No, No, Nanette

This almost-musicless but highly enjoyable musical, though released in 1940, contains all the conventions of the thirties comedies: A perky heroine who meddles in everyone's lives with sociopathic "pranks", and exotic gold-diggers whom she's combatting; a ludicrously lecherous uncle, and a knowing, wisecracking wife; anti-cultural attitudes, yet hilariously pseudo-cultural touches in numbers; sublimely silly plot complications and coincidences with surrealistically unlikely outcomes; and an environment where airplanes have sleeping-bunks, all women own enormous wardrobes of real fabric and real fur, and homes and hotels are all done in snowy white. Plus it's great fun to see some of Hollywood's then-abundant great "character" players working together, and to catch later stars before their images were forever fixed. Just imagine the innocence and aspirations of a world where an airline stewardess is clothed in an expensive military-style uniform, all of white!

Having read the negative comments regarding this film, I can only say that these people are expecting too much. I found this film to be a delightful and funny comedy featuring many great character players from the past. Especially good was ZaSu Pitts, who was reprising her role from the 1930 original film, now lost. As to the negative comments regarding Anna Neagle, what"s not to like? I find her to be a competent actress, singer and dancer as well as being extremely attractive. All in all, not a bad film, especially for the $1.00 I shelled out for the DVD. Also hilarious in the film was Eve Arden, whose presence uplifts any film that she happens to be in.

This is one of the strangest 'musicals' I've ever seen. I saw that one commenter had played Jimmy Smith in a production in 1974. I myself was one of the twin pianists in the Broadway show for the last 6 months of the run, in which I worked with Ruby Keeler, Helen Gallagher, Bobby Van, and Patsy Kelly, and after Keeler left, for Martha Raye, who was taking Patsy Kelly's maid role over but was given Ruby's big 'I want to Be Happy' number. It didn't work, but this had been a great experience for me.

I had watched 'Tea for Two' a few years ago, thought it was just fair, nothing special, I was watching just a bunch of old Doris Day things from that period. This was not one of the best, unlike 'Love me or Love Me' or 'Calamity Jane'. I don't remember how much of the score it kept, not nearly all, but here you don't even get a single whole song, except maybe one full verse of 'Tea for Two', sung by Tom and Nanette in different places. That's fairly nice, but 'I want to Be Happy' is never but a snippet, there's a little of the title song that Neagle sings at the very beginning, still only a line or two; and I think later in the movie there is a snippet of 'Take a Little One Step', which was Ruby's other big number in the B'way show, but it is not even sung as a fragment. I really don't understand this, because the sets and costumes didn't look shoddy or cheap at all. Ms. Neagle is extremely pretty and quite charming, I thought. Victor Mature is stunningly handsome at that age, he really is very much the hunk already, and very sexy. Richard Carlson is also very handsome in a different, lighter kind of way. Beautiful young people and wonderful costumes and luxury are what are on display to enjoy. I looked at the cast of the 1930 version and that at least had Bill and Lucille Early from the original production, but this plot had almost no resemblance to the show I did. Nanette did not ballet (Ms. Neagle's dancing is not terribly distinguished) and both Tom and Nanette are much more naive and 'pure ingenue'. I was surprised I enjoyed as much as I did. I just gave up on it early on as having anything much at all to do with the show I enjoyed doing live. I think it had less music than any musical I ever saw: at least 'Louisiana Purchase', although it leaves out a lot of Berlin's songs, has a couple of big numbers, even if most of the songs are left out (and that's quite a good film.)

This sad little film bears little similarity to the 1971 Broadway revival that was such a 'nostalgic' hit. Keep in mind that when Burt Shevelove directed that revival, he rewrote the book extensively. I have a feeling that this screenwriter wrought as much of a change from the original 1925 version as well. I played the 'innocent philanderer' Jimmy Smith on-stage in 1974, and thought this $1 DVD would bring back memories. Not a chance. Even the anticipated delight of seeing "Topper" Roland Young play 'my' part was a major disappointment. Three songs from the play remain, and are done very poorly. Even the classic duet, "Tea For Two", is done as a virtual solo. The many familiar faces in this 1940 fiasco do not do themselves proud at all, and the star, Anna Neagle, just embarrasses herself. When I feel gypped by spending a dollar, I know the film must be bad. Another commentator mentioned the Doris Day version, which is actually called "Tea For Two" and is about doing the stage play (the original, of course), so those who are seeking the true "No No Nanette" might find a more recognizable version there.

Looks like RKO was showcasing lead actress Neagle. She's in almost every frame, trying hard, all bounce and giggles as aging ingenue Nanette. Trouble is she may be trying too hard without let-up. Then too, the airy farce is itself trying too hard, almost frantic in its machine gun editing and pacing. Too much spark speeds by without time to digest or to maybe even enjoy. The rapid-fire also undercuts a good chance to dig into a stellar cast of supporing players, like Pitts, Arden, and Gilbert. Nonetheless, there are compensations, such as occasional snappy dialogue, women's hat stabbers, and a sexy character named Sonyabich (How'd they get that one by the censors). Anyway, had the pacing slowed without trying to crowd in so much, along with more and better musical numbers, the musical farce might have scored, instead of speeding its way into movieland obscurity.