30 reviews
"Mannequin" is a charming, Joan Crawford rags to riches story set in New York City. Desperate to get out of her family's Hester Street apartment, Jessie talks her boyfriend Eddie into getting married a little sooner than planned. At her wedding dinner in a Chinese restaurant, she is spotted by the very wealthy, well known John Hennessy (Spencer Tracy) who falls in love with her immediately. He's also impressed by the depth of her love for Eddie. But it's obvious to all but Jessie that Eddie is a jerk.
This is not a big, splashy film, but a more intimate one, with a marvelous, heartfelt performance by a young Spencer Tracy, who plays a lonely man to perfection. His sincere performance drives the film. Crawford is photographed beautifully, all gorgeous eyes and softness. I'm not sure how many animals died so Crawford could be dressed so opulently in fur, but once she gets into modeling and then hits the big time, she wears some very expensive clothes. Curtis is an attractive louse, and Leo Gorcey is great as Jessie's impossible brother. Elisabeth Risdon gives a wonderful performance, with a poignant monologue to her daughter at one point.
A sweet and satisfying film.
This is not a big, splashy film, but a more intimate one, with a marvelous, heartfelt performance by a young Spencer Tracy, who plays a lonely man to perfection. His sincere performance drives the film. Crawford is photographed beautifully, all gorgeous eyes and softness. I'm not sure how many animals died so Crawford could be dressed so opulently in fur, but once she gets into modeling and then hits the big time, she wears some very expensive clothes. Curtis is an attractive louse, and Leo Gorcey is great as Jessie's impossible brother. Elisabeth Risdon gives a wonderful performance, with a poignant monologue to her daughter at one point.
A sweet and satisfying film.
In doing Mannequin, Joan Crawford was kind of poaching on the roles that Sylvia Sidney did, the girl from the slums who's looking to break out. She isn't half bad in it.
When you think about it her part her is a kinder gentler version of the role she did in The Women. A girl looking to step up in class. But in this she's not looking to steal someone's husband to do it. She's more used than the user in Mannequin.
She's from Hester Street on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, living at home with parents and a kid brother. She's got a good looking boyfriend though in Alan Curtis who's got less than meets the eye in character. They get married.
Soon she catches the eye of millionaire Spencer Tracy who comes from the same area, but who worked his way up to owning a fleet of freighters. Spence is smitten with her.
In a reverse of Indecent Proposal, Curtis is quite willing to play on Tracy's obvious interest in Joan, but she now recognizes Curtis for what he is.
This is definitely a Crawford picture. Tracy underplays it in his usual style and has some moments, but he's clearly in support of Crawford.
Alan Curtis's part is unusual. He still loves Crawford no matter what, but he's shallow and his own interests come first. If this were done at 20th Century Fox, Tyrone Power could easily have done this role. He did a kind of variation on it in Rose of Washington Square. Curtis is never shown as violent in any way and that in fact makes him all the more smarmy in his charm.
One of the best roles in the film comes from Leo Gorcey as Crawford's younger brother. He's a tough slum kid with a big mouth and you don't like him. But he actually is very shrewd in sizing up the shortcomings of those around him, like his father Oscar O'Shea and Curtis.
The title Mannequin comes from the fact that at one point Crawford works as model in a fashion show. Of course this put into the context of the story, giving Crawford the Adrian fashions to wear that she was known for.
Fans of Joan Crawford will be pleased with this.
When you think about it her part her is a kinder gentler version of the role she did in The Women. A girl looking to step up in class. But in this she's not looking to steal someone's husband to do it. She's more used than the user in Mannequin.
She's from Hester Street on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, living at home with parents and a kid brother. She's got a good looking boyfriend though in Alan Curtis who's got less than meets the eye in character. They get married.
Soon she catches the eye of millionaire Spencer Tracy who comes from the same area, but who worked his way up to owning a fleet of freighters. Spence is smitten with her.
In a reverse of Indecent Proposal, Curtis is quite willing to play on Tracy's obvious interest in Joan, but she now recognizes Curtis for what he is.
This is definitely a Crawford picture. Tracy underplays it in his usual style and has some moments, but he's clearly in support of Crawford.
Alan Curtis's part is unusual. He still loves Crawford no matter what, but he's shallow and his own interests come first. If this were done at 20th Century Fox, Tyrone Power could easily have done this role. He did a kind of variation on it in Rose of Washington Square. Curtis is never shown as violent in any way and that in fact makes him all the more smarmy in his charm.
One of the best roles in the film comes from Leo Gorcey as Crawford's younger brother. He's a tough slum kid with a big mouth and you don't like him. But he actually is very shrewd in sizing up the shortcomings of those around him, like his father Oscar O'Shea and Curtis.
