Million Dollar Baby

Whilst May Robson is on the screen this film is entertaining.As soon as she disappears the film goes down the drain.Priscilla Lane seems to think that the quicker you deliver lines the funnier they will be.Reagans character is so poorly written that you don't know if he is meant to be funny or serious.This must be the umpteenth film of this era where a popular musician had written a symphony.Lynn is plain anonymous.In my view there is only one reason why a film like this seems to have permanently disappeared from sight.The reason is that it simply is not funny or entertaining any more.So don't bother to waste your time watching this film.Watching paint dry is much more interesting!

May Robson excelled in parts of eccentric characters. We saw this in "Lady for A Day," which earned her a best actress nomination and years later was the Glenn Ford-Bette Davis vehicle of "Pocketful of Miracles."

In this 1941 wonderful film, Miss Robson plays a very wealthy dowager who learns that her father swindled a man causing the latter to commit suicide. To be repentant, Robson leaves Europe to come to N.Y. and give the granddaughter, a wonderful Priscilla Lane, $1,000,000.

Lane is living in a small housing tenement with an assortment of characters. Her boyfriend, a pianist, lives there. Ronald Reagan is just great here in a comical turn as well as being moody and philosophical about life. This is his second best performance to "King's Row."

This Cinderella-like tale conveys the idea that money can't bring happiness. Jeffrey Lynn is in fine form as Miss White's attorney who gives Lane the money and falls for her romantically.

A wonderful film with the venerable May Robson stealing the show.

This isn't a great movie, though Priscilla Lane is (as usual) better than her material.

But, that said, I was struck with the vocal precision of Nan Wynn in "Who Is in Your Dreams Tonight". Her control was exquisite.

It is amazing to me how very, very good even minor singers were in the 1940's. No, she is not a truly great singer, and I am not a huge fan of 1940's singing. Many later singers and many of her contemporaries were more compelling with weaker vocal skills. (I lean toward Peggy Lee, Chris Connor and Susannah McCorkle on the jazz side.)

But, damn! Who among popular singers exhibits this level of technical skills today. It's a bit like the absence of workmanship in modern manufactured goods.

I love Priscilla Lane, who was great at light comedy but could also play characters with real depth when given the chance. (Check her out in "Blues in the Night"). Her role here is not very demanding, and I could see it being played by many of the other talented movie comediennes of the era. Anne Sheridan was apparently considered, and I could also see Ginger Rogers in the part, but I can't imagine anyone would've played it with more charm and gusto than Priscilla.

May Robson is also great, as always, but the one sour note for me in the movie (no pun intended) is the performance of Ronald Reagan as Priscilla's aspiring composer boyfriend. Ronnie could be a good light comedy leading man, but somehow I just can't buy him as a struggling, tormented artiste. Even worse, he's an entitled, arrogant jerk. I get that he's frustrated playing piano in a "spaghetti restaurant" and not Carnegie Hall, but why does he take it out on Priscilla, who does nothing but give him love and encouragement? His behavior towards her is bullying and borderline abusive, and she must have some serious self-worth issues to put up with him. Sorry if it sounds like I'm looking at a 1941 movie through a 2020 lens, but there were other movies of the period in which women didn't act like such door mats. Maybe it's the way he was directed, but Ronnie needed to bring a lighter touch to his scenes with Priscilla in order for us to understand what she sees in him. (I could see Jimmy Stewart being very good in this role.)

As a movie made during the tail end of the Depression it has that frequent Hollywood theme that money can't buy happiness, and so we see Priscilla having to give away her new found fortune in order to find true love. It's also a favorite Hollywood trope of the time that a real man would never let himself be supported by a wealthy wife. (I doubt that was ever true. Certainly a pianist who wants to spend his time composing symphonies would be happy to have a wealthy benefactress). The business of Priscilla giving her money away gets a bit silly, and the scenes are not directed with the skill of a Capra or Preston Sturges. By the time the movie comes to its anticipated "happy ending" I was sad to say goodbye to Priscilla but feeling a bit exhausted by the whole thing. ("Happy ending" is in quotation marks, because if this were reality, Priscilla would discover she's married a perpetual malcontent, who considers himself too good to play in a restaurant, too good to play in a swing band, and whose symphony got booed, showing that he really isn't anywhere near as talented as he imagines himself.)

As a side note, as a native New Yorker I can tell you that even in 1941 the provided Greenwich Village address of the boarding house was in a pretty nice neighborhood, and not a slum as depicted. Now, in 2020, it's smack in the middle of the richest zip code in America.

Ronald Reagan is actually marvelous as ne'er-do-well boyfriend. Jeffrey Lynn is quite handsome as his rival for Priscilla Lane's attentions. Priscilla, an underrated actress in serious dramas and light comedies alike, does a very professional turn on an airy, yet pleasing, script. Worth a watch. 6/10