The Farmer Takes a Wife (1953) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Charming, Forgettable Piece of Fluff
Bob-459 March 2005
"The Farmer Takes a Wife" is a charming, forgettable piece of fluff of the "Boy meets girl; boy loses girl; boy gets girl back" school of film musical. Fox musicals were almost always rather forgettable, with their insipid songs and frequently bad singing. However, they were also bright and colorful, since Fox used Technicolor longer and more frequently than the "Tiffany" studio, MGM. "The Farmer Takes a Wife" is especially charming in costume, art and set decoration.

Betty Grable is, well, Betty Grable, and if you adore her (and I do), you're likely to adore "The Farmer Takes a Wife". Betty's ably supported by Dale Robertson, John Carroll, Eddie Foy, Jr. and, the always wonderful Thelma Ritter. I won't pretend it's a great movie, or even a good movie, but "The Farmer Takes a Wife" is a "Betty Grable" movie, and that's good enough for me. I give "The Farmer Takes a Wife" a "6".
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Navigating On The Erie Canal
bkoganbing19 October 2008
It's sad that The Farmer Takes A Wife was owned by 20th Century Fox instead of Warner Brothers. Had Jack Warner been in charge he had the right person for the female lead in Doris Day. As it is this musical adaption of the Frank Elsner-Marc Connelly play has a most miscast Betty Grable doing a part that had Doris stamped all over it. When Betty says 'Uticky' it doesn't quite come out right.

The original play ran for 104 performances in the 1934-35 season and was the vehicle that made Henry Fonda a star. In fact producer Walter Wanger took the highly unusual step in bringing Fonda to Hollywood to star in the role that made him. Playing the parts that Betty Grable and John Carroll have in this version are Janet Gaynor and Charles Bickford.

Of course with this being changed to a musical and the billing reflecting it, the emphasis was changed from the male to the female lead. Seeing Dale Robertson as Dan Harrow though, he makes an admirable substitute for Fonda.

Too bad that Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields didn't write anything memorable in the score. And for the life of me I can't figure why John Carroll who does sing well, wasn't given more to do musically.

The story is an old fashioned rustic one set during the final days of the Erie Canal. Everyone but Betty seems to realize the railroad will eventually put the canal out of business as the major venue of transportation. Still she and soft spoken farmer Robertson do eventually come together as Robertson wins her over Carroll who is a real lout in this film. I can readily see Charles Bickford in that part in the first film version.

At the same time Betty was doing this, Doris Day was doing Calamity Jane over at Warner Brothers in a similar role with much better songs. Maybe with a better score, The Farmer Takes A Wife would have been more memorable.

Still I think it would have needed Doris Day.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A relatively bland remake of a rather bland film.
planktonrules18 November 2015
The one thing you'll no doubt notice when this film begins is that Betty is clearly older. She's 37 and playing a part designed for a teenager or perhaps a woman of 20...plus she simply looks older than 37. She also apparently had far less clout by 1953, as she was cast along with Dale Robertson--not exactly a household name. RObertson wasn't bad in the film, mind you...but he was a big comedown from folks like Don Ameche or Victor Mature in the 30s or 40s. Studio veterans John Carroll and Thelma Ritter are on hand to lend support. This loss in popularity also might help to explain why the once big star was forced to do a remake of a completely unremarkable film. The 1935 version was only fair and here almost two decades later it's essentially the same film but with music and Technicolor. This remake is certainly no better due to the miscasting of Grable, a few very unremarkable songs and a plot that just seemed to drag. Not a bad film but one that clearly showed that Grable's days as a star were nearly passed. Watch it if you'd like but it's only a time- passer and nothing more.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Could serve as the "last gasp" of the Hollywood musical...
ccmiller14922 December 2006
"The Farmer Takes a Wife" is so disappointing that it could serve as an example of "the last gasp of the Hollywood musical." It's hard to believe that the marvelous "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers" came out the following year. To start with, none of the songs are memorable, and the production numbers are so stylized and overstuffed with flounces, ruffles and ribbons that they are effectively deadened. Grable herself looks slightly overblown in this context and John Carroll who has a very pleasing voice and good presence, is not allowed to sing at all other than humming a few bars. Dale Robertson, who is not a singer and probably had his singing dubbed, is given one of the best songs to sing while taking a bath in a rain barrel...and is repeatedly shown apparently scrubbing at his crotch while performing the song! Viewers are well advised to skip this one, which is for extreme Grable and/or Carroll fans only. Even they will have a hard time tolerating it.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Takes Her Nowhere
boblipton10 September 2004
A career-killing movie for Betty Grable, who is wasted, along with everyone except Eddie Foy Jr. in this prettified musical version of the movie that made Henry Fonda a star. Dale Robertson plays the farmer, who is a moron, Thelma Ritter is wasted and some fake-looking scenery still leaves one mystified at how people can live in riverfront saloons and on farms and know nothing at all of the facts of life or the baser side of human nature -- it must be those perfectly maintained canal boats with red-striped awnings they travel in. The songs are also pretty poor, including an ode to Schenectady that did not make Rodgers and Hammerstein jealous.

