Mademoiselle Frou-Frou

The reviews should help potential viewers decide whether or not they will like a movie. I thought there were certain aspects of this movie that were exceptionally good so I was surprised to see a below average rating. When this occurs, I often see a sharp disparity in the reviews where one group loves it and another group thinks it a flop. Both are valid subjective comments. Readers should read a couple of reviews from each of the two groups and see which group they identify with and view or not accordingly. I belong to the former group. I was blown away by the fantastic performance of Luise Rainer, arguably the best actress of her era - it was exactly the characterization the original play and movie called for. In contrast, when the movie came out, critics did not like it and it didn't do well at the box office (suffering a small financial loss). Critics called it too melodramatic, but melodramas have always been one of the major genres of movies - especially in the '30s and still survive today. Critics called Luise's performance "too feminine" (NY Times) and too animated. Those criticisms are a bit like calling a Boris Karloff horror film "too scary" - if you don't like horror (or melodrama), then don't watch horror (or melodrama). The movie and story line are NOT on the same level as, say, Gone With The Wind, but it's a good B level melodrama with all supporting actors and others doing A level jobs albeit on a modest budget. Individual reviewers thought Luise's style was too animated, but that's what the role calls for and her Oscar winning performance in The Good Earth had was no animation as that's what that role required. Others thought Luise's acting style was too different than the other actors. However, the others were playing "normal" people whereas Luise was portraying a character that was qualitatively different and doing it perfectly. The key theme is the Melvyn Douglas character (solid, all business, male) falling in love with Luise's (animated, happy-alive, ultra female) character. I've seen Luise's character in real life - rare, but still seen again and again - and those who are like Melvyn's character are very strongly attracted to her as they seem to sense that she will add another dimension, or two, to their life. Melvyn's character falls for Luise's character because of who she is - her personality. But then, to be brief and not give too much away, Melvyn's character begins to become disenchanted and critical as she's not more like him. This is a deep theme for a melodrama. Being fiction, there are many possible endings and many may have been disappointed (and lowered their rating) by the chosen ending not matching their preferred ending - I preferred a different ending, but my subjective choice is NOT inherently better than the chosen ending. And as I reflect on the movie, I'm free to change the ending to fit my taste.

I have watched television over the last forty years and this is one of the few black and white movies that I missed. It was great to see one of the greats again. This movie invokes a wide set of emotions that doesn't require explicit sex, explosions or fast plots. The photography is outstanding and every close up is a prefect portrait of expression and lighting. Luise Rainer gives an incredible performance. After reading her biography, I understand that she is known for her emotional dramatic acting and hand postures, but in this film, I don't see how any one could have pretended to be as beautiful and flighty. The character was "almost" mentally ill, that is nearly detached from reality. Flighty and beautiful...a prefect performance. I'd have to say that she stole the show. *S* Thank you Luise.

Quite the period piece... the south, before the civil war. But some big names.. .Melvyn Douglas (star of silents and talkies), Robert Young (Marcus Welby), HB Warner (many films). some similarities to Gone With the Wind.... girl likes one guy. another guy proposes, so she accepts. but still likes the other guy. and doesn't really get over it. stuff happens. many references to slavery. not all complimentary, but historically accurate. goes on and on. lessons learned. one lives with ones' decisions. Directed by Richard Thorpe. about the biggest films for him were Jailhouse Rock and Fun in Acapulco.

I rarely review these old movies, but in the case of THE TOY WIFE not only do I feel the film is underrated, but also misrepresented.

The basic plot concerns a successful lawyer (Melvyn Douglas) in 19th century Louisiana, who chooses to marry Frou Frou, the spirited and lively sister of more wholesome, reasonable Louise. Although Louise is in love with Douglas, she advises her sister to marry him. Their marriage starts off well, but soon Douglas resents his wife for not being an adequate homemaker, as Louise would have been (Frou Frou is 'too nice, and not strict enough with the slaves'). He soon has Louise coming to live with them and taking over the normal duties of his wife.

Frou Frou gradually realizes her place in the home is nothing more than as a 'Toy Wife,' someone for her husband to make love to while Louise takes her place in the home as mother. This causes her to look for true love elsewhere, and finding it in another suitor (Robert Young). This has disastrous repercussions for everyone involved.

It would be unfair to label Frou Frou a femme fatale. She is too kind, too loving, and much too wise. The true villain of the piece is Melvyn Douglas, who wants it both ways. He wants a reasonable, hardworking woman like Louise to take care of the house and Frou Frou to take care of the sex. At one point in the film, Louise confronts him and says so, and thus he is finally able to question the kind of husband he has been.

The acting in the film is variable. Douglas is good as the fickle husband, who only finds error in his wife instead of looking within himself. Rainer has moments of brilliance but her acting style is difficult to get used to, and is glaringly different from the more restrained performances from the other actors.

The production, however, is a first class star vehicle for Rainer, who was usually not given the attention two Oscars warranted. Overall, an interesting and, at times, moving melodrama with a central character who was basically good and should not be dismissed as a femme fatale.

Based on a French play from the nineteenth century (1869) ,"Frou Frou" is virtually forgotten in its native country .Only a waltz which has little (or nothing ) to do with the character is still played for Thé-Dansant for old generations .

Thorpe partially succeeding in giving a French aristocratic touch to the film.There are some lines in that language ,and the classic old folk tune "Au Clair De La Lune" is heard again and again and again ,a good choice,for it is primarily a children's song and the heroine (check the title) has never grown up whereas her sister was born an adult.You cannot blame Frou Frou for what she's done because she is in a world she does not understand;Whatever she does, she is out of steps with what the others do :her sister (why shouldn't be jealous of her?) , her son (Isn't she a good mother?) , her husband (isn't she a good wife at least in her mind?) and even her lover (isn't it only a stopgap solution?)

Sainte Catherine is the heroine's model.This character has been part of the French culture for a long time and plays a prominent part in Frou Frou's life :she often says a prayer to her and when everything turns to gray ,her last resort is to go and implore her idol.The Catherinettes were girls of 25 still unmarried by the Feast of Sainte Catherine (25th November);the tradition is slowly fading nowadays.

"The toy woman" (which was retitled "Frou Frou " in the French version,although the American title is much more relevant) is a good melodrama which would deserve a better rating than the mediocre 5,8 it's got at my time of writing