Full of Borgaze's trademark swoony romanticism mixed with a touch of pre-code decadence. This tale of a struggling young couple also boasts Margaret Sullavan's enchanting sensitive performance, she seems to carry a gossamer glow with her where ever she goes. Alan Hale also adds much to the film as a sprightly good-hearted charlatan but what drags it down almost fatally is Douglass Montgomery in the male lead. To put it plainly, he stinks. He's a stiff blank slate that stops the film dead in its tracks whenever he's the focal point of the scene. You're left to wonder what a more effective actor such as Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant could have made of the part and how much better the movie would have been because of their casting.
Add a Review
-
jjnxn-115 January 2017
-
planktonrules21 December 2016"Little Man, What Now?" is a miserable story. Now I am NOT saying it's bad...but it is hard to watch and even painful to watch at times. It's the story of a young married couple who are struggling just to survive the economic malaise in post-war Germany...where their Depression was far worse than that which hit the States. Jobs were very hard to come by and life was a serious struggle.
When the film begins, Hans and Emma (Douglass Montgomery and Margaret Sullavan) marry. However, Hans works at a peculiar place...where they ONLY employ bachelors and will fire him if he marries! And, there's a constant push to make the company meaner and leaner--and the employees are warned that one could easily be fired! Well, eventually he is exposed and loses the job and they are poor and hungry. He accepts an offer from his mother to move into her place. Yet, when they arrive, you see his mother is a shallow bi...um...not nice person. She wants to charge them rent and only things about herself and her live-in lover (Alan Hale)...and life is STILL a struggle. Fortunately, Hans gets a job...but ends up losing it and they are miserable once again...a pattern that continues throughout the film. And, oddly, despite their financial problems, the couple seem to occasionally plan and spend very poorly.
If you are looking for a feel-good film, this is NOT it!! It's a portrait of the Depression and Depressions are, by their very nature, depressing!! The film is well made and an interesting historical portrait...but how many folks wanna see something this unappealing and awful?! Yes, post-war Germany (1919-1932) REALLY sucked...and here is sucks in spades!!
By the way, you can tell this is a Pre-code movie when the film begins (it came out a few months before the new Production Code was put into effect). Douglass Montgomery's character is standing outside a gynecologist's office...and it says 'Gynecology' on the sign! You'd never see this in Post-Code films of the 30s, 40s or 50s. Well made but dreadful. -
bkoganbing18 June 2017I see that the German cinema did a version of Little Man What Now a year before this Universal Picture came out. Depending on exactly when Dr. Goebbels took over their movie industry the message would have been far more polemic than here. I could see this as good material for either a Nazi inspired film or a left wing one.
But Frank Borzage as director always seems to concern himself with the plight of young lovers, the truly innocent of the world and how forces around them are buffeting their chances at happiness. Which seems to be a capital sin in Borzage films.
A lot similarity between this one and later Borzage works like Three Comrades and The Mortal Storm which also starred Margaret Sullavan. In Little Man What Now Douglass Montgomery and Margaret Sullavan are a pair of young marrieds who just can't seem to get traction enough for Montgomery to earn a living and support Sullavan and the baby coming. As things go from bad to worse Montgomery is tempted to seek radical politics of some kind.
My favorite scene in the film concerns poor Montgomery waiting on a self centered cinema star in the department store where he is currently employed. Alan Mowbray is unforgettable in that one scene. Interesting showing a the indulgences of a selfish man can have such an effect as Montgomery's job is on the line.
Even now too many of us live two paychecks from the gutter and too many of us are tempted by demagogues as a result. In that way Little Man What Now is still a very relevant film. -
Kalaman1 October 2002This is a sadly unknown and obscure film classic from the 1930s and one of my own favorites of all Frank Borzage's love stories.
A very sad and heartbreaking tale of a German couple surviving in a Nazi-occupied town in 1920s Germany, "Little Man, What Now?" was the first Borzage film to attack Hitler and the horrors of Nazism, prefiguring the director's later anti-Nazi masterpieces like "Three Comrades"(1938), "The Mortal Storm"(1940) and "Till We Meet Again"(1944).
