Vengeance d'artiste

It's one of those films where you can tell those involved really enjoyed making it. When else would they get such a chance to ham it up so gloriously! That enjoyment they exude and that fun just bubbles out of the screen at you.

You might not think that watching a load of luvvies pretending to be even bigger luvvies would be fun but darlings, you'll be surprised. It's a bit slow at the start but as soon as Mr Calhern appears it's all action. Both EGR's self satisfied yet loveable luvvie and Louis Calhern's brilliantly unpleasant cad both reminded me very much of Clifton Webb's marvellously sarcastic, pompous Waldo Lydecker in Preminger's 1944 classic LAURA. They make a magnificently entertaining sparing couple.

The real credit here goes to the snappy and witty script that's based on a play by the 'real life' Waldo Lydecker, Alexander Woollcott and George Kaufman. And let's not forget director Archie Mayo - he might have made an awful lot of trash but he also made some absolute classics too. This isn't one of his best - its pace is a little inconsistent at times and the ending is horribly rushed but it's still a pretty polished production.

One of the pitfalls pictures about acting have is that they try to be too thespian, too professional about everything. Characters making witty and cutting remarks about a fictional director's skill on the screen can fall flat if what the audience is actually watching what looks like it's directed by a chimpanzee. They have to be very careful. This overcomes this problem with its dark humour and sense of utter absurdity. It's both very clever and very silly. It doesn't take itself too seriously but still retains its edge. Not a film to watch over and over again but it certainly deserves at least one viewing.

This movie is a nice little gem, mainly for the witty dialog and impressive rank of actors who clearly enjoyed their work. No surprise there -- just look at the writers, source material and cast. Even the supporting players had great lines that they delivered with gusto. None of it is very realistic, but the set-up is great, much of the acting is over-the-top fun, and there is a great deal of humor. The finale is interesting -- it won't please everyone, but it is even-handed -- both pre-code and code aspects. See it and you will know what I mean. Incidentally, as another reviewer here noted, the TV Guide review (you have to go to the TV Guide website to see it) is WRONG about important parts of the plot and especially the ending. It is as though their reviewer did not see the movie!

Great acting from Robinson, and a little over the top, but enjoyably so, from Calhern and Astor. Very stagey, but good setups and moving camera. Beware the plot synopsis in the TV Guide movie database. It seems to describe the ending of the play, but the movie (a censored version?), which played on TCM, has a more ambiguous ending which works better and is more interesting (to me, at least). (Not that I'm for censorship, but sometimes...) Ironically, the play had a happy ending, and that is the one described by TV Guide and Maltin. It's amusing to see when the established references contain reviews that were written by people who had not seen the entire film, and in some cases not at all.

Interesting and unusual movie. It seemed to start out as a routine backstage mystery, but as time went by, it got more and more convoluted. Edward G Robinson plays an actor about to star in a promising new play. Mary Astor is his actress sister about to make a comeback. It seems she was married to a Svengali named Stanley Vance, played by Louis Calhern. Mary was under his spell when he disappeared, until she hears that he died. She then goes to pieces. That sets the stage for the plot. It takes three years for her to recover, she falls in love with Ricardo Cortez, and when she is just about to make her breakthrough, he's back.

Now it gets bizarre. She immediately falls back under his spell - and I'm not kidding. She doesn't respond to anyone but him. Her eyes glaze over. She walks around in a trance. In fact, she acts a lot like the current crop of actors we have coming out of Hollywood today. Anyway, Vance doesn't really care about her, he just wants to cash in on her share of the profits from the play. The problem for Eddie is what to do about it. Well, I won't tell you, except to say it involves a complicated, and totally implausible plan. It really doesn't matter though. If you wouldn't watch this movie for any other reason, watch it for the unbelievable, robotic performance of Mary Astor. It was mesmerizing in it's own right, but it unintentionally bordered on laugh out loud funny. If I have a complaint, it would be that the Code was in full force in 1934. You or I could have come up with a better finale.

If this film has a weak spot it's the story's details. Without giving anything away the whole idea of Vance's (Calhern) Svengali-like hypnotic effect on his wife (Astor) is a bit far-fetched, even for 1934. And quite frankly Robinson's disguise left a lot to be desired. And let's not forget the clue that clinched the policeman's case. I can't imagine building a case of such flimsy evidence. There's other areas of concern but I digress. Now for the good part: where the film shines is in the performances. This bevy of fine actors does a most excellent job at presenting complex characters driven by events not of their own choosing. It's a pretty talky film but I didn't mind in the least. The dialog is spirited, lively, expressive. And the performers tended to make me forget the plot's weak points. They were captivating, all of them, Robinson, Astor, Calhern, Cortez (in a rare good guy part), and last but not least, Mae Clarke, in my opinion a most underrated actor.