A couple reviewers noted that this movie couldn't be made today – it's too sexist. Many others talk about it being "pre-code." When the Hays Office began enforcing the movie industries' self-imposed censorship (the "code") in 1934, films after that time wouldn't be able to show or talk about some things directly. Sex was the main taboo. I hope others can see the irony in this. Today Hollywood can make X-rated films with no limits. But we have another unwritten censorship – nothing sexist. I just mean to point out the irony in this – not to approve of either type of film. Society's mores change. What was bad before is good today, or OK. What was OK then is bad today. But does it ever really change? What is good for us, or bad for us, as individuals and as a society?
"Beauty and the Boss" clearly is a sexist film. And, it clearly mirrors some – not all, but some of society of that time. The sexism is the core of the plot in this film. Without it, the whole story changes. The film is adapted from a play that ran a year or so on Broadway. Clearly, the sexist aspects are an intended part of the film's entertainment. Some may not enjoy it for that reason. Others may be able to enjoy it with the understanding that that was a part of the culture of the time.
So, how good is the film? It seems very stagy. Most of the roles are OK, but the script is weak. The film is choppy and not very well edited. I think it suffered in direction as well. Remember, this is an early sound film – only three years into it, and I think the setting, direction and filming show that. They are a bit crude yet. For a comedy, it has very little witty, clever or funny dialog. It's mostly in character interactions.
Warren William had some very good films, but his character in this one is off. I think he over does it as Baron Joseph Ullrich in his demanding manner, so that when he calms down it's too stark a contrast and not believable. This is really a film for Marian Marsh. She sparkles in the role of Susie. Josef does a good job in his rapid-fire dictation and orders, but Susie tops him in her speedy ordering of everything. The transition of her character from the meek, poor, humble job seeker to the rapid-fire, in command, self-confident yet modest woman in charge is excellent. She clearly makes this film.
Marsh was barely on the silver screen a decade when she married and retired from acting. Her roles had gone downhill after some early successes, and she had a spat with Warner Brothers. But that was after her sterling performance as Trilby opposite John Barrymore's Svengali. The movie was titled "Svengali," but George Du Marier's novel on which it was based was called "Trilby."
I should mention that a reviewer, whose comments and reviews I most often enjoy, got one thing wrong in his comments. He referred to Williams' character, Baron Josef von Ullrich, as a French industrialist tycoon. In the movie, he is Viennese. For the last part of the film, he flies from Vienna to Paris for an extended business trip and takes with him his steno-secretary (Susie) and his gopher,Ludwig Pfeffer played by Charles Butterworth.
Most of the names are Austro-Hungarian, and Josef hires Susie for 40 kronen. Before that she said she had 20 pfennig in her purse. The kronen was in place until 1924, after which it was replaced by the Schilling. From the aircraft they fly in, its hard to tell exactly the date on which the movie is based. The first trans-Atlantic nonstop commercial airline flight was in 1938 – six years after this movie. But there were passenger planes that flew in the early 1920s. What adds to the confusion is that all during the 1920s, the Austro-Hungarian area of Eastern Europe was particularly hard-hit by the great depression So, the big banking deals that Josef is pulling off seem as not very likely for that time.
A very funny scene happens in the hotel when Ludwig has returned from a night out and is tipsy. He gets off the elevator and begins walking as though he were balancing. Another hotel guest asks him, "What are you doing?" Ludwig replies, "Walking a tightrope." The guest observes, "But there isn't any tightrope." Ludwig answers, "That's OK. I can do it better without one."
"Beauty and the Boss" clearly is a sexist film. And, it clearly mirrors some – not all, but some of society of that time. The sexism is the core of the plot in this film. Without it, the whole story changes. The film is adapted from a play that ran a year or so on Broadway. Clearly, the sexist aspects are an intended part of the film's entertainment. Some may not enjoy it for that reason. Others may be able to enjoy it with the understanding that that was a part of the culture of the time.
So, how good is the film? It seems very stagy. Most of the roles are OK, but the script is weak. The film is choppy and not very well edited. I think it suffered in direction as well. Remember, this is an early sound film – only three years into it, and I think the setting, direction and filming show that. They are a bit crude yet. For a comedy, it has very little witty, clever or funny dialog. It's mostly in character interactions.
Warren William had some very good films, but his character in this one is off. I think he over does it as Baron Joseph Ullrich in his demanding manner, so that when he calms down it's too stark a contrast and not believable. This is really a film for Marian Marsh. She sparkles in the role of Susie. Josef does a good job in his rapid-fire dictation and orders, but Susie tops him in her speedy ordering of everything. The transition of her character from the meek, poor, humble job seeker to the rapid-fire, in command, self-confident yet modest woman in charge is excellent. She clearly makes this film.
Marsh was barely on the silver screen a decade when she married and retired from acting. Her roles had gone downhill after some early successes, and she had a spat with Warner Brothers. But that was after her sterling performance as Trilby opposite John Barrymore's Svengali. The movie was titled "Svengali," but George Du Marier's novel on which it was based was called "Trilby."
I should mention that a reviewer, whose comments and reviews I most often enjoy, got one thing wrong in his comments. He referred to Williams' character, Baron Josef von Ullrich, as a French industrialist tycoon. In the movie, he is Viennese. For the last part of the film, he flies from Vienna to Paris for an extended business trip and takes with him his steno-secretary (Susie) and his gopher,Ludwig Pfeffer played by Charles Butterworth.
Most of the names are Austro-Hungarian, and Josef hires Susie for 40 kronen. Before that she said she had 20 pfennig in her purse. The kronen was in place until 1924, after which it was replaced by the Schilling. From the aircraft they fly in, its hard to tell exactly the date on which the movie is based. The first trans-Atlantic nonstop commercial airline flight was in 1938 – six years after this movie. But there were passenger planes that flew in the early 1920s. What adds to the confusion is that all during the 1920s, the Austro-Hungarian area of Eastern Europe was particularly hard-hit by the great depression So, the big banking deals that Josef is pulling off seem as not very likely for that time.
A very funny scene happens in the hotel when Ludwig has returned from a night out and is tipsy. He gets off the elevator and begins walking as though he were balancing. Another hotel guest asks him, "What are you doing?" Ludwig replies, "Walking a tightrope." The guest observes, "But there isn't any tightrope." Ludwig answers, "That's OK. I can do it better without one."