Meet Me Tonight

I love Noel Coward, so I was excited to see "Meet Me Tonight," a 1952 film, based on the play, comprising three separate stories and including some excellent actors: Valerie Hobson, Stanley Holloway, Nigel Patrick, Jessie Royce Landis, and others.

Unfortunately, the stories were filled with unpleasant characters and a lot of yelling and insults. The second one especially was a real downer.

The first story, about two lousy music hall performers (Kay Walsh and Ted Ray), didn't rely on us just taking Coward's word for it that they were bad - we saw every number. Intolerable.

The last story should have worked, but it doesn't, mostly due to the annoying performance of Jessie Royce Landis.

Not particularly well directed, in some cases not particularly well acted, and loathe as I am to say it, not particularly well written. It was nice to see the lovely Valerie Hobson, though. And for that, "Meet Me Tonight" gets a 6.

This is a collection of three short Noel Coward plays, which I watched despite reading only bad reviews about it. Well, they were right, and here's another bad review. The first play, at 25 minutes, is quite tolerable - has some very corny jokes, as a pro, and some awfully contrived acting as a definite con. With different actors, this could have been quite good, because it was a pretty interesting little tale. It easily could have done with another fifteen or so minutes run time as well. The second play, at 20 minutes, was...well...I don't think I have the words. It was BAD, but compelling, in a bizarre way. One of those things that makes you keep asking, "my god, did he REALLY say THAT???" The third one, at 40 minutes, was the killer, not even the always delightful Valerie Hobson could save it; the last 5 minutes luckily made up for the other 35 minutes of pain.

Recommended only for the very bored ;)

Unfortunately for Noel Coward, the filming of three of his 1936 playlets was delayed for sixteen years and the coming of a new era in western civilization. Luckily, "Brief Encounter," based on the1936 playlet "Still Life," made it to the screen several years earlier more or less intact and went down in history as a classic. The three in this omnibus presentation survive only in tattered form. The best is the first – "Red Peppers," about a married song-and-dance team who constantly carp at one another offstage. It's an entertaining look behind the scenes of that bygone British institution, the music hall – second-rate variety thereof - which was already fading when Coward originally penned the piece. There is a sense of reality to it, for this was familiar turf to Coward and he probably encountered many individuals like the ones portrayed here in his youth as a journeyman actor on the English stage. Martita Hunt is a standout as an alcoholic veteran performer whose ego is far greater than her talent. The second segment is a straight-on filmed play of the domestic comedy "Fumed Oak." What was cartoonishly funny onstage is just awkward on screen. It lacks punch entirely. Even the redoubtable Stanley Holloway as the fed-up man of the house surrounded by jabbering suburban females cannot rescue it. The third, "Ways and Means," is an almost total disaster. More than the other two, this one tries to look like a movie but drowns in chatter. Nigel Patrick and Valerie Hobson are charming but they are not enough to make this slender tale of social parasites on the Riviera entertaining. Throughout all three the Coward wit pokes through often enough to hold the interest, but generally speaking this is a disappointing trio of adaptations.

This film consists of three short stories by Noel Coward. In the early 1950s, quite a few films with this sort of format were made-- most notably from Somerset Maugham. Some of these films were pretty good but a few were rather forgettable. This one is unusual because it was filmed in color--though it's very faded and has a red cast to it now due to decomposition of the filmstock. According to some of the reviewers who seem to know, these three plays are abbreviated and are quite a bit different than their original forms. I have no idea if this is the case or not.

"The Red Peppers" (With Kay Walsh, Ted Ray). This is a shrill and annoying short play that features an old-time stage act of the same name. Once the couple finish their routine, they return to their dressing room and argue. However, when folks that run the theater argue with them, it brings the couple closer together--as they have a mutual enemy. The consequences of all this are supposed to be funny. However, it's really loud and annoying. I'd score this one a 2.

"Fumed Oak" (with Stanley Holloway, Betty Ann Davies, Mary Merrall and Dorothy Gordon). The first portion of the play consists of some terrible women and a very quiet husband. The mother, her daughter and the granddaughter simply are awful. The mother is a histrionic know-it-all, her daughter is a nag and the granddaughter is weak, whiny and shrill. Eventually, the husband announces he's had enough and he puts everyone in their place. However, there are two big problems with this play. First, coming AFTER another unpleasant play involving screaming and nastiness, "Fumed Oak" really comes off poorly. Second, the husband slaps his mother-in-law to shut her up. While it was enjoyable to see this in some ways, the play seems a bit too misogynistic--and may just represent Coward's ambivalence towards women. I give this one a 6. If it hadn't been for my two complaints, an 8.

"Ways and Means" (with Valerie Hobson, Nigel Patrick, Jack Warner and Jessie Royce Landis). This third segment is about a couple who are self-indulgent jerks. They are upper class twits with no job skills and their job is to lie about--acting rich, gambling and using those around them. Ultimately, however, they're just about broke and at the end of their ropes. Based on their lack of character, they do what you expect--use their last pounds to try to gamble their way back to solvency. Whether they do or not, you really don't care as they really are unpleasant and have no real redeeming qualities. I'd give this one a 2.

Overall, this is a very misguided film. On their own, perhaps these plays might have worked. But together they are a very unpleasant affair. Tedious, talky and peopled with folks you simply cannot stand.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess! I saw this movie one night on Turner Classics, and thought I'd check out the IMDb write-up. I was surprised to see the negative comments about it, so I have to respond. I couldn't disagree more! It's definitely from another era, the British theatrical tradition of the '30s and '40s when Noel Coward was at his peak. I thought the writing and characterization was totally brilliant in all respects. Three short plays with unique, eccentric British characters involved in totally different slices of life. It's off-the-wall, satirical, cheeky black humor that's always ironic and engaging. All the actors are excellent, and obviously highly experienced veterans of the English stage. Consequently, this is definitely not a Hollywood production, and a lot of people might not appreciate it. But for anyone who appreciates the world of Noel Coward, I think it deserves top ratings.