Mon homme Godfrey

I've never understood the urge to remake *great* movies. They usually fail (e.g., We're No Angels) but very occasionally they succeed (e.g., His Girl Friday). This one is frothy enough to float away into forgotten-movie heaven.

The original with William Powell and Carole Lombard was on the dark side, to be sure, but this was necessary to the 'message' and the times. Nor was the message entirely political and social--at heart it is about a man who discovers that his world of privilege is empty without accepting his responsibility to others and to his community. A sharp contrast in tone, but ultimately a complement to this theme, is in Nobody's Fool. The Paul Newman character is not privileged, but his commitment to others is just as deep and at the heart of the movie.

The Niven/Allyson remake of My Man Godfrey is, in my opinion, inoffensive and fun, but also shallow and meaningless.

The is the 50s remake of the 30s classic screwball comedy. This remake feels more like TV than the slick 30s comedy does. The slick is about the only part that is still in this 50s version, and the screwball. This is, more than anything, a silly flick.

A spoiled rich beautiful family falls hard for their new butler, Godfrey, played by David Niven. The younger daughter (June Allyson) brings home after a scavenger hunt. He doesn't judge and helps wherever he can, best of all he isn't perfect. Even though this is such a silly flick, for some reason at the end I had a big smile. Silly is important.

...then watch this one first. Because IMHO the original 1936 version is just better. And then your opinion will not be colored by the comparison between the two. It's kind of like Son of Frankenstein versus Young Frankenstein. If you must watch both, watch Son of Frankenstein first, otherwise a serious movie will become unintentionally hilarious. But I digress.

This one has the same structure as the original - A scavenger hunt turns up the titular Godfrey (David Niven), who is given a job with the Bullock family as the butler. He's a bit mysterious and very urbane, but Irene Bullock (June Allyson), one of the daughters of the family, comes to love him. In the original, Godfrey's big secret was that he was from a rich family living among the city's forgotten men due to a love affair that ended badly. In this one, Godfrey is in the country illegally. Naturally they couldn't keep the original Great Depression centered plot - It would be ridiculous.

This film was well acted, well directed, and attractively shot. But other than being in color, I just could not see the point of this being remade. It's something that I watched once, found to be OK, but probably would not seek out again.

I am an huge fan of David Niven, but not even his suave, sophisticated portrayal of "Godfrey" can rescue this from the clutches of June "Dorothy-on-speed" Allyson's frenetically annoying performance as "Irene". He is, ostensibly, a penniless Austrian vagabond she discovers on a pier, takes a bit of a shine to, and impressed by his cultivated style and urbane turn of phrase, takes him back to the US to be the butler in their exclusive family home. Needless to say, he fits in perfectly and has them all eating from his hands. He does not, however, disclose that his past isn't quite what they expect and when he is eventually rumbled - and not in the way you might expect, the story becomes terribly convoluted. Comparisons with the 1936 Lombard/Powell version do not really flatter this production. It is too in-your-face without the subtle humour or romance of its predecessor. Odd to see Jay Robinson in a film without a cape and some centurions and Eva Gabor brings some glamour (if little else) to the proceedings.

Martha Hyer is the reason I sat through this movie. Her relationship with David Niven is much more interesting than that of June Allyson-David Niven. Ms. Hyer's acting was also very unstated, and convincing, unlike the Allyson character, which required a lot of over-acting.

As far as remakes go, this movie isn't bad.