"Little Man" is a painfully realistic and terrifying experience, especially the second half; and yet strangely full of hope and affirmation. Margaret Sullavan is as always luminous and touching in her portrayal of Lammchen Pinneberg. It is interesting to compare "Little Man" with Sullavan's other Borzage films like "Three Comrades" and "The Mortal Storm." There's something about her sweet innocence, devotion, and luminosity that works well with Borzage's soft-focus, anti-Nazi attitude. The glittering white dress she wears half-way throughout the film seems to suggest a symbol of light and hope (however transient) for Montgomery and against the brutal 1920s depression milieu, the same way Loretta Young's heartbreaking devotion and sweetness are intended to rescue Spencer Tracy's tough, smart-alecky personality in Borzage's 1933 masterwork "Man's Castle."
As with "Man's Castle", the Depression and, particularly in this case, Nazism are less physical than a spiritual or emotional threats to Borzage's lovers. Despite the bleak, depressing reality the characters have to surpass, both "Little Man" and "Man's Castle" retain Borzage's tender touch and humanity, inviting audience forgiveness for his characters' fragility and vulnerability.
This film will break your heart and should never be missed. -
SAMTHEBESTEST20 June 2022Little Man, What Now (1934) : Brief Review -
Frank Borzage's hope during the Depression Era, just before Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. Borzage was one of those directors from old Hollywood who liked to stick to the basics and old traditions. He rarely used any modern theories, and so he chose the films accordingly. Little Man, What Now is not just a film, it's encouragement, a boost to the people who have lost hope in life, and not to forget that it came in the early 30s, i.e. The depression era. It was just before Charlie Chaplin's silent classic, "Modern Times" (1936). "Never say die, we'll get along," - remember this quote from the film? Well, Borzage's Little Man, What Now tells you the same story from a different point of view. But the motive remains the same. I remember two old classic films fondly, which focused on the same issue of poverty and ended with a hope of ray. The first one is King Vidor's "The Crowd" (1928) and the second one is the John Ford directorial "The Grapes Of Wrath" (1940). Based on Hans Fallada's novel, Borzage's film is about a married couple struggling against the poverty caused by unemployment. The film is not depressing, nor is it too intense, yet it explains the issue very well. The couple seems relatable because they don't go through any highly dramatic conflicts, while the supporting characters keep adding humour. The screenplay is well adapted by William Anthony McGuire and it never feels boring. It's just a sweet little film with a little message that may bring a big change in perspective on looking at tough times. Douglass Montgomery and Margaret Sullivan are as cute as they could get, and you'll love watching them on screen. Frank Borzage is at his typical best when that typical term wasn't established for him. So, it's a worthwhile one to look at if you love watching films with contemporary importance.
RATING - 7/10* -
One of the most heartbreaking, swoon-inducing film experiences I've ever had is 1934's "Little Man, What Now?"
It's about a young couple, with a child, struggling against poverty and a steady stream of bad luck in early 1930's Germany. It's an American film, but at times it almost plays like a piece of European cinema. The atmosphere is thick and the story isn't afraid to drift into areas that are a bit dark (and daring in a pre-code sense). It has a sentimental streak for sure, but the sentiment is never turned on at the expense of intelligence.
Another stand out quality of the film is it's almost painfully gorgeous cinematography. The world of the film is like a dream or like something from a storybook. Sunlight shines against water and trees and grass with a pristine silvery glow. Faces are shown in the most lovely light. Margaret Sullavan, especially, is shot in a way that practically makes you fall in love with her.
