The Last of Mrs. Cheyney (1937)

How sad is this?

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Sparks fail to ignite in this light comedy about a bunch of jewel thieves and upper crust hypocrisy featuring an all star cast of Joan Crawford, Robert Montgomery and William Powell all handsomely photographed but uniformly dull and restrained. Faye Cheney (Crawford) dazzles the well heeled set with her charm and beauty. She soon finds herself pursued by two wealthy suitors but she has other plans. Her servants are actually a gang of thieves intent on ripping off the swells. When she becomes susceptible to the charms of Lord Dilling the caper begins to unravel.The Last of Miss Cheyney is well mannered slow and passionless. The larceny in the hearts of Crawford and Powell gives way to noble acts of self sacrifice and they both almost seemed fatigued by the whole idea. The comedy comes across forced and the intimacy between the leads passionless. As the plot begins to unfold a dowager suggests that the whole affair portends to French farce. We should be so lucky.

I've seen it twice and enjoyed it thoroughly each time. Still, not being an experienced movie critic, I'm grateful to Krorie for pointing out some valid deficiencies. For me, the scene in the beginning with Crawford in the wrong cabin (and bed) hooked me. Bruce's bumbling reaction was so natural, believable and funny I already decided I was going to like the rest. From then on, though, it does seem like the cast is just reciting lines. I found the constantly twisting plot at the end hard to keep up with. If anyone knows the name of the song Crawford plays on the piano, please let me know. Was it original or popular at that time?

SPOILERS BELOW ===================== So many criticisms here on the board, but most of them seem to focus on things like bad "ahhccents" and Production Code compliance. To me, such elements are just part of watching a movie from the 1930s -- (sort of like heavy-handed social welfare themes and hyper-realism in films from the 1950s.) If you know such stuff bothers you, you shouldn't be wasting your time on a 1930's pic (just as I tend to avoid those black & white issues pictures from the '50s.)But, if you can see your way past those endemic elements, this is not at all a bad film. The plot's sort of interesting (I was completely taken in before the big twist about 1/3 of the way into the movie), it has a nice amount of 1930's "isn't it just lovely to be rich?" fantasy, the acting is first rate and it's nice to see Crawford playing a (sort of) nice girl and Powell playing a (sort of) bad guy. In the trivia section it's said that Myrna Loy was originally supposed to play Crawford's part. Now, I ADORE Myrna Loy, but I actually think it was more effective to see Crawford here. With Loy and Powell in the movie, you would have known throughout that everything was going to end up light and cheery and romantic because that's the universe those two inhabit. But with Crawford, you just never know exactly where you're going -- is she going to be a good girl? Will romance overcome greed. Is she suddenly going to shoot someone? Will she go insane? I think she actually added some heft to the storyline.

Joan Crawford, desperate to get out of her shop girl roles, tries to re-do this Norma Shearer vehicle with somewhat staid results. Not for lack of trying -- when she really applied herself and if the part was written and directed well, she shone as clearly seen in GRAND HOTEL or THE WOMEN. The problem lies that the story, that of a jewel thief passing as high society with her partner-in-tow William Powell (who was used to farce and works well here), would have seemed better if Myrna Loy, who had better chemistry with Powell, had taken this part. Somehow something fails here. The comedy is really not all that there, and while Dorothy Arzner was ultimately credited as the director of this film, there were two others, and that makes for some eventual problems which will mar a film.