Skip to main content

The last time I saw a head like that was in a bottle of formaldehyde.

A Day at the Races
(1937)

(SPOILERS) Very much of a piece with its predecessor, right down to the title, A Day at the Races lacks the highs of A Night at the Opera (there’s nothing here to compare to the State Room sequence), but it’s probably more even overall. Certainly, while it’s fifteen minutes longer (and there are about twenty minutes of music), overall it has a better sense of flow, and just the fact of Groucho’s false pretences (Dr Hugo Z Hackenbush, a horse doctor posing as the human kind) gives it a certain distinction.

Whitmore: This is absolutely insane!
Hackenbush: Yes, that’s what they said about Pasteur!

Of course, the architect of the brothers’ dual off-the-bat MGM hits, Irving Thalberg, died during the production, leaving them somewhat at sea with Louis B Mayer, who didn’t really “get” them. Thalberg is commonly cited as having salvaged their careers after Duck Soup, but since reports of its failure are greatly exaggerated (even on the documentary accompanying the DVD release of A Day at the Races), it would probably be more accurate to suggest he broadened their appeal by neutering their more extreme elements. Subsequently, they’d be even less connected to their anarchic roots. Still, it’s interesting to hear the levels to which Thalberg would shrewdly analyse the mechanics of their act (a scene where Harpo mimes to Chico shifted the character, in his view, from one who didn’t talk to one who couldn’t talk).

Whitmore: Just a minute, Mrs Upjohn. That looks like a horse pill to me.
Hackenbush: Oh, you’ve taken them before.

Returning is the entirely unmemorable Allan Jones, his romantic lead this time being Gil Stewart. Entirely unmemorable aside from his character spending the equivalent of $28k on a horse he hopes will save the sanitorium owned by Maureen O’Sullivan’s Judy Standish.

Gil: Are you a man or a mouse?
Hackenbush: You put a piece of cheese down and you’ll find out.

Judy makes more of an impression, fortunately, not least for employing Hackenbush’s services (“You’re the prettiest owner of a sanitorium I’ve ever seen”). Her reason for getting hold of Hackenbush? Margaret Dumont’s Mrs Emily Upjohn, of course (“Why, I didn’t know a thing was the matter with me until I met him”), whose ready funds could save the sanatorium from going under. Whitmore (Leonard Ceeley) makes a particularly good villain in this regard (“Say, you’re awfully large for a pill yourself”), although one also has to single out the returning Sig Ruman for praise as the bearded Dr Leopold X Steinberg from Vienna, enlisted to expose Hackenbush. Meanwhile, Chico’s Tony is Judy’s good-hearted Italian driver devoted to helping her out (“You don’t have to pay me but you can’t fire me”). Harpo’s a jockey, Stuffy; the connection between the sanatorium and the horse racing is as tenuous as their being situated next to each other (it’s quite believable that this went through eighteen different versions before reaching the final draft).

Flo: I’ve never been so insulted in my life.
Hackenbush: Well, it’s early yet.

A Day at the Races highlights include Hackenbush’s initial arrival and round of insults, Whitmore attempting to contact the Florida Medical Board to establish Hackenbush’s credentials (it’s Hackenbush on the other line, simultaneously interrupting Whitmore’s call via the sanitorium switchboard), a medical exam of Harpo (“Either he’s dead, or my watch has stopped”), and Cokey Flo (Esther Muir) attempting to entrap Hackenbush but somewhat confounded by the wallpapering antics of Chico and Harpo. Even the grand climax works reasonably well, with Hi-Hat encouraged to jump in the steeplechase by the sound of Morgan’s (Douglass Dumbrille) voice, facilitated by ensuring a microphone is placed near the banker at vital moments.

Hackenbush: And don’t point that beard at me! It might go off!

To be honest, I’m not as keen on the attempt to recapture the sharpness A Night at the Opera’s of the sanity clause scene, whereby Chico scams Groucho into buying a series of code books in order to translate a coded tip he has bought from him. The sanity clause scene works so well because the two of them are both willing participants; here, Groucho is required to be uncharacteristically dim for the purposes of the extended gags (Thalberg presumably didn’t object to that!) There are some extended duets and musical sequences, inevitably, but at least this time we treated to Harpo committing mass destruction on a piano and Groucho dividing dancing duties between Dumont and Cokey Flo. There’s also a lively dance routine later on (“All God’s Chillun Got Rhythm”), which has the brothers rather unfortunately escaping their pursuers by donning black face.

Hackenbush: I haven’t seen so much mudslinging since the last election!

Groucho definitely comes out A Day at the Races the best, while Harpo has his moments (pretending to be a horse, wearing a bucket on his head, he even manages to pull a nurse’s uniform off!) If not operating at their Paramount peak, there’s nevertheless a feeling of a well-oiled machine here that could have carried on operating at a legitimate strength; A Day at Races is generally regarded as the last gasp of Marx Brothers movie greatness. Certainly, post-Thalberg’s death from pneumonia at thirty-seven, there was no great desire to re-up with the studio; they went to RKO for Room Service, before returning to MGM to diminishing returns and increasing lack of substance.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

Never lose any sleep over accusations. Unless they can be proved, of course.

Strangers on a Train (1951) (SPOILERS) Watching a run of lesser Hitchcock films is apt to mislead one into thinking he was merely a highly competent, supremely professional stylist. It takes a picture where, to use a not inappropriate gourmand analogy, his juices were really flowing to remind oneself just how peerless he was when inspired. Strangers on a Train is one of his very, very best works, one he may have a few issues with but really deserves nary a word said against it, even in “compromised” form.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

You’re easily the best policeman in Moscow.

Gorky Park (1983) (SPOILERS) Michael Apted and workmanlike go hand in hand when it comes to thriller fare (his Bond outing barely registered a pulse). This adaptation of Martin Cruz Smith’s 1981 novel – by Dennis Potter, no less – is duly serviceable but resolutely unremarkable. William Hurt’s militsiya officer Renko investigates three faceless bodies found in the titular park. It was that grisly element that gave Gorky Park a certain cachet when I first saw it as an impressionable youngster. Which was actually not unfair, as it’s by far its most memorable aspect.

I don’t like fighting at all. I try not to do too much of it.

Cuba (1979) (SPOILERS) Cuba -based movies don’t have a great track record at the box office, unless Bad Boys II counts. I guess The Godfather Part II does qualify. Steven Soderbergh , who could later speak to box office bombs revolving around Castro’s revolution, called Richard Lester’s Cuba fascinating but flawed. Which is generous of him.