This is a true jewel of obscure 1930's cinema, rarely shown and, as of this writing, not available on any home video format. See it the first chance you get. It is a must for the classic movie enthusiast who feels like they've seen everything. -
kidboots28 January 2011Many of the Hollywood moguls were sentimental about their European backgrounds and Carl Laemmle Jnr, whose father had emigrated from Germany and founded Universal Studios, thought "Little Man, What Now?" would make (with Frank Borzage in the director's chair) a topical but romantic drama. The book, by Hans Fallada, had already been turned into a German movie. Margaret Sullivan and Douglass Montgomery were to be the stars. Opinionated, stage trained Sullivan had a very low opinion of Hollywood and her movies in general but this was a film she always liked. Apparently there was not much rapport between her and Montgomery but fortunately it didn't show on the screen. "Little Man, What Now" had a lot in common with D.W. Griffith's "Isn't Life Wonderful" (1924) as it attempted to show young Germans coping with the depression caused by World War 1.
Johannes (Douglass Montgomery) has a problem - he is employed by Emil Kleinholtz (DeWitt Jennings) who only employs single men so his plain daughter Marie (Muriel Kirkland) can find a husband. But Johannes is married already to the luminous Lammchen (Margaret Sullivan) and soon to be a father, so he must keep it a secret. Eventually he is found out and so begins the desolate search for a job. There is a gorgeous scene where Lammchen goes to the amusement park and when Johannes finds her on the merry go round she confesses that she has been too scared to go home - because she eat all their tea (salmon) on the way home.
Meanwhile Lammchen has written to Johannes' stepmother and they soon find themselves living with her in Berlin. It is not the wonderful opportunity they had hoped for - she charges them exorbitant rent, the job she promised is not forthcoming and Lammchen finds herself having to fend off Holger Jackman's playful advances. Because he is played by Alan Hale, you know that underneath he is just a good hearted scoundrel and they find, in him, one of their few friends in the big city. Johannes finds a job in a department store, but once again his employment is in jeopardy. An uppity salesman (Monroe Owsley, in the type of role he played so well) sees an advertisement in the paper - "Discreet Evenings - Ladies Supplied" and as it is Johannes' address, he makes a snide remark about Lammchen. Johannes explodes as he realizes it is his stepmother!!! An afternoon with an egotistical actor (Alan Mowbray) who has come to the store not to buy but to "do research for a role" is the last straw and Johannes quits. Lammchen finds cheaper lodgings but for Johannes it is the start of a deep depression and months of joblessness, until the chance meeting of a good friend and the birth of their son shows him that life is there to be lived.
I though Douglass Montgomery was absolutely brilliant in the role. He bought so much sensitivity and pathos to his role of the life discouraged Johannes who has only the unwavering love of Lammchen to pull him through. It seems the love of a good woman can make you do anything. Douglass Montgomery's career was far more patchy than Sullivans. It seemed for every excellent role he played ("Waterloo Bridge" (1931), "Little Women" (1933)) he was then cast in some lack lustre parts ("Music in the Air" (1934), "Lady Tubbs" (1935)). Even though his movie career petered out - he never stopped acting and had a fulfilling career.
Highly, Highly Recommended. -
mgmax17 November 2007If you know anything about this film, it's that it portrays the circumstances that led to the rise of the Nazis at a surprisingly early point (1934), long before even Borzage became the first filmmaker in Hollywood to take on that subject directly in Three Comrades and The Mortal Storm toward the end of the 30s. Actually, it's clear from the clues we're given that the menace always at the edge of the story is a violent socialist uprising, not a fascist one. (The talk is always of "equality," not of making Germany great again.) But that in no way invalidates the powerful and even subversive thing Borzage does here .
Like all of Borzage's most famous late silent and early sound films, it follows a young couple in the early, dazed days of love and sexual infatuation; Lammchen (Margaret Sullavan) and Hans (Douglass Montgomery) are first seen at a doctor's office (the clear implication is that they hurriedly got married because of pregnancy), and though money is tight, and Hans already shows signs of worry which Lammchen refuses to share, they enjoy an idyllic afternoon doing nothing by a forest stream.
