Lune de miel mouvementée

It's a war film, a bit of a horror film, a code busting romantic comedy, and a drama. In 1938 Austria, journalist Patrick O'Toole (Cary Grant) comes to American Kathy O'Hara (Ginger Rogers) to let her know that her future husband, the Baron Franz Von Luber (Walter Sleazak), is a Nazi. Except the conversation does not seem serious - ever.

O'Toole flirts shamelessly with O'Hara. She flirts back. But she does marry the Baron. And there are numerous other meetings later on where in one case O'Toole just decides to order a big lunch from room service in Poland, take his clothes off in the Baron's suite and borrow his pajamas, and take a nap. And each time Grant and Rogers meet they continue their flirtation and then Ginger goes back to her husband, while romantic comedy music plays. Then Rogers just suddenly decides to leave the Baron for Grant. They traipse across Europe looking for a way back to America - even getting stuck in a concentration camp for awhile that inaccurately looks more like Juvenile hall.

For a war movie there are really no serious dramatic confrontations. It all plays out like The Awful Truth combined with the Hope/Crosby Road movies except in War torn Europe and the whole thing is off putting.

How can a film with an acclaimed director - Leo McCarey - bomb this badly, especially with a talented cast. The production values are top notch - this is not some Ed Wood film, so in fact it is worse than one. In an Ed Wood film you see things done wrong - poor and silly art design, laughably bad dialogue, poor cinematography. So this even fails as a bad film, because it is expertly presented, but it manages to be weird and boring to the point it is just annoying.

This comedy is good and at the same time shows the situation in Europe when the nazis were invading step by step each country of central and east Europe. The story is refreshing although it touches a very delicate issue, which affected millions of people in Europe in early 40s. Cary Grant was able to play a good role as a journalist, who is very well informed of the problems caused by nazis and the ways the latter used for invasion. Splendid Ginger Rogers also did very well, and no less important was Walter Slezak playing well the role of the nazi officer Baron Von Luber. In the film there is some thrill, romance and comic scenes, in conclusion Leo McCarey directed a good comedy once again.

I'm amazed at the bad reception that Once Upon a Honeymoon got from other reviewers here. It's not the greatest film from either the stars or the director, but far from the worst. See Satan Never Sleeps or My Son John for Leo McCarey's worst. And it's one of Walter Slezak's best roles.

Slezak plays the fictional Baron Von Luber who like the Fuehrer was Austrian born and played a big hand in the Anschluss. After that he became a Nazi ambassador of good will. But in his wake countries seem to fall to the Germans after every one of his missions. He's a rising star in the Nazi movement.

He's also married a show business American wife in the person of Ginger Rogers. That and his activities arouse the curiosity of editor Harry Shannon and commentator Cary Grant.

Once Upon a Honeymoon is very similar to that other Cary Grant film from Alfred Hitchcock, Notorious. Of course the Hitchcock film has Grant as an FBI agent who gets Ingrid Bergman to marry Claude Rains to spy on his postwar activities in a country with no extradition. Rains actually becomes an object of some audience sympathy even as a Nazi, but Slezak never does.

In fact his role is similar to that other exhibit of the master race found in that other Hitchcock film, Lifeboat. But he's gotten in a way that the gauleiter of the lifeboat never is. Cary Grant damns him with faint praise and a shrewd use of reverse psychology on the Nazi mind. Slezak's reactions to Grant's broadcast are worth seeing the film alone.

Leo McCarey makes some very serious points about the Nazis mixed in with the humor. When Grant and Rogers are caught when they think they're Jewish, it's a very harrowing predicament indeed until they are providentially rescued.

Once Upon A Honeymoon though firmly dated to World War II, holds up very well in the laugh and propaganda departments both.

When Leo McCarey made this film, America was only a number of months into WWII. The events leading up to the start of the war (at least in Europe) were known to some, with most of America still getting their news from the newsreels at the theater or radio. This film is a great way for people to learn about how the opening of WWII began, especially now where some schools are limited in their ability to cover the events. Two "average Americans" moving about Europe, sometimes steps ahead (or behind as in the Polish through Low Countries scenes) of the events which changed Europe. The time in the Polish Ghetto, as well as in Paris, allow for the audience to get to know the characters, without having to gather the facts as the story goes along. Just as National Treasure teaches about American History while entertaining, this movie belongs in the same group, as it tells a "You Are There" version of 1939-40 European History.

Although the indifferent critical reception, and very mixed reviews here, made me a little nervous, the cast were good reason to see 'Once Upon a Honeymoon'. Am especially fond of Cary Grant and Ginger Rogers' partnership with Fred Astaire is legendary. Comedy mixed in with a serious subject, in a sensitive time period at the time, has been done frequently on film and although it varies in success there are a lot of great examples. Have also liked a lot a good deal of Leo McCarey's work.

Not 'Once Upon a Honeymoon' though. Whether it's his very worst is debatable, haven't seen everything of his, but it is to me a lesser effort of his and nowhere near his usual standard. Both Grant and Rogers have also been better, though neither fare too badly here and actually among the better assets. For better balances of well executed comedy and tastefully executed seriousness, look elsewhere other than 'Once Upon a Honeymoon' as that is one of its biggest problems. If people got more out of this, good for them but it didn't quite do it for me while thinking still that it is not that bad.

'Once Upon a Honeymoon' has good things. It is a well made film, the photography especially being nicely done. Robert Emmett Dolan's music has quirkiness and atmosphere. There are moments of amusement, like a few nice lines from Grant, and tension thanks to the menace of Walter Slezak.

Grant embodies urbane sophistication, something that he was unaparallelled in in cinematic history. Rogers to me seemed to have fun, and didn't seem over the top or phoned in. They have a sweet chemistry together and it's the romantic element that comes off best of the different tones the film tries to take on. The supporting cast are all competent and more, although the variable amount of screen time worked against some of them. Slezak's menacing baron comes off best and the character that makes the most sense.

It is a shame however that the script is very muddled and tries to do too much, the comedy generally lacks wit and when there is any in the more serious scenes (i.e. anything regarding Grant and Rogers implausibly being mistaken for being Jewish) it leaves a bitter aftertaste. Or at least it did to me and some others. The story never properly grabbed me and suffers badly from being tonally unfocused and too many jarring shifts in tone, which suggested a not knowing what it wanted to be vibe.

To me too, 'Once Upon a Honeymoon' runs on for too long with the early portion having drawn out parts suggestive of padding not always needed. So it meant that too much of the film drags and quite badly. Successful comedy is only sporadic and the tension is hardly there. Only the baron makes sense of the characters, the others and their behaviour further to the film's strangeness. Have not seen an ending this dumb in a long time, quite insultingly so, and it also felt abrupt. McCarey's direction is pretty bland and like he was not finding it easy balancing everything.

Summarising, a watchable curiosity but an oddity. 5/10