The Prodigal

How much you like this picture depends on how much you like Lawrence Tibbett. He is in almost every scene and the picture is clearly designed for him, and he doesn't disappoint. Tall and handsome and with a great baritone voice, he carries the picture through all of its illogical eccentricities and old-fashioned moral values.

He is the scion of a wealthy southern family who 'hit the road' and became a hobo after becoming disenchanted with the graceful plantation way of life. He returns home after five years to a mixed welcome, from his mother who adores him and his brother who hates him. His brother's wife, played by Esther Ralston, is also in his corner. The story is trifling and dated but I felt Tibbett makes it work, right up to and including the peculiar ending. The plantation workers were stereotyped and this couldn't be made now, but it worked in 1931.

Not sure you will take to it, unless you are a fan of one of the Metropolitan Opera's great voices.

7 stars - Website no longer prints my star rating.

"The Prodigal" is a movie that suffers from two major problems. The first is technical, as the movie has rather poor sound...which a problem since it features the opera singer, Lawrence Tibbet, and it doesn't show off his skills well at all. The problem is common in films made up to about 1932, as sonud technology wasn't great and the resulting sound was weak and tinny. The second is a product of the times in which it was made...and that's the antics of Steppin Fetchit and a very problematic musical number called 'chitlins'. When seen with modern sensibilities, they both make you cringe and I am not in any way apologizing for the racist depictions in the film. It's the way it was...though I am loathe to say the problematic scenes should be excised or the film censored. Instead....just watch it and hold on tight!

The story is about Jeffrey Farraday, a man who comes from a very wealthy Southern family...but has chosen, instead, to be a hobo! After five years of hobodom, Jeff is returning home for a brief visit....and it immediately becomes apparent why he left. His family are mostly a lot of stuck-up and stuffy jerks. The only saving graces among them are Jeff's mom and sister-in-law, Antonia. As for Antonia, however, she's miserable...as her marriage is loveless...and having Jeff visit is a breath of fresh air. So what's next for this dysfuctional family?

The saving grace in the film is Lawrence Tibbet. Although he only made a half dozen movies (at least one of which has been lost over time), he's excellent here in a singing and comedic role. His voice really is lovely...not so much operatic but powerful and pretty amazing...and I wish the recording was better.

So is it worth seeing? Well, it all depends on you. If you are a very politically correct sort who would rather die than see Steppin Fetchit and racist depictions in films, skip it by all means. But if you can look at the film in its historical context, you may find it's still pretty watchable.

By the way, the ending is about as indicative of the morality of the Pre-Code films than just about any I've seen. Watch the picture...you'll see what I mean.

The Prodigal isn't necessarily a bad film, and it is interesting in that it portrays adultery in a non-judgemental light, but it isn't good either. The production values are quite nice, the music is absolutely wonderful, Roland Young is nicely droll and Lawrence Tibbett with his charisma and big voice is a likable lead. However, Esther Ralston shows no chemistry with Tibbett and for me this is the only Lawrence Tibbett film where neither the comedy or romantic elements quite work, the comedy being unfunny excepting Young's drollness and the romance underdeveloped and syrupy. The story is also very creaky, the characters are stock and uninteresting and the film is too short and unevenly paced. I didn't like the representation of the plantation workers either, it was stereotyped and verged on racially offensive. Overall, interesting curiosity but not a treasure. Worth seeing for the music, the subject and Tibbett if not much else. 5/10 Bethany Cox

I'm a big fan of Metropolitan Opera baritone Lawrence Tibbett, so I sat through this movie. It wasn't easy, though. Tibbett only gets a few numbers, and he doesn't do anything noteworthy with any of them, even Vincent Youmans' very beautiful "Without a song." He is often very stiff, and while it is true that the script is very bad, he doesn't deliver most of his lines very well. So, in short, it really isn't worth sitting through 76 minutes of bad melodrama to see him.

The rest of the movie is just bad. The melodrama is bad, as I said, and none of the other actors do anything interesting with it.

And then there is the depiction of the black characters, starting with Stepin Fetchit. Even for a 1930s movie, it's bad.

So, my recommendation: if you want to hear Tibbett sing, go to YouTube or your record collection - if you're old enough to have one. Don't regret not seeing him act. He really doesn't here.

Five years after he had to hot-tail it out of town, Lawrence Tibbet returns with fellow tramps Roland Young and Cliff Edwards. He sings some songs, terrifies Stepin Fetchit and charms the children and Esther Ralston (Yowza!) and worries the men, who fear for their women-folk.

It looks like an attempt to do for Tibbet what The Champ did for Wallace Beery, but Harry Pollard ain't King Vidor. Once Tibbet gets a bath, everyone is clean and neat, especially the darkies down at the meeting house in the swamp who sing about chitlins. Except Roland Young. Of course, I love Young from the late 1930s, but it's nice to see he could do more, as here.