While none of Gable's starring musicals are likely to make any top-100 lists, most of them have fairly good musical numbers and enough plot and comedy relief to get you from one standard to the next. This one doesn't.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Rather disappointing effort for a nice cast
browser-422 May 2008
I would lke to give this a 6 but I just cannot even though I am a big Grable fan, Also a fan of Robertson but this was not his best performance by far. Maybe he felt as out of his element as I perceived him to be.

However the weak script and scenes lets the two of them have several moments that the songs couldn't completely ruin.

I did burn this to DVD because I really do want to have a complete library of both the stars.

The costumes were nice and the color was nice and the 4 major actors/actresses did as much as you could hope for in a weak vehicle.

Watch it but don't expect too much and you won't be disappointed.

As I think on it a 5 might be a little high but I will stick witn it
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"You look good enough to eat." ... "Wait'll you taste my cooking."
moonspinner555 December 2015
Agreeable 20th Century-Fox musical, a remake of their 1935 Janet Gaynor-Henry Fonda comedy-romance, based on the novel and play "Rome Haul", is uncertainly directed, full of static staging, and embarrassed by at least one terrible dance number--but it does have Betty Grable, full of her usual sass and vigor (which this vehicle definitely needs). On the Erie Canal in 1850, a young lovely and her fiancé/business partner run a barge hauling supplies (she cooks, he drinks); she hires a horse-driver to pull the barge, a low-keyed farmer with a sweetheart in Chicago, but when her fiancé is thrown in jail for fighting with the incoming railroad folk, the girl goes into partnership with the handsome newcomer, sparking romance. Director Henry Levin doesn't seem to know anything about staging a musical number on the screen; though the mediocre songs by Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields are clearly no help to him, Levin hasn't paced the narrative with the energy needed for a musical, and the introductions to each song are creaky with hesitation. "We're in Business", featuring Gwen Verdon (who pops in without an introduction), is the worst of the lot, while the reprise of "Today I Love Everybody" includes a brief vocal by Thelma Ritter that proves the actress can't do everything. Grable and quiet, polite Dale Robertson aren't an exciting match, but his gentle tone cools down her brashness. There's a streak of early feminism in Grable's character when she flatly refuses to become a farmer's wife (without her feelings on the matter even being considered!), which is then abandoned in the face of true love, however she and Robertson look good together. The color is gloppy, and the finale--where Levin apparently chose to move the material back to its stage roots--is perplexing, yet the movie is upbeat and pleasurable despite its faults. **1/2 from ****
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Too much lipstick and electric lights!
pokey-4654621 December 2015
Typical 1950's Hollywood production. Costumes are not period, zippers, high heeled pumps and pony tails were not part of the 1850's. The men wear dinner jackets with bow ties and everyone's outfit is sparkling clean and starched, despite the fact that they have been working all day plowing, washing and cleaning. Penciled in eyebrows, eyeliner and lipstick a hundred years too early. Betty Grable still looks like a a pin up girl, and Dale Robertson has a pompadour hair style, also why are they using southern accents in Rome NY? This movie is cute but not Betty Grable's best picture by far. Lovely 1950's period piece in long skirts.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Nothing Special
LeonardKniffel27 April 2020
This film is one of the Hollywood musicals that marked the end of a particular genre-the romantic, comical romp filled with solid songs sung well by stars like Judy Garland, Doris Day, and Alice Faye. Based on a Broadway play and a 1935 nonmusical film, this half-hearted attempt is more insipid than romantic or comical. Betty Grable, whose charms I have always found elusive, is miscast as a cook on a boat on the Erie Canal, with Dale Robertson (not a great musical talent) as the guy she falls for. Although they are written by the great Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields, the songs are forgettable. The highlight of the film for me was watching an uncredited Gwen Verdon dance with Grable in the splashy tune "We're in Business."
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Just enjoy this lighthearted musical
lora6431 January 2007
It's easygoing, middle-of-the-road entertainment so no point taking it too serious or being critical. I happen to like Betty Grable films and this one is a lovely setting for her to shine in, a very photogenic lady.

Dale Robertson, as Daniel, is the farmer who finds work on the canal to pay his way so he can join a ladylove and settle down to farming in future, but plans don't always work out as intended. I feel it's a lesser role for Dale compared to other movies of his I've seen such as Golden Girl (1951) which was a very good role for him to star in.

Thelma Ritter too is a favorite of mine and here she plays the rich widow, Lucy Cashdollar, who plans on having a husband No. 6. She's beautifully dressed in all scenes, more so than I've ever seen her in other films, which of course fits her role here.

