Strangers May Kiss

"Strangers May Kiss" was made in 1931, still the early days of sound films. The film stars Norma Shearer as a free-spirited woman who falls for a traveling journalist, played be Neil Hamilton. The film is certainly racy (for the time) in its frankness about issues like pre-marital sex and promiscuity. The Hays Code, while in existence, was largely ignored by studios until 1934. The story basically is that Shearer falls for Hamilton, knowing that he isn't the sort that wants to marry or be tied down. His career comes first, and that takes him all over the world. She agrees to the arrangement, but of course falls madly in love with him anyway. The two do travel some, but Hamilton deserts her (after telling her he is married!). Shearer embarks on a whirlwind of the good life, with lavish parties and lots of men, all in the attempt to forget Hamilton. She did the same thing in "The Divorcée" made just the year before, the film that earned her an Oscar. The film also stars a young Robert Montgomery, as a playboy with a penchant for drink and Shearer. He adds some much needed comic relief at times to a film that is somewhat heavy and drags at times. Hamilton isn't given much to do here, except play the bad guy. The script is somewhat lacking, but the real star of the show is Shearer. She traipses through the film in lavish costumes, various hairstyles, and plays a free soul at a time when not many women did so on-screen. While the film has some similarities to "The Divorcée" (woman loves man, loses man, embarks on affairs) it is not quite up to the standard of that earlier film. Still, it's always a delight to see Mrs. Irving Thalberg on-screen in her heyday. Love Shearer or not, the woman had tremendous screen presence.

The pre-Code talkies included many movies in which women led an independent life and refused to submit to the sexual double standard. This one tries to be bold but ends up in a lot of tortuous moral tangles that not only negate the vaunted sexual freedom but make no sense.

The starring free spirit is Norma Shearer, that triumph of hard work (and being married to the boss) over beauty and talent. Though she wears the divine gowns of Adrian, Shearer has no class of her own. Coy, affected, arch, she gives a performance that is a patchwork of tricks and gestures. There's the head flung back, fingers fluttering at her forehead; the hands clasped at one side of her waist while she leans against a door frame; the high-pitched stuttering mirthless laugh (as Rebecca West put it, "out of an all-star revival of Sheridan").

Hardest of all to take is Neil Hamilton as Shearer's Great Love. True, he didn't write the ridiculous dialogue, but he hardly overrides it, with his impersonal, stuffy delivery and bunched-up, prissy features and little mustache.

In the scene in which Shearer encounters Robert Montgomery after a two-year absence, look out for Ray Milland, standing on the right of a row of admirers. Now, he is REALLY cute! But Norma has no eyes for him, only for some slimy type who speaks broken English. Some girls just DON'T want to have fun!

This film is profoundly confused about what kind of morality it's embracing.

Norma Shearer plays a modern young woman, having an affair with a dashing foreign correspondent (Neil Hamilton, in his first role with MGM). Her long-time friend Steve (the eternally effervescent Robert Montgomery), who has an inclination towards drink, has been in love with Shearer all their lives, but she won't give him a tumble (she actually uses that hoary old line, "I love you, but I'm not in love with you"). Shearer and Hamilton have no interest in marrying, but prefer their open relationship. Shearer's aunt extols the joy of marriage one evening, but when she sees her husband of 12 years kicking up his heels with a bimbo, she goes home and kills herself.

Shearer and Hamilton head off for Mexico, where Hamilton reveals that he actually has a wife back in Paris (so apparently he DID once believe in marriage...). He leaves for Rio and refuses to take Shearer. She proceeds to sleep her way across Europe in order to drown her grief, which, of course, is one way of dealing with it. Montgomery finds her two years later in Spain where, despite her string of dalliances, he still tries to marry her. But Shearer gets a cable from Hamilton who has now divorced his French wife and is waiting in Paris, willing to marry. By the time Shearer responds, however, Hamilton has heard about her past two years of affairs, and is so repulsed that he never wants to see her again. He claims she should have WAITED for him, DESPITE her not knowing if she would EVER see him again. And...she AGREES. The level of double standard is staggering.

Montgomery, however, STILL wants to marry her. Hamilton claims that a marriage to Shearer would leave him haunted by those "shadows on the wall," but Montgomery says, "What wall?" But Shearer says no. She says, in fact, that his wanting to marry her knowing of her promiscuous past proves that he doesn't actually love her.

A year or so later, Montgomery and Shearer are at the theater, when they run into Hamilton. Time has mellowed him a bit, and he tells Shearer that they belong together. Montgomery watches her go, observing wryly that at least he'll always have a champagne bottle waiting for him.

So, first, let's establish that I'm a huge fan and avid watcher of pre-Code film, and I'm not trying to judge this movie with a 21st-century sensibility. But let's figure out what the film is telling us:

1) marriage isn't necessary if there is true love (Shearer and Hamilton, at the beginning)...2) marriage can only lead to heartbreak, because the man will inevitably cheat (Shearer's aunt and uncle)...3) men can abandon wives and go off with lovers and embrace free love and that's OK (Shearer and Hamilton in Mexico)...4) women can't (Shearer and Hamilton in Paris)...5) men who love women who've had promiscuous pasts don't really love them (Shearer and Montgomery)...6) women should wait forever for the man they love, through all the misunderstandings and rejections, and never ever get involved with anyone else, on the off chance that the man they love will decide they belong together (throughout)...7) a man who wants to marry a woman despite her promiscuous past can't actually love her, although a man who has punished and heaped contempt on said woman and then finally decides he wants to marry her despite it DOES actually love her

Well. This film sends so many mixed signals, you need an air traffic controller.

