I had long waited to see this early talkie curiosity.However the copy that i purchased had 10 minutes missing,which unfortunately included the musical number.I have seen part of this number before and it has to be one of the worst numbers ever performed.The story is rather dated.As for Murrays performance whilst it isn't very good neither is it very bad.What is noticeable is the fact that she is rather overweight with a rather pronounced double chin.Given the fact that she had rather foolishly left MGM and lands up at an independent she probably felt that her career had run its course as she only made another couple of films after this.
12 Reviews
Much ado about... not much
marcslope28 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Grade B early talkie from the tightfisted Tiffany studio, and boy, early talkies don't get early-talkier than this: clodhopping camera, unstable sound levels, and a director who just hasn't learned how to pace sound. There are so many silences between lines that it sounds like real, not scripted, dialog--but it doesn't help. Mae Murray was a big silent star, but, though her voice isn't awful (I assume her singing is dubbed), you can see why she didn't make it in talkies: She attitudinizes rather than acts, moves stiffly (a brief Technicolor dance sequence is particularly painful), and, unflatteringly photographed, isn't the great beauty she's made out to be. The story's a trite bit of barely-post-Victorian morality: Mae, a New York showgirl, decides to abandon the sophisticated businessman she's been seeing and marry a Texas childhood sweetheart, but suspicions about her being a "bad girl" lead to the engagement's collapse. One nice twist: The lounge-lizard-looking plutocrat, who convention tells you should be a snake, turns out to be a decent, forgiving guy, while the all-American D.A. she marries (Jason Robards, father of Jr.), who convention tells you should be the good guy, turns out to be priggish, small-minded, and unforgiving. But the writing is terribly flat--you can often tell what the next line will be--and the jumpy continuity suggests there's some missing footage, or maybe just that these minor-studio hacks don't know how to tell a story. A final question: Why the heck is this called "Peacock Alley"? That's the name of the main hall at the Waldorf Astoria, but this is set in some fictitious New York hotel called the Park Plaza, and it has neither peacocks nor alleys.
Short and sweet
HandsomeBen9 March 2021
Warning: Spoilers
A woman tries to settle for another man, after the man she really loves rejects the idea of marriage.
I don't get why some people on here thought this was the worst movie in existence. I thought it was competently made and entertaining and had some funny bits. Is it the best movie? No. My favorite character was the nosy hotel employee who accused the woman of being a prostitute, and her soon to be husband getting mad and fighting with the employee. The employee really amped up the energy, and gave this life, otherwise it would have been a melodramatic soap opera.
I don't get why some people on here thought this was the worst movie in existence. I thought it was competently made and entertaining and had some funny bits. Is it the best movie? No. My favorite character was the nosy hotel employee who accused the woman of being a prostitute, and her soon to be husband getting mad and fighting with the employee. The employee really amped up the energy, and gave this life, otherwise it would have been a melodramatic soap opera.
Stiffany Tiffany Talkie
ptb-813 May 2012
My research about TIFFANY STUDIOS has revealed that initially they were a production house for Mae Murray films directed by her husband Robert Z Leonard. In 1924 when the three separate Metro and Goldwyn and Mayer studios amalgamated to form MGM, many tech and crafts persons and actors where not included. These outcasts reformed at a grander more ambitious Tiffany and released their films thru the MGM distribution network. However MGM did not want Mae Murray (too much Norma Desmond for their liking) but did want her husband Robert Z.
As a result Mae and Z divorced and his career continued at MGM and she was cut loose. When Thalberg rival John Stahl took over Tiffany in 1925 his plan was to be an MGM equal and produce sophisticated glossy urban dramas cluttered with expensive props and costumes and out dazzle and out tech MGM. For a while his ambitions were successful and Tiffany began to produce some very good films like THE LOST ZEPPELIN and MAMBA. However they also gambled again with Mae Murray and this film, a remake of her 1922 opus was produced as a glamorous talkie, all set in a hotel full of snazzy dazzling props. Mae unfortunately must have dominated the whole proceedings as her first super style talkie and spends the entire film posing and looking towards Jupiter. At the 30 minute mark, dull proceedings liven up considerably in a very dramatic exchange about who spent the night where and some good direct dialog erupts. There is also a very well dressed deco apartment which now is almost the entire reason to see the film. A short satirical color sequence is inserted where Mae badly dances whilst believing she is funny. This is a laborious creaky talkie but intermittently fascinating for its ambitious glamor by a studio which folded in 1932. Robert Z had a successful career at MGM again and Mae faded into poverty and obscurity until SUNSET BOULEVARD was made based on Mae's enduring belief she that would make another comeback.
