The Golden Arrow (1936)

Overrated and overhyped

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

A lot of fun.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

The Golden Arrow casts Bette Davis and George Brent as a typical 30s heiress who abounded in so many films and the reporter who married her. Heiresses and reporters, ever since It Happened One Night they were together in movies like ham and eggs.But there's an interesting twist on it here. Davis is a pseudo-heiress hired by Henry O'Neill to play his daughter and live the good life as a walking breathing advertisement for his cosmetics. Of course reporters are to be avoided as they tend to get curious and ask embarrassing questions. But Davis falls for Brent and they marry.After which like Tyrone Power in Love Is News and That Wonderful Urge he becomes the object of press scrutiny. Now George knows how the boyfriends of Madonna and Paris Hilton feel.This screwball comedy is not the best of material for Davis and Brent who certainly did some classics later on. But it's passably amusing and Bette's fans will like it.

"The Golden Arrow" is for the most part a delightful, if not heavy-weight, film, and is definitely worth watching all 68 minutes worth. It opens in wild pre-code fashion, with a gaggle of wealthy Depression-era socialites firing arrows into the bathroom of a surprised and very naked man in a bathtub – he actually is shown standing up out of the tub – and he is quite obviously naked, did I mention that? But then the show really begins.To me the most delightful scene occurs early on, when Bette Davis, playing a rich heiress, invites reporter George Brent to talk to her, and swim with her, in her yacht's little pool, although Brent is only a reporter, and not the rich gentleman she thinks he is. Although never beautiful, Bette Davis comes across as quite attractive in her energetic and perky way in many of her early movies, and I think this scene, in which Davis shows an astounding amount of leg, may be perhaps the sexiest of her career. And her chatter with Brent is quite enjoyable here, perhaps because the scene involves only the two of them, with no weak distracting supporting cast present, even if they both may be wearing the most unflattering and unattractive bathing suits in the history of movies.Bette Davis totally dominates this movie, completely outclassing all the other actors; even George Brent, always likable, does not try to compete with Bette, instead wisely spending most of the film grim-faced and grumpy. He does have the funniest line in the film, though, when he greets his valet, who he despises, with "Hello, Useless".Carol Hughes plays the "other" rich heiress in this film, and does not play her role badly; she is not completely unattractive. But it is astounding how weak she is when side-by-side with the great Bette Davis. Or maybe it's the other way around: we really appreciate how magnificent Davis is when we can see her next to some Warner Brother's competition.In good old Depression-era fashion, the rich snobs of Europe are played as buffoons, and we are asked to cheer Davis' decision to marry a real American – nothing wrong with a little nativism. And Eugene Palette gets a nice little role playing a self-made millionaire common man with a family that drives him completely nuts – a role he played to perfection in that same year of 1936, in the great "My Man Godfrey".Easily recommended little film, even if ultimately a little predictable.

The Golden Arrow (1936) ** (out of 4) Pleasant, if rather forgettable, romantic comedy from Warner has a heiress (Bette Davis) growing tired of people controlling her life so she hits the town with a reporter (George Brent) who had previously tried to get a story from her. While out the duo have a good time and the rich lady requests that they get married for convenience sake but the reporter requests that he not use any of her money. The plot of this thing is rather stupid and goes in all sorts of directions. While the film remains entertaining thanks to the stars, one can't help but feel that their talents are being wasted in such a minor film like this. Again, if you're a fan of Davis or Brent then you're going to at least be entertained from start to finish but this is clear case where the studio factory was just pumping out material without putting too much effort into it. The film starts off well enough as Davis does a very good job playing the fun loving girl who's just wanting to get out from under the control that people have on her. I thought the scenes with her and Brent at the fair were a lot of fun and it really did seem as if the two stars were having a blast. The film certainly takes a nose dive after the marriage as the screwball elements start to come into play and they just don't contain any spark or laughs. I thought the material just wasn't strong enough and Brent's constant hissy fits were more annoying than charming. Both leads are very good together and we get some nice support from Dick Foran and Eugene Palette but the story lets them all down.

This is an EXCELLENT example of early Bette Davis talent. The production is above average for 1936 timeframe. I cannot understand why the owners of the rights to this film have not put it on DVD. Owners, PLEASE PLEASE release it. I would buy it immediately. I have not seen it in more than thirty years, on television, but remember it well.