Because the Stanislavsky method of playing bridge has no rules, it promotes marital harmony for those who stick with it.Because the Stanislavsky method of playing bridge has no rules, it promotes marital harmony for those who stick with it.Because the Stanislavsky method of playing bridge has no rules, it promotes marital harmony for those who stick with it.
- Directors
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 2 wins total
Wally Albright
- Boy Bridge Player
- (uncredited)
William Bailey
- Van Dorn's Bridge Partner
- (uncredited)
Reginald Barlow
- Theodore
- (uncredited)
Maurice Black
- Paul
- (uncredited)
Harry C. Bradley
- Bridge Match Referee
- (uncredited)
Jack Byron
- Lola's Contest Escort
- (uncredited)
Walter Byron
- Barney Starr
- (uncredited)
Joseph Cawthorn
- Alex Alexandrovitch
- (uncredited)
Jimmy Conlin
- Oscar Smelt
- (uncredited)
George Cooper
- Josh
- (uncredited)
Gino Corrado
- Barber
- (uncredited)
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Grand Slam (1933)
** (out of 4)
An intelligent Russian man (Paul Lukas) living in New York City and working as a waiter sees Bridge as a childish game but when he beats a world famous player, his wife (Loretta Young) talks him into letting a ghost writer (Frank McHugh) write a book about it. Soon the husband and wife are rolling into money and fame but as we know there's always a price to pay with this. It should be noted that GRAND SLAM was made during a time when Bridge was storming the country much like the way poker did this past decade. It should also be noted that I don't know a thing about Bridge and this film doesn't try to explain anything about it so clearly it was meant for people who know the game. Some of my favorite actors appear in this movie but sadly the film isn't all that memorable. I'm willing to say that if you know the game then you'd probably want to add on an additional half star but I'd say the rest will find much of the humor flying over their heads. I think for the most part the cast members do a nice job with Lukas leading the film as the man too smart for the sport but soon finds himself being turned upside down by the fame. Lukas certainly makes you believe he's this genius and there's no denying that his acting has a certain style all his own. McHugh is always nice to see in a movie like this because his fast talking always keeps the speed up. Glenda Farrell, Helen Vinson and Roscoe Karns round out the supporting players. Loretta Young, my favorite actress, isn't given a very good part but she does what she can with it. As usual she's very easy on the eyes and she also adds that charm like only she has. The film is done in an extremely light manor meaning that most of the situations are quite over-the-top and silly. Just check out the scenes with the fighting couples trying to play Bridge but they can't get through an entire game without smacking each other around. The ending has a big game with the principle characters going at it but the suspense that the filmmakers go for never reaches a high level but things have already fallen apart by this time anyways.
** (out of 4)
An intelligent Russian man (Paul Lukas) living in New York City and working as a waiter sees Bridge as a childish game but when he beats a world famous player, his wife (Loretta Young) talks him into letting a ghost writer (Frank McHugh) write a book about it. Soon the husband and wife are rolling into money and fame but as we know there's always a price to pay with this. It should be noted that GRAND SLAM was made during a time when Bridge was storming the country much like the way poker did this past decade. It should also be noted that I don't know a thing about Bridge and this film doesn't try to explain anything about it so clearly it was meant for people who know the game. Some of my favorite actors appear in this movie but sadly the film isn't all that memorable. I'm willing to say that if you know the game then you'd probably want to add on an additional half star but I'd say the rest will find much of the humor flying over their heads. I think for the most part the cast members do a nice job with Lukas leading the film as the man too smart for the sport but soon finds himself being turned upside down by the fame. Lukas certainly makes you believe he's this genius and there's no denying that his acting has a certain style all his own. McHugh is always nice to see in a movie like this because his fast talking always keeps the speed up. Glenda Farrell, Helen Vinson and Roscoe Karns round out the supporting players. Loretta Young, my favorite actress, isn't given a very good part but she does what she can with it. As usual she's very easy on the eyes and she also adds that charm like only she has. The film is done in an extremely light manor meaning that most of the situations are quite over-the-top and silly. Just check out the scenes with the fighting couples trying to play Bridge but they can't get through an entire game without smacking each other around. The ending has a big game with the principle characters going at it but the suspense that the filmmakers go for never reaches a high level but things have already fallen apart by this time anyways.