The title Mannequin comes from the fact that at one point Crawford works as model in a fashion show. Of course this put into the context of the story, giving Crawford the Adrian fashions to wear that she was known for.
Fans of Joan Crawford will be pleased with this.
- bkoganbing
- Dec 18, 2005
- Permalink
This is a modest film, beautifully proportioned and modulated, that manages to draw the viewer into its romantic world. It easily could have become maudlin, or stridently melodramatic, or overblown. Joan Crawford could have overacted, or Spencer Tracy could have turned smug. But the film is amazingly free of false notes. This is not a film to be seen for camp , but for its very real charm. Director Frank Borzage succeeds in creating a world that is feels completely consistent and free of cliche. Take for example, the scene in which the heroine is on the dance floor with her new husband, singing "their song"--easily a cliched moment. But while she croons, the husband is tense, alert, observant, distant. Or look at the scene where Tracy meets with his striking workers, and faces the loss of his business and fortune. The scene unfolds with a quiet dignity and depth of feeling on both sides of the conflict. Again and again, Borzage balances romance with realism, pathos with stillness, emotion with dignity. As a result, Mannequin is a deftly made film that moves along lyrically, making what could have been preposterous, touching.
The main interest points in seeing 'Mannequin' were that it was directed by Frank Borzage, a director who deserved and still does deserve more credit, and the great cast, with Joan Crawford and Spencer Tracy in their only collaboration together. That is perhaps the film's biggest draw, that they were great on their own is reason enough to see anything of theirs but seeing them together in a rare pairing is even more so.
With those things taken into account, 'Mannequin' had all the makings to be a charming film. Which it on the most part is. Not perfect or great, and Crawford, Tracy and Borzage have all done better, but 'Mannequin' is a nice undemanding film that doesn't feel too simplistic or too challenging and doesn't try to do or be more than necessary. While not a must see 'Mannequin' does have more than enough to warrant more exposure.
'Mannequin' may have corny and melodramatic parts and moments that don't quite ring true, do not expect reality here and that is including the ending (which admittedly does also strike a chord emotionally). A few of the early scenes are a bit static.
Alan Curtis does his best bringing smarmy charm to his role, but the character is too one-dimensional unpleasant for the charm to properly convince.
However, 'Mannequin' is beautifully filmed, clearly loving Crawford (looking radiantly photogenic) and those costumes are to die for. While not one that will stay long in the memory, the score fits and complements the film well and doesn't feel like it should have belonged somewhere else. The script has wit and emotion, much of the film is far from dull once it gets going and the story has a lovely poignancy and intimacy (the dance floor scene is a lovely moment and interesting from an interaction stand-point, pointed out already) on the most part,
Borzage directs with his usual sensitivity and he definitely seems at home here. What makes 'Mannequin' especially worth watching is the cast. Whether Crawford is believable as a young working class girl is debatable, but that doesn't matter when she gives a performance so charming and deeply felt. Tracy underplays sympathetically and more than appealingly, they make a lovely pairing. Shrewd Leo Gorcey and movingly sincere Elizabeth Risdon are particularly good in support.
On the whole, nice pretty good film. 7/10 Bethany Cox
With those things taken into account, 'Mannequin' had all the makings to be a charming film. Which it on the most part is. Not perfect or great, and Crawford, Tracy and Borzage have all done better, but 'Mannequin' is a nice undemanding film that doesn't feel too simplistic or too challenging and doesn't try to do or be more than necessary. While not a must see 'Mannequin' does have more than enough to warrant more exposure.
'Mannequin' may have corny and melodramatic parts and moments that don't quite ring true, do not expect reality here and that is including the ending (which admittedly does also strike a chord emotionally). A few of the early scenes are a bit static.
Alan Curtis does his best bringing smarmy charm to his role, but the character is too one-dimensional unpleasant for the charm to properly convince.
However, 'Mannequin' is beautifully filmed, clearly loving Crawford (looking radiantly photogenic) and those costumes are to die for. While not one that will stay long in the memory, the score fits and complements the film well and doesn't feel like it should have belonged somewhere else. The script has wit and emotion, much of the film is far from dull once it gets going and the story has a lovely poignancy and intimacy (the dance floor scene is a lovely moment and interesting from an interaction stand-point, pointed out already) on the most part,
Borzage directs with his usual sensitivity and he definitely seems at home here. What makes 'Mannequin' especially worth watching is the cast. Whether Crawford is believable as a young working class girl is debatable, but that doesn't matter when she gives a performance so charming and deeply felt. Tracy underplays sympathetically and more than appealingly, they make a lovely pairing. Shrewd Leo Gorcey and movingly sincere Elizabeth Risdon are particularly good in support.
