The character of Parnell has interested me ever since I read James Joyce's Ulysses. I caught this movie by accident when channel surfing and landed on TCM, the source of many old movie nuggets. "Parnell" brings us some first rate actors, from Clark Gable to Myrna Loy, Edmund Gwyn and Donald Crisp. The viewer sees the main outline of the controversy involving Charles Parnell and Kitty O'Shea and its impact on the Irish Free State bill. The movie is dressed up in melodrama with violin music to the strains of Irish ballads. This cloying treatment, not unusual in Hollywood, does not detract from the story of a great man and the overlooked merits of this film. Parnell brought the Irish factions together to achieve a significant breakthrough in his time and might have saved many troubles. Parnell was the stuff of greatness and his story has been enshrined in history and literature. We know that the struggle for Ireland continued beyond his life; still, his story reverberates. This movie gives a sense of the tragedy but the poor sound and grainy film are a bit of an irritation. Also, the choice of Clark Gable, Hollywood's rugged icon of the 1930's, for the role of Parnell, falls flat. This is unfortunate because the movie is far from a disaster. Nevertheless, I would like to see a film with a more complete story, with more character development and background. It would tell the epic tale of Parnell's achievements and the forces that shaped Ireland in the late nineteenth century. The British movie industry does those period movies very well. This movie gives us a taste of that history.
Add a Review
-
richard-178717 May 2017Legend has it that Clark Gable was badly miscast in this movie, an example of an actor who wanted to show that he could do more than the roles in which he had been type-cast but in fact showed that he could not.
Well, legend is in part right. Gable could do many things, quite well. But he is very bad in this movie, for several reasons.
First is that he seems to have no command of the oratorical style that is supposedly the gift of every Irishman and certainly of every Irish politician. This is strange, because he certainly commanded an oratorical style in movies like *San Francisco*. But it's true. When he addresses Parliament, or his fellow Irish politicians, he sounds weak, and in no way raises his audience with the power of his oratory. That is all the more clear because several of the other actors in this movie demonstrate a fine oratorical style. The contrast is striking, and not in Gable's favor.
Second, the script often stinks. It is wooden, unrealistic, and sometimes almost laughable.
Third, there is no drama in these scenes. The movie drags badly.
I have the feeling that Gable, or the director, did much of this intentionally, making an effort to create a character that did not have Gable's usual flair, like Blacky in *San Francisco*, for example. Perhaps I'm wrong. But seeing Gable play someone so often so weak is not an appealing sight. -
bkoganbing21 November 2004If one were to see the movie Captain Boycott and see Robert Donat in a brief cameo as Charles Stewart Parnell making a speech you would be seeing a far closer portrayal to the real Parnell then Clark Gable gave in this film. Myrna Loy wasn't too much better as Kitty O'Shea, both the leads looked like they had something else on their minds.
The real Charles Stewart Parnell was a great Irish patriot who by force of intellect and oratory rose to the head of the Irish party in the House of Commons. During the 1880s the members for Ireland in Parliament under Parnell's leadership held the balance of power between the Conservatives and Liberals. If the whole business with his affair with Mrs. O'Shea had not come to light, Ireland might very well have gotten it's own parliament and essentially home rule which was Parnell's goal. He accomplished this all the while clinging to his Protestant faith. The fact that Parnell was a Protestant was not mentioned at all in this film.
Also, the key to Parnell's downfall was his haughtiness. He was not an easy guy to like. He was a great Irish patriot, but he was also haughty and arrogant. When he was brought down by a back street affair come to light, even a lot of his allies weren't unhappy at his political demise.
Before the affair came to light, his enemies tried another gambit with some forged letters that purported to show Parnell's complicity in the assassinations of Lord Fredrick Cavendish and his secretary in Phoenix Park in Dublin in 1881. The trial scenes were the best in the film and it might have been a good film had they stuck to that of course with someone else playing Parnell. The best performance in the film is that of George Zucco who was Parnell's attorney, Sir Charles Russell. Running a close second in acting is Alan Marshal who plays Myrna Loy's husband, Captain O'Shea who thinks by pimping his wife to Parnell he can advance his own career.
