The Reckless Hour

I enjoyed this film a lot, because Dorothy Mackaill, who I guess was an answer to Marion Davies, has a really sweet demeanor. I'm happy there's a happy ending, and in fact, I never saw Conrad Nagel looking better! I also very much like Joan Blondell, who was so cute in these very early roles, before they gave her that stiff glamorous hairdo. I can't stand the wise-cracking boyfriend, but then maybe that's the idea, we're not supposed to like him. It's a fun film with some really touching moments. I first saw Dorothy Mackaill in "the flirting widow" with Basil Rathbone , and I really liked her in that, too.

"The Reckless Hour" appeared in theaters in August 1931. That was nearly two years into the Great Depression that had gripped the industrial world. Hollywood had always done a lot of comedy, but now it was cranking out comedy films along with musicals and other films with gaiety and laughter. Audiences that did or didn't have money to spend on entertainment, surely didn't want to spend it watching morose movies about gloom and doom. This was a time when people needed things to help lift their spirits. This may seem far-fetched to audiences of the 21st century, but it was very real for people of the 1930s who lost jobs, incomes, businesses, houses, farms, and, in many cases, hope.

Yet, Hollywood still produced some dramatic films. A common element of those included the wealthy, high society, and the fun life. Audiences could still dream about the good life – a life that most would never really achieve or see. And, mostly those serious films about the rich and worldly had a tragic element to them. The message was that all was not sunshine and gaiety at the top.

"The Reckless Hour" has the usual appeal to riches. The film seems to be set in a time when there wasn't a depression. I would guess that models and jewelry clerks would have been among the least employed during that time. Yet, here we have Dorothy Mackaill and Joan Blondell in just such jobs. Mackaill's Margaret Nichols is the model, while Blondell plays her sister, Myrtle. It's through Margaret's job that this film acquires its riches theme.

I won't divulge the story more here, but just note that this is a surprisingly good morality play. It bursts the bubble of the idea that wealth is everything and brings happiness. The title hints at what is to come. It's a story about hope, decency, mistakes, forgiveness, family, selfishness and charity, kindness and sacrifice. In its own way, this film could lift the spirits of audiences.

The attention given this film for being "pre-code" seems nothing more than a marketing effort today. While there is a situation that could be very scandalous in that day and time, it is only alluded to in the film. And, it's important to the plot, and as an example of the culture and mores of the time.

All of the cast give good performances. Mackaill was a dramatic actress who starred in many silent films of the 1920s. She made the transition to sound with several good films in the early 1930s. But, the rise of many new talented and attractive stars diminished her demand and she retired from films by the mid-1930s. Blondell, on the other hand, was more diversified, and her movie career would last until her death at age 73 in 1979. She played in many comedies, but was also very good in dramas, musicals and other genres. Walter Byron's career also started in the silent era and came to an early end by the start of the 1940s.

This is a good film for a look at these and some other good actors who graced many films into the mid-20th century, but who today are little known. Conrad Nagel, H.B. Warner and Claude King had very good careers in movies.

Hollywood felt the need to teach us morality in the early 1930s such as with WEEKEND MARRIAGE (1932) and LUXURY LINER (1933). The delivery however of this Warner Brothers sermon is not given by the charismatic firebrand preacher but by Doris from the delicatessen in Spar. This is not a good film.

Weren't things different once upon a time! This is firmly rooted in the morality of the early thirties and the moral being preached in this was the same as was preached in so many others of the early thirties: know thy place. Watched today the message feels chauvinistic and regressive but although these people look like us, they are from a very different society, a society where such moralising worked.

Marriage was massively important. It was such a different thing back then - it wasn't just a romantic commitment, it was vital for survival. What else could most young women do - there were no other options. Young women needed to get married primarily to have somewhere to live - especially during The Depression. In early thirties movies it seems crazy to us how people seem to marry each other at the drop of a hat but marriage was for security. At the most basic level, marriage was a contract to look after a man, give him children and he will give you somewhere to live. These themes were explored much better in other films.