On the whole, nice pretty good film. 7/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Nov 12, 2018
- Permalink
As I'm finding is usual with Frank Borzage films I've watched recently, there's more here than first meets the eye. At its heart is a love triangle of sorts initially involving Joan Crawford and Alan Curtis but later adding in Spencer Tracy.
Crawford is the beating heart of the movie. A hard-working dancer, she faithfully takes her unopened pay-packet home to her mum in the family apartment on the poor side of town. Her dad is unemployed and basically sits about the flat reading his paper expecting to be waited on hand and foot by his wife. Alongside him, fulfilling a similar function, is Crawford's feckless and cynical younger brother but worse yet is the guy with whom she's loved-up and engaged.
This is Curtis's unsteady Eddie, selfish and grasping, well-balanced as the saying goes, with a chip on both shoulders. He's going to take the quickest way to easy money and doesn't mind using Joanie any way he can to get there. Joan can't see this of course and despite her mother's "Don't do as I did" warnings, duly marries Eddie, but at their reception, Tracy's wealthy shipping magnate John L Hennessy also happens to be there, where he's immediately smitten by Crawford.
We see Tracy in place as a benevolent boss, playing fair with his employees but in a sign of the times, there are hints of discontent especially as the labour is unionised. Thoughts of Joan distract him from his work and of course she's unattainable, given that she's married and apparently in love with Curtis, but it's not long before hubby starts to show his true colours and concocts a seedy plan to use her to entrap Tracy in a get-Eddie-rich ruse.
Things don't go according to plan however, as he doesn't count either on the scales finally falling from Crawford's eyes where he himself is concerned or her developing feelings for the blindly adoring Tracy. At the same time though, things aren't going so well for Tracy's business leading to a multi-faceted ending where the true price of love is learned by the principals.
The love story aspect isn't without cliché, reflective as it is of the Depression-era backdrop. It's interesting and diverting enough but certainly somewhat fantastical. There are some nicely humorous touches, one scene in particular when Crawford, by now working as a clothes-store mannequin, models a number of day-wear outfits at a fashion show as an ever-more interested Tracy looks on, especially keen to see what she wears to bed. However I was probably more interested in the back story of Tracy and his relationship with his workers. At the climactic scene where he confronts them at a mass meeting after they've come out on a sympathy strike, he doesn't threaten or bully them but instead respects their position no matter the personal consequences to him.
I am finding Borzage to be an interesting Hollywood Golden Age director. Sure, there's a love story at the heart of all the movies of his that I've seen, but it's the serious stuff in the background which really gets my attention. Tracy and Crawford are both excellent in their parts, while Curtis too registers strongly as Eddie the Heel.
All in all, an entertaining and in its own modest way, educational movie with its depictions of working class life and industrial relations of the time.
Crawford is the beating heart of the movie. A hard-working dancer, she faithfully takes her unopened pay-packet home to her mum in the family apartment on the poor side of town. Her dad is unemployed and basically sits about the flat reading his paper expecting to be waited on hand and foot by his wife. Alongside him, fulfilling a similar function, is Crawford's feckless and cynical younger brother but worse yet is the guy with whom she's loved-up and engaged.
This is Curtis's unsteady Eddie, selfish and grasping, well-balanced as the saying goes, with a chip on both shoulders. He's going to take the quickest way to easy money and doesn't mind using Joanie any way he can to get there. Joan can't see this of course and despite her mother's "Don't do as I did" warnings, duly marries Eddie, but at their reception, Tracy's wealthy shipping magnate John L Hennessy also happens to be there, where he's immediately smitten by Crawford.
We see Tracy in place as a benevolent boss, playing fair with his employees but in a sign of the times, there are hints of discontent especially as the labour is unionised. Thoughts of Joan distract him from his work and of course she's unattainable, given that she's married and apparently in love with Curtis, but it's not long before hubby starts to show his true colours and concocts a seedy plan to use her to entrap Tracy in a get-Eddie-rich ruse.
Things don't go according to plan however, as he doesn't count either on the scales finally falling from Crawford's eyes where he himself is concerned or her developing feelings for the blindly adoring Tracy. At the same time though, things aren't going so well for Tracy's business leading to a multi-faceted ending where the true price of love is learned by the principals.
The love story aspect isn't without cliché, reflective as it is of the Depression-era backdrop. It's interesting and diverting enough but certainly somewhat fantastical. There are some nicely humorous touches, one scene in particular when Crawford, by now working as a clothes-store mannequin, models a number of day-wear outfits at a fashion show as an ever-more interested Tracy looks on, especially keen to see what she wears to bed. However I was probably more interested in the back story of Tracy and his relationship with his workers. At the climactic scene where he confronts them at a mass meeting after they've come out on a sympathy strike, he doesn't threaten or bully them but instead respects their position no matter the personal consequences to him.