Gable took ribbing for this film the rest of his life and even he admitted it laid an ostrich egg. -
planktonrules18 March 2006I am an avid lover of the book THE FIFTY WORST FILMS by Harry Medved. It's brilliantly written and funny. However, a few times the book lists movies that are poor but really don't approach awfulness. This movie is one of them (along with THAT HAGEN GIRL and SWING YOUR LADY). While I will gladly admit that it is about Gable's worst film from the mid to late 1930s, it's certainly better than some movies he did in 1931 when he wasn't yet a star. Also, with so many bad films from Hollywood, this movie just seems poor--not bad. After all, even with a saccharine script, this movie STILL stars Myrna Loy and Clark Gable and how bad can a film be when it features these fine actors? Yes, it's true that Clark as Parnell is pretty wussy and unbelievable (and completely unlike Gable in other films, but I actually saw some merit, albeit little, in the film and just can't accept that it deserves a 1 or even a 2.
-
AlsExGal11 November 2015I watched Parnell and waited for the awfulness. It never happened. What may have thrown off audiences in 1937 is that this is a period piece with absolutely no action and lots of speechifying. I thought Clark Gable was good and believable in his role as Charles Stewart Parnell, Anglo Irish politician and champion of Irish home rule, but this was not what people expected when they went to the movies to see a Clark Gable film. I guess it would have been like seeing Johnny Weismuller on a marquee in the 1930's, buying a ticket, and finding out he is portraying Abraham Lincoln instead of Tarzan or a Tarzan like figure. Thus many people say this film was a case of miscasting in the star role. I think it was more a case of unexpected casting.
The film keeps moving with Parnell dealing with one problem after another. There's even a murder trial thrown in at the middle of the movie! Then there is the married Kitty O'Shea (Myrna Loy) as Parnell's love interest.I thought the romance built slowly and credibly, and the charisma between Gable and Loy is electric. Kitty is unhappily married to Willy O'Shea, who is a complete weasel with high political aspirations. How many husbands are so unpleasant that their wives would rather pay their expensive bills to keep them away from home? That's what Willy kept threatening - pay this or that bill or I'll simply have to move back in with you. It does make you wonder why they married in the first place.
One strange thing that the film did was have Billie Burke, who was 53 at the time, playing Clara, Kitty's rather flaky sister, when she was old enough to be Myrna Loy's mother and only one year younger than Edna May Oliver who plays Clara and Kitty's aunt Ben. Billie Burke had been playing matronly characters with grown children for some time, so making her up and dressing her up to be somebody in her 20's who didn't have a real place in the plot other than being Oliver's comic foil just seemed a little weird.
As usual with biopics, this film got some facts about Parnell wrong. He actually toured the American south with his brother in the 1870's, not places associated with the Irish Americans in the 19th century such as Boston and New York. His affair with Kitty O'Shea was not that innocent. He actually fathered three of her four children while she was still married to her first husband. I can see how for the sake of dramatic license and the production code MGM would just make them guilty of holding hands and gazing into each other's eyes for years and years.
Great performances all around, good production values, a plot that kept my interest, and great supporting characters who often starred in MGM's lesser films of the time - thus I'd say this film is probably a 6.5/10, but I had to give a whole number rating so I rounded up to 7. It certainly held my interest and made me curious enough to want to learn more about this part of Irish history of which I know so little, thus I consider it a success, not a failure. -
schweinhundt196712 December 2004I'm inclined to agree with the other reviewers who have commented on the fact that Gable was the wrong man for this particular job.It might bear some discussion as to why this might have been so.
Gable's screen persona was that of a "man's man."Hearty,frank,forthright,generous,and good natured.You'd find yourself enjoying his company,if only for an evening.(Let's not get into the fact that his camping trips were manufactured for screen publicity,or the rumors of his having been a hustler at the bus depot.We've all done things that we've been ashamed of.)But Gable was a broad actor;truly subtle work was beyond him.And nobility and sensitivity weren't with his range,either.He did what he could do very well.But not with this.
I keep thinking that Ronald Colman,Walter Pigeon,and Errol Flynn all would have been better choices. -
wes-connors7 May 2013After a two-month visit to America, Irish-accented Clark Gable (as Charles Stewart Parnell) returns to 1880 Ireland. There, he is treated like an uncrowned King. As you might have guessed, the English oppose Mr. Gable's advocacy of independence for the Irish. Gable is drawn into an uneasy political alliance with Alan Marshal (as William "Willie" O'Shea) and begins a relationship with Mr. Marshall's wife, Myrna Loy (as Katie Wood). His enemies use Gable's affair with Ms. Loy for political gain...