However, reality soon begins closing in. Hans' boss is a laughing sadist who has hired three single men in hopes that one will marry his daughter; Hans tries to keep his marriage secret to protect his job, but every little betrayal cuts like a knife and the truth is soon out. He and Lammchen go to live with his stepmother in Berlin, but Hans' moral disapproval of her loose lifestyle is obvious, and we figure out long before they do that Jachman is a pimp using the stepmother's spacious apartments (with her connivance) as a brothel. Hans finds work at a department store; but his job hangs by a thread each week and his self- confidence erodes.
The lesson of Borzage's great late silents was that love could conquer death (Seventh Heaven), betrayal (Street Angel), disability (Lucky Star), even wind, sleet and snow (The River), a message that only works with booming organ and the dream state of silence. Which is what makes it shocking when Hans gets swept up in the anger and resentment of the soapbox agitator who pops up at different moments in the movie, and he finds himself holding a rock-- or a knife. He doesn't know what we know-- the unspeakable depths to which an ambitious young man's resentment could take him in the years ahead in Hitler's Germany-- but he knows enough to know that of all the ways he could betray Lammchen, the worst would be becoming the sort of man who picks up a knife at a political rally, ready to take out his anger on any convenient target like a policeman... or a religious minority. And in that moment, Borzage acknowledges for the first time that the greatest threat to grandiose, silent movie-sized love isn't some outside adversity, but the danger in your own heart.
The biggest drawback to the film is the fact that Douglass Montgomery is one of those handsome, callow young juveniles with excessively clean diction of the early 30s, who don't play at all well with today's audiences. Yet to my mind that works in the context of the film; a real movie star would have reserves of charm which would serve to assure us that everything would be all right, but Montgomery really does seem ordinary and thus the risk-- that he could starve, that he could turn vicious, that he could abandon Lammchen one way or another-- seems real. And despite his limitations, it really is a heartfelt performance, and clearly the high point of Montgomery's promising, but not especially successful, career.
The imbalance in the film is that opposite him, in her second film and first of four Borzage roles, is Margaret Sullavan, a 1000-watt bulb whenever she comes on screen. But several sequences involving her take Borzage back to the visual heights of the silent cinema, pushing the dramatic credibility of a realistic talkie but paying huge dividends in establishing a metaphorical mood of dreamlike romance. One is one of the loveliest sequences in all 1930s film: Hans comes home to find Lammchen has run away, he tracks her to a carousel (shades of Liliom), and as she continues to spin out of his reach, distraught and guilty, she pieces together the tale, a sentence at a time-- she'd gone to buy salmon with their last few marks-- but (being pregnant) she was so hungry that she ate her half right there-- and then she ate some of his-- and more of his-- and all of it! Humor and tender forgiveness blend beautifully with a dynamic visual setup to produce one of the most charming and affecting romantic scenes in movie history, a high point in Borzage's late 20s through 1930s streak as the premier poet of young love, in all its gaucheries and foibles, of golden age Hollywood. -
Janiemhart25 February 2005This movie represents the best of the early '30s soap opera genre. Based on an earthy German novel, it satisfies from the opening credits to the end. Margaret Sullavan was never more eager, poignant or believable and I think it must be the role that made her a star. Douglass Montgomery showed a promise he was never again given a chance to develop or display in Hollywood. The supporting cast included Alan Hale and Mae Marsh, two of the best actors in the business at the time. In my opinion, MGM got a great return on its investment. This movie managed to stay within the bounds of the excessive censorship in effect at the time (although some of the plot does come up to the line) and although it showed how desperate times call for desperate measures, it never lost its message of faith and hope. I hope it's available on DVD soon.
-
1930s_Time_Machine15 September 2023I found this a little disappointing because... it was better than I expected! I was expecting something more melodramatic and emotionally wrenching than natural acting in a subtle and believable story showing that even in the midst of adversity, love is all you need.
