Escaping to England from a French embezzlement charge, widower Henry Scarlett is accompanied by daughter Sylvia who, to avoid detection, "disguises" herself as a boy, "Sylvester." They are ...
See full summary »
A young man falls in love with a girl from a rich family. His unorthodox plan to go on holiday for the early years of his life is met with skepticism by everyone except for his fiancée's eccentric sister and long-suffering brother.
Mountain girl Trigger Hicks, a fierce loner equally handy with a rock or a prayer, is in danger of having her faith-healing mistaken for witchcraft by the neighbors. She shows a vulnerable ... See full summary »
Letty, a young woman who ended up pregnant, unmarried and on the streets at fifteen is bitter and determined that her child will not grow up to be taken advantage of. Letty teaches her ... See full summary »
In rural 1840's Scotland, Gavin Dishart arrives to become the new "little minister" of Thrums's Auld Licht church. He meets a mysterious young gypsy girl in the dens and to his horror ... See full summary »
Franz Roberti is a famous orchestra conductor who has a number of girlfriends. While talking with his old music teacher, Professor Thalma, he meets Constance, an aspiring music composer. ... See full summary »
Escaping to England from a French embezzlement charge, widower Henry Scarlett is accompanied by daughter Sylvia who, to avoid detection, "disguises" herself as a boy, "Sylvester." They are joined by amiable con man Jimmy Monkley, then, after a brief career in crime, meet Maudie Tilt, a giddy, sexy Cockney housemaid who joins them in the new venture of entertaining at resort towns from a caravan. Through all this, amazingly no one recognizes that Sylvia is not a boy...until she meets handsome artist Michael Fane, and drama intrudes on the comedy. Written by
Rod Crawford <email@example.com>
You can't really love this picture, to be honest, though I really do
want to love anything with Hepburn. In fact, this was the first time I
ever caught myself thinking she'd put in a second-rate performance, but
that's arguable - some will say that her boyishness actually was well
done, and I can't entirely disagree with that.
The truth is that this movie is bursting with melodramatic affectation,
and that is rather off-putting to us who are so used to the post-Brando
state of character representation. We have to believe that the actor IS
the character for the whole thing (writing, characterization, acting,
everything) to be a success. If we are embarrassed by what we perceive
as a bad performance, the whole thing's in danger of being
embarrassing. Now I am no expert on 30s cinema, but I have seen a lot
of this kind of thing originating from that decade and I kind of reckon
it was the expected style of performance, still left-over from the
silent days when body language was all a performer had. Knowing what
Hepburn would be capable of bringing later, I think it can't be that
she relied on the melodrama like a crutch - instead it's my feeling
that she was too easily by Cukor's direction, since many of the other
cast members act similarly.
The script is also weak, as it relies on the audience using their
imagination far too much in order to fill in the gaps we assume exist
in the novel. A good writer/director team will indicate passage of time
more fluidly than this; we are left with a lurching sensation, like
weeks or months have passed for the characters but not for us, and some
might even be confused by the sudden shift of action. If it hadn't been
for this clumsiness, I would have given the picture another star for
The film gets the five stars I gave it for Cary Grant's performance,
which is one of the best of his career, a superb, well rounded job, and
of course it is good enough to deserve a recommendation for the film,
even if everything else about it was not-so-good.
19 of 29 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?