This fine looking MGM production is clearly dependent upon a captivating and passionate lead performance from its star. A subdued Gable is unable deliver. Distracting in his fluctuating sideburns, Gable does not excel in biographical characterizations. They should have shipped it to Paul Muni at Warner Bros. Or, made the story more exciting. This is an unexciting adaptation of the Irish hero's life. The romance with Loy is also a bore. And, the direction given by John M. Stahl makes it feel twice as long.
*** Parnell (6/4/37) John M. Stahl ~ Clark Gable, Myrna Loy, Alan Marshal, Edna May Oliver -
sol121811 November 2006Epic motion picture about the life times and loves of the immortal Irish patriot Charles Stewart Parnell, Clark Gable, who fought for Irish independence and home rule from the hated and oppressive British Empire. In the end Parnell succumb not to British power bullets or gallows or even his fellow Irishmens infighting but to the woman that he loved Mrs. Katie O'Shea, Myrna Loy. It was Katie's social climbing husband Captain Willie, Alan Marshal, who exposed his love affair with his wife Katie in order to get back at him.
Parnell was a man who never turned away from a good fight and his career in Irish/British politics was filled with battles that he both fought and won against almost unbelievable odds. Yet when it came to defend himself in the divorce trial of his love Katie O'Shea he just refused to stand up and fight like a man for her and his honor. Katie's husband Willie never loved her and just kept her around, not giving her the divorce that she begged him for, for only political reasons and nothing else.
Coming back to his beloved Ireland after visiting his mother in the United States Parnell is quickly caught up in the vicious and cold-hearted attempt by the British to drive tens of thousands of Irish families out of their homes and farms in a major land-grab on their part. Being himself arrested for inciting violence, which was a bald-faced lie on the part of the British government, Parnell in fact called on his fellow Irishmen to refrain from violence and fight their brutal British overlords with the power of the vote instead.
Being framed for the infamous May 6, 1882 Dublin Phoenix Park murders of British foreign secretary Fredrick Cavendish and his aid T.H Burke, Parnell stood on trial for his life and forced the issue when he got the Irish editor Richard Piggot,Neil Fitzgerald, to admit that he forged the letters supposedly written by the Innocent Parnell taking credit for the two British diplomats murders. Exposed on the stand as both a liar and a fraud a shaken Piggot asks to be excused so he can go outside the courtroom for some air and then proceeds to blow his brains out.
Parnell now on the verge of his greatest and most sought after political victory, Irish autonomy and independence,is back-stabbed by his lovers, Kate O'Shea's, scheming husband Willie who exposes his affair with his wife by suing Katie for divorce. Refusing to defend himself feeling that his, and Katie's, personal life is nobody's business Parnell is then about to be thrown out of the newly formed Irish Parliament that he, more then anyone else, was responsible from being brought into existence in the first place.
With a lifetime of battles under his belt Parnell's decision to turn away from this one the nasty and publicized O'Shea divorce lead him, by the vicious attacks on Katie and himself in the press, to suffer an emotional and physical collapses. In the end Parnell died from pneumonia on October 6, 1891 at the very young age of 45; Parnell was married to Katie some six months at the time of his death.
Nowhere as bad as it's critics said it was back in 1937 "Parnell" gives a very accurate description of one of Ireland's most beloved sons and charismatic statesman and Clark Gable is very good in the role as the fiery but tragic Charles Stewart Parnell. The only thing that was bit too overdone in the film was Parnell's long and drawn out illness which could have been at least cut in half so the movie wouldn't have turned out to be a boring TV soap opera. Besides that "Parnell" is one of the best biographies to come out of Hollywood back then in the 1930's. -
blanche-222 November 2015Just not good.
"Parnell" from 1937 stars two of MGM's greatest, Clark Gable and Myrna Loy, in the hopes, I guess, that people would go to see it. I wasn't there so I don't know if they did but I doubt it.
As someone here said, the roles would have been better suited to Spencer Tracy and Maureen O'Sullivan.
Parnell, who died at the age of 45, was a controversial figure with a complicated political career. And the film does show some of what he went through, including false accusations that he supported the murders of two people in power, the trial, and then suit against the newspaper.
Other problems followed, but the film is most concerned with his torrid romance (well, not in this movie) between Parnell and a married woman, Katherine O'Shea.
Now, in the movie, they don't get married. In real life, they did. And as far as a torrid affair, I'll say - she had three of his children while she was married. The couple wasn't married very long -- from June of 1891 and he died in October 1891 of stomach cancer. However, he also suffered from kidney failure. He is shown, not very convincingly, as ill in the film.
