Sa douce maison

Stage performer Kay Francis leaves wealthy lover John Halliday to marry society man Gene Raymond. Visiting Halliday after an operation, he says he should have married her, pulls out a gun, and tries to kill himself. Miss Francis tries to stop him, but fails, and is found guilty of his murder. Twenty years go by before she is released and gets a makeover. She meets gambler Ricardo Cortez and they fall in love, but returning to New York, they get jobs at the gambling house, where her daughter Margaret Lindsay, who thinks her dead, shows up. And then the story gets complicated.

Miss Francis gets a lot of costume changes and a couple of hair-dye jobs, of course, from stage tights through high fashion, and does very well in her performance as usual. After her heyday, she got an undeserved reputation as a clothes horse and nothing more. Cortez, still trying to hang onto leading roles after sound revealed an accent unsuitable for his silent, Valentino-like roles, does also does very well. Director Robert Florey might have made this about the changing face of New York, and perhaps that story wound up on the cutting-room floor. With Frank McHugh, William 'Stage' Boyd, and Hardie Albright.

Lightning-paced drama directed by Robert Florey stars Kay Francis (top female star at Warners) as a chorus girl in 1905 who is pursued by an older man (John Halliday) who has no interest in marriage and a younger man (Gene Raymond) who wants to marry her. She opts for Raymond and becomes a society hostess and eventually has a baby. Later, when she learns Halliday is ill, she visits. He tries to commit suicide but Francis is convicted and jailed for 20 years. The baby daughter grows up (Margaret Lindsay). Out of jail, Francis goes by the name of Mrs. Stone and meets up with a gambler (Ricardo Cortez). They work in a speakeasy and everything is OK until the daughter shows up one night. The ironic ending is perfect.

At 68 minutes, this film whizzes along but is filled with lots of period detail and plot elements. Very nicely done. Kay Francis gets to transform from the frilly 1905 fashions and hair to a sleek henna-rinsed beauty in 1927 and finally to a slightly graying babe dealing cards in 1933. She's terrific, and the ending will surprise you.

Co-stars include Nella Walker, Henry O'Neill, Frank McHugh, Hardie Albright, and William "Stage" Boyd.

The premise may not have been an original one, but Kay Francis was always a very watchable and more actress and was often one of the better things about all her films (which varied quality-wise generally). She was my main reason for seeing 'The House on 56th Street', one of my quests in seeing all of the films of people that impressed me enough to see more of their work. Have also liked Ricardo Cortez, usually cast in the more villain-type roles, in other things, but Gene Raymond has always been a hit and miss for me.

Is 'The House on 56th Street' one of her best? In terms of films, it's nowhere near close, it's no 'Confession'. In terms of performances though, it is towards the top and it boasts one of her more complex characters too. Cortez is also served well. Raymond left me indifferent here though. Overall 'The House on 56th Street' to me was not a great film and for some it will be easy to criticise. There are a lot of things worthy of a lot of praise though.

A good starting point being Francis, who is extremely good here and is the main reason to see the film. She is very elegant, but also burns with intensity and poignancy. Cortez is suitably smarmy and does fare joint best of the supporting cast, the other standout being charming Magaret Lindsay. 'The House on 56th Street' is a good looking film as well, stylish without being overblown and looking like it was shot with a lot of care and time. The locations are also beautiful. The music fits nicely, not quite enhancing things but at least it fits.

Script has some nice wit and is intelligently done in places. The story starts off very well and has some nice turns in the plot. The film is nicely directed and the main character, a complex one, is fascinating.

Despite those good things, it was hard for me to ignore 'The House on 56th Street's' drawbacks. It does tend to be very sudsy and over-heated in the writing. The story does have its moments, but does get too over-dramatic and loses momentum in the latter stages. Suspension of disbelief is hardly unheard of in film, it is actually a relatively regular occurance to put it politely. That doesn't stop the latter stages especially from being rather ridiculous. The ending is particularly hard to swallow.

While Francis as well as Cortez and Lindsay fare very well, Raymond is practically a just there cipher and John Halliday likewise. Not even Frank McHugh makes much of an impression!

Concluding, worth a look but only a little above average. 6/10

Every cliché, every stock character and every conceivable plot twist are knitted into this gloriously daft, frenetically fast early thirties ultra, ultra-soapy melodramatic melodrama.

If you found yourself in 1933 and was asked to make something which you knew audiences would flock to, you'd make this. It's got everything 1933 wanted. Rose-tinted nostalgia for the gilded age, romance, tragedy, estranged daughters, murder, prison ...and Kay Francis. In many ways it is just a box ticking exercise, there's absolutely nothing special about this. There's too much happening in too short a time for you to become emotionally engaged but nevertheless it's enjoyable enough.

Unlike something like NIGHT COURT, made a year earlier which makes you get up and rant at the screen with the injustice it portrays, this doesn't quite hit you where it's meant to. Although fortunately nothing like the awful STELLA DALLAS which ushered in the sentimental fluff of the forties, there are ominous clouds of that type of mush visible on the horizon in this. It's not helped by Robert Florey's bland direct-by-numbers approach, weird incongruous close ups and sloppy editing.

But still, where else are you going to get so much squeezed into just over an hour than in a classic Warner pre-code?

I interpret this not as a full length feature but as a one hour front end of double feature (which would be preceded by a cartoon and a newsreel). In other words, you could call it a B movie. Seen that way, it is almost perfect. It is short and uncomplicated but manages to engage you and deliver a twist at the end.

It starts out looking like it will be another Kay Francis light romantic comedy along with the usual accompanying fashion show. Certain, she parades quite a collection of hats in the opening 20 minutes or so. Then the melodrama and angst kicks in and it becomes clear that this is no comedy.

It is not profound and opens no new paths in movie making. It sets out to entertain and deliver on expectations but manages to give something extra. You come away satisfied that you have seen a good movie but not so tired and engaged that you can't watch the back half of the double feature.

Kay Francis delivers what you would expect from her. In 1933, people went to see her movies expecting certain things and they get them plus some additional and effectively portrayed moods and emotion as a bonus. However, I must say that she is not as stunning and glamorous as she was in many of her other movies but that could be appropriate and deliberate here. The rest of the cast is up to their tasks. There isn't enough material for any of them to actually shine. The movie moves quickly and covers more than one time period.

Overall, a very successful B movie.