As a result Mae and Z divorced and his career continued at MGM and she was cut loose. When Thalberg rival John Stahl took over Tiffany in 1925 his plan was to be an MGM equal and produce sophisticated glossy urban dramas cluttered with expensive props and costumes and out dazzle and out tech MGM. For a while his ambitions were successful and Tiffany began to produce some very good films like THE LOST ZEPPELIN and MAMBA. However they also gambled again with Mae Murray and this film, a remake of her 1922 opus was produced as a glamorous talkie, all set in a hotel full of snazzy dazzling props. Mae unfortunately must have dominated the whole proceedings as her first super style talkie and spends the entire film posing and looking towards Jupiter. At the 30 minute mark, dull proceedings liven up considerably in a very dramatic exchange about who spent the night where and some good direct dialog erupts. There is also a very well dressed deco apartment which now is almost the entire reason to see the film. A short satirical color sequence is inserted where Mae badly dances whilst believing she is funny. This is a laborious creaky talkie but intermittently fascinating for its ambitious glamor by a studio which folded in 1932. Robert Z had a successful career at MGM again and Mae faded into poverty and obscurity until SUNSET BOULEVARD was made based on Mae's enduring belief she that would make another comeback.
Not surprisingly, Mae Murray tried to sue Tiffany Studios for nearly $2 million!
JohnHowardReid11 April 2010
"Peacock Alley" is just plain awful. True, the DVD under review is missing its ten-minutes Technicolor sequence in which Mae Murray moves her lips to a voice dubber's rendition of "In My Dreams, You Still Belong To Me", but frankly not even Al Jolson could save this absolutely dreadful non-movie in which the characters just stand around and declaim gosh-awful dialogue for what seems like two hours. As to who give the worst performance? That's easy. Mae Murray. As to who is the most unflatteringly photo-graphed heroine in movie history? That's easy. Mae Murray. Who wears the worst make-up, the worst clothes, the worst hair style? Mae Murray. In fact, very sad to say, Mae Murray looks a total wreck, and as an actress she's a total write-off. True, her co-star, George Barraud, runs Mae close in the bad acting stakes. He seems to be under the delusion that he's on a stage rather than a film set. Maybe Marcel De Sano, fresh from directing Charles Boyer and Huguette Duflos in the French version of "The Trial of Mary Dugan" (1929) at M-G-M, had a limited command of English? In any case, this movie helped to put paid to Mae Murray's career. She had a good role in Lowell Sherman's "Bachelor Apartment" (1931) and then co-starred opposite him in "High Stakes" (also 1931). That was the end of her acting career. In 1949, she re-emerged as a producer in England with "Dick Barton Strikes Back", followed by "Come Dance with Me" and "Shadow of the Past" (both 1950).
A poor film in most respects
planktonrules10 July 2015
As for the film, it has a very old fashioned plot that didn't seem so old fashioned back in the day. Claire is in love with a rich guy but he just won't commit. Eventually, she tires of waiting and marries some guy who seems like a nice guy. But when her honor is called into question, this loser guy is no where to be found...and Claire seems all alone. What's to happen with her?
According to IMDb, the star of this film, Mae Murray, attempted to sue Tiffany Studios for the failure of this movie. Well, after seeing it I would agree that PART of the problem with the film is the lousy writing and dull direction. However, to blame the studio alone is silly, as SHE was clearly the worst thing about "Peacock Alley"! Murray's acting is poor, her character talks way too much and she looks pretty wretched. Having her shoulder this film was the biggest mistake.
According to IMDb, the star of this film, Mae Murray, attempted to sue Tiffany Studios for the failure of this movie. Well, after seeing it I would agree that PART of the problem with the film is the lousy writing and dull direction. However, to blame the studio alone is silly, as SHE was clearly the worst thing about "Peacock Alley"! Murray's acting is poor, her character talks way too much and she looks pretty wretched. Having her shoulder this film was the biggest mistake.