The film is very melodramatic, with Loy relying on the melodrama to get her through her role. Gable could not have been more wrong - he did not have a great range as an actor, and this called for at least more than he had. He was a charismatic, rugged, gorgeous, charming man who radiated a lot of warmth, all of which made him perfect for many roles. Not this one.
I spent time during this film dwelling on why mustaches went out of style. I decided Hitler and mens hair requirements during World War II caused them to go out of style. Gable looked great with and without one, and of course, he kept his as it was one of his trademarks.
Parnell is not a good movie, and it was hard to concentrate on it. -
malvernp19 May 2021This is a movie with a considerable reputation--mostly bad. Some of that lack of regard is appropriately earned. However, there are good aspects to Parnell, too. It is definitely worth reconsideration after over 80 years since its initial release.
Was Clark Gable miscast? It is indisputable that there were better choices to play the inspiring, charismatic Irish champion whose great dream was for home rule for his country. But Gable was certainly capable of playing such a decent, noble character with honest conviction. He did so with considerable sincerity in The Misfits. And even though Gable made him seem more American than Irish, we should remember that Parnell's mother was a Yankee, and he always had a close connection with the United States.
Was the film misdirected? John M. Stahl was not in his usual element in tackling such a dense biographical/historical drama. But on the whole, Stahl obtained compelling performances from his actors, and the narrative moved at a pace that held the viewer's attention. MGM showered him with a stellar cast of players and its usual glossy production values. The end result is both entertaining and interesting.
Did the film's historical inaccuracies contribute to its lack of success? Other commentators have pointed out these flaws, and they need no repeating here. However, the biographical film genre by its very nature is often full of contrived fiction usually inserted to make such movies more likely to be commercially acceptable. Is Parnell any worse than MGM's Boys Town, Young Tom Edison/Edison The Man or Madame Curie In this regard? I think not.
In the end, Parnell (the movie) was probably doomed because Gable's fans could not accept him playing an obviously non-Gable part---much like what happened to Tyrone Power when he did Nightmare Alley, Cary Grant when he starred in None But The Lonely Heart, Spencer Tracy when he took on Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde and Robert Young when he appeared in They Won't Believe Me. Gable had a specific carefully created star image and was usually cast in roles that burnished and enhanced that image. Playing Charles Stewart Parnell--an almost God-like idealist, leader and patriot--definitely went beyond being cast against type. His fans were obviously disappointed, and the movie accordingly failed at the box office. Perhaps much of this result was caused by the unpleasant surprise of his fans seeing Gable trying to do such a role, rather than due to intrinsic faults in the film itself.
Take another look at Parnell and judge for yourself. -
MOscarbradley19 January 2009Surely when this movie first appeared in 1937 somebody, (everybody?), involved must have known what a crock, (and I'm not talking gold, here), they were sitting on. "Parnell" is a turkey fat enough to feed a family of forty and like a lot of big, bad movies is, nevertheless, quite enjoyable, if for all the wrong reasons. Historically, I can't vouchsafe for its accuracy but then this isn't a film about Irish history and the struggle for Home Rule but a romantic drama about a real-life historical figure ruined by his love for a married woman and it starred two of the biggest names in movies at the time.
When this movie came out Gable had already won an Oscar and Myrna Loy was fresh from playing, superbly, in The Thin Man movies but they are both terrible here. Indeed, this isn't just Gable's worst performance but one of the monumentally bad performances in the history of the movies, (his death-bed sequence is a classic). A sterling supporting cast, (Edna May Oliver, Donald Crisp, Billie Burke, Edmund Gwenn), do offer a few crumbs of comfort but they are far from enough to redeem this sorry mess. John Stahl directed but you would never have guessed it. -
gkeith_120 May 2017Spoilers. Observations. Opinions.
Gable is great. He is handsome, charming and charismatic in his portrayal. The character was ill during much of the film (slow heart rate; bradycardia it looked like). He kept fainting and falling down, and medical science could do little. Heart artificial pacemakers were invented in 1899, and put into use since around 1950. Parnell could have used a pacemaker, but alas, that great invention was off in the unforeseeable future.
Gable underplayed the part. As Parnell, he refused to fight certain fights, because of the gentleman who he was. For Parnell, it wasn't worth his valuable time to set himself up for more public ridicule and opposition. That would have meant more strain upon his weak heart, which he didn't need. He also may have had high blood pressure.
Anyone badgered and threatened for several years by political opposition is bound to end up with health issues. It was only a matter of time before Parnell would succumb to a life-ending illness. He gave everything to his political life, and he got paid back by extreme jealousy and backstabbing. This still happens today.
