Own the rights?
18 out of 20 people found the following review useful: A Darker Social Climber, 5 September 2004 Author: nycritic
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The 1930s were the years that Joan Crawford came into her own as a star, and by 1934 her movies were a must-see. She had already charmed audiences in the previous decade by playing increasingly endearing performances in silents, breaking out as a jazz-baby right at the brink of the stock market crash, and moving into talkies. In those days, an actor was given the roles the studio believed he or she could play best in order to maintain a level of success in the box-office. Joan, unfortunately, worked at MGM, and Norma Shearer was the indisputable Queen of MGM by marriage to Irving Thalberg: hence, she had the choice roles to play, and Joan Crawford got only the rejects that Shearer refused to make. Somehow, she managed to make the best of her roles, but they were always a slight variation on the same the same theme -- the young, aspiring secretary/shop girl/heroine who wants to find love, rebukes the attention of one man for another one who will give her a more financial position. The lead frequently was Clark Gable; the second lead an equally secondary movie star -- Robert Young, Franchot Tone.Once the formula began to wear itself to shreds, Joan tried to get better roles but only got the same material. This is one of the clones of her movie roster of the 30s, complete with a heavy melodrama and Adrian gowns which make their required appearances and further his reputation. One thing must be said, though -- Crawford for once is unsympathetic from start to sappy finish. Here she is pretty hell-bent on marrying rich and continuing her ruse albeit the circumstances, which seems to foreshadow the kind of power driven roles she would play in the early 50s.The movie is in its entirety decent (and Dorothy Arzner must have really been fond of Crawford as she photographs her strikingly well), the plot is unbelievable, and Crawford's do is one solid page-boy, refusing to get mussed up even after a fall from a (relatively short) cliff after a verbal tangle with Tone.
6 out of 6 people found the following review useful: Dreams come true, but they don't last.., 25 July 2006 Author: beyondtheforest from United States
If this were the typical Cinderella tale, Anni (Joan Crawford), a beautiful but hardened prostitute from Trieste, would have been whisked away to the wealthy vacation resort with clothes and money to spare, and some rich and dashing prince in shining armor would have fallen in love and married her (social class issues notwithstanding). MGM tries their very best to make the film appear to be a Cinderella story of that sort, but I am not unhappy they failed.The story does not turn out that way at all. We have Anni, given such a stellar characterization by Crawford (so perfect as hardened women who seek, but have been constantly been denied, love, in a quintessential role for her), but she is not simply a poor girl from the wrong side of the tracks. She is a prostitute in a dingy bar. We can see from the very first closeup that she is completely hopeless and disillusioned. Crawford's expression as she sings "Who Wants Love?" (an appropriately and brilliantly cynical love ballad which sets the tone for the film) is so brilliant, evocative, and controlled; the work of a great actress, indeed.A very wealthy count discovers her and sets her up for a stay in a resort for other wealthy people, where she can pose as an heiress and possibly attract a man. The catch here is the count is not motivated by altruism; he simply wants to satisfy a bet with a friend that social class has nothing to do with breeding, but just luck. Although he is probably right, there is something unkind about the way he treats the girl. Although at first it seems a kind thing to do (and if this was the Cinderella story it would be), this is not a fantasy but the real world, and in the real world dreams can be broken..The theme of the film is that of dreams being broken. Anni dreams of finding love, wealth, happiness, but eventually she learns no amount of posing or pretending or scheming can get her those things. The rich man she tries to snare turns out to be a cad, only interested in her as a mistress and not as a wife. Another dream is broken.. In the end, although in keeping with the Cinderella aspect of the story it appears she has fallen in love with the postal delivery man, it's obvious she has settled. She has thrown the childhood hopes to the wind, and is ready to accept love in practical terms. And when she settles, we know the biggest dream of all has broken, and Crawford, great actress that she was, shows us her heartbreak by registering extremely subtle emotions in her face, through her walk, and mannerisms.A remarkable film. An undiscovered masterpiece; perhaps Dorothy Arzner's best work.