A perfect illustration of how bad early talkies could be
MissSimonetta23 January 2023
Imagine you're a moviegoer in 1930. Imagine you're also a Mae Murray fan. Never the most lauded actress, critics sneer at her affected posing, her dance numbers, her elaborate (and sometimes scanty) outfits, the sheer campiness of her films. However, you adore her in films like THE MERRY WIDOW, grand productions where she danced a steamy waltz with heartthrob John Gilbert and lounged about in elaborate gowns. Perhaps you can remember back to her early film career, when she was making light Cinderella-style comedies like THE DELICIOUS LITTLE DEVIL with Rudy Valentino.
Now imagine Murray-- a star you associate with glamor and dance-- trapped in a static, very talk-heavy film in which everyone involved is more concerned with where to position their mouths so the microphone will catch each over-enunciated, badly written bit of dialogue. Murray-- in her forties-- is playing an ingenue half her age, and barely conjuring any chemistry with the two wet blankets we're supposed to believe are madly in love with her. Bored and remembering the fluid camera of those pre-sound days, you appreciate fleeting elements of Murray's performance that recall her dance background-- the way she gracefully spins into a lover's arms, the way she walks across a room like she owns the place. But none of this can save PEACOCK ALLEY and you struggle not to nod off.
Now imagine Murray-- a star you associate with glamor and dance-- trapped in a static, very talk-heavy film in which everyone involved is more concerned with where to position their mouths so the microphone will catch each over-enunciated, badly written bit of dialogue. Murray-- in her forties-- is playing an ingenue half her age, and barely conjuring any chemistry with the two wet blankets we're supposed to believe are madly in love with her. Bored and remembering the fluid camera of those pre-sound days, you appreciate fleeting elements of Murray's performance that recall her dance background-- the way she gracefully spins into a lover's arms, the way she walks across a room like she owns the place. But none of this can save PEACOCK ALLEY and you struggle not to nod off.
Second NOT best
BSKIMDB10 February 2023
Be aware this is the second version (early talkie) of a silent picture, although the DVD cover is from the silent one. They both feature the same story played by the same actress (Mae Murray), but in quite different circumstances. The first was made in 1921 and released next year, directed by her then-husband Robert Z. Leonard and with a luxurious look. This silent version is supposedly lost. Some photographs exist showing the peacock gown featured in this DVD cover, which pertains NOT to this picture.
Miss Murray was an ex-Ziegfeld girl famous in the 1910s and 20s for the way she staged her dances and for her make-up (she was known as "the girl with the bee-stung lips", her star faded and is said to have been the inspiration for Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard). She partnered in Tiffany Productions, responsible for the two versions.
The story offered here has its main point of interest in Miss Murray's character having or having not been unfaithful to her brand-new husband; a secondary point for some may be to see Jason Robards Sr. Playing this role. There could be another one in a Spanish early Technicolor dancing sequence (Tiffanny also made Mamba trying to compete with newly assembled MGM), stills of which also exist, but this has been plainly DELETED, leaving a noticeable gap leading to an abrupt and rather unbelievable ending. Aside from these, I can see no other qualities. The story is outfashioned even for its time (but probably not for 1922) and it resents a total lack of rythm, "running" at a tedious pace. The image quality is poor. The sound equals it. Miss Murray looks unatractive and cheap. Even so, judge for yourself, as it may be the only chance to have an idea of this picture.
Peacock Alley is the name some hotels name their lounges or restaurants, like the Waldorf at N. Y. or the Willard Hotel in Washington. If you look at the pictures, it might have been this one the inspiration for the first sequences.
By the way, if anyone knows of an available copy of the 1921-2 silent version I'd be glad to know it (UCLA/LoC are said to own some fragments).
ATTENTION ! For those wanting to watch the missing TECHNICOLOR dance sequence, go to the link at the External Links section.
Miss Murray was an ex-Ziegfeld girl famous in the 1910s and 20s for the way she staged her dances and for her make-up (she was known as "the girl with the bee-stung lips", her star faded and is said to have been the inspiration for Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard). She partnered in Tiffany Productions, responsible for the two versions.
The story offered here has its main point of interest in Miss Murray's character having or having not been unfaithful to her brand-new husband; a secondary point for some may be to see Jason Robards Sr. Playing this role. There could be another one in a Spanish early Technicolor dancing sequence (Tiffanny also made Mamba trying to compete with newly assembled MGM), stills of which also exist, but this has been plainly DELETED, leaving a noticeable gap leading to an abrupt and rather unbelievable ending. Aside from these, I can see no other qualities. The story is outfashioned even for its time (but probably not for 1922) and it resents a total lack of rythm, "running" at a tedious pace. The image quality is poor. The sound equals it. Miss Murray looks unatractive and cheap. Even so, judge for yourself, as it may be the only chance to have an idea of this picture.
