This is an above-averagely clever sex romp from the pre-code days. Lots of clever double-entendres.
To me, the most interesting aspect was the opening sequence, in which Shearer plays a VERY dumpy housewife who must come to terms with her husband's infidelity. That infidelity is never explained, but the audience is certainly led to believe that her husband has gone astray because she has allowed herself to become so frumpy.
Compare that to almost identical scenes in Shearer's 1939 hit *The Women* and you see major differences. In that movie, it is suggested that Joan Crawford lures Shearer's character's husband away because she knows a few extra tricks in the bedroom. But we never see Shearer as anything less than her most elegant self. Was the Shearer of 1939 no longer willing to appear as unappealing as the Shearer of 1930 was willing to do?
The other thing I found interesting, but not in a positive way, about this movie was the very last line. Once again it will recall the last scene in *The Women*, but this time, after all Shearer's character says about her new-found independence, it really comes out of the blue. Whereas in the 1939 movie Shearer's character's acceptance of her erring husband comes as no surprise, here it comes as a real bombshell - and as a disappointment.
This is a fun movie, in great part because of the script and another superb performance by Marie Dressler. It is also interesting to see that Shearer was already using all the mannerisms familiar from *The Women* already 9 years before. But the last line is really a disappointment.
To me, the most interesting aspect was the opening sequence, in which Shearer plays a VERY dumpy housewife who must come to terms with her husband's infidelity. That infidelity is never explained, but the audience is certainly led to believe that her husband has gone astray because she has allowed herself to become so frumpy.
Compare that to almost identical scenes in Shearer's 1939 hit *The Women* and you see major differences. In that movie, it is suggested that Joan Crawford lures Shearer's character's husband away because she knows a few extra tricks in the bedroom. But we never see Shearer as anything less than her most elegant self. Was the Shearer of 1939 no longer willing to appear as unappealing as the Shearer of 1930 was willing to do?
The other thing I found interesting, but not in a positive way, about this movie was the very last line. Once again it will recall the last scene in *The Women*, but this time, after all Shearer's character says about her new-found independence, it really comes out of the blue. Whereas in the 1939 movie Shearer's character's acceptance of her erring husband comes as no surprise, here it comes as a real bombshell - and as a disappointment.
This is a fun movie, in great part because of the script and another superb performance by Marie Dressler. It is also interesting to see that Shearer was already using all the mannerisms familiar from *The Women* already 9 years before. But the last line is really a disappointment.