Edna May Oliver was a blonde here. Curly Jean Harlow? This time, Edna looked almost cute and adorable. Aunt Ben was almost nasty with the character of Billie Burke, constantly browbeating that pestering gnat.
Billie Burke was adorable here, and her usually flighty, flittery character with little more than sawdust in her cabeza. This was highly calculated; who was better at this than she? Don't forget that she embarked upon her latent film career after an earlier successful stage career. This was done in order to pay off the expenses of her late husband, that wastrel Florenz Ziegfeld. Ziegfeld lost his fortune in the Stock Market Crash of 1929, and passed away in 1932, broke. The Wizard of Oz was soon to become a memorable role for Billie Burke Ziegfeld, and where would we be without that famous pink-gowned bubble-riding Good Witch of the North?
Myrna Loy was excellent. Her gowns were charming and beautiful. She portrayed platonic Katie, but in real life the character had three Parnell children while married to O'Shea. It is quite different seeing Loy with Gable, instead of with William Powell in The Thin Man films. I do miss seeing the sweet little dog, however. Besides, Gable was way more gorgeous than Powell could ever have hoped to be.
Remember that this film was Post-Code (ending mid-1934). Now, illegitimate children could not even be hinted at. An earlier Gable film shows him as a physician attending a girlfriend's surgery, but in the real story the woman had a botched abortion trying to end the life of the baby. -
Eric26626 March 2018Parnell is one of those costume dramas that had a good idea, but the execution just didn't work. I'm a huge Gable and Loy fan, but it was hard sitting through this movie. As perfect as Gable would be as Rhett Butler two years later, he was completely wrong for Parnell. Equally, Myrna Loy was tremendous as Nora Charles in the two Thin Man movies prior to this film, but the chemistry between her and Gable in this film is bad, real bad. The love affair felt rushed and poorly scripted and the two actors, who were really good together in Manhattan Melodrama and Wife Vs. Secretary, just didn't seem to connect in this film. It makes me think it was either the writing or the directing.
As far as the historical aspects go, this is also poorly handled. The romance between Parnell and the married Katie O'Shea was more sordid and scandalous than depicted in the movie. Parnell fathered three children with Katie which is never mentioned. Parnell also sported a full beard which Gable refused to do. Lastly, Parnell was a more sensitive character while Gable plays him as he does most of his roles, a man's man. This movie also nearly cost us Gable playing Rhett Butler. The reception and box office on this movie was so bad, Gable threatened never to do another historical costume drama and had to be convinced to play Rhett Butler. Whew. Thank god he changed his mind.
If you like the actors involved, its a nice companion to some of their other pairings, but its easily the worst films of their careers. -
mrturk18222 January 2018It's been roughly over 80 years now, and anyone who really likes to keep up with the entire history of film is still wondering how the heck did this dud ever came about. It has a lot of promising elements. It has Clark Gable and Myrna Loy, both phenomenal actors, and John M. Stahl, who's done pretty good films before. But for some reason, they weren't bringing their best to this biopic about the Irish politician Parnell. For brilliant actors, both Gable and Loy are uninvested, and their chemistry is unconvincing. If something like that's going to happen, it would have to come down to the direction of Stahl. He had no idea how to properly interpret this real-life story, which got padded down by too much fluff, inaccuracy, and a running time that leaves you bored out of your mind. And whoever did the makeup job on Gable should've been fired. Yeah, there's some cinematic intergrity to be found here, but for the most part, it was an off day for the talented people at the forefront of this movie. Eh, it happens.
Score: 27/100 -
WarnersBrother7 July 2006When I saw that "Parnell" was coming up on TCM, I eagerly TIVO'd it, as an avid Gable fan and a rabid Loy fan. Plus, it enjoys an infamous reputation as a stinker and Gables worst movie. Coincidently I had earlier this week watched "Gone with the Wind" in it's entirety for the first time in about 5 years. This reinforced my three emotions about "Wind": It's the greatest movie ever made though not the best; It's script is a cloying, almost craven ode to the old South including the racist fantasy of happy slaves "diggin' fo' da South!";Lastly that as great a cast as it has, and how wonderful Vivian Leigh is, Gable steals the picture. He IS Rhett Butler. The film slows whenever he is offscreen, and lights up when he is on. No Gable, and Selznick has half the picture.
