No Marriage Ties

Taped this film in the late 60's because Richard Dix was a Veteran Actor along with Elizabeth Allan. Dix,(Bruce Foster)had a drinking problem which was portrayed in the 1930's as being funny and cute and enjoyable to view. He was a newspaper man and it seemed Hollywood associated them with always being drunk in order to function. Allan(Peggy Wilson) who appeared in her last film with Boris Karloff "Grip of the Strangler"'58 tries to help Bruce get on his feet and it was refreshing to see that a woman could help a man in trouble without having to see them take their clothes off and jump into bed. There was a beautiful attraction between a man and a woman, which made the story different from the average picture in the 1930's. It is impossible to be critical of this film and its actors, who were super stars in those days. Richard Dix was a leading man in many pictures and made "The Whistler" movie series a tremendous success.

An alcoholic sports reporter misses the Tunney-Dempsey fight he was supposed to cover, and is fired from his job. Despite being a mess, a kind aspiring artist helps him out, and the two become lovers. They believe in 'free love,' not marriage, and their relationship is open. They live together but at one point she doesn't see him for eight days; she doesn't mind that he's been sleeping around or want to know what he's been up to, saying to him, "so long as you come back to me." Meanwhile, quite improbably the man has gotten a job in advertising and quickly risen to being not just a partner in the business, but the driving force behind its success. One of the clients he takes on is a beautiful woman, and after wearing her down, he becomes her lover too. The rub is that she cramps his style, expecting him to show up for dinner and then wanting to get married to him. He thus apparently has a choice in both women and lifestyles.

It sounds like pretty spicy pre-Code fare and I guess the idea is pretty daring, especially since the couple at the beginning seem quite happy with their relationship. However, as there really isn't much passion on display and little chemistry in either pairing, it actually seemed pretty tame. The cast doesn't have big stars (Richard Dix is the man, Elizabeth Allen the artist, and Doris Kenyon the client), and that might have been part of the problem. More significantly, though, the film doesn't really want to commit itself to this idea of "no marriage ties," or exploring what that means in an honest way. The character of the artist has no depth and comes across more as a sweet fantasy than a real person. The film then veers off into the guy's immorality in the advertising business, selling products that don't work or are harmful, a subplot that takes a life of its own and leads to a dreadful expository speech near the end. Good grief that was bad. It then seems to link what he's doing as an advertising exec with his lifestyle and its consequences, wrapping it all up in a bundle that's rather traditional and conservative.

At 72 minutes though, at least it moves along, and there are some fun little bits to this film that made it entertaining. While drunk the guy refers to his boss as a "sh*t faced mongrel," for example. Another thing is the guy's office being equipped with a giant bar on a revolving stand; he comes in and his secretary wheels it open, pours him a shot, and tells him "Your breakfast," while handing it to him. By contrast, his client's office has some lovely little Art Deco touches and beautiful lettering on the office doors. When he's dating her she takes him to a performance from "The Russian Art Players" where we see a scene of a couple of peasants speaking Russian; he then takes her to a wrestling match the next time they're out. While in the Caribbean and she's in his arms on a boat, we hear a lovely little bit of the song "Venezuela" from a voice that I wish had been credited. With these kinds of things and the initial challenge to traditional marriage I would have given it a slightly higher rating if it hadn't slipped off the rails at the end; regardless, you could do worse than seeing this one.

I caught this forgotten flick by accident the other night. Far from being just a 'B' throwaway, it's actually a lot better than you might expect.

Its biggest asset is the surprising charisma of the two leads. I'd always thought of Richard Dix as just another silent-screen hunk. And it's true, a lot of shots linger on his impressive profile. But he rings true as a character who never thinks things through, and projects a self-deprecating charm that really won me over.

Elizabeth Allan is an actress I'd never heard of at all, but this film makes me wonder why she wasn't a much bigger name. She seems able to be effortlessly both witty and vulnerable. I would have loved to see her and Dix together in another dozen films; they make a perfect team.

The script, apparently based on a stage play, is also sharper than you'd expect. The dialog is slick, and the story takes some interesting turns. It's not exactly Shakespeare, but it's way better than the average 1930s potboiler.

My advice: give No Marriage Ties a shot, if you have the chance. I'll certainly watch it again, if I can.

Very little of this film rings true, especially when sports reporter Richard Dix gets too drunk and forgets to cover the Dempsey-Tunney heavyweight championship fight, which his boss screams is the greatest news story since the armistice. For me, it put two strikes against the film right at the start. When sophisticated stranger Elizabeth Allan then takes Dix home and spends the night I knew the screenplay wasn't going to do much for realism. It's also loaded with stilted dialogue and it can't decide whether it is an exposé of bad advertising ethics or the perils of love without any marriage ties. On the other hand, I loved watching Elizabeth Allan and Doris Kenyon act. Allan steals the film as she becomes Dix's lover (this was a pre-code film) and is hired by him as an artist when he goes into the advertising business, using unethical ads to sell questionable products. Then Dix woos cosmetics magnate Kenyon to get her account at first, but later in ernest. Since Kenyon also gives an excellent performance, the female stars are good reasons to see this film.

Our forgetful filmmakers department: Dix and David Landau both worked for a newspaper called "The Reflector," but when they later discuss their past association, Dix calls it "The Chronicle."

...That being Dix' character Bruce Foster. As in "Lost her and OK with that". In fact, Foster loses lots of things. In the beginning he is on what apparently is one of his frequent benders and loses his job as writer at a newspaper because he is a no show at the fight he is covering. I did some research and apparently this was the Dempsey-Tunney fight at Soldier Field in Chicago in September 1927. A very big deal and a very big egg to lay as a writer to not turn in a story on that event. But on that bender he picks up an out of work artist (Elizabeth Allan as Peggy Wilson), who seems to be on the verge of becoming a prostitute with a John who has all of the charm and looks of Jabba the Hut. It is implied that they begin living together with "no marriage ties" and no hope of any.

This is where things get somewhat outrageous. On another bender Dix is drinking next to a couple of ad men. He comes up with the slogan they've been looking for and ... gets a partnership in the ad firm??? Allan Dinehart plays the other partner who hired him, and it is weird seeing him be the rather dull voice of morality after watching him play shady flamboyant characters over at Warner Bros. Dix plays the guy who will sell anything to anybody using fear as a motivation - "Buy a home before you lose a job!". The movie makes this out as a scandalous thing, but I scratch my head over this one. Foster is not lying to anybody. He is just using proven ad techniques. He gets homeless and hungry Peggy a job as an artist at the firm. He gives a no strings loan of five hundred dollars - a princely sum in 1933 - to an employee whose wife keeps having babies. Doesn't the employee understand how to make this stop? In other words, Foster is personally a generous guy with lots of humanity. He just has this personal motto of "no marriage ties", and as a result, a tragedy ensues.

So if Foster is honest with women - to the extent he is capable - about not wanting to marry, and the worst thing you can say about him is that he expects the consumer and the producer of products to be responsible, how is he insufferable? Mainly because he makes ridiculous headstrong decisions and is the most obnoxious drunk in the history of the world. Dix' drunk routine here is awful. I'm actually surprised RKO would put Dix in this very pedestrian B programmer since he was one of their biggest stars at the time.

The best thing about the film - to me - is the last scene. Is it real or a drunken delusion of what Foster wants to happen? Watch and see what you think.