I am finding Borzage to be an interesting Hollywood Golden Age director. Sure, there's a love story at the heart of all the movies of his that I've seen, but it's the serious stuff in the background which really gets my attention. Tracy and Crawford are both excellent in their parts, while Curtis too registers strongly as Eddie the Heel.
All in all, an entertaining and in its own modest way, educational movie with its depictions of working class life and industrial relations of the time.
I hate to be a spoil sport, but I must disagree with the other reviewers who are un-restrained in their enthusiasm for the only Joan Crawford/Spencer Tracy co-starring vehicle. The movie often feels as though it had been re-heated and, while it has many admirable moments, just as many ring false. Crawford herself remains remote and aloof for much of the running time and, while Spencer Tracy probably couldn't give a false performance if he tried, his heart doesn't seem to be in it either.
The early scenes, in which Joan plays a poor, restless girl who lives in a tenement with her ne'er do well father and brother, as well as with her overworked, tired mother are so stilted and obvious they are an embarrassment. These scenes play almost like parodies of the previous Crawford vehicles POSSESSED (1931), DANCING LADY (1933) and SADIE McKEE (1934). Crawford has played this "noble girl whose ambitions will lift her out of her miserable station in life" part before, and she has played it better. Here she seems tired, like she's not even believing it herself and, although it may sound un-gallant to mention, she's a little long in the tooth to play this type of role convincingly (God forgive me).
Things brighten considerably when Tracy and Crawford begin to spark and it is the middle section of the movie that is the most enjoyable. A lot of this may stem from the fact that the middle section contains the least amount of screen time for Alan Curtis, who plays Joan's "so bad he's hissable" louse of a husband. Curtis is so one dimensional and so "obviously" rotten that you wonder what Crawford's character could EVER have seen in him.
Complaints aside, there are good and memorable moments to be found in MANNEQUIN. When Tracy and Crawford are alone on-screen, they both seem to be off of their game, but together, they have a haunting chemistry that transcends explanation. They both manage to convey that they truly understand and accept what the other is thinking, a rarity in film. It makes MANNEQUIN all the more frustrating when we get glimpses of what made these two the magnificent stars they were. It disappoints me that they never worked together again in a project more worthy of their combined talents.
Standing in dramatic counterpoint to Crawford's 1938 "box office poison" label, MANNEQUIN was a big hit with audiences early that year. Other, more ambitious (and in my opinion, more interesting) Crawford vehicles such as THE BRIDE WORE RED (1937) and THE SHINING HOUR (1938), however, were not.
The early scenes, in which Joan plays a poor, restless girl who lives in a tenement with her ne'er do well father and brother, as well as with her overworked, tired mother are so stilted and obvious they are an embarrassment. These scenes play almost like parodies of the previous Crawford vehicles POSSESSED (1931), DANCING LADY (1933) and SADIE McKEE (1934). Crawford has played this "noble girl whose ambitions will lift her out of her miserable station in life" part before, and she has played it better. Here she seems tired, like she's not even believing it herself and, although it may sound un-gallant to mention, she's a little long in the tooth to play this type of role convincingly (God forgive me).
Things brighten considerably when Tracy and Crawford begin to spark and it is the middle section of the movie that is the most enjoyable. A lot of this may stem from the fact that the middle section contains the least amount of screen time for Alan Curtis, who plays Joan's "so bad he's hissable" louse of a husband. Curtis is so one dimensional and so "obviously" rotten that you wonder what Crawford's character could EVER have seen in him.
Complaints aside, there are good and memorable moments to be found in MANNEQUIN. When Tracy and Crawford are alone on-screen, they both seem to be off of their game, but together, they have a haunting chemistry that transcends explanation. They both manage to convey that they truly understand and accept what the other is thinking, a rarity in film. It makes MANNEQUIN all the more frustrating when we get glimpses of what made these two the magnificent stars they were. It disappoints me that they never worked together again in a project more worthy of their combined talents.
Standing in dramatic counterpoint to Crawford's 1938 "box office poison" label, MANNEQUIN was a big hit with audiences early that year. Other, more ambitious (and in my opinion, more interesting) Crawford vehicles such as THE BRIDE WORE RED (1937) and THE SHINING HOUR (1938), however, were not.
When TCM ran this flick recently, the host observed that Crawford, while not exactly thrilled about sharing the spotlight with Tracy, did take care to scale her performance down so that her usual overplaying wouldn't look wildly out of place. She's still false -- all eyebrows and key lighting -- but she does have star quality, and she's playing a very appealing, practical rags-to-riches lady. Tracy brought his usual sincerity to another appealing role, and Borzage brought his characteristic lyricism -- the whole movie seems quiet and understated, not at all tainted by the typical MGM frou-frou. The dialogue has snap, the plot has pace, and there are unusual touches: Note the scene in the subway car, and how charmingly and inconclusively it ends. Maybe this was considered standard MGM claptrap in its day, but it holds up remarkably well and somehow feels modern. The issues haven't really dated. Maybe today's Joan Crawford, Julia Roberts, could do a remake?