Having seen "Parnell" (and I made myself watch it twice) I agree with other reviewers that other actors might have been better suited to the script and the director. However, I utterly disagree that that Gable is miscast;He could easily been great in this: He (and the rest of the film)were mis-DIRECTED. I can't imagine how this picture came to completion under the strict system at MGM. Stahl should have been yanked off and sent packing after the first days rushes. Was Louis B. Mayer off somewhere in space? It is the most shocking directorial failure I have ever seen from MGM.
Gable merely followed his direction, which I think must have been "Clark, I want you to think of Ronald Coleman underplaying. Now I want you to do it just like that, but think Coloeman on opium....and kinda fey" It is extremely obvious that Stahl imagined this role for Coleman, Leslie Howard, Robert Donat or even as someone else has said, Walter Pigeon. It only makes it worse that that the real George Parnell was much closer to Rhett Butler than he was to the scipt of this piece.
Gable, unlike todays leading men, was notoriously not a creampuff. I am frankly surprised that after this thing flopped, he didn't beat the hell out of Stahl. Famously, Gable was afraid of period pieces after this and reluctant to play Rhett. But having now seen Parnell, I believe that this experience also lead him to be wary of "Wind"s first director, George Cukor who, like Stahl, was known for "womens pictures", and summarily helped lead to Cukors dismissal from that film.
Having said all this, if you have the chance to see it, do. it's not a zero...maybe a 3.
BTW, as a postscript: Someone commented that Gable doesn't affect an Irish accent, which is probably wise....remember, he was the only one in Gone With the Wind without a bad Southern accent :-) -
HotToastyRag21 August 2023Parnell is not a well known old movie, but even at the time, it didn't go over well with audiences. It was such a box office bomb, Clark Gable vowed he'd never make another period piece again. We can all have a chuckle at his promise, since he was shortly afterwards cast as Rhett Butler in Gone With the Wind, but it certainly explains why he didn't want to take that part.
Clark starred as Charles Parnell, an Irish politician at the end of the 1800s. As usual, he didn't put on any accent for the role. Neither did Myrna Loy, his leading lady. But why wasn't it Robert Montgomery or Franchot Tone, actors who did put on Irish accents for their movies? Clark and Myrna played love interests in seven movies, so they certainly had their chemistry practiced. In this one, she's an unhappily married woman, and despite the huge political risks to getting involved with her, Clark can't resist her. This was a true story, so if you're cringing and wondering why Clark couldn't put the good of the country ahead of a pretty face, just remember that the real Parnell couldn't either. Personally, I found the romance a little irritating, since so much was at stake. But that's what true love means!
In the supporting cast, you'll see lots of familiar faces, like Edna May Oliver, Edmund Gwenn, Donald Crisp, Alan Marshal, Billie Burke, and Donald Meek. But the biggest treat of all is to sit through a Clark Gable movie and not hear him shout. Perhaps Gable really did his research and wanted to give a good impression of Parnell, if he was soft spoken, or perhaps he just wanted to try a departure from his usual loud, shouting delivery. Whatever the case, he seemed like a totally different actor, and it was very nice to see him try a different acting style. -
eamiller-880117 August 2022I only watched this as part of my Myrna Loy viewing quest, and it's far from my favorite movie, but it's also far from the worst that I've seen of hers.
It was just...there. At one point, there was a courtroom scene, and that added a bit of tension, but that only brought my overall score up to a 5.
Overall, it seemed slow and went on and on, yet the story didn't really progress very far. Loy and Gable weren't terribly well cast here, however they and their characters just didn't have much to do, just talk, fret, talk some more. -
dbdumonteil15 October 2002John Stahl is famous for his tear-jerkers -often excellent- which make ladies (and gentlemen)cry rivers of tears.Remember "only yesterday" "back street" or his precedent movie "the magnificent obsession"."Parnell " is another matter because it deals with the life and times of an Irish hero who fights for his people right ,a real human being ,not,say, a Fanny Hurst's character.The problem is that Gable's and Loy's characters resemble Fanny Hurst's characters.The movie runs almost two hours and the screenplay is often muddled and confuse.Arguably,Stahl hesitates between a straight political biography -and he's not really good at that- and a full bore melodrama -Gable's and Loy's impossible love)and it satisfies neither the fans of the first genre nor the soap operas' buffs.The ending ,which is guaranteed to send the sensitive people tearing through a ton a kleenex,is pure Stahl Stuff. Best part comes from Edna May Oliver ,playing Loy's auntie.Otherwise,a disappointment and .. a bore.