7 out of 10 people found the following review useful: maybe a flop then... but its my favorite movie of all time, 25 June 2005 Author: original_sinner1978 from United States
actually this is the movie that made me fall in love with Joan Crawford and Franchot tone.this movie is kinda like a Cinderella story except it has a twist in the end. Or actually like another pretty woman only to me better.Franchot tone plays as the handsome postman and Joan Crawford plays as the beautiful hooker/prostitute.I'm not saying anything else to spoil it. i watch it every night before i go to bed.and think about it everyday.I'm hoping that it will soon be on DVD.nobody can ever say they are a true Joan Crawford fan and say they hate this movie.Joan Crawford shows her true ability as Anni.this movie is a true love story!
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful: Underrated and deserves better than it got..., 16 September 2001 Author: wrk6539 from Boston, MA
Well, you can't blame Joan for trying. Always wanting to go beyond that glamorous clothes-horse/shopgirl-makes-good mold in which MGM so successfully cast her throughout the 1930's, she was always attempting to outreach her grasp. When Metro's Austrian star Luise Rainer backed out of making a film of Molnar's THE GIRL FROM TRIESTE, a dark photoplay about a prostitute sent on a masquerade in the Tyrolean Alps, Crawford grabbed it, hoping to get her teeth into a meaty role. Imagine her chagrin when Metro executives "improved" the piece to be more suitable for Crawford's image, taking the meat and guts with it. What emerged was an uncomfortable picture built on compromises in an attempt to graft a typical Crawford/Cinderella plot onto what is basically a nasty, mean little story. Registering far below the Crawford usual at the paybox, THE BRIDE WORE RED started her career to skid.A closer look, however, reveals that not all of the edge has been softened from the piece. I wholeheartedly agree with the reviewer who calls this Joan's most underrated performance, and there is a reason we do not sympathize with this Cinderella. Crawford's Anni is cold and snappish, and has the potential to do real harm to some nice, decent folk. The film plays like the dark side of all of those rags-to-Adrian gown stories Crawford played in the Metro phase of her career, and CRAWFORD IS FULLY AWARE OF THIS. Although seemingly played straight, there is an irony underneath that tells us Crawford herself isn't crazy about Anni either. It's understandable that 1937 audiences did not warm to a Joan they couldn't root for (even her hair is cut into a severe, but stunning, pageboy), but it deserves real recognition now that we are removed from the era and have seen ALL the phases of Crawford's career. In many ways, it's a harbinger of the darker, icier roles she was to play at Warner Bros. and throughout the 1950's.The performances are uniformly good, with George Zucco strong as the decadent, evil Machiavelli who sends Anni on her masquerade, but Crawford, for the most part, is the standout. Only in the early scenes of the film, when she attempts to portray Anni as a world-weary honky tonk singer (in what must have been the cleanest, most glamorous "dive" in all of Trieste!!) does she fail to convince.(Ironically, Crawford's next film, MANNEQUIN, released early in 1938 and co-starring Spencer Tracy, was a strictly paint by the numbers Rags-to-Adrian tale, inferior to this, that found great favor with the movie-going public.)
5 out of 9 people found the following review useful: A hidden jewel in the acting crown of Crawford., 2 September 1999 Author: TOML-4 from nj, usa
Considered a flop in the past(it is the film that got Joan labeled box office poison, despite the fact that the film before it, Mrs. Cheyney, was a big hit), viewed today, it is incredible how much Joan gave to an obviously butchered script. Her scenes alone in her "ivory tower" of a room, especially when she notices that the birds have gone from their nest, are acting in it's highest form. Strangely, this is one of a number of films where she plays the working girl that we DO NOT feel much sympathy for her.
