A Cativante Viuvinha

This 1929 version has all the tight pacing and wit that the 1937 film lacks. It also doesn't have the tacked-on moralizing ending that so blights the 1937 version. Basil Rathbone (so young!) is charming and funny with that hint of edge that he could do so well. The two-part scene in which he invites Norma Shearer for a little supper at his apartment and is then verbally rebuffed by the "butler," only to return to kiss the hem of Norma's garment is priceless. I watched it four times. Basil Rathbone is believable as an English lord in ways that Robert Montgomery in the 1937 version is so painfully not believable. George Barraud as Charles effaces himself effectively in the beginning scenes as the butler, and his scenes with Rathbone are not marred by the hint of effeminacy Montgomery brings to his fraternization scenes with the butler when that is not called for in the script. As much as I love William Powell, and I think he's the only reason to see the 1937 version, he can't manage to efface himself effectively in the beginning scenes as the butler. He's always William Powell. As enjoyable as Powell is, when you see George Barraud move from effacement to boldness, you really see how it should be done.

Talky, uncinematic and slow-as-molasses, "The Last of Mrs. Cheyney" (1929) is really for film historians only (the second half is SLIGHTLY more tolerable than the first). Norma Shearer is OK but not yet in full bloom, Basil Rathbone comes off best, while Herbert Bunston is particularly awful. Gotta love the "good woman" = "virgin" coded speak, though. ** out of 4.

Last of Mrs. Cheyney, The (1929)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

The rich British society welcomes Mrs. Cheyney (Norma Shearer) as one of their own but what they don't realize is that she's actually connected to a group of jewels thieves. THE LAST OF MRS. CHEYNEY was a hit on the stage so it's easy to see why MGM would want to produce it for the screen. It must have done well as the studio would go on and remake it twice including once in 1937 with Joan Crawford. Early film buffs will be interested to know that this was MGM's first talking picture that had the sound actually recorded onto the film instead of the Warner method of recording the sound on a separate disc. That is certainly a historically important thing but it's doubtful very few outside of major film buffs are going to care about that. The finished product is what's going to really make one interested and sadly this is a pretty poor movie all around. You can start with the fact that this is obviously an early-talkie and we get non-stop dialogue scenes that just go on and on and on to the point where you really do forget what they're talking about. It's as if you're watching the start of the scene and listening to what the characters are saying but within a minute or two you're completely zoned out and this happens quite often. There are some plot points that pop up ever so often but not a single thing is believable and more often than not you just sit there wishing everything would be over with. The performances are all rather bad and that includes Shearer. I haven't seen too many of her pictures but it's clear she had talent but it's also clear that this is perhaps the worst I've seen from her. Her line delivery is extremely bad but I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she was just working with a new system and doing what she could. Often times it seems as if her and the other actors are leaning towards where the mic is just so that the dialogue can get picked up. Basil Rathbone is fair in his part but at the same time his line delivery is quite poor. The supporting players include Hedda Hopper, Herbert Bunston and George Barraud but none of them add much. The sound quality isn't the worst that I've heard but at the same time it's easy to tell that this was very early in the game. For the most part the voices are heard just fine but the added sound effects really come off poor and the constant hiss in the track becomes annoying after a while. All of this is just a part of its time but sadly the film itself is just hard to sit through.

Dashing Lord Arthur Dilling (Basil Rathbone) and old Lord Elton (Herbert Bunston) compete for the affections of the lovely widow Fay Cheyney (Norma Shearer), who is secretly a jewel thief.

Early sound films have a reputation for being badly made and boring, but I disagree. Some early sound films from 1929 and 1930 are exceedingly well made. However, for every film like Bulldog Drummond or The Love Parade, there's a film like The Last of Mrs. Cheyney.

The Last of Mrs. Cheyney is clunky, badly acted, badly paced, badly written and badly directed. It's a mess. It lacks all the charm of the 1937 version. It's also much more stagier than the '37 version. This version doesn't even have the opening meeting on the ship between Mrs. Cheyney and Dilling (one of my favorite parts of that version), yet it still manages to be almost the same length as the latter film.

Norma Shearer is an actress I like much more than most people, but she definitely doesn't have the charm or wit of Joan Crawford. Basil Rathbone turns in an terrible performance as Dilling, and Herbert Bunston's performance as Lord Elton is absolutely dreadful. I did like George Barraud's performance as Charles; he's easily the best actor in the film, and it's a shame he didn't have a bigger career.

Overall, go watch the Joan Crawford version instead. You'll enjoy it a lot more.

A comedy of manners, requiring close concentration to catch the liveliness of the dialogue. Basil Rathbone is magnificent as a dapper wolf; his performance is perhaps the best I've seen in a role like this, of course aided by the snappy discourse between himself and the slower-but-sweeter Norma Shearer. No classic but very entertaining. Anyone amused by witty pick-up lines from the 30's should find this quite funny.