L'enchanteresse

MGM in trying to expand Joan Crawford's repertoire into period costume pieces spared no expense and gave her one all star cast in this drama about the Peggy O'Neal Eaton affair. The basic facts are true, Peggy O'Neal, daughter of a Washington, DC tavern-keeper and widow of a young Navy Lieutenant, marries the Senator from Tennessee who then is chosen Secretary of War in President Andrew Jackson's original cabinet. The Cabinet wives however refuse to receive Peggy socially as does the wife of the Vice President John C. Calhoun. Jackson blows his cabinet up, requests resignations from all involved and Eaton and Peg are sent in exile so to speak as he is made Minister to Spain.

The real story is far more complex than that. Jackson did regard Peggy as a slandered woman, much like his late wife Rachel was. Rachel Donelson Robards Jackson dies between the election and inauguration of Jackson. Beulah Bondi plays her in the movie and it's the best performance in the film. In real life this whole affair was being maneuvered behind the scenes by John Calhoun and Secretary of State Martin Van Buren taking anti and pro Peggy positions respectively. Van Buren's character is barely mentioned here. Played by Charles Trowbridge, he's given one or two lines in the film.

Robert Taylor strikes the right note as the young Naval Lieutenant Bow Timberlake. After Timberlake and Peggy are married, he is ordered to sea and dies there. The manner of his death has never been satisfactorily explained. It's also not explained here and that leaves the audiences up in the air.

Franchot Tone plays John Eaton and I think a lot of his performance is left on the cutting room floor. In real life there is some question as to whether Eaton and Peggy were involved while she was married to Timberlake.

But the most fantastic error in this plot is John Randolph's interest in Peggy. The real John Randolph was impotent, his testicles never descended, he never reached puberty. He never had any romantic attachments with anyone, he wasn't capable of it. In real life John Randolph because he never reached puberty had this girlishly high-pitched voice when he spoke on the floor of Congress. No one ever dared make fun of him though as he was a crack shot with a dueling pistol. Melvyn Douglas played a character with no basis in reality.

One of the other things I found a bit much was Douglas's constant prattle about state's rights. To him this a nice philosophy to be debated on the floor of Congress. Louis Calhern's character who is admittedly like a previous reviewer describes him as a Snidely Whiplash villain, is ready for secession. He goes to Randolph and says that he's organized a movement and he wants Randolph to lead it. The real Randolph would have been hot to trot for that. Melvyn Douglas reacts in horror however, he threatens to expose Calhern's villainy. Calhern has to shoot him. But if you think about it, the only thing Calhern did was take that state's right talk of Douglas to its logical conclusion and translate it into action.

The real John Randolph was never assassinated, he died of natural causes and had no major role in the Peggy O'Neal affair at all.

Maybe some day someone will make a better film of this incident.

Fictionalized historic soaper about Andrew Jackson's friendship and protection of a young woman named Peggy O'Neal. Lionel Barrymore plays Jackson and Joan Crawford plays Peggy. The rest of the cast is pretty impressive. Melvyn Douglas, James Stewart, Robert Taylor, Franchot Tone, Beulah Bondi, and Louis Calhern....not a bad lineup. Too bad the movie is boring. Andrew Jackson's wife dies and asks Peggy to look out for him. Thus she becomes the unofficial First Lady, despite not being married to or even romantically involved with the President. Peggy has a somewhat scandalous reputation of her own, which reminds Jackson of his wife, who suffered at the hands of Washington gossips. Worth seeing for Lionel Barrymore alone. But the rest of the cast being what it is warrants you check it out.

Fanciful, but silly biography of Peggy Eaton (Crawford), a controversial figure during the Andrew Jackson administration in the late 1820s, and her relationships with influential men of that era. Semi-fiction story is "gorgeous" to look at thanks to elegant period settings and costumes, not so much the performances or script.

"The Gorgeous Hussy" impressed me at once as a rather trite, artificial history-based (I won't actually call it historical) film about the Eaton Affair scandal of Andrew Jackson's presidency. It's an odd subject somewhat to choose as the basis for a romance-filled drama, and the script doesn't do it a whole lot of justice at times. A lot of the dialogue is just difficult to swallow or sickly-sweet, and American history is treated with a kind of overly orthodox distorting reverence -- turning the scandal into a stage for Andrew Jackson to be held up as an early defender of the Union in a proto-iteration of the Civil War -- that grates.

There are good points too however: Lionel Barrymore creates a wonderfully memorable performance as the raucous and rough yet wise President Jackson. He makes the former president human even while the script presents him somewhat two-dimensionally as a kind of grumpy but lovable old uncle most of the time (with a few nice scenes where he gets to be principled and statesmanlike in the face of his congress). Joan Crawford seeps magnetism and sympathy as Margaret, even as we are not really allowed to see the struggles between men that make up much of the movie emotionally dramatized for her. These actors get to play a few nice dramatic scenes amid the posturing, including a very effective one after President Jackson's wife's death.

Unfortunately, the piety with which "The Gorgeous Hussy" treats American history extends to other elements of its subject matter. We are supposed to sympathize with Margaret about the viscous rumors that are spread about her, but we never really learn what the rumors are or why they are spread. In other words, in this Hays-code influenced feature, we see how the titular gorgeous hussy is gorgeous, but never really how she is a hussy.

There are a few fine performances here, and the film is quite watchable, but it is let down by an overly careful, pious, and reverent production in many respects.

'The Gorgeous Hussy' had a lot of potential to be good. The subject sounded really interesting. Clarence Brown may not be one of my favourite directors, but he did do some good films. His films more often than not looked great and he was often very good in his direction of his lead actresses, a prime example being Greta Garbo. Have always loved period drama films. Plus who can resist a cast with the likes of Joan Crawford, Lionel Barrymore, Melvyn Douglas and Beulah Bondi in the same film?

Sadly, the film was a pretty major disappointment. There are certainly far worse films out there and it has its good things, but a story that actually is a lot more interesting than the film made it deserved better. As far as Brown's films go it is a lesser effort and it is a lesser effort of Crawford's too, both film and performance. Everybody, even the few actors that came over well, did a lot better both before and since (primarily since as some of the cast are in early roles).

Certainly there are good things. The best asset is the production values. It is sumptuously designed and costumed and even better is the cinematography, it clearly loved Crawford who didn't always look this luminous at this point of her career. The best performance belongs to Barrymore, he has the juiciest character and gives the role so much zing and enthusiasm (it may not be what one calls a subtle performance but then again Barrymore was not a subtle actor, which is not actually a bad thing in his regard).

Bondi also comes over very well, making the very most with what she was given. The score is not too over-bearing or melodramatic.

Most of the cast disappoint. Crawford to me was too mannered in her role and never seemed to gel with the setting with too modern a look. Douglas, Robert Taylor, Franchot Tone and James Stewart all gave their fair share of good performances, but all four are dull in sketchy roles. Tone is particularly wronged and doesn't look comfortable with dispiriting material. Brown's direction at best is undistinguished and quite leaden.

Also felt that the story never properly engaged, with too deadingly dull a pace and with too much narratively being too uneventful. It is a shame too that the story didn't have the same amount of juice and venom that the character of Andrew had and took on a far too careful approach that made the film feel very safe. The script is well intentioned, but came over as too talky and preachy.

Summarising, rather lacklustre though not without good things. 4/10