The Call Sheet:
William Powell, Kay Francis, Carole Lombard, Olive Tell, Gilbert
Emery
Behind the Camera:
Directed by Lothar Mendes, Screenplay by Herman Mankiewicz from a
story by Rupert Hughes, Cinematography by Victor Milner
Snapshot Thoughts:
Ladies’ Man is a fairly routine and static melodrama whose
main selling point is its rather sordid story of Pre Code loose
morals. William Powell plays Jamie Darricott, the titular ‘Ladies’
Man’ (the film’s euphemism for gigolo) who is the escort of
choice for middle aged socialite Mrs. Fendley (played by Olive Tell).
Mrs. Fendley is rich and bored, as her husband is too busy making
money to take her to the opera and go to parties with her. The
perpetually jaded looking Jamie fulfils his position with a resigned
stoicism due to the fact that it provides him with money to keep up
the pretence that he is a gentleman. A complication arises when Mrs.
Fendley’s young daughter Rachel (Carole Lombard) falls for Jamie
and he obliges to her overtures, creating an odd ménage a trios
between mother, daughter and gigolo that is mildly distasteful even
in the context of Pre Code bad behaviour. Jamie eventually meets
Norma Page (Kay Francis), a fairly normal woman and they start a
relationship while Jamie attempts to extricate himself from the
entanglements of his profession and start a new life with Norma.
From that brief synopsis we find a movie shrouded in a bleak air of tragedy where death constantly lurks. William Powell plays the part of Jamie in the restrained manner of a man married to his fate and tired of life. In Mrs. Fendley’s home he admires portraits of Catherine the Great and her lover the statesman Grigory Potemkin (I love how 30s films continually throw in these historical references assuming their audience knew full well that they were talking about. I wonder how many did? I had to look it up). They talk about how Potemkin ‘had to die’ for loving Catherine but that it was ‘a glorious death’ for such a love. The relationship is brought up several times throughout the film to remind us that following your heart results in death.
Jamie finds something to really live for when he meets Norma, but we know full well it is doomed (and if we didn’t, the fact that Mrs. Fendley and her daughter both proclaim that if Jamie doesn’t marry them they will kill him kind of gives it away). At this point we are supposed to feel some sympathy for Jamie’s dilemma, but it’s really difficult not to think he has willingly and selfishly brought it all on himself. Meeting Norma may have made him see the light and experience real love but he is still unrepentant for his lifestyle and prefers to blame busy husbands for creating the bored wives that provide a living for him. It’s a testament to the screen persona of William Powell that we feel anything at all for the cad.
Star Performances:
William Powell is his usual excellent self and without him
the movie would be like watching paint dry. He portrays Jamie
Darricott as a world weary, fatalistic traveller who is constantly
aware that his life can only end with premature death. Unfortunately
at times he is often too world weary which hurts the picture when the
poor dialogue and somnambulant pace really require a jolt of energy
and movement. Powell is good in the film but the restrictions of the
part really limit his ability to give his usual warm, assured
performance. Kay Francis, still a few films away from stardom gives a
rather charming performance as Norma. She is likable and feisty
despite her motivation being questionable (why exactly is she with
him?). Unfortunately she serves merely as window dressing for many of
her scenes, standing or sitting silently while other characters move
the plot on. However, it’s definitely a positive appearance for
her, and she has future star written all over her. Speaking of which,
the third part of the triumvirate of dream casting in the movie,
Carole Lombard acquits herself well as the highly strung daughter
Rachel. It’s not much of a part and indeed her character disappears
two thirds of the way through the movie but she shows poise and
charm. The scenes where she is blind drunk and acting alternately
silly then threatening are particularly good. Finally, plaudits must
also go to Olive Tell as the bored society wife who starts the whole
sorry mess. She looks and sounds like the typical middle aged
socialite of so many classic movies, yet instead of being shocked at
immoral behaviour, she is the one instigating it. It’s an
interesting role for her that continually plays against type.