The Joan Crawford Experience 23 / 59
Joan Does The Rags-To-Riches Thing Again
Jessie Cassidy (Joan Crawford) is a hard-working girl from the raggedy tenements on Hester Street in NYC. She slaves away in a textile factory to support her harried mother, her lazy out-of-work father, and her shiftless, smart-ass, out-of-work little brother. She dreams of getting out of that dump with her boyfriend, the boxer Eddie Miller (Alan Curtis). Eddie is obviously the lazy con-man type; he talks a big talk and makes lots of promises he can't keep ... but Jessie is in love!
Jessie convinces Eddie to marry her and while they celebrate with their wedding party at a Chinese restaurant, they run into John L. Hennessey (Spencer Tracy). He's originally from the tenements on Hester street but has made a fortune by becoming a shipping magnate. Hennessey is smitten with Jessie.
Jessie and Hennessey cross paths again when Jessie has a job in the chorus line as a Gebhart Girl at the "Gebhart Frolics", and the entire gang is invited to a cocktail party at Hennessey's penthouse suite. Hennessey makes a play for her but she is a married woman, so she slaps him!
The rest of the film involves Hennessey's pursuit of Jessie, Jessie's realization that Eddie is small time two bit hood looking for easy money, and Eddie's nasty little plan to get some of that money from Hennessey by using Jessie as bait.
This is a pretty darn good film. The story is engaging, the cast is great, and Adrian really went all out on some of the fashions at the fashion show (where Jessie is a model / mannequin). I wonder how many animals died for Joan's fabulous fur coats and wraps? Oh well. Doesn't matter. She looked fierce!
Recommended!
Joan Does The Rags-To-Riches Thing Again
Jessie Cassidy (Joan Crawford) is a hard-working girl from the raggedy tenements on Hester Street in NYC. She slaves away in a textile factory to support her harried mother, her lazy out-of-work father, and her shiftless, smart-ass, out-of-work little brother. She dreams of getting out of that dump with her boyfriend, the boxer Eddie Miller (Alan Curtis). Eddie is obviously the lazy con-man type; he talks a big talk and makes lots of promises he can't keep ... but Jessie is in love!
Jessie convinces Eddie to marry her and while they celebrate with their wedding party at a Chinese restaurant, they run into John L. Hennessey (Spencer Tracy). He's originally from the tenements on Hester street but has made a fortune by becoming a shipping magnate. Hennessey is smitten with Jessie.
Jessie and Hennessey cross paths again when Jessie has a job in the chorus line as a Gebhart Girl at the "Gebhart Frolics", and the entire gang is invited to a cocktail party at Hennessey's penthouse suite. Hennessey makes a play for her but she is a married woman, so she slaps him!
The rest of the film involves Hennessey's pursuit of Jessie, Jessie's realization that Eddie is small time two bit hood looking for easy money, and Eddie's nasty little plan to get some of that money from Hennessey by using Jessie as bait.
This is a pretty darn good film. The story is engaging, the cast is great, and Adrian really went all out on some of the fashions at the fashion show (where Jessie is a model / mannequin). I wonder how many animals died for Joan's fabulous fur coats and wraps? Oh well. Doesn't matter. She looked fierce!
Recommended!
- cdale-41392
- Feb 28, 2019
- Permalink
JOAN CRAWFORD plays a tenement girl with a Park Avenue accent no matter how much she has to sweat in a factory for a living. She hates her tenement environment so much that she's willing to run off with boyfriend ALAN CURTIS at the drop of a hat. Of course, what seemed like a good idea changes drastically once she meets wealthy SPENCER TRACY and realizes what her life could be as "a lady". LEO GORCEY is a howl as her nasty kid brother.
That's the main thrust of MANNEQUIN--a sort of "money can't buy happiness" theme that is played out in typical '30s style with Joan Crawford giving her fans a rags to riches story tailored to please depression weary audiences. Despite the fact that Crawford seems too cultured to be playing a girl from the city flats, she's convincing enough as the newly married woman who croons a song to Curtis on the dance floor, a little something called "Always and Always". Curtis has the role of a thankless heel and plays it to the hilt.
Tracy is so enamored with "the awfully sweet kid" that you know the Curtis/Crawford marriage is headed for the rocks. Thanks to the natural performances of Tracy and Crawford, it all works better than it sounds on paper--due also to Frank Borzage's fine direction and ELIZABETH RISDON's performance as Crawford's hard-working mother who doesn't want her daughter to give up her dream.
