Lonely Wives

I chuckled more than once at the convoluted goings on in this farce filled with sexual innuendos. Edward Everett Horton is good in his double role as both a famous womanizing lawyer called Richard and a vaudeville impersonator called Felix. Felix wants to add Richard to his list of people he impersonates and would get permission only if he can fool Richard's mother-in-law, Maude Eburne, for a night. Meanwhile, Richard goes to meet Laura La Plante about getting a divorce from her husband, who happens to be Felix, although Richard doesn't know it. And Richard's wife, Esther Ralston, comes home from a vacation early and spends the night with Felix, disguised as Richard.

I was impressed with the smooth special effects when both Richard and Felix appear onscreen at the same time. It was done, of course, by a double exposure, but the timing of their conversations was perfect. As the befuddled butler, Spencer Charters overplays his role when he gets conflicting commands by both Felix and Richard and it was a bit tedious and predictable. The rest of the cast was fine. This is a good example of a pre-code sex farce.

The origins of the story was a 1912 German vaudeville act called "Tanzanwaltz" by Pordes Milo, Walter Schütt and Dr. Eric Urban. Although A.H. Woods is credited onscreen as the writer of the 1922 play on which this movie is based, contemporary reviews list him only as producer, with Walter De Leon and Mark Swan as the English language adaptors.

The title and advertising for this film are salacious in that laughable pre-Code way; "All hot and bothered...wild husbands on the loose," read one. The plot that sets up this early sex farce is awfully contrived; it has a guy showing up to a lawyer's office who looks identical to him (both men are played by Edward Everett Horton), allowing the lawyer to slip out and have some fun with a couple of women at the "Whoopee Club" 'til dawn, and then his wife to unexpectedly return from a vacation all rarin' to go with the stranger she assumes is her husband. "I bought a new lace nightie yesterday that's positively indecent - wait 'til you see it!" she says. Meanwhile, one of the women the lawyer has gone out with just happens to be the other guy's wife.

It's pretty damn silly and if you're looking for something sophisticated, skip this film (which I guess you could have guessed from the title). In addition, the quality of the print which survives is pretty poor, the cast (aside from Horton) lacks star power, and the aspects of the plot in the middle of the film that focus on the butler's confusion and the mother-in-law's delight over possibly getting a grandchild are overdone and quickly become tiring.

However, it does have its moments, starting with the sassy secretary (Patsy Ruth Miller) who likes strutting across the room to show her boss her "wiggle." There is an air of subversive desire in the film; the new client (Laura La Plante) who comes to the lawyer to ask about a divorce doesn't mind if her husband stays out at night, as long as she could always depend on him doing so, so that she could have some fun herself. When the lawyer plans to meet both her and his secretary later that night, she says "But wouldn't you be embarrassed with two girls?" and he replies "Two? And me feeling positively Oriental?" There are several more lines like this, and it's kind of fun seeing two Edward Everett Horton's on the screen at the same time. In the screwball mayhem towards the end, one of the film's better sequences, watch for the moment when he hurdles over his mother-in-law, who's fallen down during a chase up the staircase. The film could certainly have been better, but it was mildly amusing.

Maybe it is as not as good as I rated it, but I thoroughly enjoyed this little movie. It has lots of little saucy lines in the script and the main character, a defense attorney, delivers his with style and wit. His secretary is quite a little number as well.

I am sure this does not rank up there in any list of great early films, and I had never even heard of it, but I came across it on youtube today, posted in full, and completely enjoyed it.

When a client comes to call, the lawyer tells him he can only spare five minutes. The client flatters him and he responds "maybe 10 minutes." Not hysterical but the way he says it brought a laugh.

Overall, maybe a silly little film, but not a bad one, and fun to watch.

For decades, a familiar and very stupid cliché has been used in movies and on TV--the identical stranger or identical cousin. While such things are 100% impossible and ridiculous, the idea has been used (and over-used) for years. I am usually annoyed by such productions, as these are not very similar folks but EXACTLY the same--which makes no sense at all. "Lonely Wives" is based on such a premise--and so it loses a few points for its dopiness.

Edward Everett Horton plays two people--Dickie Smith and a vaudeville performer, Mr. Zero. Zero is a professional impersonator and has managed to look, sound and behave exactly like Dickie. So, the two concoct a plan to have Zero pose as Smith but not surprisingly, lots of problems result--such as Dickie's wife apparently sleeping with Zero! While I admit that the film IS entertaining and a bit cheeky, the plot is silly fluff. But, in this case, it works a bit better than usual because I love Edward Everett Horton--he was a very funny character actor who had a chance to star in this farce. Not brilliant...but cute.

This film is based on the 1922 play, renamed "Who's Who" - a better title than "Lonely Wives" - that starred Charles Ruggles. While Ruggles would have been perfection as Smith/Zero, this film version is hilarious, due primarily to the inventive comedic performance of Horton. Also superb are the butler - a tippler who thinks he's going crazy - and Horton's guard dog mother-in-law. It's a pleasure to watch the adorable Ralston, La Plante, and Miller - 3 femme stars from the silent era who have featured roles - contribute so deftly to the merriment. As the plot thickens, the tempo speeds up so that the second half is a whirl of exits, entrances and misunderstandings. Surprisingly, but believably, all wrongs are righted in the end.

Even though this film from the Mill Creek comedy collection was a poor visual and audio transfer from a TV showing, it's amazing just how good this comedy is and how much I enjoyed it.