Peacock Alley is the name some hotels name their lounges or restaurants, like the Waldorf at N. Y. or the Willard Hotel in Washington. If you look at the pictures, it might have been this one the inspiration for the first sequences.
By the way, if anyone knows of an available copy of the 1921-2 silent version I'd be glad to know it (UCLA/LoC are said to own some fragments).
ATTENTION ! For those wanting to watch the missing TECHNICOLOR dance sequence, go to the link at the External Links section.
The Film That Ended Mae Murray's Movie Career
springfieldrental16 July 2022
It was a very known fact that if people wanted a career in Hollywood, they shouldn't butt heads with MGM's president Louis B. Mayer. Mae Murray proved to be a prime example of what could happen if a person did. The veteran actress listened to the advice of her new husband, David Mdivani. He had assumed the role as her personal manager in 1926, and advised her to walk out of her MGM contract to become independent. One of Hollywood's more popular silent movie actresses who played opposite of Rudolph Valentino, was directed by Cecil B. DeMille, and was known as "The Gardenia of the Screen," Murray soon found out one doesn't get Mayer's blood pressure up without some sort of repercussions. Her acting offers with other major film studios dried up. Murray soon discovered she was being 'graylisted," meaning there was no official announcement for the studios to avoid hiring her, but it was secretly known throughout Hollywood circles not to do so.
Murray's career was in limbo until she connected with her ex, Robert Leonard, owner of the small movie studio Tiffany Pictures. Murray had formed the company with her then husband Leonard in the early 1920s, but her divorce from him required her to divest from the studio. She saw a chance to rejuvenate her film career by starring in her first talkie, Tiffany Pictures' January 1930's "Peacock Alley."
Alas, there would be no Cinderella story here. The movie proved to be a dismal financial failure. Even though Tiffany Pictures constructed elaborate sets for Murray's movie on a low budget, "Peacock Alley" did more damage to the actress' future ambitions than she ever could ever imagine. "Peacock Alley" was a reprise of her successful 1922 silent of the same name. The plot involves her desire to marry wealthy Stoddard Clayton (George Barraud), even though she doesn't love him. Her reasoning: "I'm running away from the doubts and uncertainty and problems of a woman who isn't married." Staying overnight at Clayton's suite, she later finds another option in Jim Bradbury (Jason Robards, Sr.), a Texan from her hometown. They marry, but Jim soon finds out about that overnight stay in Clayton's suite. Fireworks erupt.
"Peacock Alley" was universally critically panned by almost every publication. Typical was Photoplay's scathing assessment of Murray, whose other nickname was "The Girl with the Bee-Stung Lips." Describing the movie as "a sorry affair," the critic said Murray's performance was "more affected and more bee-stung of mouth than ever. You'll laugh at the drama and weep over the comedy."
Murray was so upset at the reviews she turned her venom over "Peacock Alley's" failure on Tiffany Pictures. She sued the company for $1,750,000, claiming the studio technical crew's incompetence was on full display throughout the film. She assessed the high damages based on her career facing ruination. This was the first court case in cinema where an actress sued members of a film crew for incompetence. Murray's case ended up not in her favor. After the trial, the actress did appear in two small movie roles the following year, but her on-camera presence failed to generate any further interest.
The man who gave her such bad advice, husband Mdivani, spent most of Murray's money she had earned throughout the years. The two divorced in 1933. To make ends meet, she found a job performing in the 1940s at New York City's Billy Rose's Diamond Horseshoe nightclub, which was famous for hiring silent film actors for its nostalgic "Gay '90's" shows. The aging Murray, in her mid-50s by this time, was criticized for wearing outfits designed for much younger performers and for applying heavy make-up to hide her deep wrinkles. Murray ended up in poverty, dying in 1965 at the Motion Pictures retirement home in Woodland Hills at 79.
"Peacock Alley" proved to be one of character actor Jason Robards, Sr.'s larger roles. He had a long career in film and on stage, beginning in 1921 and lasting through the late 1950s with his television appearances on NBC's 'Cimarron City.' But his visibility lessened as talkies took hold. He is the father of Jason Robards, Jr., who witnessed his father's struggles as the silent film actor hustled for parts to pay his family's bills.