Interestingly, in the novel on which this film is based, the Shearer character eventually commits suicide after years of waiting in vain for the Hamilton character to return to her. So, the mixed signals may come from the Frankenstein-like effort of fusing a happy-ending head onto the original tragic body.

Montgomery is, as always, charming and natural, which shows up in stark contrast with Shearer's silent-movie-born overacting. You may want to stab yourself in the eye after watching Shearer throw back her head and laugh gaily for the umpteenth time. Hamilton does a serviceable job in a thankless role, but it's always difficult to keep from visualizing Police Commissioner Gordon when he's on screen.

I found this movie almost unbearably frustrating--but that's just me. Others, clearly, were more open to it. But I prefer a film that obeys its own internal logic, no matter how screwy it may be in relation to "reality." "Strangers May Kiss" doesn't carry that off.

Norma Shearer intrigued and interested me (in an uncanny way) ever since I was kid and my fondness for Classic Hollywood Films began. I first read about her in the late 1970s, but there was not much material available of her. Norma's acting ability and beauty were not much praised, she was permanently "accused" of overacting, but the authors weren't able to deny her immense popularity and star appeal during her heyday. Her charisma was huge.

It is true that in certain moments of specific films, especially talking pictures, she tends to overact and dramatize in excess her reactions, using certain mannerisms or posturing unnaturally. A sad example of this is the interesting "Strange Interlude", flawed, in my opinion among other facts, because of Norma's artificial performance in certain pivotal moments. There are other films in which she is uniformly good, like "Private Lives" (the best comedy of her I have seen to date) and "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" and "Smilin' Through" (ditto two of her best dramatic pictures).

"Strangers May Kiss" on the other hand, is the most Pre-Code film of Norma I have ever seen (and I have seen "The Divorcée", "A Free Soul" and "Riptide"). I also feel that Norma's performance has been unfairly criticized by some reviewers at IMDb.com, who accuse her of posturing and overacting. Well, I just watched this film yesterday and I was positively impressed by Norma's natural acting, for once, almost devoid of overacting, even in the dramatic moments.

Norma plays a modern Bostonian girl who (apparently) neglects marriage as something that kills passion and love. She's absolutely infatuated by the character played by Neil Hamilton. Bob Montgomery knows her since childhood and has always been in love with her. After certain events I won't tell about, Norma gets disillusioned of Hamilton and takes a crack at the wild life in Europe, turning into an outrageously promiscuous woman.

This film is one of the most Pre-Code films I have ever seen, specifically in relation to Norma's character. She's simply unashamedly immoral during her European spree (that lasts two years or more); I could not believe that Norma was allowed to play such an openly, in-your-face sexually voracious (for a while at least) lady (she had her reasons though, justified or not). From this film is that oft-quoted line: "I'm in an orgy wallowing and I love it!" Such (unpunished) behavior would have never-ever been allowed during the Code; Unthinkable.

Norma, Neil Hamilton and Bob Montgomery are good and believable in their respective roles. There is a first rate supporting cast lead by Marjorie Rambeau, Irene Rich and Hale Hamilton. Conchita Montenegro (who starred opposite Leslie Howard in "Never the Twain Shall Meet") plays a sexy Spanish dancer. Karen Morley, Ray Milland and Edward J. Nugent (aka Eddie Nugent) play bit roles.

The print I saw was taped off of TCM USA, but is not very good. I'd like to watch a fine print of this film, but I bet a better one does not exist anymore.

In all a fine and interesting precoder that has been unjustly neglected and underrated.

I find much to agree with in all of the comments made about this film. The hypocritical morals are obvious. The disparity between Norma Shearer's acting style, nurtured in silent films, and Robert Montgomery's style, which does anticipate a more modern approach, is also apparent. The costumes and sets are marvelous and capture the milieu with authenticity and panache. But not being a great fan of Miss Shearer, I did, indeed, grow weary of seeing her throw her head back in laughter. I wholeheartedly agree that Robert Montgomery steals the show.

The content of this film makes it racy in any era. The montage of scenes depicting Shearer with man after man makes the point clearly enough without being as explicit as a contemporary film. In fact that method of story telling is one of the key distinctions between films from the Golden Age of Hollywood and contemporary cinema. This method either appeals to an individual's tastes today or doesn't (and it is that bias which often forms the basis of comments found in forums such as this). For the record, I appreciate a less explicit approach to cinema.

The only point I would like to make more explicit is that I found it impossible to see what: 1) Miss Shearer's character saw in her caddish married lover or 2) what Mr. Montgomery's character saw in Miss Shearer's character. The only person who seemed the slightest bit attractive was Montgomery's character (despite his penchant for the bottle), who nobody found desirable.

Filmed today, this movie would probably explore the rejected woman's past, searching for psychological explanations for her preference of an abusive mate over a warm, caring one. This film, therefore, might have been an interesting psychological study and made a little more sense. But filmed in 1930, cinema had a long way to go before really delving into such explorations. Even Bette Davis' landmark portrayal of Mildred in 1934's "Of Human Bondage" is not so much an exploration as a portrait.