This is very much a typical Frank Borzage film. A director who could always find the silver lining in the darkest cloud. Although this is set in Germany during one of its most difficult times in its history, the suffering and misery is far from layered on with a trowel as you might expect. What was happening in the real world, the background, the eye watering poverty and political violence are instrumental in moulding our young couple but this film is not about Germany, the depression or the rise of the Nazis. It is a film about two young people starting out in the world when everything seems to be against them. It's about how they learn to love each other, how they learn to love themselves and how they learn to love life.
Carl Laemmle at Universal didn't want to make his audiences even more miserable than the Depression was already making them so asked Mr Borzage to give this a positive message and a cheerful outlook which indeed suited Frank Borzage's own optimistic attitude. It is not therefore as emotionally engaging or in my opinion, anything like as good as MANS CASTLE but has a very similar feel - even down to feeding pigeons in front of people who haven't eaten in days. Just like in MANS CASTLE our young couple here, Hans and Lammchen almost exist in their own little universe which the real world inconveniently occasionally pokes its ugly head into.
That ugly world on the outside is never fully explained, again just like Loretta Young and Spencer Tracy in his other film, Hans and Lammchen don't really have any family or friends or connections to the outside world. This is about how they just need each other. That outside world however is a bad place but it never expands on the conflicts between the Nazis or communists and it doesn't expand or explain the very curious and somewhat disturbing relationship the middle-aged Mr Jachman has with Hans' new wife. That's just one of those outside factors which true love eventually triumphs over.
If I've made it sound light and superficial then I apologise, that's not what I intended - it is gritty, it is upsetting but it is also a fairy story for grown-ups. That fairy-tale feel is possibly reinforced by the first fifteen minutes when we have to suffer the almost cartoon characters who own the business Hans works for. As soon as this awful bunch of actors are gone, I assure you it gets much better. -
lqualls-dchin23 December 2012Frank Borzage was one of the prize directors at the Fox Studio in the late 1920s; he became the first director to win the Academy Award for SEVENTH HEAVEN in 1927, one of the essential romances of the silent cinema. But by 1932, William Fox was running into trouble, and the finances of Fox were shaky. Borzage had won his second Oscar for Best Director in 1931 for the Fox production of BAD GIRL; two years later, he was working for Mary Pickford's own production company (SECRETS), Paramount (A FAREWELL TO ARMS), Columbia (MAN'S CASTLE and NO GREATER GLORY) and Universal (LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW?). LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW? was based on a German novel by Hans Falleda, which had been made into a movie in Germany in 1933. (I haven't seen the German movie.) But LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW? would be the follow-up film for Universal's new star, Margaret Sullavan, who had made an impressive debut in ONLY YESTERDAY, directed by John M. Stahl. She was known for being temperamental, and she refused several projects before she agreed to star in LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW?
In some ways, LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW? is the quintessential Frank Borzage movie, with many scenes and themes which echo his earlier films. There is the young couple, struggling to survive severe economic hardship; there are the effects of the Great War, leaving many with few opportunities. There is even the scene where the heroine appears in a shimmering gown, a radiant moment that is a respite from the general squalor and/or misery (this scene can be found in SEVENTH HEAVEN, in MAN'S CASTLE, in THREE COMRADES). LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW? takes its young couple (Sullavan and Douglass Montgomery) through various strata of the struggling working class in Germany during the worldwide economic downturn of the early 1930s. Along the way, they encounter a variety of characters, including Muriel Kirkland as the hideously overprivileged daughter of an employer, Catherine Doucet as Montgomery's giddy stepmother, and Alan Hale as her hearty, possibly shady friend. Through it all, Sullavan's empathetic, luminous performance provides the film with its beacon of hope in the midst of turmoil and strife.
This would be the first of four collaborations between Margaret Sullavan and Frank Borzage. (Just for the record, it should be stressed that this film was made at Universal Studios, NOT MGM, where Borzage would start working in 1937; Universal has been one of the studios which has been notoriously problematic in terms of getting their films on various home-video formats, so it's no wonder that LITTLE MAN, WHAT NOW? is unavailable, but asking for MGM to release a Universal film on DVD is an object lesson in futility.) -
dbdumonteil6 September 2006Peace and tolerance are the hero's favorite words."Little man what now" was the first part of the trilogy which encompassed "three comrades" and would culminate in "the mortal storm" .The three movies featured the same star (Margaret Sullavan) and depicted life in Germany before WW2.
