Skip to main content

If you're going to be rude to my daughter, you might at least take your hat off!

My Man Godfrey
(1936)

(SPOILERS) William Powell deserves more credit than he gets as one of the all-time most watchable movie stars. My Man Godfrey garnered him his second of three Best Actor nominations, teaming him (at his own behest) with ex-wife Carole Lombard. A hugely entertaining screwball comedy, it duly achieved the singular feat of being nominated for all four acting Oscars (of which it was the first), and writing and directing. But not Best Picture.

Notable, as this was a year with ten Best Picture nominees, many of which have faded into obscurity; Mr Deeds Goes to Town (which didn’t win), is probably the highest profile today, and Powell starred in another screwball that did get nominated, Libelled Lady. My Man Godfrey’s plot is typically high concept, whereby Lombard’s privileged socialite Irene Bullock employs Powell’s homeless Godfrey as a butler after enlisting him in a scavenger hunt where she has to find a “forgotten man”. Godfrey only agrees to present himself as a hunt item in order to put one over on Irene’s obnoxious sister Cornelia (Gail Patrick), and because “I was curious to see how a bunch of empty-headed nitwits conducted themselves” (the sisters’ mother Angelica, Alice Brady, is also part of the hunt, and has proudly procured a goat).

Presented with the job offer, he readily accepts, although the assumption that anyone untrained can buttle, something that would surely meet with Jeeves’ opprobrium, goes unchallenged. It’s clear from the outset that Irene, whom Lombard imbues with a marvellously woozy, breathless energy, is smitten with Godfrey. And that, being in a position calling for decorum and propriety, he will have to spurn the advances of the spirited girl (Irene is apparently supposed to be teenager, but one never gets the sense Lombard is playing less than she is, mid-twenties).

At the outset – as Pauline Kael also notes – there’s a feeling this might be intended as a satire on class and privilege, the poor seen as amusing curios by the wealthy. Maybe that was an element in Eric Hatch’s 1935 novel 1101 Park Avenue, on which My Man Godfrey is based and for which he receives a co-writing credit (along with sometime Marx Brothers writer Morrie Ryskind), but it quickly falls away. Still, there are nominal elements commenting on the fleetingness of amassing earthly possessions; Eugene Pallette’s patriarch Alexander Bullock loses all his money at the end, so it’s fortunate Godfrey had the vision to take precautionary measures. There’s also the rejuvenation of the down-at-heel; in a rather facile move, Godfrey turns the spot of his erstwhile homeless home Hooverville into The Dump, a nightclub, thus creating jobs and lodging for fifty people.

Things might have been different had there been an actual class element rather than a superficial nod to the same. We discover that Godfrey himself comes from a privileged background; a torrid love affair left him suicidal, only to discover a different outlook among the homeless. I can see why the revelation element was appealing (a man with a secret), but the actual motivation feels very thin. I even wondered if there was consideration to Godfrey having lost all his money in the Crash, but that might have been hewing a bit too close to reality.

Nevertheless, Powell traversing a household of nuts – aside from Alexander, who feels much the same way, and maid Molly (Jean Dixon) who is soon as smitten with Godfrey as Irene – offers pots of comedy gold. His chemistry with Lombard is fantastic (“He’s the first thing she’s shown any affection for since her Pomeranian died”), and his interactions with the various members of the household, in particular Brady as the batty mum and Cornelia oozing bile, are highly enjoyable. At one point, haughty Cornelia, assuming she can wrap him round her little finger, asks what he really thinks of her, and he calls her a Park Avenue brat. Which leads to Powell relishing a dive an elaborate drunk routine and Cornelia attempting to finger Godfrey for some stolen pearls.

The pleasure of this sort of movie is that every character has something interesting going on, even if it’s no more than peculiar quirks. Such as Angelica’s protégée Carlo, who is essentially there to stuff his face whenever he can and do an alarming gorilla impersonation. Director Gregory La Cava ensures My Man Godfrey is too light and frothy to carry a strong message, but Powell makes his delivery of the positives his stay with the family have given him count. And being a screwball, it makes sure that the guy is only in control so far; he’s too blinkered to admit to love, so it takes Lombard showing up at The Dump, minister in tow, to make him tie the knot.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.