Hearts Divided

First thing to do is to forget history (I will not argue with American history,but as far as French history is concerned,well..): No,they did not live happily ever after ,for the marriage was finally broken ,and Jerome had more mistresses than you could count.No,Madame Mère -who briefly appears to sweeten her offspring's relationship- did not probably intervene.

But it does not matter when you deal with Frank Borzage,my favorite American director of the twenties/thirties.To say he gave it his all is diminish this director ,because there was always more to give,another passion to plumb,another open wound that demanded he raises his voice ;no one depicted love (against the whole world) as he did.In consequence ,the best scenes are to be found in the second part of the film:Marion Davis ,"translating" the letter into English in a voice chocked with emotion;the scene on the ship where the unfortunate lovers raises their glasses before the bell ring -this scene is similar to the ones we find in "Humoresque" before the hero goes to war ,and in "Street angel" when Janet Gaynor says goodbye to his love (who does not know it's a farewell celebration).In "Hearts divided" the sequence is too short ,and somewhat ruined by the final scenes although the song and the wall are romantic stuff.

As everything Borzage did ,"Hearts Divided" is a movie which deserves to be watched.I will not rate it as highly as Borzage's true masterpieces ("Seventh Heaven" "Street Angel" "Little man what now?" "A farewell to the arms" "Strange Cargo" or the immortal "Mortal storm") though.

I should make you aware of one thing that most IMDb users are not aware of but which several other users have also noticed. There is a small and devoted group that has given all of Miss Davies' films scores of 10--even her lesser or bad films. I'm not sure why, but these folks appear to think EVERY Davies film is a classic and I have been attacked for daring to dislike some of her films--such as "Cain and Mable". Speaking of "Mable", it was one of the biggest box office losers of its time yet currently 61% of its votes are 10s. Compare this to "The Godfather" at 56%, "Gone With the Wind" at just under 39%, "The Shawshank Redemption" (currently the highest ranked film on IMDb) at just under 60% and "12 Angry Men" at 39%! Critics over the years have been pretty hard on her films--though she definitely did star in a few classics (such as the wonderful "Show People"). My suggestion is that you don't be swayed by the scores alone...as well as the reviews (including mine). See the films and make your own decision.

From the start, I must admit that for me, at least, the film has a major strike against it. The likable Dick Powell co-stars in the film, however, since it was made during his "singing star" period, he spends lots and lots of time singing...and I don't particularly like it in the film. In fact, Powell himself hated all the singing roles he had through the 1930s and loved when they gave him films where he could concentrate on his acting--which was usually very nice. Why they would have Davies starring opposite a singer like Powell is beyond me--it does not play to her strengths--she was certainly NOT a singer but was more adept at light comedy. Now had the female lead been Jeanette MacDonald, this might have worked better! As for the rest of the cast, Davies got some nice support. Likable and very capable supporting actors like Henry Stephenson, Arthur Treacher (oddly, he's NOT starring as a butler here), Claude Rains, Charlie Ruggles and Edward Everett Horton are on hand--adding a lot of nice color to the film.

Oh, and speaking of color, some might feel rightly put off by the slaves in the film. They are pretty happy folks and the white masters are pretty good to them (especially the sweet Davies) and this is pretty tacky. This "happy slave" stereotype is perhaps worse than just ignoring the plight of blacks during the era in which the film was set.

The setting for the film, incidentally, is both in France and the US during the early years at the beginning of the 19th century. Napoleon (Rains) need funds for his many wars and is trying to sell the Louisiana Territory to the Americans. During these negotiations, a French agent and brother to Napoleon (Powell) is in the States--though you really aren't sure why. In his capacity as an agent, he wants to remain incognito, so he poses as a French language teacher and is engaged by Davies' family to tutor her. Her family is quite wealthy--and happen to hate Napoleon.

Naturally, like romances of the day, you know that eventually the two will be in love. However, where it went from there was hard to predict because, amazingly, this weird and seemingly silly plot is actually based on the real life romance between Elizabeth Patterson and Jerome Bonaparte! And, oddly for a romance of the 1930s, it ends most tragically--not sweetly like the audience probably hoped.