Murray's career was in limbo until she connected with her ex, Robert Leonard, owner of the small movie studio Tiffany Pictures. Murray had formed the company with her then husband Leonard in the early 1920s, but her divorce from him required her to divest from the studio. She saw a chance to rejuvenate her film career by starring in her first talkie, Tiffany Pictures' January 1930's "Peacock Alley."
Alas, there would be no Cinderella story here. The movie proved to be a dismal financial failure. Even though Tiffany Pictures constructed elaborate sets for Murray's movie on a low budget, "Peacock Alley" did more damage to the actress' future ambitions than she ever could ever imagine. "Peacock Alley" was a reprise of her successful 1922 silent of the same name. The plot involves her desire to marry wealthy Stoddard Clayton (George Barraud), even though she doesn't love him. Her reasoning: "I'm running away from the doubts and uncertainty and problems of a woman who isn't married." Staying overnight at Clayton's suite, she later finds another option in Jim Bradbury (Jason Robards, Sr.), a Texan from her hometown. They marry, but Jim soon finds out about that overnight stay in Clayton's suite. Fireworks erupt.
"Peacock Alley" was universally critically panned by almost every publication. Typical was Photoplay's scathing assessment of Murray, whose other nickname was "The Girl with the Bee-Stung Lips." Describing the movie as "a sorry affair," the critic said Murray's performance was "more affected and more bee-stung of mouth than ever. You'll laugh at the drama and weep over the comedy."
Murray was so upset at the reviews she turned her venom over "Peacock Alley's" failure on Tiffany Pictures. She sued the company for $1,750,000, claiming the studio technical crew's incompetence was on full display throughout the film. She assessed the high damages based on her career facing ruination. This was the first court case in cinema where an actress sued members of a film crew for incompetence. Murray's case ended up not in her favor. After the trial, the actress did appear in two small movie roles the following year, but her on-camera presence failed to generate any further interest.
The man who gave her such bad advice, husband Mdivani, spent most of Murray's money she had earned throughout the years. The two divorced in 1933. To make ends meet, she found a job performing in the 1940s at New York City's Billy Rose's Diamond Horseshoe nightclub, which was famous for hiring silent film actors for its nostalgic "Gay '90's" shows. The aging Murray, in her mid-50s by this time, was criticized for wearing outfits designed for much younger performers and for applying heavy make-up to hide her deep wrinkles. Murray ended up in poverty, dying in 1965 at the Motion Pictures retirement home in Woodland Hills at 79.
"Peacock Alley" proved to be one of character actor Jason Robards, Sr.'s larger roles. He had a long career in film and on stage, beginning in 1921 and lasting through the late 1950s with his television appearances on NBC's 'Cimarron City.' But his visibility lessened as talkies took hold. He is the father of Jason Robards, Jr., who witnessed his father's struggles as the silent film actor hustled for parts to pay his family's bills.
Sound silences Murray's career.
st-shot9 May 2020
Silent film star Mae Murray's career crashed and burned in her first sound outing, Peacock Alley. The girl with the bee stung lips, more dependent on her feet than voice in her silent period shows why as she insipidly squeaks out a performance that put a fork in her career.
Cruising the night life scene at an upscale dinner club (Plaza Suite?) Claire Tree picks up wealthy bon vivant Clayton Stoddard for what he hopes will be a night of seduction that instead turns out to be an all night chit chat. When her hubby to be (Jason Robards Sr.) shows up the next day they immediately marry and end up at the same hotel. A thuggish house dick recognizes her and determines she's a bimbo on the make. It gets ugly and the newlyweds separate despite Stoddard's vain attempt to explain matters.
A little chunky, sporting a double chin, a bit long in the tooth (she made the silent a decade earlier) Murray simply looks and sounds silly in her lengthy tet a tet with Barraud delivering her lines at times like the interior monologues from Strange Interlude when she's supposed to be connecting with him. Her scenes with a heavily caffeinated Robards fare no better.
A color strip exists of Murray dancing and singing that is missing from the print I viewed but it is clear it was not about to save the picture or her career with the damage being displayed in monochrome already.
In addition to Murray's cringingly poor performance blame should also be affixed to the lack of direction by Marcel DeSano who looks like he's letting his entire cast figure it out for themselves. Along with primitive sound and the mediocre look of typically tarted up Tiffany art direction Peacock has nothing to preen about.
