A Cativante Viuvinha

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.

I found this early talkie difficult to watch and I'm a Norma Shearer fan! It's not her fault, but the primitive production values of this film would cause any viewer to become bored. 90% of the movie is filmed with "medium shots," and it's very similar to watching a dull play.

Antiquated, early talkie curio from Frederick Lonsdale's hit play of chic American jewel thief (Shearer) residing among the gullible rich London aristocrats, and taking interest in dashing Rathbone. Like the 1937 version, it is dated now, but is quite interesting to watch thanks to the star chemistry

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.

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.