The Greeks Had a Word for Them

This fun, pre-code romp from 1932 starring Joan Blondell, Madge Evans, Ina Claire, was remade in color in 1953 as How to Marry a Millionaire. Similar plot, but in the original, the girls steal boyfriends (David Manners and Phillips Smalley) from each other, where as in the remake, they each find their own man, and then have to decide if they want to keep them or not. Interesting that Betty Grable, who starred in the 1953 version had appeared as a hat check girl in the 1932 version. This was one of the last films directed by Lowell Sherman ( also played Boris Feldman in the film) as he died two years after filming this. Ina Claire (played Jean) would have been the oldest of the three co-stars, 39 years old in 1932, and she only made three more after this. "The Greeks" was made during prohibition, so of course part of it takes place in a loud, smoke-filled "speakeasy". Lots of dark eye makeup, and the picture and sound quality are pretty terrible in the version I watched, but this IS a pretty old flick. A little slow, but fun if you have the patience. Gives you an idea of how some of the young, poor women got by in those days if they weren't willing to go look for work.

The Goldwyn production based on Zoe Akin's racy play about three gold diggers has Joan Blondell, Madge Evans and Ina Claire playing the trio, double-crossing each other as the mood suits them with the men falling like tenpins. David Manners, Phillips Smalley, even Lowell Sherman, the director, who doubles as a concert pianist is not immune to their machinations and *ahem* talents. Apparently George Barnes, the director of photography fell in love with Blondell on the set. They married the next year; presumably Claire would have stolen him from her, except every time she put on a new costume, she rushed over to show soon-to-be ex-husband John Gilbert how she looked.

The wisecracks fly fast and furious. Miss Claire, with her cigarette voice and scheming role steals the show every time she's on. It's a crackling Pre-Code, even though the lingerie shots are kept to a minimum

The clothes, coats, hats and jewelry are gorgeous in this 1932 pre-code film that was remade as How To Marry a Millionaire in 1953 with Marilyn Monroe, Lauren Bacall and Betty Grable. The colorized 1953 version had the women being much more overtly calculating in their goal to marry a millionaire. In this pre-code version it was more subtle...they were definitely gold diggers although one genuinely falls in love and wants to marry, it is not as clear that the other two want to marry at all. It seems that they all three like to drink, party and spend other people's money.

It is a lifestyle I guess, but with friends like these...who needs enemies. At least two of them have a fierce competition going and end up sabotaging each other at every opportunity!

Worth seeing for the gorgeous lush clothing...and the three ladies in question, especially Joan Blondel who is an eye catcher in every film she is in...although in this one she had some competition!

I saw this on a Mill Creek DVD collection of 50 comedies. As with most cheap Mill Creek public domain film collections, the print was not in great shape. The black and white was muddy and the sound squeaky. I hope some one will release a good print on DVD some day.

I won't repeat what other reviewers have said about the plot. Although it is jumpy and confusing, one does have to give it credit for being fast-paced, original and surprising.

Joan Blondell and Ina Claire do a good job of providing the comedy. Madge Evans is really the straight woman here. She is quite beautiful and glamorous and manages to steal the picture.

Besides these three women actresses, the movie has a lot of witty lies and a nice air of frivolity to it. There are some nice, subtle innuendos here and you do have to pay attention to catch the cleverness of the script.

This is a solid woman's picture from 1932 and there really weren't that many made.

If you have to watch the Mill Creek print, turn up the volume a bit.

I read with interest the comments of the critic for "Three Broadway Girls." Then I saw the movie. I must say that in accordance with the critic's 2007 standards, he was quite correct in his analysis. However, I am now 80 years old and remember the pictures in those days fairly well. I would say that the critic must be in his 30's or 40's for he evaluates the content and acting with those skills of 2007. If he were a critic in 1932 or the 30's for that matter, I think he would find this a 'charming' bit of humorous story telling. I would offer that those who criticize motion pictures should take into account the era in which they were made, and NOT evaluate them with the 2007 era standards.