So how true is this film? Well, in many ways it's surprisingly close--at least in the first 2/3 of the film. However, the scene with Napoleon convincing Elizabeth to give him up never occurred--as in real life, she tried and tried in vain to keep her Jerome--even though history shows us that he wasn't worth this loyalty (he was a real chuckle-head). I also cringed a bit with the scene between Napoleon and his mommy--it just came off as false and a bit silly. But worst of all was the tacked on happy ending--that never happened in real life!! In reality, Jerome left his pregnant wife and married a German princess!! Oops! This bit of historical liberty is simply unforgivable. How so many people could give this amiable but patently false film a 10 is beyond me.

I wasn't prepared to like this film as much as I did, since I had read the reviews of the people here on the IMD first before commencing to watch it on TCM. It's a good thing I didn't dismiss it, because I liked it much better than Miss Davies' "Page Miss Glory", which preceded it on the broadcast schedule.

The cast was wonderful, the script was meaty for a romantic picture, with some really funny lines, and I enjoyed the sweet romance between the principals, Miss Davies and Dick Powell. Claude Rains was a joy to watch as Napoleon; loved that bathtub scene with his servants scrubbing his manly hairless chest. Sort of like Johnny Rocco (Edward G. Robinson) in "Key Largo", but much funnier.

Special mention goes to character actors Charlie Ruggles, Arthur Treacher, and Edward Everett Horton as would be suitors to Miss Davies; they helped round out the script and bring even more giggles to the story.

I also enjoyed the music, including two pretty tunes by songmeister Harry Warren, and the negro spirituals.

8 out of 10.

Imagine Dick Powell--the all-American charmer--as Napoleon's brother! Have him serenade--didn't you know Jerome Napoleon was a crooner!--Marion Davies, miscast as his beautiful young American sweetheart. Add a romantic score in an attempt to lend credence to their implausible pairing and you end up with this misguided misadventure in movie-making. Everything in this picture rings as false as the fake "Sicilian" nose pasted onto Claude Rains' face. The picture's premise is that Napoleon's brother threw away everything, sacrificing the opportunity to become a King by marriage--thereby extending Napoleon's empire--to marry his true love, sweet Betsy Patterson. Faithful to this vision, the picture ends with star-crossed lovers Powell and Davies--reunited after a "Hearts Divided" separation forced by Napoleon--in each others' arms once again set to live happily ever after in America. But the historical Jerome Bonaparte was in truth an opportunist who actually DIVORCED this first American wife in order to go through with the politically-motivated pairing and become King of Westphalia! The movie is a handsome production, but the script expects everyone to mouth the most ridiculous platitudes about class, duty, patriotism, "true love", etc. ad nauseum--all played straight. In the best Hollywood tradition, Dick Powell courts Marion Davies disguised as her lowly tutor, only to reveal his true "imperial" self after she casts aside all trepidation about marrying below her station. But who really believes that American society would hold the brother of a military dictator in such high esteem? All of the classic elements of a great Hollywood romance are here, only the plot and actors are really just going through the motions against this implausible historical backdrop--and we the audience aren't fooled one bit.

Marion Davies was a winsome, whimsical, and very pretty comedienne, with a slyly subversive personality not unlike Carole Lombard's. But her mentor and manager William Randolph Hearst preferred to see her as a clothes horse, in stuffy period romances. And so we have this sleepy costume epic, from a flop play by the author of "Naughty Marietta," where she's a Baltimore society heiress, with hair of a color no 1805 society heiress ever knew, who keeps smiling gallantly while her heart is breaking. It's a Norma Shearer sort of part, and Marion's noble suffering is equally uninvolving. She looks glum and too old for the role, and her romantic interest, Dick Powell as Napoleon's brother (!), looks equally unhappy. Claude Rains is an asset as the Emperor, as are Edward Everett Horton, Charlie Ruggles, and Arthur Treacher as her three other suitors (though the screenwriters might have come up with better dialog for them). But mostly it's Marion being noble--acting condescendingly nice to the slave labor, going from haughty to starry-eyed over Powell in record time, shedding glycerine tears, and advancing to an unlikely, logic-defying happy ending. Frank Borzage directs with his typical moonlight and magnolias, but even he doesn't seem to believe it, and Marion seems to be wishing she were in a screwball comedy.