That Man's Here Again (1937) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
5 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
Hugh Herbert Sparks Comedy/Drama
Ron Oliver11 February 2004
An eccentric gentleman helps a pair of young lovers get started in life.

The gentle, whimsical humor of Hugh Herbert highlights THAT MAN'S HERE AGAIN, a little tale of romantic difficulties. Always enjoyable to watch, particularly in a big film with seasoned costars with which to interact, here Herbert is not given quite enough to satisfy his fans. Not until the closing sequence is his zany quirkiness given fuller rein and he turns what has been essentially a drama into light comedy. It's worth the wait.

Tom Brown & Mary Maguire play the elevator operator and maid whose happiness Herbert determines to ensure. Brown portrayed the stalwart juvenile lead in many movies during the 1930's and he always turned in a good performance. Miss Maguire, with her charming Australian accent, is radiant; a real joy to watch. It is a shame major Hollywood stardom eluded her.

The title obviously refers to Herbert, but otherwise is meaningless. Interestingly, the mystery surrounding Miss Maguire's past is never explained--a surprising loose end considering the requirements of the Production Code.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
That man's a little dull
Gary Dickerson14 February 2002
For a film that's barely over an hour, "That Man's Here Again" takes a while to get off the ground, not entirely sure it's a comedy until the titular man, old Vaudevillian Hugh Herbert (known for his Daffy Duck-esque "Woo-hoo"s), gets involved to tie up the loose ends. Until then, the main reason I watched was for the extremely cute Australian actress Mary Maquire.

The plot is basically this: young Jimmy Whalen (all-American boy Tom Brown, who later turned up on "Gunsmoke") works as an elevator operator in the Park Avenue apartment house where Thomas Jesse (Herbert) comes in late & drunk every night. One cold & rainy night, Nancy Lee (Maquire) sneaks in, cold & wet, looking for shelter. She's been living on the streets, & Whalen finagles a job for her as a maid. The two fall in love, but Nancy's secret is that she a baby in state care. When Jimmy expresses his dislike of kids, & after Nancy breaks Thomas Jesse's valuable Ming vase, she disappears, & Jesse & Whalen have to conspire to not only get her back, but find a way for the young couple to live happily ever after (tm).

As I've said, this doesn't become comedic till the end, & there are really only a couple of good laughs in the film (one in a police station). The sitcom-y way it's all wrapped up might be forgiven if certain issues of the film found a decent resolution - the main one being, where's Nancy's baby's father?

All that being said, they really don't make them like this anymore, & Hugh Herbert is amusing to watch once the scene becomes his. This is strictly late-night, can't sleep fare, but, really, isn't that what all those classic movie channels are for anyway?
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Interesting Curio
adamshl3 May 2016
It could be a drama, till the end when Hugh Herbert becomes comical. Then it's hard to figure what was the writer's intention.

Whatever the case, this is a truly "lost and forgotten" film, obviously meant to focus on Herbert's talent. However, it's the romantic leads, Tom Brown and Mary McGuire, that peaked my interest.

Brown, though quite youthful here, was a fully seasoned professional, having been an actor for years. His character rendition always rings true which he projects with total conviction. Now there's a natural talent that can't be "learned." Likewise his romantic interest, McGuire, is most photogenic and appealing, playing her part with dramatic security--another genuine talent.

Herbert plays his comedy down till the end when his trademark zaniness emerges. True, this is a "B-film," and an enjoyable one.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This film is enjoyable BUT it also makes no sense whatsoever.
MartinHafer28 April 2017
If you are looking for a logical film, please do NOT watch "That Man's Here Again". And, although it's billed as a comedy, it's also one to skip if you are looking for a laugh-filled picture. Now I am not saying it's a terrible film...but it does have its problems and it's almost like two separate movies tossed together.

Most of the story is about a young man and woman, Jimmy (Tom Brown) and Nancy (Mary McGuire). Jimmy finds Nancy out in the rain...wet, hungry, homeless and without a job. He helps her to get on her feet and it's obvious he's smitten for her. As for her, she is carrying a secret that is very strange for a post-code film...she has a baby. But because she has no money, job or home, the child is living at a home for foundlings. Her intention is to bring him home...but this becomes a problem after Jimmy makes an off-handed comment about how he hates kids! What's next? Well, soon Nancy disappears...and one of the people living in the building where Jimmy and Nancy works comes to the rescue...and from here on it's like a completely different movie. The final portion consists of Thomas Jesse (Hugh Herbert) working hard to help the young couple...even if it means twisting the law...a lot!

If you watch this one, I suggest at the end you just turn off your brain and enjoy. It never makes ANY sense...but it is fun.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Nothing Much to See Except Hugh Herbert
boblipton28 April 2017
In this Warner B movie, Tom Brown is a night-shift elevator operator in a ritzy apartment building, full of obnoxious people and a kindly but ostentatiously rich Hugh Herbert -- he keeps talking about the Ming vase he bought for $10,000 in Hong Kong and the other vase he bought for $6 in New Jersey. They look identical, so there's one certain scene. He rescues waifish Mary Maguire and gets her a job as a maid in the building. There's young love a-budding.

Unfortunately, the young leads endure their hardships in such a humble and kindly manner that it's not a terribly interesting movie. All this is underscored by a score by an uncredited Howard Jackson that is overly intrusive. It's a harmless, unmemorable, high-speed (58 minutes) from a period when there wasn't much of interest going on in this division of the studio.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews