Hearts Divided

Hearts Divided (1936)

** (out of 4)

Claude Rains masterful performance as Napoleon is wasted in this rather bland mess that was clearly meant to be a showcase for star Marion Davies. In the film, Napoleon sends his brother Bonaparte (Dick Powell) to America where he is to negotiate $20 million for the Louisiana Territory. Once there, he ends up teaching French to the beautiful Elizabeth Patterson (Davies) and eventually falls in love with her, which doesn't sit too well with his brother. It's well known that Davies felt at ease with a good comedy but the costume dramas made her nervous and that's obvious here in this film, which besides a few good things turns out to be a complete mess. Based on true events, the movie changes history around to fit the story so those looking for the truth might want to settle with a book on the subject. Hearst obviously thought Davies could handle the material but she can't and sadly she comes off looking pretty weak her. There wasn't a single scene where I believed her as this character as she didn't look the part nor was she able to act it. Powell, selected by Davies, isn't any better and often just appears to be modeling for the camera. The two of them have absolutely no chemistry together and this really kills the love story trying to be pushed here. The main reason to watch this film is for Rains performance, which is another great one by the character actor. He does a great job at filling the part of Napoleon and one can't help but wish the entire movie be built around him. Rains plays the character quite low but that power (or evilness) is easily viewable just by looking at his eyes. The film isn't helped any by some really silly dialogue or rather lampoonish scenes including one where a group of men follow Davies character up a tree. In the end, there might have been a good story somewhere here but one can't help that the producers didn't find it.

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 must preface by saying I'm a big Marion Davies fan, but this was the least appealing of her films that I've seen. Worth watching, just to see Claude Rains playing Napoleon-he pulls it off beautifully. Dick Powell is okay, but he and Davies together looks stiff and miles apart in age and demeanor. Simply bad casting, as Davies looks much older than Powell, but more sadly,seems to move awkwardly in the past and given her, which detracts from the idea they can be romantic together. This spoils Rains performance,and even the great character actors Edward Everett Horton & Arthur Treacher are wasted in characters that seem to be contrived, just to fill in time. Miss Page Glory is a much better film, and really shows Davies at her best. Too bad about this film, but skip it.

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.

Hearts Divided is a historical romance starring Dick Powell and Marion Davies. The two live during the Napoleonic era when France was trying to sell Louisiana to the Americans and the French Revolution was brewing. Powell and Davies' characters meet accidentally at a horse race and begin a glorious romance almost immediately despite their multiple scuffles. He becomes her tutor for music, French, and fencing. Her family does not approve of their romance because they are distinguished and he is a lowly tutor, but Davies responds to his advances. The two are separated but brought back together and it is discovered that Powell is not an average citizen at all; he is the brother of Napoleon. A wedding is planned but it is Napoleon who does not approve this time.

This film is typical of Marion Davies for it not only has the ability to show off benefactor William Randolph Hearst's many historical items and costumes, she is able to show her natural spunk and joviality. Powell responds in kind with his lighthearted cracks and beautiful smile. The two work well together and shine in their own rights.

There are also a few catchy songs sung by the gorgeous tenor voice of Dick Powell.