Lune de miel mouvementée

Although there is a silly side to this movie, I really don't think that its only value is as a curiosity. In reality, it was a singular vehicle for Ginger Rogers to flex her acting muscles, instead of merely being a sidekick in a dance routine. She is something to behold in this movie. And, I maintain that if you are a Cary Grant fan, it's nothing to sit through this slightly confectionery film. It is practically astonishing that the Jewish issue was addressed in a movie made in 1942. Finally, it's worth pointing out that any average film from this period is Shakespearean compared to the dreck on offer most of the time these days.

Leo McCarey helms this 1942 lark, whose moods and genre conventions---saccharine romance, espionage adventure, screwball farce and war-time propaganda---swing to and fro so regularly that it's difficult to be bored even when the tipping scales of narrative contrivance become somewhat stressful at times. It's soapboxy-er than its early blitheness suggests, and at one point, the customary lead comic duo is mistaken for Jews and have a close shave with quite a grim fate. At times, because of the nonsensicality of the wildly contrived plot, the brashness of swastika hands on clocks and downer developments initially feel mislaid before they're consistently salvaged by a highly competent group of surprisingly naturalistic and genuinely funny performers, but meets its challenges admirably when it matters.

Vienna, 1938. Ginger Rogers plays Katie O'Hara, a Brooklyn dancer who's flown off to marry the rich and high-ranking Austrian Baron Von Luber, a Nazi VIP on the sly, for status and prosperity. Chin dimple extraordinaire Cary Grant plays hyper-transatlantic correspondent Pat O'Toole, who receives a job as a radio commentator to obtain a rare interview with the impending baroness to expose the Baron as a Nazi undercover. The Baron is played by Walter Slezak, that indelible character actor who managed to get pigeonholed as cunning Nazis. You may recognize him from Hitchcock's Lifeboat. Pat's not deterred by Katie's unwillingness to be questioned, and manages to meet her posing as a tailor.

Obviously, the reporter becomes smitten with Katie and frantically attempts to disabuse her regarding her fiancée. A turning point slams into this happy-go-lucky buffoonery when Hitler takes Austria, and Katie begins to learn the truth about her new husband's dealings. The two brash Yankees team up and go on the lam through Norway, Holland and Belgium before sudden sabotage missions are sprung on them and create grave dramatic tension. "This is the sort of thing that can make a man a Republican!" he huffs.

I had my doubts about Ginger Rogers. Not having seen many of her best known films such as those with Fred Astaire, I thought she may prove yet another example of how incomparable Irene Dunne was alongside Archie boy. About forty minutes into Once Upon a Honeymoon, I was firmly disabused of my presumptions. She has an inborn knack for being natural in a way that even transcends the stagy tenets of the Golden Age, saying a lot without saying much, and saying something different with her face than what she's saying with her mouth. I can't say this excuses the inanity of Archie earlier on managing to trick her so effortlessly into thinking straight vodka is a glass of water, but overall, she's not an uncomplicated Dumb Blonde Type present only to hang off Cary Grant's shoulder. McCarey takes the time to photograph her surprisingly emotive disillusionment about the state of affairs around her.

I'm frankly willing to forego any criticisms or dismissals of any moments that border on cornball or lugubrious purely for reward of the scene where O'Toole and Von Luber finally happen upon one another and have a man-to-man sit-down. It's one of those delicately cool scenes where two characters hold their cards firmly against their vests, but say just enough and share just enough sidelong glances to be satisfied of the other's hand. It's an exciting scene that raises the stakes and ratchets up the tension in a subdued, completely unexpected way. In fact, McCarey and his cast are so graceful that it only falls apart when it finally reaches the bungled ending, which I suppose is what happens when you try to balance propaganda and slick storytelling. Regardless, though quite the opposite of cynical or acerbic, it has a streak of the spunk and cunning of a Billy Wilder film, or the "shpontanuity," as one of the Baron's comrades suggests.

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.

Comedy? I don't think so. Even Grant's charms can't save this one. A comedy set in Europe during WWII isn't impossible (see To Be Or Not To Be, also from 1942). But this one includes scenes with Hitler, and jokes about Nazis, not very funny I may add. The story is too ludicrous, the so-called jokes terrible. Whoever liked the movie should check is head. The ending is SO-Stupid! And what honeymoon? Forget it. Even worse than Penny Serenade. Beware. Read a book, eat, do something, anything else.

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