There's the usual barroom mêlées or free-for-all fights, songs sung by the lead characters, and romance where as they say, Love always finds a way. It's just charming entertainment meant for a pleasant Saturday afternoon, and is a video I like to have for cheering up when needed.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Underrated, charming, Technicolor musical remake of nonmusical '35 version, starring Betty Grable.
weezeralfalfa5 December 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Caught this on a FXM viewing. Despite the title, we never catch sight of a farm or farm house, except from a distance in one scene, until presumably in the finale, with the farm being a mere cartoonish background painting. Otherwise all the action is scripted as taking place along the Erie Canal of 1850 or the canal city of Rome, where construction of the canal began, historically. Handsome Dale Robertson plays the farmer: Dan Harrow. He shows up in Rome, trying to make some extra money to follow his recent fiancé, who is taking a boat to Illinois(weird!). Dan meets sexy Molly Larkins(Betty Grable) in Rome. She is the cook and girlfriend of boat owner Jotham Klore(John Carroll): a stereotypical hard drinking , brawling, canal man : not really Molly's idea of an ideal husband. Although not specified, Jotham is most likely the son of one of the many Scot Irish who dominated the work force in building the canal. Larkins is an Irish surname. Another main character is Fortune Friendly: a ne'er -do-well drifter, played by Eddie Foy Jr.: a holdover from vaudeville, also Irish, of course. Much beloved Thelma Ritter, as the well off 5X widow Lucy Cashdollar(appropriate name):an older friend of Molly, rounds out the main characters. She is paired romantically with Foy, despite his destitute status. I was surprised how much Robertson reminded me of the yet undiscovered Elvis Presley, in his looks, laid back persona and southern drawl, if not singing. His speech makes him seem a very unlikely born and bred up state New Yorker!

This is basically a remake of the '35 film of the same title. Prior to that, it had a run as a play, also starring Henry Fonda as Dan. I haven't seen this earlier film for comparison, However, besides the different actors, there are 2 obvious major differences: 1) Technicolor vs. the B&W of the earlier film 2)This is a musical vs. the nonmusical(I assume) earlier film. The all original score was composed by the team of Harold Arlen and Dorothy Fields. While no hit parade songs resulted, they are serviceable songs for the screenplay. Early, on Betty frolics around town, singing the joyous "I Love Everybody". This would be reprised for the finale, on her wedding day, with a team of bucolically-dressed chorus in support. "Something Real Special" was also here very briefly reprised, having been sung by both Dan and Betty, referring to each other. While they are frolicking, taking a breather from refurbishing the abandoned boat Molly was born on, they sing and sometimes dance to "We're in Business", sometimes including a bunch of onlookers. This project, in the absence of the jailed Jotham, serves to further cement a growing romantic relationship. Just prior to this, Dan sings "With the Sun Warm Upon Me", while reclining in a meadow, reminding him of his farm. "On the Erie Canal" is sung by various towns people, celebrating the importance of the canal. "We're Doing It For the Natives of Jamaica" is a drinking song for Jotham and his buddies, after filled with rum. Eddie Foy does a song and eccentric vaudeville-styled dance to "Can You Spell Schenectady?"

We have several conflicts in the screen play. There are two significant impediments to a Dan & Molly marriage.1) Both already have a boy or girlfriend. However, these prove not as important in the end. More important, Dan insists on remaining a farmer, whereas Molly insists on remaining a canal 'rat'. Being a farmer's wife she imagines as being too boring and hard a life. Secondly, there is a conflict between the canalmen and the hated railroad builders, who threaten to make the canal obsolete. The canalmen actually overestimate the immediate impact of a competing railroad. True, the railroad soon stole most of the passenger traffic. But, the canal still offered much lower freight rates for decades to come, which saved it from early obsolescence.

The barriers to a Molly & Dan marriage are finally resolved by 2 events, 1) Dan receives a letter from his Illinois fiancé, saying she married another farmer.2) During a formal race between Jotham's boat and the boat refurbished by Dan and Molly, Dan and Jotham roll around all over the boat fighting over Molly. Dan is the unofficial winner when he finally knocks Jotham into the canal. This magically causes Molly to forget about her determination not to live on a farm! The next scene features their wedding reception, presumably in Dan's farm house. This ending is very hurried and unconvincing! Simultaneously, Foy marries Lucy, which he previously quipped would be a fate worth than death!(She offered to pay his betting debt if he married her).

The take home message for contemporary audiences was similar to that in the contemporary musicals "Anne Get Your Gun" and "Calamity Jane" : Even gorgeous feisty young women should defer to the ambitions and egos of the man they love, if they hope to have a happy love life. This was the era of the say-at-home mom, after the WWII era, when many women were forced to become the 'family boss' and factory wage earner, with their men overseas.

As depicted, 2 horses or mules was the norm for pulling most canal boats. However, there were 2 teams that alternated, one being housed within the boat! There was only one tow path, hence the boat race was not a practical reality. As dramatized by Dan's headlong dive into the canal, originally, it was only 4 feet deep, although it was later deepened several times, to allow larger boats.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

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


Recently Viewed