The Gorgeous Hussy

No! No! No! What is that most modern, at least to her time, of actresses Joan Crawford doing in hoop skirts and crinoline? Pretty much making a fool of herself, not that it's her fault MGM should have known better. There is not one look or gesture that she makes that has a feeling of any period but the 20th century.

Both stagnant and silly this completely miscast picture takes an interesting and scandalous piece of American history, The Petticoat Affair, and make it seem asinine and trivial when it practically tore Jackson's presidency apart and did lead to most of his cabinet's resignation.

Proof positive that not every film that came out of Hollywood's golden age and its premiere studio was a classic worth seeing filled with top flight talent or not. Even if you are a completist of any of the stars work this will be a struggle to get through.

'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

Joan isn't all that gorgeous, only a halfhearted hussy, and not much of an actress, either--at least not here. Rather, she's a nice but confused innkeeper's daughter in 1820s Washington with love and politics on the brain. Mostly she lifts her considerable eyebrows up and down, up and down, to indicate joy, worry, bafflement, empathy, ecstasy... All the while she's pursued by most of the leading men of MGM circa 1936, for reasons best known to them, since there's nothing particularly fascinating about her character. This lengthy melodrama does have first-rate production values and intermittent good acting, especially from the quieter performers, Melvyn Douglas and (most of all) Beulah Bondi, as a gentle, pipe-smoking Mrs. Andrew Jackson. But as a historical romance it's rather listless, with a rote Snidely-Whiplash villain (Louis Calhern) and much nattering about states' rights. The conflicts feel painted-on. The ending feels hurried and contrived. And Joan always seems to be looking for her key light.

Joan Crawford shines in this movie, despite what many of her detractors have said about her. I have read many articles about how she was not right in this role and that she was much better in contemporary films and not period dramas, such as this. But I will tell you that they are wrong. This is one very entertaining film and it holds your interest from beginning to end. Everything about this film is breathtaking, the sets, the costumes, the acting (not only from the leads, but also the minors), and even the make-up is very good. Just take a look at Charles Trowbridge and his likeness of Martin Van Buren--amazing!! This film has it all and this film puts another jewel in the Crawford crown of great acting!!

THE GORGEOUS HUSSY, based on a 1934 historical novel by Samuel Hopkins Adams, is another one of those genteel forays into the past from squeaky clean MGM. The only compelling ingredients in this overlong saga about the controversial hussy Peggy Eaton who wielded much influence over President Andrew Jackson are a few of the performances and the novelty of actual political debates occurring in the context of a love affair; Hollywood seldom mixed those two elements. The first half hour is bone dead, with familiar performers strutting around in period costumes and delivering the necessary exposition. Joan Crawford is not particularly persuasive as a young tavern keeper's daughter. She looks somewhat haggard and hard, but still beautiful. Things liven up with the appearance of Andrew Jackson (Lionel Barrymore) and his unpopular and maligned wife Rachel (Beulah Bondi). Barrymore may have been a ham who gave basically the same performance in film after film, but at least he puts some juice into the proceedings, making the most he can of the extremely diluted representation of Jackson supplied by the script. Bondi is touching in her depiction of the ill-fated Rachel, the love of Jackson's life. Until then we have had to endure endless moments with a dashing but wooden Melvyn Douglas and a competent but unexciting contribution from neophyte Robert Taylor. Jimmy Stewart and later Franchot Tone are on hand too but only in a few scenes and to little effect. And we have the always nasty and conniving Alison Skipworth as a disapproving society matron to hold our attention. And the marvelous Zeffie Tilbury as Skipworth's deaf mother who disagrees strongly with her snobbish daughter's malicious gossip. Between these bits there are occasionally interesting sketches of the political contentions of the time, mostly about how much power should be granted to the individual states, foreshadowing the Civil War. But we never get a sense of what an extraordinary woman the title character was. Nothing in Joan Crawford's performance or in the material given her indicates that this is anything other than an unusually attractive and well behaved lady with romantic yearnings – but someone for whose honor and reputation a President would dissolve his cabinet and change the course of US history? No way. You cannot make a polite film about these characters in this historical period, but this is what MGM tried to do.