Emma

The role of Emma was tailor-made for Marie Dressler, one of Hollywood's greatest treasures. And she jumps into it with both feet as the nanny to the Smith children and then as their step-mother after marrying their widowed father, played by Jean Hersholt. She plays the part to a tee and wrings every ounce of laughs and tears out of her role, a tour-de-force for this old trouper.

Good support cast headed by Hersholt and by Myrna Loy in a thankless role as a spoiled kid/woman and Richard Cromwell in a favorable role here (3 years later he would get Gary Cooper killed in a wimpy part in "Lives of a Bengal Lancer"). But it's Dressler who makes the picture work by the magnetism and charisma of her screen presence. She made 4 subsequent pictures before she was taken from us too soon. "Emma" is a good but not great film held together by Marie.

7/10 ******* - website no longer prints my star rating.

This is one of the rare melodramas from 1930's MGM that is really not outdated as others. It is a funny, but genuinely touching story of a devoted housekeeper (Dressler) who marries her wealthy employer, which does not settle well with his grown children. Dressler is just perfect and the ending is so perfect and bittersweet.

Hefty housekeeper Marie Dressler (as Emma) becomes the surrogate mother to a wealthy Long Island family, after their mother dies, giving birth to Richard Cromwell (as Ronnie). While helping her prepare for a well-deserved Niagara Falls vacation, family father Jean Hersholt (as Smith) startles Ms. Dressler by proposing marriage; and, the trip becomes a honeymoon. Back home, only Mr. Cromwell, Dressler's favorite "son", celebrates the marriage. The three other Smith children (George Meeker, Myrna Loy, and Barbara Kent) are furious; they feel the ailing Mr. Hersholt married a mere "servant", who will steal the family fortune.

This is Marie Dressler at her sentimental best; assisted by an apt MGM team, including Clarence Brown (director), Oliver Marsh (photographer), and Frances Marion (writer). Dressler won a "Best Actress" Academy Award" for a previous effort, "Min and Bill" (1930); however, her "Emma" is a stronger characterization. This more deserved "Best Actress" nomination became the Academy Awards' #2 choice for the 1931/32 eligibility period; in the voting, Dressler was just behind winner Helen Hayes (in "The Sin of Madelon Claudet"). Dressler should have won for "Emma", rather than "Min and Bill".

Richard Cromwell and Jean Hersholt might have been nominated as "Best Supporting Actors"; but, the category was not introduced until 1936 (Dressler would have likely won the 1929/30 award, in this category, for "Anna Christie"). Parts of "Emma" have not aged well, especially some of the early, yet important, scenes. But, its strengths make up for these weaknesses. Watch for the scene in which Dressler throws her ungrateful step-children out of the house. This is followed by a scene with Dressler being "haunted" by the "ghosts" of the little Smith children; it's an extraordinarily touching "special effect". And, it all works so well due to Dressler.

Dressler is unfairly called a "scene stealer"; most of the time, she was just very good. If you were good, you kept up with her. With material to work with, Dressler's co-stars are just as memorable. Note, how, in lesser roles, Cromwell and Hersholt compliment Dressler's "Emma" perfectly. Both Hersholt and Dressler play his "death scene" beautifully. And, Cromwell's one-word description of "Emma" is the film's most lingering. You won't forget it.

********* Emma (1/2/32) Clarence Brown ~ Marie Dressler, Richard Cromwell, Jean Hersholt, Myrna Loy

Marie Dressler was a fine actress who deserves to be better known today, one of the few actors/actresses that had a career in silents that transitioned quite well into sound. 'Min and Bill' being a strong example of what was so great about her. Clarence Brown was a gifted director in my view, but was a director that had a very uneven filmography (with some very good films like 'Anna Karenina' and also some average at best ones). Love classic film and certainly have no bias against sentimental films.

1932's 'Emma' is certainly one of those sentimental films and is a pretty good one. It is an example of the lead performance being a good deal better than the film itself, but there is actually in my view a lot more to 'Emma' than just Dressler (although she is the best thing about it). It is not one of Brown's best pictures and there are better representations of the rest of the cast, but it is worth seeing to see one of the best performances of Dressler and deserves more credit.

'Emma' isn't perfect by all means. The pacing isn't always great, with some dull stretches from having some extraneous scenes that go on for too long without developing or progressing enough. It would have helped if the story wasn't as slight as it was.

Would have liked a lot more development to the characters, only Dressler's and Myrna Loy's are properly developed, the others are too one-dimensional and Richard Cromwell's is especially underwritten. Cromwell also seemed rather bland in his role, being just there with not enough feeling.

Dressler however is superb, she shows off sparkling comic timing, radiates class, has such an expressive nuanced face that always tells so much and also really touched my heart. Her character is interesting, worth relating to and develops beautifully. There is more to the film than just her in terms of merits, Jean Hersholt brings a good deal of colour to his too short screen time and a very young Loy is at her most hateable (was very surprised to see her in this way). Brown also directs with enough control and ease.

It looks good, with some lovely atmospheric photography and sumptuous art direction. The script avoids sinking into melodramatic and has humorous and poignant lines. The story has enough parts where it is charming and moving, with the standout being the real tear-jerker that is the ending (more like the last 10-15 minutes).

Concluding, worth seeing particularly for Dressler, but falls short of being a must see. 7/10.

My only two criticisms is that it's a tad slow and yet there isn't enough screen time for Marie. If this film doesn't make you cry at the end- especially the bittersweet "gift" she receives- you are made of stone. Marie may be a tad hammy, but you believe her, none the less. I can see why she was a star.