Kaufman/Ferber just would not have cut it on the silent screen with cue cards.

The family currently consists of grand dame Henriette Crossman, daughter Ina Claire, son Fredric March and granddaughter Mary Brian. Crossman is the kind that will carry on the theatrical tradition of the Cavendishes come what may. The theater is a religious calling and she's instilled that in her offspring. Ina Claire whose resemblance to Ethel Barrymore was unmistakable carries on, but she's starting to yearn for a quieter existence and she might have it with millionaire platinum king Frank Conroy. Her daughter from a former marriage Mary Brian is an eager young hopeful who has young playboy and future Durango Kid Charles Starrett panting after her. In real life Ethel did marry into the Colt Arms Manufacturing company and her daughter did pursue a stage career as well.

But the part of Tony Cavendish whom everyone took as John Barrymore provides the real spark in this work. Fredric March got his first Oscar nomination for this wonderful satire on a most outrageous man in John Barrymore. Barrymore's dissipation came later on, the result of the high flying, high living that you March brag on here. The tabloids of the day were filled with the doings of the Barrymores/Cavendishes and John provided most of the copy.

There's no Lionel equivalent here. Not that Lionel wasn't colorful in his own right, but he managed to keep his vices out of the public eye.

Ethel who took her position as First Lady of the American Theater quite seriously considered a law suit against any and all who had something to do with the play and film. But John who saw Fredric March do a stage version in California as well thought the play outrageous and funny and he congratulated March on getting him down so well. I guess without a Barrymore united front, Ethel really couldn't consider a lawsuit.

I saw the film years ago and then just saw it and I remembered back then how March just dominates the film, it's that kind of part. You enjoy Tony Cavendish when he arrives and you just wait for him to come back.

Although the play's been revived a lot, I doubt will see a remake of this film. The hijinks of the Barrymore clan are really not known to today's movie-going public and a lot of the jokes will be dated except to people like me. Still seeing this sparkling comedy might make you want to find out about the American theatrical tradition known as the Barrymores.

The Barrymore lineage has been one of the most documented theatrical families in the history of acting. The performing dynasty dates back to its patriarch, Maurice Barrymore, a London stage actor before moving to New York City in 1875, and stretches to present day Drew Barrymore, who first gained notice at seven for her role in 1982's "E. T." Several books have been written about this talented group, including James Kotsilibas-Davis' 1982 'Barrymores Royal Family in Hollywood." Cinema has also paid homage to the Barrymores, leading off with the first talkie that presents a thinly-veiled portrait of them in December 1930's "The Royal Family of Broadway."

When the New York City play which the Paramount Pictures movie was based on first came out, Ethel Barrymore was incensed by it. 'The Royal Family' stage drama, co-written by Edna Ferber and George F. Kaufmann, became an instant hit with the Broadway crowd, running 345 performances at the Selwyn Theater beginning in December 1927. Compounding Ethel's angst was when she saw the Herman Mankiewicz-scripted movie. Both the play and the movie focuses on a fictional acting family, the Cavendishes. Its matron, Fanny Cavendish (Henrietta Crosman), loves the stage and never wants to retire. Her daughter, Julie (Ina Claire), never enamored with acting, wants to get out of the profession and is anxious to marry a South American millionaire. Julie is clearly Ethel. Her brother, Tony (Fredric March), is based on John, who is quite a rebel-rouser loving life to the fullest and is equally talented on stage and in film. Most of the actors in the stage version appeared in the 1930 film.

Ethel hired a high-power lawyer to sue the producers of both the play and the movie. Once reviewing the screenplay, her lawyer said her brother, John, had more of a case for libel than she did. John saw the play with March playing his character. After the performance, Barrymore went backstage and "walked into March's dressing room with a glowering look," according to inside sources. "Then suddenly relaxed, he waxed charming and agreeable, and congratulated the jittery actors on a fine performance." So ended Ethel's thoughts of lawsuits.

March earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor. The actor had played the role of Tony Cavendish on the stage, film and on television. March claimed it was one of his favorite roles, mainly because it was spoofing another person, which didn't stress him to interpret a character where he was forced shape it to his own style.

"The Royal Family of Broadway" also gave future director George Cukor the opportunity to become familiar with film production. Shot at the Paramount Studios in Astoria, Queens, New York, he designed the stage settings and blocked the actors before director Cyril Gardner filmed the scenes. Cukor's roots on the stage began in 1920 as a manager and he worked his way up to directing his first play, 'The Great Gadsby,' on Broadway in 1926. He signed with Paramount Pictures in 1929 on the basis of his stage work, and was instrumental in making the movie "The Royal Family of Broadway' a critically acclaimed film, although not totally embraced by the public. The members of the American Film Institute regard it as a great comedy, nominating the movie as one of 500 feature films considered for the Top 100 Funniest American Movies.

...but don't let that stop you from enjoying this film. Specifically, Fredric March's second billing on top of his Oscar nomination for Best Actor for his role of Tony Cavendish in this film might lead you to believe that you are going to be treated to a big dose of March as a thinly disguised version of John Barrymore, as in fact the whole Cavendish family is supposed to be a parody of the Barrymore clan. That is not the case. I'd say March's role is a supporting one and his billing is probably due to the fact that he has the biggest role of any male in the film. That is because this film is in fact a close study of the hopes and angst of three generations of the female members of the Cavendish clan as they try to find a balance between the homes they want to have and the profession they love. It really is more of a drama examining the theatrical life from a woman's point of view than anything else.

The real star of the show is Ina Claire as Julie Cavendish, a 40ish actress who realizes mid-life is upon her and this has caused her to reflect upon her life. Specifically she is wondering if it is time to settle down with a long time somewhat bland but stable male acquaintance and leave the theatrical life behind. Julie's daughter Gwen is beginning her career on the stage and is contemplating marriage to a stock broker with old-fashioned ideas. He doesn't really want her to even start down a career road that he feels has ruined her mother's life. Julie's mother Fanny is considered a grand dame of the stage, but her dependence on a cane for walking has robbed her of the spotlight, and it is a hole in her life that she feels mightily. Much of this film thus focuses on these three women contemplating life in conversations with their significant others and each other - there is not that much action.

That's where Fredric March comes in. With his larger than life portrayal of Tony Cavendish/John Barrymore he periodically invades the ancestral home bringing the residual troubles of his wild life with him. He's either hiding from process servers fearing a breach of promise lawsuit or practicing his dueling with the servants. It is truly an inspired and hilarious performance, and if the Academy had supporting actor awards in 1930, March likely would have been nominated for that award instead and probably won. He really balances the film, keeping it light and preventing it from turning into pure soap opera.

Without March I'd consider this a well acted but a somewhat archaic 6/10. With March as Tony Cavendish it rises to an entertaining 7/10.