"Little man" -although Hitler came to power in January 1933- ,like "Three comrades" ,remains vague as far politics are concerned.But we feel while the heroes pace up up and down the street that there's something in the air (the first pictures).In "three comrades" ,the ending in the graveyard tells us that "they" are in town.And "the mortal storm" connects all the links and is the absolute masterpiece Borzage always threatened to make.
"Little man" is an overwhelming movie.Lammchen and Hans believe in love ,tolerance and peace and the world they live in is harshness ,selfishness, corruption and contempt.Hans's longing for human warmth is harrowing in the scene with the nurse.With an exception, when Hans is looking for a job,he meets people who enjoy humiliating and demeaning their fellow men.
"Little man" is full of strong scenes : the stroll in the country where the outside world (the hateful Kleinholz) will not leave the heroes alone; the actor who wants to play the part of a guy who "lives on the wrong side of the town" but who does not show any compassion when he meets one of those guys.Margaret Sullavan on the carousel,confessing she ate all the salmon she bought; on a bench in the park feeding the pigeons .Both Hans and Lammchen display the same naiveté : she really did know that near the pigeons ,there was a man and his wife who were starving.Hans did not know either that his stepmother's parties were very bad things.
When the movie ends,there's another little man who,says Lammchen, will be by your side and help you cope with your struggle .
Watching "little man" (or any of Borzage's movies) helps you be a better human being. -
Legendary American born director Frank Borzage was a master at romance set in difficult situations. He specialised in stories set in Germany just before or during the build-up to WW11 (The Mortal Storm '40 - Three Comrades '38) In this interesting pre-code drama he's following two young lovers in 1930s Germany - as they hide the fact they are newly married and expecting a child. The young man (Douglas Montgomery) is keeping his secret to protect his current job - that for various reasons demands he's single.
The settings (outdoor and indoor) are a delight to the eye, even when they are living in a stable! This is life as raw as it can be for two young newlyweds living in the glow of their own love - within a rapidly changing pre war German landscape. Prolific veteran cinematographer Norbert Brodin (known for several classic Noir dramas including "The Kiss of Death" '47) who, with a combination of fine art and set direction; create a dreamlike poetic look for this thoughtful and offbeat film that deserves to be better known.
Highly recommended for lovers of vintage dramas that highlight a historical time gone by, and do so with a special flair. Also, for the truly remarkable, unforgettable Margaret Sullavan. -
AlsExGal7 January 2022This is the story of a young German couple, Emma (Margaret Sullavan) and Hans (Douglas Montgomery), struggling to get by in Weimar Germany with a Depression going on. It reminds me of "Made for Each Other" starring James Stewart and Carole Lombard made in 1939.
Hans and Emma are unmarried and facing an accidental pregnancy. They get an appointment with a doctor where it is implied that they can get an abortion. But the doctor refuses, and having no other "references" of doctors who are trustworthy in this matter, they get married and decide to have the baby.
They face a multitude of problems, the first being that Hans is one of three men his employer has hired with the strict rule that none of the men be married. The reason is that said employer has a homely daughter of marriageable age and he is trying to foist her off on one of them. And said homely daughter has decided that Hans is the man she wants. That leads to unemployment for Hans, but not the way you think. Then they decide to move in with Hans' well off stepmother, but she sees Emma as her personal servant, and then it is discovered that dear old stepmom is running a brothel from her house when Hans is away during the day.
The two just encounter a raft of cold heartless employers that use the hard times to make ridiculous demands on their employees. It's not like any of this has any parallels in today's world right? But along the way the couple does meet some kind people or else this story would just be too depressing.
The turbulent political times are mentioned too, as Hans and Emma keep running into a penniless Marxist couple that is homeless and often hungry.
