La fin de Madame Cheyney

I found this early talkie difficult to watch and I'm a Norma Shearer fan! It's not her fault, but the primitive production values of this film would cause any viewer to become bored. 90% of the movie is filmed with "medium shots," and it's very similar to watching a dull play.

Dashing Lord Arthur Dilling (Basil Rathbone) and old Lord Elton (Herbert Bunston) compete for the affections of the lovely widow Fay Cheyney (Norma Shearer), who is secretly a jewel thief.

Early sound films have a reputation for being badly made and boring, but I disagree. Some early sound films from 1929 and 1930 are exceedingly well made. However, for every film like Bulldog Drummond or The Love Parade, there's a film like The Last of Mrs. Cheyney.

The Last of Mrs. Cheyney is clunky, badly acted, badly paced, badly written and badly directed. It's a mess. It lacks all the charm of the 1937 version. It's also much more stagier than the '37 version. This version doesn't even have the opening meeting on the ship between Mrs. Cheyney and Dilling (one of my favorite parts of that version), yet it still manages to be almost the same length as the latter film.

Norma Shearer is an actress I like much more than most people, but she definitely doesn't have the charm or wit of Joan Crawford. Basil Rathbone turns in an terrible performance as Dilling, and Herbert Bunston's performance as Lord Elton is absolutely dreadful. I did like George Barraud's performance as Charles; he's easily the best actor in the film, and it's a shame he didn't have a bigger career.

Overall, go watch the Joan Crawford version instead. You'll enjoy it a lot more.

I realize that this is a minority view, but I find the later version from the late Thirties of The Last Of Mrs. Cheyney superior to this one. I'm sure brickbats will follow.

This is not choosing Joan Crawford over Norma Shearer's performance here. It's a question of the technical advancements made over a decade to a film that was one of MGM's first all talkie productions. This version quite frankly is a photographed stage play.

The Last Of Mrs. Cheyney is a play not often revived I'm sure as it belongs to an era of fluff. Shearer is a con woman with a small entourage who pretends to be a wealthy widow from Australia. Actually she gets herself invited to the best homes in London, the better to scope them out for robberies which butler George Barraud does.

However when at one party Shearer arouses the interest of Lord Basil Rathbone it's on several levels. He's smitten with her, but he knows something's afoot since he recognizes Barraud as a thief previously arrested. After that it's a game of cat and mouse.

For reasons I can't explain The Last Of Mrs. Cheyney got a nomination for 'writing achievement' as it was phrased then. As this was just a photographed version of Frederick Lonsdale's play, then what was the achievement?

The film is the second sound film for Norma Shearer and it was Basil Rathbone's debut in talkies. It has some witty dialog, but in the end it's entertaining fluff.

Posing as a wealthy Australian widow, con woman Norma Shearer (as Fay Cheyney) encroaches herself in Monte Carlo society. Her nefarious plans are complicated by an attraction for Lord Basil Rathbone (as Arthur Dilling). This version of Frederick Lonsdale's hit play is in good hands with director Sidney Franklin, who had a lack of flash that was perfect for early talking films; he manages the new technology competently. Ms. Shearer is charming and theatrical. In his sound debut, Mr. Rathbone makes a good impression despite raccoon eye make-up. Handsome rival George Barraud (as Charles) is impressively natural and Herbert Bunston (as Elton) chews into the script. MGM tried a re-make in 1937 with Joan Crawford , but it failed to move "The Last of Mrs. Cheyney" off the stage. The plot has appeared in dozens of other stories.

****** The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (7/6/29) Sidney Franklin ~ Norma Shearer, Basil Rathbone, George Barraud, Herbert Bunston

This 1929 version has all the tight pacing and wit that the 1937 film lacks. It also doesn't have the tacked-on moralizing ending that so blights the 1937 version. Basil Rathbone (so young!) is charming and funny with that hint of edge that he could do so well. The two-part scene in which he invites Norma Shearer for a little supper at his apartment and is then verbally rebuffed by the "butler," only to return to kiss the hem of Norma's garment is priceless. I watched it four times. Basil Rathbone is believable as an English lord in ways that Robert Montgomery in the 1937 version is so painfully not believable. George Barraud as Charles effaces himself effectively in the beginning scenes as the butler, and his scenes with Rathbone are not marred by the hint of effeminacy Montgomery brings to his fraternization scenes with the butler when that is not called for in the script. As much as I love William Powell, and I think he's the only reason to see the 1937 version, he can't manage to efface himself effectively in the beginning scenes as the butler. He's always William Powell. As enjoyable as Powell is, when you see George Barraud move from effacement to boldness, you really see how it should be done.