CALL HER SAVAGE may have been the only decent film John Dillon directed. This is not his finest hour, he doesn't manage to make you care about his cast, he doesn't make them real. Walter Byron is basically Captain Hook from the Christmas Pantomime, Dorothy MacKaill is insipid and H B Warner, the 'concerned dad' is acting like they're making a silent movie. Only Joan Blondell in her little role as feisty little sister acts like she's in a normal film.

Its stilted and unnatural feel possibly wasn't all Mr Dillon's fault, production was being disrupted at the time as Warner's recording equipment was being replaced as this was being made. Ironically the 'inventors' of the talkies were now having to play catch up with the other studios but nevertheless, others at Warners managed to make decent pictures then. This just feels amateurish and unpolished.

I've said that Dorothy MacKaill's character Marie is rather insipid but for the story to work, she has to be nothing more than a mouse. Girls in 1931 would however be able to relate to someone like this more so than to someone more interesting like Joan Crawford, it doesn't make for entertainment though. Whilst the attitudes prevalent of the time makes uncomfortable viewing today, this was how things were and how people thought. Marie nearly ruins her life by trying to be different, trying to marry the man of her choice, not the choice of her parents. It should not annoy us that having one's own mind was frowned upon, that's what kept society working then.

What's been mentioned is how a supporting role from Joan Blondell outshines all the established stars. Joan shortly-to-become-the-sexiest-woman-in-the-world Blondell isn't actually that good but her co-stars are just so dull. She wasn't bad - in fact her performance in this as the sassy sister (or only character actually with any character) helped to secure her long time contract.....in films a lot better than this.

Dorothy Mackaill stars as Maggie, a sensible girl from Jersey City who works as a model in New York City but lives with her family. She's tired of dating ordinary men and one day meets a rich man (Walter Byron) who's eager to date. She enjoys the gifts and evenings at nightclubs but her parents are worried.

Meanwhile her younger sister(Joan Blondell) is dating the guy Maggie jilted. Her father (H.B. Warner) is having a tough time with his book shop, and her mother (Helen Ware) defends Maggie's dating the rich guy. Things start to go wrong, however, when Maggie discovers she is pregnant. She assumes the rich guy will marry her. After he dumps her, she's left to explain things to her father.

After some time in a "rest home," she meets another rich guy (Conrad Nagel). Has she learned her lesson? Will he be interested in "damaged goods"? Should she tell him everything?

Mackaill is terrific as Maggie and earns audience sympathy by being so nice. She's matched here by the snappy Joan Blondell who drops wise cracks every time she opens her mouth. Warner and Ware are fine as the parents. Byron is an appropriate louse. Nagel is fine as the nice guy. Also in the cast are Billy House as Jennison, Dorothy Peterson as his wife, and Joe Donahue as the sourpuss Hal.

As a pre-Code film, there are some surprises in the way the women act. A few years later, the Code would force certain behaviors and conclusions. There's one outrageous exchange when Maggie declines to go out with her drippy boyfriend. When Blondell's character jumps on her for standing him up, the mother says something like, "Leave Maggie alone. She's been on feet all day." Blondell (whose character works at Macy's) snaps back, "And where have I been all day? On my back?"

Joan Blondell, here playing the little sister, is about a thousand times more charismatic on-screen than star Dorothy Mackaill, and her presence is one of the only excuses to give THE RECKLESS HOUR (1931) a shot.

The Depression-era melodrama starts off boringly enough (until we meet Blondell's character) and covers the familiar ground of the rich boy dating the middle class girl and making promises he never intends to keep, leaving the girl to suffer the consequences on her own.

Dorothy Mackaill's line readings really bring the movie down. It's something about her enunciation and how she spaces her lines apart. Blondell, for example, is much more naturalistic, but H.B. Warner and Conrad Nagel are also noticeably better than Mackaill in their scenes with her. Top-billed Mackaill is probably the worst actor in the whole film, and some of the scenes late in the movie, with the melodrama slapped on pretty thick, are almost impossible to take seriously.

Joan Blondell, just starting out in Hollywood, is relegated to a supporting role with limited screen time, but is nevertheless delightful. Fans of hers might want to give this one a look if it shows up on TCM. Otherwise...