Whether slumming or enjoying the posh life among the idle rich, Crawford never loses her poise and gets to toss off some smart lines. No matter how poor she's supposed to be, her clothes never look like they came off thrift shop racks. She photographs attractively with a softer look than her later image would have, so this is a real treat for Crawford fans. Especially when she becomes a "mannequin" at a posh fashion show, attired in some of Adrian's most outrageous gowns.
The good chemistry with SPENCER TRACY helps a lot. "It all started when you slugged me," says Tracy, proposing marriage to her. Will she or won't she find true happiness with a rich man? Hint: It ends with another slug.
Summing up: Fun for true Crawford fans, but others may find it's all a little too artificial for comfort.
That's the main thrust of MANNEQUIN--a sort of "money can't buy happiness" theme that is played out in typical '30s style with Joan Crawford giving her fans a rags to riches story tailored to please depression weary audiences. Despite the fact that Crawford seems too cultured to be playing a girl from the city flats, she's convincing enough as the newly married woman who croons a song to Curtis on the dance floor, a little something called "Always and Always". Curtis has the role of a thankless heel and plays it to the hilt.
Tracy is so enamored with "the awfully sweet kid" that you know the Curtis/Crawford marriage is headed for the rocks. Thanks to the natural performances of Tracy and Crawford, it all works better than it sounds on paper--due also to Frank Borzage's fine direction and ELIZABETH RISDON's performance as Crawford's hard-working mother who doesn't want her daughter to give up her dream.
Whether slumming or enjoying the posh life among the idle rich, Crawford never loses her poise and gets to toss off some smart lines. No matter how poor she's supposed to be, her clothes never look like they came off thrift shop racks. She photographs attractively with a softer look than her later image would have, so this is a real treat for Crawford fans. Especially when she becomes a "mannequin" at a posh fashion show, attired in some of Adrian's most outrageous gowns.
The good chemistry with SPENCER TRACY helps a lot. "It all started when you slugged me," says Tracy, proposing marriage to her. Will she or won't she find true happiness with a rich man? Hint: It ends with another slug.
Summing up: Fun for true Crawford fans, but others may find it's all a little too artificial for comfort.
One of Frank Borzage's very best films is also one of his least known. He made "Mannequin" in 1937 with Joan Crawford as the working-class girl who marries her childhood sweetheart, Alan Curtis, but he's a heel. Then she meets sweet self-made millionaire Spencer Tracy who's got a soft spot for her, so her heel of a husband comes up with a plan for her to divorce him and marry Tracy so they can split the money. It's a surprisingly tough little movie, (the title doesn't really do it justice), beautifully written by Lawrence Hazard from Katharine Brush's story and both Tracy and Crawford are superb.
This was Crawford when she was a real actress and at her least self-conscious and the movie came out in the same year that Tracy won his first Oscar for "Captain's Courageous", but he's so much better here. It's a lovely, naturalistic performance, very simple and direct, and it showed what a great romantic actor he was. Indeed, Borzage even managed to get a good performance out of Curtis as the heel. This is one Borzage picture that cries out for a revival.
This was Crawford when she was a real actress and at her least self-conscious and the movie came out in the same year that Tracy won his first Oscar for "Captain's Courageous", but he's so much better here. It's a lovely, naturalistic performance, very simple and direct, and it showed what a great romantic actor he was. Indeed, Borzage even managed to get a good performance out of Curtis as the heel. This is one Borzage picture that cries out for a revival.
- MOscarbradley
- Feb 28, 2019
- Permalink
First half is pretty good with well paced, sharply observed scenes, courtesy of scenarist Lawrence Hazard and director Frank Borzage, of lower middle class tenement life and an unhappy marriage. But then the marriage falls apart and the movie has nowhere to go but into a dull relationship with the wife and a tug boat tycoon, plus a lot of union baiting that, while characteristic of MGM at the time, is not exactly guaranteed to light up the screen. Acting's ok, with the subsidiary players, in my opinion, outshining the two famous leads, especially Alan Curtis as the self pitying, resentful husband, Elizabeth Risdon as a beaten down house drudge and Leo Gorcey as the mother of all annoying Irish kid brothers. Give it a C plus. PS...Always thought Hester Street was Jewish, not Irish. Live and learn.
MANNEQUIN is a pretty typical plot for Joan Crawford in the 1930s. Again and again, she played the poor girl who longed for the good life--though in this one she isn't a money-grubber like she was in several of these films. The only interesting angle to set this one apart was the no-good husband (#1) that she married near the beginning. He was vile and so easy to hate--I liked that. But then when she met Spencer Tracy (husband #2), the movie just stopped making sense.