This may be the only full-length Hollywood film about contract bridge so I suppose you could as well call it the "War and Peace" or the "Abbott and Costello Go to Mars" of contract bridge films. The point is that it has as much connection with how bridge is played as its contemporary "Horsefeathers" has with how football is played. In case you missed it, Harpo Marx scores the winning touchdown in "Horsefeathers" while driving a horse-drawn garbage truck.
However, "Horsefeathers" did make some salient points about universities where football has priority over education and the administration pays professional "students" to play who never see the inside of a classroom. Of course that was back in the 1930s. Today's universities are ...
Never mind. Getting back to bridge, in 1931-32 the game enjoyed its fifteen minutes of fame with "The Bridge Battle of the Century" between Ely Culbertson and Sidney Lenz, with the winner getting to sell more books about his bidding system. The fifteen minutes were somewhat literal in this case as NBC radio broadcast a fifteen-minute summary of each day's action, which was also reported on the front pages of the nation's newspapers.
So just as "Horsefeathers" was more accurate about the milieu in which football was played than about how the game was played, "Grand Slam" has its fun with the idea of crowds gathered around radios and electronic news tickers for the latest results of a bridge match. It's also fairly accurate in depicting the whining, gloating and backbiting endemic among serious bridge players, of which I am one.
Aside from that, it's a lightweight romantic comedy of average quality. Nothing really "pre-code" about it. If you play bridge at all you may get a kick out of the ridiculousness of the few scenes where they're supposedly playing the game. If not, I hope this description of the film's circumstances will increase your enjoyment of it.
However, "Horsefeathers" did make some salient points about universities where football has priority over education and the administration pays professional "students" to play who never see the inside of a classroom. Of course that was back in the 1930s. Today's universities are ...
Never mind. Getting back to bridge, in 1931-32 the game enjoyed its fifteen minutes of fame with "The Bridge Battle of the Century" between Ely Culbertson and Sidney Lenz, with the winner getting to sell more books about his bidding system. The fifteen minutes were somewhat literal in this case as NBC radio broadcast a fifteen-minute summary of each day's action, which was also reported on the front pages of the nation's newspapers.
So just as "Horsefeathers" was more accurate about the milieu in which football was played than about how the game was played, "Grand Slam" has its fun with the idea of crowds gathered around radios and electronic news tickers for the latest results of a bridge match. It's also fairly accurate in depicting the whining, gloating and backbiting endemic among serious bridge players, of which I am one.
Aside from that, it's a lightweight romantic comedy of average quality. Nothing really "pre-code" about it. If you play bridge at all you may get a kick out of the ridiculousness of the few scenes where they're supposedly playing the game. If not, I hope this description of the film's circumstances will increase your enjoyment of it.
One of the funniest comedy shorts I've seen is Al St. John's "Bridge Wives". It's ridiculous and over the top as it shows a husband losing his mind because his wife has been playing a marathon bridge game for weeks...only for it to end in a tie! Well, while "Grand Slam" isn't quite as memorable, it's quite similar and is apparently evidence that bridge was a VERY popular game back in the 1930s. It would help to understand the movie better if you understand Bridge, though you still can enjoy it regardless.
Peter Stanislavsky (Paul Lukas) is apparently very good at playing bridge, though he obviously doesn't seem to enjoy the game nor the drama that often accompanies it. Later, he ends up being pushed into playing a game and doesn't realize that one of the people he's playing against is considered the world's greatest Bridge player. Well, after defeating this champion handily, suddenly Peter is famous...and his life certainly changes for the worse. Ultimately, it even ruins his marriage to Marcia (Loretta Young).
While I'd never say it's a laugh out loud film like "Bridge Wives", it is clever and enjoyable...and I nearly gave it an 8. Unusual and well made for a B-movie.
Peter Stanislavsky (Paul Lukas) is apparently very good at playing bridge, though he obviously doesn't seem to enjoy the game nor the drama that often accompanies it. Later, he ends up being pushed into playing a game and doesn't realize that one of the people he's playing against is considered the world's greatest Bridge player. Well, after defeating this champion handily, suddenly Peter is famous...and his life certainly changes for the worse. Ultimately, it even ruins his marriage to Marcia (Loretta Young).
