Outcast Lady

This is an MGM chick flick, 1934- style. Constance Bennett, a first class actress, is Iris, a penniless heiress (I'm still trying to get my brain around how she and her drunken brother can live so well despite their circumstances... they have servants who work whilst politely grumbling over not being paid) who loves the Napier, (Herbert Marshall) son of a prominent English family with interests in India. His father (Henry Stephenson) bans their marriage and each goes off in different directions while carrying awfully large torches for each other. My problems with the production: 1) Marshall is ill-fitted as the somewhat spineless son--- he's 44 here (!) 2) Stephenson is a real one-dimensional turd until the big revelation. 3) The ending (I won't give it away, but it doesn't really fit with Iris' temperament). Connie Bennett ranks (along with Kay Francis and Bebe Daniels) as one of the most underrated actresses around and is always fascinating to watch... even in pedestrian soap like this.

Constance Bennett is terrific in this not so terrific film. Late in life she told an interviewer she was no Sarah Bernhardt but her self-appraisal was off target and doesn't apply to her performance as the outcast lady. MGM filmed this story in 1929 with Garbo and audience comparison of the 2 interpretations may have been a factor in the 1934 version's box-office failure. Or maybe it was something else.

In the early scenes Iris is a young woman in love, bubbling with happiness, for she's about to marry her true love, played by Herbert Marshall. But Marshall is miscast. He's too old to play Napier, Iris childhood playmate, who allows his father to make major life decisions for him. Iris and Napier don't marry. Years later, Iris marries 'Boy', a man with a secret, which she discovers on her wedding day. Boy's response to her discovery is incredible. Iris then makes her own incredible decision that results in the ruination of those she loves as well as herself. Iris tells a lie. This saves Boy's reputation while destroying her own. More years later, the truth is revealed, but it's too late to be of use to anyone. That Bennett succeeds in making these incredible happenings credible is impressive.

And Bennett is graceful and alluring on the dance floor. A wonderful scene shows the pleasure seeking merry widow in her Adrian gown dancing the tango in a nightclub on the Riviera. She does appear to be enjoying herself and her partner. But we know better. Under that gay exterior there beats the broken heart of a noble woman. Or something like that.

Variety's reviewer wrote, "It's a very good acting job by Constance Bennett and if the story hadn't been such a patch-quilt it might have been one of her memorable performances." I agree. The story is to blame. BTW, the secret Iris guarded is somewhat mysterious. Being referred to as Boy's "purity" has misled today's viewers, but the audience of 1934, especially the males, would have known that Boy had a disease, at that time incurable and considered so shameful that it was spoken of only in confidence with one's doctor. MGM's genius producer, Irving Thalberg, as well as the Production Code were responsible for this hash.

How an actress so magnificent is not more celebrated leaves me shaken with incomprehension.

I love her in comedies such as "My man Godfrey" and "Merrily we live" but in this she suffers so gallantly and beautifully. In my first feature film I style Elizabeth Mcgovern after her and in this film she shimmers and shines.

I cannot recommend it more.

See it and love it and cherish it.

Her sister Joan always said she knew who she was and what she could bring to the screen and boy in this does she deliver the goods.

Hollywood's British colony with the exception of star Constance Bennett filled out the roles in this drama about the British upper classes. I know that American audiences during the Depression did like to see how the upper crust lived. But these noble sacrificing people were a bit much.

Herbert Marshall who appeared regularly in these kind of dramas is going out with Bennett. But dear old dad disapproves because of the unsavory reputation she and brother Hugh Williams have. Henry Stephenson was always playing these upper crust British types as the British like to see themselves is the father.

As a dutiful son and member of Parliament he obeys. Marshall even makes a more suitable match in Elizabeth Allan. As for Bennett she nobly sacrifices herself and Williams does likewise.

A little honesty all around and none of these plot situations would have developed. Outcast Lady should stay outcast.

Occasionally, I read a review of a film and think to myself "I think that sums up the film every bit as good as I could...probably better". So, because of that, you might want to read the review of David (Handlinghandel), as he hits the mark.

The film begins with Constance Bennett and Herbert Marshall becoming engaged. However, when Constance tells her friends, she is shocked to hear how dead-set against it his father (Henry Stephenson) is. Apparently, she is poor and has quite the past--though what exactly this is, we don't know.

Four years pass--Constance is about to marry another when Marshall returns for her. Considering he's a limp weenie who left her when his father objected, I can't see how this makes a lot of sense. And, it didn't, so they pledge eternal friendship. Jolly good, eh what?! What happens next, you'll need to see for yourself....if you care.

Through so much of the film, the characters are so well-mannered and stilted that the entire thing is pretty dull. It's odd that during the Depression so many Hollywood films featured pretty rich folks with rather mundane problems. After all, who cares about the romance of Sir Reginald Muckity-muck or the ennui that comes with vacationing on the French Riviera or difficulty getting good servants when so many out there (about 25%) were unemployed and whose families subsisted on rat sandwiches?! And here, to make it worse, are some of the dull rich folks and low-energy performances! As a result, shortly into the film I just wanted it all to end...or for there to be some ill-mannered buffoonery (such as one of the characters using a cocktail fork to eat their pheasant....oh, the horror!).

Too many pained looks from Marshall, a dull script and unlikable characters sink this one. Just because it was made by MGM doesn't mean it's worth seeing.