A Vida é uma Dança

Between the tacky title and the pre-Code year (1931), I was expecting a carload of cheap thrills. Happily, the first ten minutes does deliver. There's the tawdry lineup of taxi dancers waiting to get mauled; the over-loud bouncy band; and the tacky guys eager for ten cents of hard-boiled maybe's. Then there's the dressing room where the girls get to trade war stories and smooth out their nylons. No, it's not exactly the uptown social register, but it is colorful as heck. Plus, the slinky, gum-popping Stanwyck couldn't be more at home.

But then the story goes all soap-opera, as Barbara (Stanwyck) tries to hang onto her philandering husband, a very un-charismatic Eddie (Owsley), who also happens to steal from his employer (Cortez) who also happens to be an uptown socialite who also happens to have a yen for Barbara, of all people. Yes, it does get a little confusing. But hang on anyway, since our suddenly very faithful ex-taxi dancer has to suffer big time in order to deserve her eventual reward. I expect there wasn't a dry eye in the house.

No, I didn't get the cheap thrill carload I was hoping for. But Stanwyck does compensate for a lot. Plus I really liked the camaraderie amongst the girls, sort of like what you find among men in combat. But then I guess that fits. Anyhow, if you have a preference for weepies and gum-popping dames, this stone age talky fills the bill.

Fans of pre-Code films will forgive this 1931 Columbia Pictures feature directed by Lionel Barrymore (his last directorial effort) if only because it stars Barbara Stanwyck in an early role. As is the case with all stars, she is even then true in every moment, entirely believable, and far surpasses the wooden script and the rest of the cast. Most embarrassing is Monroe Owsley as her no-good husband; he is particularly bad, totally false, overacting. Ricardo Cortez has a thankless role and does his best. This is a perfect example of how a star can make something out of nothing by the sheer power of her personality.

This relic from before the days of the Production Code and the Hays Office is good fun, not great but entertaining.

Based on a song by Rogers & Hart that was an enormous hit at the time, the story revolves around dance hall girl Barbara Stanwyck who is romanced by wealthy businessman Ricardo Cortez (who was indecently handsome), but whose heart belongs to her bookish neighbor Monroe Owsley. She and Owsley marry, but keep it a secret, while she dismisses Cortez, who still holds out hope. She helps hubby get a job in Cortez's company, but married bliss quickly turns sour as Owsley develops a taste for the high life and steps out with a college sweetheart and gambles in high-stakes bridge (Yup! I know, it's pretty funny....). Finally he embezzles $5,000 from Cortez, and is about to go on the lam, when his devoted wife goes to Cortez....and I won't reveal anything else, although the ending was certainly a surprise.

Stanwyck is the best thing about this movie; in one of her earliest roles she's quite accomplished. Owsley is the weak point; he's unattractive and sniveling, while Cortez is amazingly suave and sexy, while his performance is earnest but unremarkable.

While ostensibly a drama, it's filled with laughs, many inadvertant as some elements of this movie have aged very poorly. But there are a lot of good witty lines; at one point Stanwyck says to Cortez, "My brains are in my feet, while yours are in...." That's pretty darn suggestive for 1931! There's a lot of bawdy and suggestive stuff in this flick, in the last days before the Code clamped down and whitewashed everything. An amusing antique, a good reminder of how far we haven't come in 70 years....this story could very easily be changed to fit 2003 but could keep the basic plot, with the original ending, in place.

... I wouldn't give you a plugged nickel for that heel husband of hers.

When we first meet Barbara O'Neill (Barbara Stanwyck) she's hustling dances at a dime a piece in a cheap Depression era dance hall. She seems to have a good enough head on her shoulders, one good enough to prevent her from descending down into prostitution or believing the lies of the customers that might want things to go further. This is not the tough hardened Stanwyck of Baby Face. However she genuinely likes Bradley Carlton (Ricardo Cortez), a wealthy businessman who just enjoys talking to her. She asks him for one favor, and that not for herself - to hire an out of work and soon to be homeless young guy who lives at the same boarding house she does, Eddie Miller (Monroe Owsley). She gets her favor.

For some reason the common sense Barbara has with men in the dance hall seems to elude her when it comes to Eddie. Beggars can't be choosers, but unfortunately so many are and Eddie is no exception. When he learns Barbara is working in a dance hall, not a dance school as she told him, he busts in and insists she quits and manages to fit a proposal somewhere in there too. The two hastily marry, and Eddie, once so grateful for a forty dollar a week job that would keep him fed and a roof over his head soon wants more than he has - more of a job, a higher class lifestyle, maybe even a higher class woman. I'll let you watch and see where all of this goes.

It was fun to see Ricardo Cortez playing a good guy for a change - not a doormat - just a good guy. I also really liked the playing of the title song in its entirety after the movie ends - it was a nice Depression era touch.

Ten Cents a Dance (1931)

*** (out of 4)

Criminally underrated drama about a woman (Barbara Stanwyck) working at a dance hall who agrees to marry a poor man (Monroe Owsley) even though she could have had a rich man (Ricardo Cortez) who was in love with her. Soon after the marriage the woman learns that her husband is a womanizer and a thief but she's forced to ask the rich man for money when her husband falls into some major trouble. I had read so many negative reviews about this thing (including one in Leonard Maltin's Classic Movie Guide) that it really took me by surprised and I'd probably go as far as to call it one of the most underrated and un-appreciated films from this era. I'm not going to say this is a lost masterpiece or some important piece of film history but it's certainly a highly entertaining gem that deserves to be re-discovered. What really caught me off guard was the performance of Stanwyck who is quite remarkable. She made a career out of playing tough women who wouldn't take any crap from anyone but here she's the complete opposite as her character is so weak and fragile that it really shocked me at how terrific the actress played it. Just take a look at the first ten minutes when she's forced to be tough inside the dance hall but then the next scene she's falling for the sad story being told to her by Owsley. The compassion Stanwyck expresses in this scene is something I've never seen from her and the eventual weakness of her character is something else I've never seen her do. She handles all of this extremely well and it really made me wish we had gotten to see more roles like this. Sure, she's a legend playing the tough girl but she really was remarkable here and sold every inch of her character. Owsley is also terrific as he too has different sides of his character and he does both of them with ease. I thought he was terrific as the sweet, friendly guy that Stanwyck marries and that sleazy side comes across without any issues. Cortez is another major plus getting to play a soft-hearted guy. Barrymore's direction is pretty straight-forward as he doesn't go for much style but instead lets the performance lead the film. I thought he did a very good job at keeping the drama going and it's a shame this turned out to be his last directorial job. The film is based on a popular song of the day and when I saw this on the credits I thought we were going to be in for a long and boring film but it was the complete opposite. This Columbia film has pretty much been forgotten, which is a real shame but hopefully more people will give it a shot. Film buffs will also notice a line that would become legendary in CASABLANCA but here it is over a decade earlier.