Before I watched this film, I had never seen Rosalind Russell in a leading role. For me, she had always been the supporting comic foil or the other woman to Jean Harlow (in China Seas and Reckless). So when I read about a film where she played an obsessive-compulsive house-obsessed control freak housewife, I knew I had to watch it.
The film did not disappoint me in the least. It was less than 75 minutes long, but I watched it in two parts. Rosalind Russell proved to me that she could do more than just be funny, and I warmed up to her. Her performance is definitely one that sticks in your head after viewing.
Now comes the comparison to the remake, Harriet Craig, with Joan Crawford. Some people say they prefer that one, some people prefer this one, I thought of them as two different movies that just happened to have the same characters and a similar story. I would be lying if I said I preferred one to the other. Rosalind's Harriet Craig is a control freak, yes, but she plays the character with a mild sympathetic edge. At the end, when she realizes what she's done to herself and her peers, you really feel almost bad for her. Joan's Harriet, on the other hand, is a nail-spitting (I can't put that word here) who tears into everyone without even a shred of regret, not even at the end. This one is based off Geroge Kelly's stage play, and the Joan one is a remake of this one. There is also a silent one, but I'm not sure if it's lost or extant. If I can find a copy, I'd like to watch it.
Now that I'm done describing Roz Russell's character, I can describe John Boles. I can't think of any other movies with him, but every time I see his name I think of Walter Craig. He works better in that role than the guy in the remake (I've forgotten his name). Billie Burke as the neighbor basically plays her character from Dinner At Eight again, and the other actors are good as well... but I forget their names.
I would recommend watching both films- this one and Harriet Craig- and deciding which one you like best. I personally am indifferent, but I know that not everyone is me.
The film did not disappoint me in the least. It was less than 75 minutes long, but I watched it in two parts. Rosalind Russell proved to me that she could do more than just be funny, and I warmed up to her. Her performance is definitely one that sticks in your head after viewing.
Now comes the comparison to the remake, Harriet Craig, with Joan Crawford. Some people say they prefer that one, some people prefer this one, I thought of them as two different movies that just happened to have the same characters and a similar story. I would be lying if I said I preferred one to the other. Rosalind's Harriet Craig is a control freak, yes, but she plays the character with a mild sympathetic edge. At the end, when she realizes what she's done to herself and her peers, you really feel almost bad for her. Joan's Harriet, on the other hand, is a nail-spitting (I can't put that word here) who tears into everyone without even a shred of regret, not even at the end. This one is based off Geroge Kelly's stage play, and the Joan one is a remake of this one. There is also a silent one, but I'm not sure if it's lost or extant. If I can find a copy, I'd like to watch it.
Now that I'm done describing Roz Russell's character, I can describe John Boles. I can't think of any other movies with him, but every time I see his name I think of Walter Craig. He works better in that role than the guy in the remake (I've forgotten his name). Billie Burke as the neighbor basically plays her character from Dinner At Eight again, and the other actors are good as well... but I forget their names.
I would recommend watching both films- this one and Harriet Craig- and deciding which one you like best. I personally am indifferent, but I know that not everyone is me.