If I Were Free

If I Were Free is based on a John Van Druten play that never got over to Broadway entitled Behold We Live. The British stiff upper lip tradition is shown at its finest or its silliest depending on your point of view.

Barrister Clive Brook and Interior Decorator Irene Dunne unhappily wed to others fall in love. Brook carries with him a souvenir of the last war which causes him all kinds of health problems and being married to a cold fish of a wife Lorraine McLean doesn't help.

Irene Dunne is married to Nils Asther a real smooth operator who works in the nether regions of morality and legality. He's got the best role in the film and makes it count with only a few lines.

At this point in her career Irene Dunne was churning out these soap operas regularly at RKO. I think the ending looked like it was tacked on. I'm reasonably sure this was not the ending the author had in mind.

Irene Dunne fans will like it and Clive Brook beats out Herbert Marshall for the best British stiff upper lip.

Two desperately unhappy people, both trapped in loveless marriages, meet one night by chance in Paris...

IF I WERE FREE is a fine example of what could be done with a soap opera plot when given the advantages of excellent acting & good production values. In less expert hands the film could have easily become awkward & mawkish; instead, the viewer is given slightly over an hour of solid entertainment.

Irene Dunne & Clive Brook are first rate as the sensible lovers who enter a relationship with their eyes wide open. Some clever scenes with sophisticated dialogue - going through her childhood books, visiting his favorite old church - makes their interaction a delight.

Considerable contributions are also given by the supporting performers: Henry Stephenson as Brook's jolly legal friend and Vivian Tobin as his pixilated wife are very amusing. Laura Hope Crews as Brook's free spirited mother & Tempe Pigott as Dunne's Cockney housekeeper add their own style of drollery to the proceedings.

Silent film star Nils Asther scores in the small role of Dunne's caddish husband. His celebrity had considerably dimmed with the arrival of talking pictures, but given a decent role this actor could still deliver the goods.

Movie mavens will recognize an uncredited Halliwell Hobbes as Brook's butler.

Irene Dunne and Clive Brooke find love after each loses it in unwanted marriages--she because of an abusive spouse and he because of a wife who pursues a marriage in name only. While Dunne's character Sara has the courage to stand up to and leave Nils Asther's no good Tono, Clive Brooke's Gordon seems more resigned to his fate. That is until he discovers that the new girl of his fancy loves him too. That is why this story works. Because love is lovelier the second time around, when both partners truly appreciate the fact that they have been blessed with a second chance. I love Irene Dunne in her very early, pre-Code film phase. She is so fresh faced and fun loving, especially in the scene where Brooke literally sweeps her off her feet in the churchyard and whisks her away and she says "Well, alright!". As if to say, it's about darn time you showed me how you really feel! All's well that ends well and the lovers are united in the final scene where we see them blissfully floating downstream with their erstwhile friend Hector sitting in the bow. We find out that they have indeed sealed the deal as Sara admiringly glances at her wedding ring, the outward symbol of her newfound respectability with Gordon and more poignantly as the reflection of their wedded bliss.

Irene Dunne fans will probably like the film. Clive Brook is absolutely wooden. What a poor choice for Dunne's leading man.

Brook's facial expression hardly changes, whether he's supposed to be happy or sad, whether he's speaking of his despair or whether he's making love to Dunne. His kissing is positively mechanical. He spends most of the film looking away from his fellow actors or looking down at the floor. In fact, he was much older (about 46) than his character was supposed to be (38), and he looks it.

The plot now seems tired. The plot of a later film, "In Name Only", bears a lot of similarities to this film: (1) Man in unhappy marriage meets his "soul-mate"; (2) Wife won't give him divorce; (3) Sickness in hospital with man calling out for his paramour rather than his wife. This begs the question—which of the authors copied the other? This film hasn't aged well. Since it was made pre-code, they could have spiced this up, but didn't. There are many other films of this vintage which we still enjoy seeing today, but in my opinion, this film isn't one of them.

I enjoyed this 1933 movie made before the censors had their hand into things. After 1934 you would not have seen this same story, the unwanted wife would have had to die or would have been a bad wife and a divorce the right thing for her husband to do. The story is rather sophisticated in that the unwanted wife is just asked to step aside so her husband's love affair could be made legitimate. Oh,they had made an agreement that if either one got tired of the other than one or the other could walk away from the marriage with no argument. Apparently the unwanted wife had had an affair earlier, it didn't work out so she wanted to hang on to what she had and not give her husband up to Irene Dunne's character. Though Clive Brock's character was diagnosed with a life-threatening problem that required a very risky surgery, the unwanted wife did not want the divorce and demanded that his lover, Dunne leave the hospital even in the face of the fact that Brock was near death and calling for Dunne and not his wife. The wife does not want to allow the visit but Dunne pushes by and goes to the dying man's bedside and her presence stimulates Brock's recovery from surgery and they are seen in the last scene as a married couple on holiday. Censors would not have permitted this to pass if done later than the mid thirties. Especially since the unwanted wife did not want or agree to the divorce when she found out that her husband was having an affair and wanted to leave her for another woman. It was a good story and I would see it again.