Cruising the night life scene at an upscale dinner club (Plaza Suite?) Claire Tree picks up wealthy bon vivant Clayton Stoddard for what he hopes will be a night of seduction that instead turns out to be an all night chit chat. When her hubby to be (Jason Robards Sr.) shows up the next day they immediately marry and end up at the same hotel. A thuggish house dick recognizes her and determines she's a bimbo on the make. It gets ugly and the newlyweds separate despite Stoddard's vain attempt to explain matters.
A little chunky, sporting a double chin, a bit long in the tooth (she made the silent a decade earlier) Murray simply looks and sounds silly in her lengthy tet a tet with Barraud delivering her lines at times like the interior monologues from Strange Interlude when she's supposed to be connecting with him. Her scenes with a heavily caffeinated Robards fare no better.
A color strip exists of Murray dancing and singing that is missing from the print I viewed but it is clear it was not about to save the picture or her career with the damage being displayed in monochrome already.
In addition to Murray's cringingly poor performance blame should also be affixed to the lack of direction by Marcel DeSano who looks like he's letting his entire cast figure it out for themselves. Along with primitive sound and the mediocre look of typically tarted up Tiffany art direction Peacock has nothing to preen about.
Grown Child
view_and_review4 February 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Some of the movies in the 30's make the adults seem so childish. Not that some adults aren't childish today, but they were childish in a different way back then that was supposed to be virtuous.
Claire Tree (Mae Murray) was in love with Clayton Stoddard (George Barraud) and she insisted he marry her, except that Clayton didn't believe in marriage. He was a modern, rich, playboy who believed in romance and also believed that marriage killed romance (see "Perfect Understanding" (1933) and "Illicit" (1931) for similar mindsets from the main character). Claire was resolute; it was marriage or nothing.
What needs to be noted is that Claire met Clayton at a swanky hotel in New York City. This is important because a "house detective," as he was called, saw Claire hooking up with Clayton and had her pegged as a prostitute.
When Claire broke it off with Clayton she called up an old high school sweetheart named Jim Bradbury (Jason Robards Sr.) who was dying to marry her. He hopped on the next thing smoking to New York to swoop up Claire. He was so desperate to marry her they married the day he arrived no questions asked.
That was his first mistake, and he wasn't alone in that. It seems that a LOT of people got married hastily back then without vetting their potential spouse. They were so impatient, impetuous, and pollyanna. They had an idea of the man or woman, fell in love with the ideal image, and proceeded based upon that.
By pure coincidence Jim chose the same swanky hotel for he and Claire's honeymoon. When the nosy, pushy, and presumptive house detective saw Claire with Jim the very next day after he'd seen her with Clayton, he decided to clear them out. "This isn't THAT kind of hotel," was his message. Even when Jim said that he and Claire were married the keystone cop wasn't buying it. He told both of them to leave.
I can't imagine that such a position existed. A hotel "detective." Do that many crimes happen in hotels that they needed their own detective. And even if such a position did exist, I doubt they would've been as boorish, rude, insulting, and as much of a jerk as the detective, Dugan (William Thorne), was.
Jim wasn't going to let such impertinence and rudeness go. He spoke to the manager of the hotel and demanded an apology from Dugan. Dugan doubled down. He insisted that she was what he intimated she was (he couldn't say prostitute back then) because he saw her with Clayton just the night before.
So started the drama. Jim began to let his inner child out.
Jim's anger turned towards his wife. He grilled her and demanded answers to which she pleadingly tried to answer without making herself look like a ho ho ho. The more Jim grilled her the more HE looked like a buffoon.
I've seen it several times in these 30's movies. Man is dying to marry woman. Woman has checkered past by 30's standards. Woman gives in and marries man. Man finds out about past and behaves like an angry child.
This is one of the worst cases. Jim hadn't seen Claire in years and he rushed to marry her after just a phone call. He could not have been more impatient and hasty. If he cared so much about her having lovers before him, why didn't he ask?
Oh yeah, because of what I said before: they fell in love with an image and dared not ask a question that could possibly ruin that image.
The way I see it, if you didn't care enough to ask before you got married, you shouldn't care enough to know after you got married. Furthermore, if you loved her soooo much, why wouldn't you take her word?
Eventually Jim found out more than he wanted to and left Claire in a huff like the petulant child he was. They were married less than a day before he left her. In the end Clayton proposed to Claire as it always happens when anyone begins the movie denouncing marriage, and all was right with the world.
Free on YouTube.
