This 1933 film's action begins in 1905. The first quarter or so, though the quality of acting and period costumes and sets is high, may strike today's viewer as the most cliched of Cinderella stories, more suitable for a Depression-era shopgirl seeking escape than a sophisticated 21st-century Internet user. Pretty proletarian chorus girl Peggy (Kay Francis) is romanced by not one but two fabulously wealthy playboys. As would any of us, she opts for the younger and handsomer of the two, who additionally wants to marry her over the objections of his stuffy mother, who of course eventually is won over by Peggy's natural charm and sweetness.
By this time, unless you're a fan of Harlequin romance novels, you may be sorely tempted to switch to another channel, DVD or website, as I probably would have had my spouse and I not been watching together, each reluctant to be the one to suggest pulling the plug.
However, there is one hitch in this opening chapter of bliss. Peggy's older, less handsome rich playboy was more than just a hopeful suitor. In fact she was his mistress in a richly furnished love nest. So there is hope that something a bit more dramatic will develop, and indeed it does and the film morphs into a typical hard-hitting fast-paced pre-code melodrama.
This is where my deep thought comes in. If a similar story was presented today as a movie, TV show, short story or novel, it would start with some later courtroom scene or act of violence to let you know what was in store, then flash back to the beginning without your having to wonder if anything interesting was going to happen.
Hey, I know, even in 1933 they knew about flashbacks. They also knew that 1930s moviegoers, with no TV or computer waiting at home, who had paid their nickel for four hours of escape from the Depression, were not going to walk out of the theater after fifteen minutes, so the film could start slow and work its way up.
So don't necessarily touch that dial, or remote, or keyboard and be prepared for, eventually, a pre-code action melodrama with, as so often, a morally ambiguous conclusion.
2 out of 3 found this helpful