Frank Borzage spent his entire life in the United States, but his parents were both from Central Europe. I guess it is from the tales they told him that he learned enough about the place that his films set in post WWI Europe ring so true. As for the romantic angle in this film, Borzage was in a marriage in which the love was strictly one way. His wife did not care for him at all. Maybe some of the optimism and romanticism found in his films is rooted in his hope that somehow his own marriage would eventually work out. -
classicflm22 February 2004Margaret Sullavan was never more beautiful in this mega tearjerker. Even if she has to act opposite the unappealing Douglass Montgomery, the films works. Wonderfully photographed, and superb acting by all makes this movie a must see.
-
This is a typical Frank Borzage film, dealing only with ordinary people but telling a very moving story about a young family with a father out of work, who happen to all kinds of social mishaps in their desperate effort to survive and find a livelihood. It is based on Hans Fallada's most famous novel, which was a bestseller in its day, as too many recognized themselves in the fate of the unemployed father, as it deals with the difficult years of the depression. Like so many of Borzage's films, it all happens in Germany, and the mood is that of the general desperation and unrest after the First World War in the 20s. Douglass Montgomery as the father makes a very touching figure of a helpless father who can't handle money properly and considers it more important to satisfy his wife's irresponsible fancies than to keep a job that inflicts on his pride. Margaret Sullavan as the wife is perfect for the role, irresistibly pretty and charming and at the same time outrageously naïve in her lack of character, while she manages to keep spirits up nevertheless. Alan Mowbray plays a short part accentuating the social tensions and differences of that society, while their final old host (Christian Rub) makes an adorable character. The whole story is actually about a baby, who is expected throughout the film, and the mishaps of the young parents to be keep you anxiously worried all the way about what will happen to this poor family, while Borzage as usual and the baby actually save the show.
-
jarrodmcdonald-11 May 2022Margaret Sullavan is remembered for the work she did later at MGM, especially the romantic films she made with James Stewart. But she began her Hollywood career under contract at Universal. In the mid-1930s she appeared in several noteworthy pictures for the studio that merit attention.
One such gem is LITTLE MAN WHAT NOW? (1934) which pairs her with two very different men- Douglass Montgomery and Alan Hale (Sr.). Talk about a contrast! The story is about a young couple struggling to survive, and it is a remake of a German melodrama from a year earlier which itself was based on a popular novel.
Universal executive Carl Laemmle would act as if he had conceived the idea for this production, when in reality he was just borrowing the template of what had been a hit in Germany. Laemmle and his team who endeavored to adapt the material don't seem to Americanize it very much. But that doesn't matter.
What does matter- the stars at the center of the drama. Douglass Montgomery, who had played the object of Katharine Hepburn's affections in RKO's version of LITTLE WOMEN (1933), is an actor who's always drawn me in with his performances. How come nobody ever cast him to play Romeo?
I think it's the unique combination of masculinity and femininity that he projects on camera. There is a soft quality in him that works when he has to play a vulnerable guy on the brink of failure.
Alan Hale is the total opposite. Older and a "man's man" all the way, he brings experience and assuredness to his part. In the story, he is a paternal benefactor who would like to cross the line with young bride Sullavan. But things remain platonic.
Hale's character doesn't have a huge amount of screen time. He usually appears when there is a turning point in the narrative, trying to help solve some of the couple's problems which sometimes creates new problems. Adding a layer of complexity is Hale's open relationship with Montgomery's mother (the much underrated Catherine Doucet). She is basically running a brothel.
As for Miss Sullavan herself, she brings every bit of noble suffering and triumph that she can possibly muster to the screen. We know things will only get better as long as she remains by her husband's side. This includes periods when he is unemployed and they are barely scraping by. After she becomes pregnant, their situation is even more delicate.
Watching the film I kept wondering what the title meant- but that all becomes clear in the last few shots. The little man is not the underachieving husband in a world of business giants. It is their newborn son who has a world of opportunity and life decisions ahead of him.