Technical
Excellences: There’s not much to report here sadly. The
direction by Lothar Mendes, is flat and uninspiring. The fact that he
had previously worked with William Powell and Kay Francis several
times seems to made no difference to the quality of their
performances and the generally static visual style. Looking at his
other directorial efforts of the period, this seems to be his
characteristic style and generally his films rise and fall based on
the script and the charisma of the actors. Sadly here, neither are
particularly inspiring, with Herman Mankiewicz’s script delivering
some of the most stilted and dull dialogue imaginable. On the plus
side, there are some lovely sets, particularly the hotel lobby set
and the various society balls portrayed in the film look like they
take place in some suitable grand surroundings. However, the flat
direction generally reduces such scenes to vacant wide open spaces.
The Sublime: The
best bit of the movie is it’s finale, where Mr. Fendley finally
confronts Jamie about his dalliances with his family as a costume
ball is about to start. After a brief scuffle, Jamie falls to his
death from the hotel balcony and Mr Fendley takes his place leading
the procession at the ball. He walks with his wife as it slowly dawns
on her what he has done, his eyes glazed over as the police arrive.
It’s a really strong ending which in the hands of a better director
could have been a powerful scene of celebration slowly descending
into tragedy as the truth dawns on all involved. As it is it’s
still good, and capped off by Norma crying in the corner if the hall
as the dance begins. A policeman says to her “Were you in love with
him too?” and in a classic piece of Kay Francis tragedy she tearily
replies “You don’t have to feel sorry for me. He loved me. They
can’t take that away from me!”. She gives the camera a desperate,
hysterical look as the film ends, safely chalking up another entry in
the Pre Code book of miserable downbeat endings.
The Ridiculous: Kay
Francis’ fashions. I don’t know who was responsible (sensibly the
guilty party is left off the credits) but she wears some truly
ridiculous outfits in Ladies’ Man. First off she has a hand muff in
the hotel lobby that is the size of a baby seal (it may actually be a
baby seal). It’s so big it takes up most of a coffee table and
provides a useful ice breaker for Jamie to talk to her. Maybe that’s
why she was wearing it as it’s really difficult to miss. The film’s
designer then strikes again when it come to Kay’s evening wear. She
wears a fur coat that looks like a stuffed and mounted poodle lives
on her shoulders complete with a collar that even Liberace would say
“No, too much” when asked to wear. And after that there is her
dress. Wow. It’s a white (I think) number with polka dotted shiny
things on it that may or may not be bits of foil taped on, or the
entire 1931 supply of rhinestone, it’s difficult to tell. It also
seems to have bits that hang off it and move about and basically it
is a mess. From a distance it looks like a landing strip for a flying
saucer. If you need to see this film, if you really need to, it
should be to witness this monstrosity of misplaced glamour. No wonder
everyone at the nightclub was drunk - one look at her ensemble and
they were three sheets to the wind.
Is it worth
watching?: In a word, no. Unless you are a hardcore Pre
Code fan and have to see everything, I wouldn’t recommend it. It’s
the sort of film that is interesting as a glimpse of the average
filler material thrown out to a public demanding constant product.
Not every film was a priority and contracts had to be met so the
result is a movie like Ladies' Man. It takes a well known star, a
couple of up and coming players and some veterans then throws
together a bunch of ‘scandalous’ tropes involving sinful
behaviour. Add some melodrama, a contract director and mix. Quite
watchable, with hints at greater things but ultimately average and
uninspiring. It’s the sort of picture that filled up the bill of an
evening’s entertainment and was then instantly forgotten. And let’s
face it, there’s nothing wrong with that.
Of course, with that said, if you are true connoisseur of 30s high fashion and impeccable glamour then Ladies’ Man is one of the greatest films ever made.
Random Quote: “Women
are always waiting for someone, and then Mr. Darricott comes along!”