Claire Tree (Mae Murray) was in love with Clayton Stoddard (George Barraud) and she insisted he marry her, except that Clayton didn't believe in marriage. He was a modern, rich, playboy who believed in romance and also believed that marriage killed romance (see "Perfect Understanding" (1933) and "Illicit" (1931) for similar mindsets from the main character). Claire was resolute; it was marriage or nothing.
What needs to be noted is that Claire met Clayton at a swanky hotel in New York City. This is important because a "house detective," as he was called, saw Claire hooking up with Clayton and had her pegged as a prostitute.
When Claire broke it off with Clayton she called up an old high school sweetheart named Jim Bradbury (Jason Robards Sr.) who was dying to marry her. He hopped on the next thing smoking to New York to swoop up Claire. He was so desperate to marry her they married the day he arrived no questions asked.
That was his first mistake, and he wasn't alone in that. It seems that a LOT of people got married hastily back then without vetting their potential spouse. They were so impatient, impetuous, and pollyanna. They had an idea of the man or woman, fell in love with the ideal image, and proceeded based upon that.
By pure coincidence Jim chose the same swanky hotel for he and Claire's honeymoon. When the nosy, pushy, and presumptive house detective saw Claire with Jim the very next day after he'd seen her with Clayton, he decided to clear them out. "This isn't THAT kind of hotel," was his message. Even when Jim said that he and Claire were married the keystone cop wasn't buying it. He told both of them to leave.
I can't imagine that such a position existed. A hotel "detective." Do that many crimes happen in hotels that they needed their own detective. And even if such a position did exist, I doubt they would've been as boorish, rude, insulting, and as much of a jerk as the detective, Dugan (William Thorne), was.
Jim wasn't going to let such impertinence and rudeness go. He spoke to the manager of the hotel and demanded an apology from Dugan. Dugan doubled down. He insisted that she was what he intimated she was (he couldn't say prostitute back then) because he saw her with Clayton just the night before.
So started the drama. Jim began to let his inner child out.
Jim's anger turned towards his wife. He grilled her and demanded answers to which she pleadingly tried to answer without making herself look like a ho ho ho. The more Jim grilled her the more HE looked like a buffoon.
I've seen it several times in these 30's movies. Man is dying to marry woman. Woman has checkered past by 30's standards. Woman gives in and marries man. Man finds out about past and behaves like an angry child.
This is one of the worst cases. Jim hadn't seen Claire in years and he rushed to marry her after just a phone call. He could not have been more impatient and hasty. If he cared so much about her having lovers before him, why didn't he ask?
Oh yeah, because of what I said before: they fell in love with an image and dared not ask a question that could possibly ruin that image.
The way I see it, if you didn't care enough to ask before you got married, you shouldn't care enough to know after you got married. Furthermore, if you loved her soooo much, why wouldn't you take her word?
Eventually Jim found out more than he wanted to and left Claire in a huff like the petulant child he was. They were married less than a day before he left her. In the end Clayton proposed to Claire as it always happens when anyone begins the movie denouncing marriage, and all was right with the world.
Free on YouTube.
Worst Movie Ever Made
arfdawg-128 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
The Plot nonsense manner, so when she finds herself in the New York City hotel-suite, in fashionable Peacock Alley, of Stoddard Clayton, she wastes no time. Claire wants to get married. But, Stoddard, whom she cares for very much, has several proposals directed at her, none of which sound remotely like a marriage proposal; Claire tells him, in her straight-forward, no-nonsense manner that she wants to get married because, in her words: "I'm running away from the doubts and uncertainty and problems of a woman who isn't married." Stoddard thinks that nuptial bonds is a stupid old-fashioned tradition and fatal to romance. She says any man who says that is lying, and when she departs his suite at the crack of dawn, she seems convinced Stoddard indeed believes what he said he believed. But Claire has another option awaiting her...a Texan from home, and she promptly accepts his marriage proposal
I am dumb founded that this movie gets over a 6 rating. It is truly horrible. The only marginally interesting thing about it is the short strip/dance segment toward the end that was filmed in some sort of early technicolor. Now the entire thing is basically red and appears to be been sped up.
Other that than curio, the movie is a complete waste of time.
I am dumb founded that this movie gets over a 6 rating. It is truly horrible. The only marginally interesting thing about it is the short strip/dance segment toward the end that was filmed in some sort of early technicolor. Now the entire thing is basically red and appears to be been sped up.
Other that than curio, the movie is a complete waste of time.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