Considering that this film was made by MGM and featured Joan Crawford and Spencer Tracy, it should have been much better instead of just being a competent time-passer. Most of this problem I attribute to bad writing as opposed to the acting, as everyone involved seemed to try hard to get as much out of this story as they could. The problem is that although the plot was moderately diverting, clichés and inexplicable behavior made the film seem so ridiculously improbable. First, the HUGE cliché--Tracy sees Crawford once and very briefly dances with her--then he falls madly in love with her and tries to steal her away from her husband starting on their wedding day! This is ridiculous and the whole "love at first sight" angle made me gag. Basing an entire movie on this is quite a stretch. Plus, if Tracy is supposed to be a super-nice guy, then why is he such a slimy slug to hit on a woman on her wedding day?! Sure, husband #1 was a jerk, but Tracy didn't know that at the time. Second, the ending made no sense at all. Why Crawford decided to leave her loving husband was totally ill-defined and seemed like a plot device more than anything else.
So overall, some decent performances and a terribly flawed film make this one just passable entertainment. This should have been a lot better.
Considering that this film was made by MGM and featured Joan Crawford and Spencer Tracy, it should have been much better instead of just being a competent time-passer. Most of this problem I attribute to bad writing as opposed to the acting, as everyone involved seemed to try hard to get as much out of this story as they could. The problem is that although the plot was moderately diverting, clichés and inexplicable behavior made the film seem so ridiculously improbable. First, the HUGE cliché--Tracy sees Crawford once and very briefly dances with her--then he falls madly in love with her and tries to steal her away from her husband starting on their wedding day! This is ridiculous and the whole "love at first sight" angle made me gag. Basing an entire movie on this is quite a stretch. Plus, if Tracy is supposed to be a super-nice guy, then why is he such a slimy slug to hit on a woman on her wedding day?! Sure, husband #1 was a jerk, but Tracy didn't know that at the time. Second, the ending made no sense at all. Why Crawford decided to leave her loving husband was totally ill-defined and seemed like a plot device more than anything else.
So overall, some decent performances and a terribly flawed film make this one just passable entertainment. This should have been a lot better.
- planktonrules
- Feb 13, 2008
- Permalink
- Poseidon-3
- Feb 7, 2006
- Permalink
I haven't seen too many of Frank Borzage's movies but the ones i have seen are just OK like The Mortal Storm and the only one i really liked came out the same year as this one called Big City, not too many people liked it but i did. This movie starts out with Joan Crawford working to provide for her family while her father says he's looking for a job but not really. Crawford can hardly take it anymore and marries her boyfriend, played by Alan Curtis, who she thinks has money but it's all a show. Crawford then meets Spencer Tracy who is a millionaire and he instantly falls for her. Crawford slowly begins to understand that her husband is just as bad as her family and Tracy wants to marry her but she doesn't love him. It's just an OK movie and the two stars made much better movies than this one.
I am not a big Joan fan. However she is watchable in most of her movies. She and Tracy were understated and good here. Villain first hubby was not bad either. Main thing for me here was that she was absolutely beautiful in this movie. There is a softness here that is not displayed or photographed in her other pics. Adrian's clothes were not over the top but he was generous to her. I tried to see who did her hair and makeup. Those items completely flattered her. Less was more and it worked for Joan here. Could find no credits for hair/ makeup. Job well done. Decent movie. Story was believable. A different kind of Joan: nice.
- viveca-powell
- May 9, 2024
- Permalink
Often casting for dramatic roles where Joan Crawford portraits plenty, when she stays angry or worry her face changes exposing histrionics, upon this girl bitter profile Frank Borzage fits Crawford as asphyxiated by extreme poverty at New York's slum area, then forlornly she begs for his crook boyfriend Alan Curtis a quickly marriage to leaving that nasty atmosphere where she has suffering since early days, however in few days she'll figures out that was fooled by his lazy guy.
Meanwhile pushed upwards to big boss Spencer Tracy's arms by his scheming husband aiming for an upcoming affair to late got a big rewarding in a future break up, whereby Crawford comes to refuse this outrageous deal, even so she ends up kicking her snooty husband, after a couple months has been wooed by Spencer from whom surrender, after a worldwide honeymoon she strangely decides for a leaving.
Aside an usual concept it has a flimsy and contrived storyline where a girl from rags ambiance has a dubious mindset, firstly by choose a wrong applicant at first hand, (without notice?) aftermaths keeping alive a flame of an improbable affair with older man whereby she didn't want by any means, then out of the blue an unexpected break up, the outcome will display such mismatch.
Thanks for reading.
Resume:
First watch: 2024 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.
Meanwhile pushed upwards to big boss Spencer Tracy's arms by his scheming husband aiming for an upcoming affair to late got a big rewarding in a future break up, whereby Crawford comes to refuse this outrageous deal, even so she ends up kicking her snooty husband, after a couple months has been wooed by Spencer from whom surrender, after a worldwide honeymoon she strangely decides for a leaving.