While I'd never say it's a laugh out loud film like "Bridge Wives", it is clever and enjoyable...and I nearly gave it an 8. Unusual and well made for a B-movie.
I like the oldies, usually, and this one did not disappoint.
I thought it was wittily presented, taking the upper-middle class game of bridge and making it the national obsession across all classes. And it was a nice touch that the Russian hero/waiter/writer/bridge expert did not try to present himself as a Czarist aristocrat.
Loretta Young was her gorgeous, likable self; Paul Lukacs was a revelation to me (so handsome, so youngish); and the rest of the cast were the usual great 1930's supporters.
One of its virtues was its length. Movies today are too long, especially comedies where the humorous premise gets overworked. This little bit of froth was just right!
I thought it was wittily presented, taking the upper-middle class game of bridge and making it the national obsession across all classes. And it was a nice touch that the Russian hero/waiter/writer/bridge expert did not try to present himself as a Czarist aristocrat.
Loretta Young was her gorgeous, likable self; Paul Lukacs was a revelation to me (so handsome, so youngish); and the rest of the cast were the usual great 1930's supporters.
One of its virtues was its length. Movies today are too long, especially comedies where the humorous premise gets overworked. This little bit of froth was just right!
This reminds me of the Monty Python sketch, 'Summarising Proust' in its absurd silliness. The whole world stops to listen to a radio broadcast of.....a card game!
Although it's actually based on a real event, this has to be one of the daftest premises for a film ever. The outlandish pitch that someone must have given to Jack Warner and Darryl Zanuck to convince them to finance this sounds like one of the cons James Cagney did in his fabulous film, HARD TO HANDLE! Incredibly it works...well almost. It's not one of Warner Brothers' best comedies but it's still a pretty decent one.
It's directed in typical Warner Brothers breakneck speed so you don't have time to think to yourself: this is ridiculous. You just get dragged along with the madness. The script is both witty and natural which again adds to the overall believability of this and the acting is first rate. We get a lot more of Frank McHugh than in most of these types of film which is great; he's the one who makes this comedy an actual comedy. Loretta Young was an exceptional actress and is of course as faultless as ever in this. She was however not a comedian so Frank McHugh makes a perfect partner for her. What about Paul Lukas you might wonder - isn't he her co-star? He's probably the weakest link in this picture. I'm not sure whether he's playing his silly character straight for comedic effect or whether he's just a bit dull.
Although it's actually based on a real event, this has to be one of the daftest premises for a film ever. The outlandish pitch that someone must have given to Jack Warner and Darryl Zanuck to convince them to finance this sounds like one of the cons James Cagney did in his fabulous film, HARD TO HANDLE! Incredibly it works...well almost. It's not one of Warner Brothers' best comedies but it's still a pretty decent one.
It's directed in typical Warner Brothers breakneck speed so you don't have time to think to yourself: this is ridiculous. You just get dragged along with the madness. The script is both witty and natural which again adds to the overall believability of this and the acting is first rate. We get a lot more of Frank McHugh than in most of these types of film which is great; he's the one who makes this comedy an actual comedy. Loretta Young was an exceptional actress and is of course as faultless as ever in this. She was however not a comedian so Frank McHugh makes a perfect partner for her. What about Paul Lukas you might wonder - isn't he her co-star? He's probably the weakest link in this picture. I'm not sure whether he's playing his silly character straight for comedic effect or whether he's just a bit dull.
Did you know
- TriviaThe film uses the actual cover of the November 8, 1932 (no. 2572) edition of Life magazine. At the time, the publication was a humor magazine, like Punch in the UK, with limited circulation.
- GoofsIn the newspaper article about Peter beating Van Dorn, the second paragraph of the story is unrelated gibberish.
- Quotes
Marcia Stanislavsky: How have you been?
Philip 'Speed' McCann: Okay. I've been working pretty hard. I just finished writing a book called Sex and What Causes It. It's for Bernard McGovern. I got five grand out of it.
Marcia Stanislavsky: Five grand!
Philip 'Speed' McCann: For only two weeks work. How have you been?
Marcia Stanislavsky: Oh, boy.
- Crazy creditsOpening credits begin with bridge being played in the background. Then, closeups of cards are shown with a picture of one of the actor/actress, his/her name, and the role s/he plays in the movie; director credited also on a playing card.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- La gran jugada
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $164,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 7 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content