Director: Elliott Nugent
A reversal of the familiar trope in which conspiring children attempt to bring their parents together, this screwball comedy finds Jackie Moran and Edith Fellows playing two bratty children who will do whatever they can to destroy their parents’ engagement. As the central couple is Melvyn Douglas and Mary Astor, the latter of whom is so storied as an empowered, strong-willed presence on screen that Douglas’ grouch is sickly sweet by comparison. This is part of the problem—Douglas’ stubbornness is hardly convincing, and in many scenes it seems like he simply doesn’t care about the material. It is the amount of screen time given to their offspring, however, that ruins its potential as a screwball comedy. A good screwball comedy typically involves healthy doses of cynicism and sexuality. In pairing that genre with a story about two rambunctious children who become friends, the script completely neuters the potential of Douglas and Astor’s relationship. Regardless, the ski lodge setting was relatively uncommon for the genre and it works well as a device to keep the couple trapped until they fall in love. Donald Meek is expectedly amusing as the exasperated hotel manager.
Director: Elliott Nugent
After its release in 1935, the New York Times did an excellent job summarizing the type of picture that Love in Bloom falls into the category of: “Relying upon one of the oldest plots known to Hollywood and unadorned with any semblance of newness, the picture falls into the vast, undistinguished classification which is summed up in the one word: fair.” Indeed, much of the 75 minute run time follows a blossoming romance between Dixie Lee and Joe Morrison, who both have their charms but have about as much personality as the young couples that bring the fun to a halt in a typical Marx Brothers picture. Morrison’s repetitive crooning of “My Heart Is an Open Book” reeks of a desperation to produce a hit, and co-stars George Burns and Gracie Allen are woefully underused. There are a few nice moments here and there–Lee and Morrison have an excellent scene during a stormy night that has the feel of a decent Frank Borage imitation (including a memorably racy line: “Are you as wet underneath as you feel on top?”), and Lee’s self-pity leads to a genuinely affecting moment late in the picture–but Love in Bloom is so perfectly average that it leaves little impression at all.
Filed under: Reviews | Tags: 1939, elliott nugent, the cat and the canary
Director: Elliott Nugent
Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard were paired for the first of three films in The Cat and the Canary, an “old dark house” horror film injected with Hope’s humorous cowardice and penchant for one-liners. He plays a self-deprecating actor who recognizes each cliche element of the mystery due to his experience in the theater. It’s a charming gimmick, with the self-aware dialogue inviting the audience to be made conscious of the machinations of the plot without losing their investment in it. Ultimately, the picture isn’t nearly as satisfying as the duo’s followup The Ghost Breakers, which more effectively managed the balance between laughs and scares. Cinematographer Charles B. Lang contributes reliably excellent work–like the aforementioned The Ghost Breakers or the paranormal classic The Uninvited, he revels in the play between light and dark, hiding so much in the shadows that the illuminated areas only feel more vulnerable. A climactic chase scene is the closest the film comes to being genuinely frightening, and it has much to do with the sense of claustrophobia that Lang communicates with both lighting and framing.
For Reel 