Very formulaic, but still well made and enjoyable, 29 April 2007 Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida
If you are a big fan of classic Hollywood films, then the chances are you've seen several Joan Crawford films like THE BRIDE WORE RED. MGM type-cast many of its stars during this period--Greta Garbo was the super-vamp, Jean Harlow the slut who used her body to sleep her way to the top, Myrna Loy was sweet and a bit kooky and Joan Crawford was a poor girl who THINKS happiness will be found by marrying a rich man. Of course, these stars did other films, but most of their films during the 30s were true to these images. As a result, while this Joan Crawford film is very good and very well made, it was totally formulaic--so much so that an astute viewer will not be the least bit surprised where it all ends.Given that you can get past this, the movie is very good--sort of like an odd variation of the Cinderella story. An eccentric rich man (George Zucco), on a lark, decides to dress up cheap lounge singer Crawford and send her to the smartest hotel in order to fool his friends into thinking she's a rich society woman. Once there, Crawford fits in rather well and rich Robert Young is smitten. While she does not seem to love him, Crawford sees marrying Young as a way to leave her life of poverty--since Zucco will only pay for her to pretend to be rich for a short period of time. The problem is that Franchot Tone plays a sweet but poor guy she meets at the hotel and Joan finds herself falling for him but also wanting to marry Young for his money. How all this is resolved is pretty predictable but there is a certain beauty and glossiness to the production that help it still be quite watchable.By the way, I was quite surprised to see Billie Burke play against type. Instead of being rich, kooky and sweet, she's a bit of a viper! Now that's interesting, huh?Oh, and in real life, Tone and Crawford were husband and wife...briefly.
3 out of 7 people found the following review useful: A Dull Curiosity., 26 March 2004 Author: tjonasgreen from New York, N.Y.
Despite the provocative title and the first few scenes, which suggest this might be an interesting variation on Shaw's "Pygmalion," we're actually back in Joan Crawford's MGM universe, where one suitor isn't enough if you can have two, and where Adrian can be counted on to provide a drop dead gown at regular intervals.This airless, relentlessly phony picture did Crawford no favors. For a major star she is remarkably inexpressive. Her face, so strong, angular and meticulously made up, is striking enough to get all our attention, but this curiosity is never repaid. We search Joan's face looking for fleeting expressions, varying moods, complex emotions but we get only a single mask of anxiety. Crawford in this period seems incapable of shaping a performance or giving a character flesh, blood and heart -- she just sleepwalks from scene to scene looking as perfect and lifeless as a mannequin (coincidentally the title of her next film).If glamor without rhyme, reason or variation is your idea of entertainment, you are welcome to it, but I thought THE BRIDE WORE RED was both strange and boring. By the way, the eponymous dress is kind of tacky but undeniably spectacular, and it sure looks red, even in black and white.
4 out of 9 people found the following review useful: What Joan Did, 8 November 2006 Author: medwardb1976 from United States
In about 1980 I saw this film at the UCLA Film Archives in a series presenting Dorothy Arzner directed films. There was a guest speaker at the event who was a personal friend of Arzner's. I don't remember her name, but she was introduced as, among other things, the writer for the script of "Craig's Wife" (1936; starring Rosalind Russell). She said she was on the set for some of the shooting of "Bride Wore Red," and described how Joan Crawford was completely uncooperative with the director. Originally it was written for Luise Rainer but for some reason she was unavailable. "So they got Joan Crawford who wasn't anything like her," and was not suited for the film in this woman's opinion. While she was on the set she witnessed how Dorothy Arzner would gently make suggestions as to how to play a scene, "...and Joan would scream, 'You'll destroy me! You'll destroy me!' and she would run up to L.B. Mayer and he would say, 'There, there Joan, play it your way." So she did, "...and frankly, the film bombed. But when you have a star that is entirely uncooperative, you can't blame the director." I hope I have quoted this woman accurately. That is what has stuck in my memory. I am a big Crawford fan, but her flaws were apparently spectacular. I just thought it would be interesting to record this bit of info.
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful: A Typical MGM Glamor Film, 6 November 1999 Author: nickandrew from PA
Crawford in this 1937 MGM "women's picture," plays a middle-class cabaret dancer who poses as a rich society girl as a prank to secretly snag a wealthy husband. What a plot!!! There are some beautiful settings (obviously fake) and the black-and-white photography could never be better.
Add another review
