Duel de Femmes

Rachel Crothers was one of the United States' best playwrights for decades. "He and She" and "When Ladies Meet" are her two best-known works. There was a good earlier version of this work; this remake has the benefit of stars of the caliber of Greer Garson as the wronged wife, Joan Crawford as the girl who wrongs her, Herbert Marshall as Garson's husband and Robert Taylor as the young man who loves Crawford. Robert Z. Leonard directed the film, with his usual skill in getting first-rate performances from his actors. The screenplay, adapted from the fine play by Anita Loos and S.K. Lauren, seldom seems as if it had been a stage work; and the scenes are opened out to include sailing and other outside scenes. The film boasts another lovely set by Cedric Gibbons, and some dense B/W style provided by the photography team. Music is by Bronislau Kaper, and in the talented cast along with the aforementioned quartet of well-cast actors the director gave us Spring Byington and several other good choices. But it is the plot in this highly-intelligent and understated contest between two women that drives every action; the theme of this important look at personal relations and the rules of commitment in partnerships is honesty--to oneself, and to one's partner. Garson thought she had a good marriage; Marshall may not have thought so, but he had no real reason to cheat, except to pretend to be Crawfor'd infallible mentor--a very unhealthy misassumption. Crawford thinks she is modern because she does not care why she is making herself momentarily happy; and Taylor loves Crawford for what she should be, not what she is. Byington, older and wiser, has taken on a 'husband' who is content to be her husband, and she has settled for his good points and agreed to put up with the rest on equal terms. The gimmick that works as a plot device here, cleverly, is that the two women in Marshall's life have never met; and when they do, Crawford still does not know who Garson is--or that she know her for what she is... In their parts, Garson is powerful, wonderfully intelligent and strong; Crawford does her best but apart from matching her charisma she cannot begin to match Garson's ethical screen presence. Robert Taylor plays his part as callow, charmingly young, and it is one of his best in energy, approach and timing. Marshall is professional in his part, but a bit old or staid to play a part that really required a Warren William or Walter Pigeon. .The lighting, the set decorations by Edwin B. Willis and the costumes are a great asset also. This is a very underrated.and intelligent look at "modern marriage", c. 1941. The upshot of the film is that Marshall realizes what he about to lose and is smart enough to try to earn Garson's love again, and that Crawford realizes what she was about to do for momentary pleasure by pretense, without even having earned it--with the possibility that Taylor may become to her what she had been fantasizing Marshall might be. This is always an interesting narrative, a very compelling mix of dramatic and character- revealing screwball satire elements. Highly recommended

Hey, I like both versions of this film. Not into parsing them either. The assembled talent, story, parts, clothes, set. This is the kind of movie I like to watch multiple times. First, watch the movie through. Then, maybe follow separate characters through. There's a lot going on simultaneously. Then, watch the clothes. Then, check out the house, furniture, etc. There was so much style put into these. All of these elements are what made these 30's and 40's films so special. I don't understand why all the comparisons and nitpicking.

In both versions, the lady of the country house is something of a wonder - Spring Byington here. I like the Jimmy part a lot, and thought both actors did him well. He's the kind of guy who makes a wonderful friend, though he could get on your nerves at times. He's a young man who will settle down and make a good husband, reliable and good company along the way. Woodruff was an older man who hadn't settled down, self-centered, made a bad husband and rather a dullard actually.

I think the sorting out between the women worked for both of them. The wife shook off the dead weight or drew her line anyway; the "girl friend" woke up from her naive daydream. We hope the husband woke up as well. Looks like Jimmy has a chance to come out on top as well!

What's there to be so cynical about?

Simple story, but some of the acting is marvelous, especially Greer Garson, who literally steals the movie. It was almost embarrassing to watch Joan Crawford try to act next to her. The difference of talent between the two women is unmistakable---Garson is leagues ahead.

Robert Taylor was also excellent, playing the mischievous suitor, comically bent on winning Joan Crawford's Mary Howard. I had previously only seen him melodrama, so watching him play a comedic role was very refreshing.

The story is a bit slow, but it picks up when Crawford and Garson meet towards the end of the picture. The dialog there is smart and thought provoking, and the talent of Garson really shines through.

Not a great movie, but worth a rental to catch some good acting from two of the studio era's greatest stars.

Very seldom is the remake of a film better than the original, but this film is pleasantly one of the few exceptions. First of all, it is unknown to this reviewer why this film was remade so soon. Generally, film remakes are done after a generation of time has passed (20 years), but this film was remade just 8 years after the original in 1933. In addition, the original film cast was led by a cadre of Hall of Fame performers in their own right - Myrna Loy, Alice Brady, Frank Morgan, Ann Harding, and Robert Montgomery. You'd figure with a cast this good, how is any remake going to improve on those performances? Logical question. Yet, remarkably the five leads in this remake, pound for pound, improve on each of the original performances.

We meet the very successful novelist Mary Howard (Joan Crawford) at a party for the launch of her new book. The party is hosted by her good friend, the much older, wealthy dingbat "Bridgie" Drake in her lovely apartment in New York City. Mary's long-time boyfriend is there too. Jimmy Lee (Robert Taylor) is a journalist and he proposes to Mary there at the party but she blows him off. It becomes clear that her romantic interests have shifted to her publisher, the much older, much less fun (and less attractive) Rogers Woodruf (Herbert Marshall).

There's just one problem ... he's married to Claire (Greer Garson).

Mary's follow-up project is a book called "Gods of Destiny." It's about a woman who falls in love with a married man; and Mary is struggling with the ending. She's desperately trying to make "The Other Woman" into some noble heroine, and she can't get it quite right. Bridgie invites her up to her country estate for the weekend to work on the ending and Mary gets her to invite Rogers as well.

Jimmy gets wind of this; and arranges a way to "drop in" on Bridgie with Claire that weekend after he's found a sneaky way to get Rogers out of the house for a bit.

So, what happens when the ladies meet?

Well, the moment Mary sees Claire across the room she spits her gum out, shakes her shoes off, and hands her earrings to Bridgie - "Hold my gold!" She snatches Claire by the hair and dogwalks her out to the patio where she holds a bottle of champagne by the neck and breaks it over Claire's head, but before she can do any damage to her face Claire pulls a switchblade out of her sock and .....

Wait a minute. No. That's not quite right. Hold on.

It's actually quite civilized. They talk about the situation and about the concept of Love and blah blah blah, and I'm sure you can guess how it all plays out.

Joan is alright here, and Greer is wonderful, but I found the dingbat Bridgie (Spring Byington) and her younger witless and gay gold-digging boyfriend the most entertaining.

Sure, I'd recommend it!