MOVIEmeter
SEE RANK
Down 6,707 this week

Laughter (1930)

7.1
Your rating:
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  
Ratings: 7.1/10 from 155 users  
Reviews: 9 user | 7 critic

Add a Plot

Director:

(as H. d'Abbadie d'Arrast)

Writers:

(screenplay), (story), 4 more credits »
0Check in
0Share...

User Lists

Related lists from IMDb users

a list of 42 titles
created 27 Dec 2010
 
a list of 100 titles
created 09 Aug 2011
 
a list of 1080 titles
created 27 Nov 2011
 
a list of 28 titles
created 26 Feb 2012
 
a list of 31 titles
created 28 May 2012
 

Related Items

Search for "Laughter" on Amazon.com

Connect with IMDb


Share this Rating

Title: Laughter (1930)

Laughter (1930) on IMDb 7.1/10

Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.

Take The Quiz!

Test your knowledge of Laughter.
Nominated for 1 Oscar. Another 1 win. See more awards »
Edit

Cast

Cast overview:
...
Peggy Gibson
...
Paul Lockridge
...
C. Mortimer Gibson
Glenn Anders ...
Ralph Le Sainte
Diane Ellis ...
Marjorie Gibson
Ollie Burgoyne ...
Pearl - Peggy's Maid
Leonard Carey ...
Benham, Gibson's Butler
Edit

Storyline

Add Full Plot | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Comedy | Romance

Edit

Details

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

25 September 1930 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Laughter  »

Company Credits

Production Co:

 »
Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

(Western Electric Sound System)

Aspect Ratio:

1.20 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

One of over 700 Paramount Productions, filmed between 1929 and 1949, which were sold to MCA/Universal in 1958 for television distribution, and have been owned and controlled by Universal ever since. See more »


Soundtracks

Little Did I Know
by Irving Kahal, Pierre Norman and Sammy Fain
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Seminal screwball comedy: funny, reflexive and only superficially dated
31 March 2010 | by (Spain) – See all my reviews

Harry D'Abbadie D'Arrast always complained that this movie, which he considered his best, was undeservedly forgotten, for it created many concepts which would reappear in comedies of later years.

This time he was right. It is surprising to find in such an early film the conflict between economical safeness and spiritual freedom that would later be typical of such wonderful films as Frank Capra's You Can't Take It with You, and very especially, George Cukor's Holiday (not a surprising coincidence, since it was written by the same screenwriter as Laughter).

It is an answer to the existentialism dilemma, where the only choices to make are living for the future (marrying a millionaire) or for the present (enjoying the moment you're currently living). Laughter goes even further than the later films, for it incorporates a third answer: suicide, which takes the story for the path of melodrama with a surprising respect of its unity.

In fact, what is most curious about Laughter is that it is much more mature that one would suspect. The structure of the story, the performances and even the humor feels fresher than those of other comedies of the period. A good example is the surprising scene in which Fredric March and Nancy Carroll do some role playing just for the sake of it: they pretend to be a marriage in which he is the woman and she is the man. They both imitate the conventions of each sex's supposedly proper behavior, making fun of predetermined attitudes and social obligations, clearly defending sponaneity and freedom as opposed to that which they parody/criticize (social roles conditioned by sexes).

Also the way the structure of the story is inventive enough, with a past time we never see but which is reflected in the present, and a triggering opening which serves as the conclusion of the movie as well. In fact, many other the elements of the movie (starting by the title itself) are developed in more than one level, like this one.

The biggest fault of the film is not in its final quarter (which, contrary to what I had read, seems to me fluid and coherent with the rest of the film): it is a number of technical limitations, which harm its rhythm for today's audience. These were common in the beginning of sound film (Lubitsch somehow avoided most of them in The Love Parade, made one year before this and quite a miracle).

The shortcoming I found most annoying was the impossibility for the camera to show the characters in a more frontal angle than the profiles during dialogs, which gives some important scenes a very old fashioned stagy feel.

(It had to do with the sound equipment: for what I know, they couldn't edit the sound they recorded, so they had to film each scene with several cameras so that they could use full takes of sound. So there could only be one light setup, and therefore, the characters had to be filmed from the only side where the light was better).

However, compared with most movies of that period, Laughter is a clear winner, and it is no wonder that March considered it one of his best films. His performance is relaxed, joyful and attractive still today, and so is Nancy Carroll's.

It is a pity that D'Arrast is not better known today, nor this movie properly restored/distributed. It is a interesting work on many levels, by a highly original and innovative filmmaker.


8 of 9 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Discuss Laughter (1930) on the IMDb message boards »

Contribute to This Page

Create a character page for:
?