There are two kinds of silent comedies: those starring recognized comedic actors (Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd, Charlie Chaplin, Laurel and Hardy, and so on), whatever their level of renown, and those starring actors who, whatever their level of renown, were not famous specifically for their comedy. The former are almost always guaranteed to be a blast; for the latter, results may vary significantly. Even before we consider the film itself, having a legend like Clara Bow attached to your picture is guaranteed to attract viewers, but not necessarily elicit laughs, and that's without even considering whether or not there will be expression herein of values that have not aged well over the past several decades. With all this very firmly in mind, how does Dorothy Arzner's 'Get your man' hold up? As if all this dry prattle weren't evidence enough, suffice to say that more than ninety years later, it's no premier gut-buster, and for both good and ill, it does dally with values that are alien to our modern world. It is still modestly fun, though, and sometimes that's all a flick needs to be to succeed.
It's fair to wonder exactly how this was received by audiences in 1927; in 2023, it takes fifteen minutes to earn its first laugh. In fairness, that paucity is no doubt informed by the tenor of the movie (bearing touches of romantic drama), and the changing of societal mores over the years. There's also the fact that, simply put, the feature as it exists is both damaged and incomplete. (Also in fairness, it takes only another ten to earn the second laugh, and yes, there are more.) None of this is to say that the title isn't enjoyable, because it certainly is, and it would be even if we weren't treated to specific highlights. I'll even say that it picks up as it goes along, building to a strong finish in the last minutes. Even as it presents in its extant form the story is rich with potential, and I'd rather like to see Louis Verneuil's play itself, or even a new period adaptation. The situational humor - peppered intermittently with splendid gags - really is a minor delight; the cast at large is wonderfully charming and capable, including Josephine Dunn and Harvey Clark, among others. And in all manners this is very well made, including Arzner's sharp direction, gorgeous sets and costume design, lovely hair and makeup, and even some unexpectedly smart cinematography.
One way or another this is no major must-see. It feels like some faults shine through even despite the status of the picture; one doesn't need to be familiar with Verneuil's stage play to get a sense that this screenplay had cut some corners. Even if you're a devotee of the silent era, or a huge fan of someone involved, I wouldn't say it's a priority; just as much to the point, there's nothing here to change the minds of those who have difficulty engaging with older cinema. I, who love silent films, also sat with mixed to high expectations based simply on the involvement of Bow at the peak of her career, and my reaction is relatively mild. Nonetheless it remains worthwhile on its own merits; owing to how language changes, there are even some bits that are even funnier now than they would have been upon release. Failing that, in the very least it is to be treasured as a (mostly) surviving silent feature. Nearly one century later there's nothing about 'Get your man' that comes across as a stroke of brilliance, not even some terrific shot composition, or the best of the comedy - yet while it may not demand viewership, it's still solidly if softly entertaining, and for those who are receptive to the style, I'm pleased to give it a fair recommendation.
