A few Ruth Chatterton mini-reviews

Rolling right along with my new girlish preoccupation and not, I admit, watching particularly critically. Oh, I know I should take this moment to write a sensible post on the woman herself, or at least to describe this zealous wave of affection that steals over me once every six months or so for a newly discovered grande dame. But the thing itself requires constant feeding, so instead I must be off to watch another star vehicle. Check out the posts below for some fuller thoughts, which not coincidentally decrease in clarity and insight as the fixation grows. Oh, well. I’m having fun, and this is more than I’ve managed to write in some time. There’s always hope for the next one.

Anybody’s Woman
1930, DOROTHY ARZNER
19 July

Neil I say a man would be better off with a woman like that for a wife than with the kind of wife I have. That sort of girl is what she is. She’s on the level whether you’re for her or if you’re not. If she isn’t, a man can kick her out. But a nice woman can get away with anything.
Gustave The trouble with women nowadays is they’re getting smart.
Neil Too smart.

Dot Everybody can do something.
Pansy Yeah, I’ve heard that. There was a time when a girl could try her hand at a little easy grab and maybe come home with the rent, for instance. I’ve done it myself. Oh, I only did it when it was that or the first high window. But having tried it, I’ll try jumping next time. I ain’t crazy enough about living to get mine that way.

Unfaithful
1931, JOHN CROMWELL
19 July

Thoughtful, concise plot that doesn’t quite set everything right in the end, just the way a pre-Code film should be! Meantime Ruthie transforms into an unrespectable party girl, belts out cabaret numbers, teases men, gambles with sailors, strides about in pants, and gets the Joan Crawford treatment in a parade of lovely gowns (doubt she ever had a more glam role). Nice little romance with Paul Lukas on the side. Better than average stuff, highly entertaining.

Once a Lady
1931, GUTHRIE MCCLINTIC
21 July

<3 these pre-Code titles. This one's possibly a bit more boring than others to those who don't have a secondary reason for watching them. Like um, a tiny little girlcrush on Ruth Chatterton, who does a fine Russian accent here, in another variation on the Madame X theme.

The Lady of Scandal
1930, SIDNEY FRANKLIN
26 July

Looking for something similar to the on-screen chemistry with George Brent, I found Ruth’s husband #1, Ralph Forbes, to be rather a candidate for the most boring man in all film. Tellingly, I’ve seen him in half a dozen movies according to the IMDb, yet I didn’t for a moment recognize him. Basil Rathbone (the man Dorothy Parker so aptly likened to “two profiles pasted together” and whom Margaret Mitchell inexplicably favored for Rhett Butler) is the nominal love interest, charming and amusing in his peculiar way. The titular scandal attached to this lady is her stage profession, certainly scandal enough to her fiance’s aristocratic family, but which elevates her to the level of genius in they eyes of her father who also protests the marriage, not wanting her to marry below her station. A modest drawing-room comedy with some light laughs from the changes she brings to the family (introduces them to “gullet washers” and popular music), some romantic bathos, and everything else you’ve come to expect from the sort of thing.

Charming Sinners
1929, ROBERT MILTON
26 July

Very Maughamy and probably should have stayed in print. Also, I have the same issue with this as I had with Sylvia Scarlett, in that it defies all reason that William Powell should fail to seduce a woman away from the likes of Clive Brook. No consolation kisses, either — very disappointing.

Journal of a Crime
1934, WILLIAM KEIGHLEY
26 July

Ruth gets away with murder in the most perverse way possible. You don’t need to look up the release date to know this is most definitely on the pre-Code side of 1934. Distraught over the thought of losing her husband permanently to another woman, she dispatches her, and lets another hang for her crime. Husband Adolphe Menjou (probably the cutest man who ever lived — I think of him as the human equivalent to the panda bear) shares her secret, and he takes it as both his own punishment and a curious way of serving her and justice to continue living with her, waiting for the burden of her conscience to compel her to do the right thing. Chatterton’s performance is chilling, as the woman recedes deeper and deeper within herself, cold, despondent, and terrifyingly calm. If I’ve spoiled everything else, I will not spoil what I mean by the “most perverse way possible” to walk away with one’s life, love, and mind, but it left me both shuddering and giggling in appreciation. Not the most sophisticated film, but it has much to recommend it. Journal of a Crime was Chatterton’s last film at Warner’s after both parties stonewalled at contract negotiation, and marked the end of her prolific run in Hollywood. Thoroughly a creature of pre-Codes, she would only make three freelance films following this, and two more in London.

Girls’ Dormitory
1936, IRVING CUMMINGS
2 August

Lame soaper that works anyway if you are in the majority who fancies Simone Simon (who is wet and pouty a lot), are, like… me alone who fancies Ruth Chatterton, or — if this film is to be believed — one of the horde of teenage girls who is totally infatuated with Herbert Marshall. Sort of enjoyed the faculty sniping and Ruth looking bored — and the fencing scene, yeah. Oh, and all the scenes like the one at left (don’t question why Simon/Marshall making out is creepy, but Simon/Chatterton in bed is totally hot). Otherwise, yeah, lame and vaguely gross.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>