winstonchurchill-93755 Heiress fins in the 30's are most always interesting and entertaining. The message is the same: rich bsd, poor good. He, it works. Bette Davis was a versatile actress who could pull off anything. George Brent made a good partner. 1929-1939 produced the most enjoyable films over other decades. It's pathetic that TCM feels the need to apologize for non PC movies. Soon, movies that display human nature accurately may be banned. Enjoy them while you can. This is a fun one.

ksf-2 Twenty-eight-year-old Bette Davis had been making films for five years, quickly working up to lead, and pretty much the same for George Brent. They would appear in about TWELVE films together in the 1930s and 1940s. Rich girl Daisy (Davis) meets reporter Johnny (Brent), in a case of mistaken identity. At first, she is angry at him, but they quickly hit it off. Eugene Palette is in here too, with his deep, booming voice. Some interesting bits about Palette's life, if you have the time to read it. The story here has ups, downs, around the mulberry bush, as they used to say. Rawtha a silly plot, but easy to watch, and its only 68 minutes long. One odd bit of timing... at one point, Daisy yells "If you don't stick to our agreement, I'll break my contract", and soon after filming "Arrow", Davis DID walk out on her contract. Showing on Turner Classic now and then. Directed by Alfred Green, who had directed some of the biggies in the business, starting in the days of the silents. Story by Michael Arlen, who had created the character "The Falcon", in all those films in the 1940s.

trimmerb1234 I knew nothing of this movie before starting to watch it however within minutes it became quickly apparent that she is surrounded by a cast below her league and I began to wonder if this was Bette Davis's last Warner Bros picture which indeed it was.Prickly, fastidious Bette Davis knew her own worth and while other stars - see Rosalind Russel in "The Women" - could clown as well as be serious, Davis's haughtiness and seriousness about her craft made this an absolute no no. Here amiable George Brent was no "A List" star and some of the support is decidedly mediocre. In the movie she has longish exchanges with, and must submit to being I think playfully slapped on the back by, an actor some leagues below her. She was an actress who could and did frequently signal boredom and distaste when the plot has her in substandard company. In terms of fellow cast it is clear that she is here but the script demands that she doesn't indicate or feel that. As a viewer I thought the movie was more than she could - or deserved to - take. That Warners did not see that is curious. Perhaps their sense hitherto of owning, contractually, their stars who had to do what they were told. Perhaps it is hindsight - what the world came to know later of her character and talent. "Now Voyager" has her cast as a drab - she was not vain about her appearance, but in that, cast with the superbly charming, intelligent talented Claude Raines she had a part and co-star equally worthy of her talent. She was surely right to demand that the parts and co-stars matched her own high standards. Classic movies fully worthy of her talent were the result.

David (Handlinghandel) George Brent is a reporter sent to interview an heiress. She is supposedly the heir to a face cream fortune. He interviews her on her yacht. They fall for each other in bathing costumes.It turns out (quite early) that she is not an heiress. She part of an advertising campaign for the cold cream.The movie follows the ups and downs of their romance.The supporting cast does little to buoy it up. Davis and Brent carry the picture. Though it's fairly predictable, it is also fairly entertaining. It's far from her best. But, especially considering its obscurity in her oeuvre, it's not one of her worst, either.