Aside an usual concept it has a flimsy and contrived storyline where a girl from rags ambiance has a dubious mindset, firstly by choose a wrong applicant at first hand, (without notice?) aftermaths keeping alive a flame of an improbable affair with older man whereby she didn't want by any means, then out of the blue an unexpected break up, the outcome will display such mismatch.
Thanks for reading.
Resume:
First watch: 2024 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.
- elo-equipamentos
- Nov 18, 2024
- Permalink
Here on the Rag, you must know I'm not really a Joan Crawford fan. The two greatest exceptions are the two movies that earned her Hot Toasty Rag nominations: Grand Hotel and Mannequin. In both films, she gives fantastic performances, so if you do love her, make sure you watch both to see her at her best.
In Mannequin, she plays a young impoverished woman desperate to break free of her poor home and live a better life. Her father is rude, her brother freeloads off her salary, and her mother enables the unhappy pattern at home. As Joan wipes the sweat from her brow and tries in vain to fix the leaky kitchen sink, she says in a trembling voice, "I've gotta get out of here, Mom, before it's too late." You can feel her desperation and fear, and when she runs to her boyfriend's arms and begs her to take her out of her life, you understand. For most of the movie, Joan is sweet, hopeful, endearing, and strong. Unfortunately, Spencer Tracy comes into the movie, and into her life, and he ruins everything. A different actor would have only slightly helped, since his character is incredibly obnoxious, entitled, seedy, and the exact opposite of what Joan's character would need to find happiness. Joan's mother, the versatile and underused character actress Elisabeth Risdon, gives a heartfelt monologue about women's roles and expectations in the home and in society. She serves as an example of how she doesn't want Joan to turn out, and it's incredibly sad.
With the exception of the final third of the film, when Spencer Tracy's character horns in on the plot, Mannequin is a very good movie. For an interesting take on feminism and women's expectations in 1937, check out this well-acted drama.
In Mannequin, she plays a young impoverished woman desperate to break free of her poor home and live a better life. Her father is rude, her brother freeloads off her salary, and her mother enables the unhappy pattern at home. As Joan wipes the sweat from her brow and tries in vain to fix the leaky kitchen sink, she says in a trembling voice, "I've gotta get out of here, Mom, before it's too late." You can feel her desperation and fear, and when she runs to her boyfriend's arms and begs her to take her out of her life, you understand. For most of the movie, Joan is sweet, hopeful, endearing, and strong. Unfortunately, Spencer Tracy comes into the movie, and into her life, and he ruins everything. A different actor would have only slightly helped, since his character is incredibly obnoxious, entitled, seedy, and the exact opposite of what Joan's character would need to find happiness. Joan's mother, the versatile and underused character actress Elisabeth Risdon, gives a heartfelt monologue about women's roles and expectations in the home and in society. She serves as an example of how she doesn't want Joan to turn out, and it's incredibly sad.
With the exception of the final third of the film, when Spencer Tracy's character horns in on the plot, Mannequin is a very good movie. For an interesting take on feminism and women's expectations in 1937, check out this well-acted drama.
- HotToastyRag
- May 29, 2019
- Permalink
This was one of the slowest and dullest films made by either of these icons. The little conflict is tepid and passionless. The two stars have no on screen chemistry at all. Crawford looks beautiful and the art deco sets are interesting. That's about it.
- pumping_iron-1
- May 9, 2024
- Permalink
Another rag-to-riches soaper for Joan Crawford. She plays a factory worker named Jessie who wants out of her rut of a life so she marries her ne'er-do-well boyfriend Eddie (Alan Curtis). On their wedding night the two meet self-made tycoon John L. Hennessey (Spencer Tracy). Hennessey becomes infatuated with Jessie and doesn't mind letting her know it, married or not. Eddie's OK with it and even encourages it, hoping to gain financially from any relationship Jessie has with Hennessey. From there things get complicated and it becomes harder and harder to root for anybody. That's the movie's biggest problem. I didn't really love any of the characters and grew not to care about what happened to them. The direction is nice, though. Frank Borzage always made good-looking movies. Loved the way the tenement building looked. Even the slums are pretty at MGM. Leo Gorcey is fun as Joan's no-good little brother. Not really my cup of tea but if you enjoy glossy MGM soap operas a lot, you'll probably have a more favorable opinion. It's also Joan's only movie with Spencer Tracy so there's that curiosity factor.
This film stands out for its respectful treatment of the female characters. I loved Joan Crawford's character in this film. I found it so nice to see her as something besides pathetic or crazy or heartless. Unlike many of the women in movies from the 1930's, this Joan continually stands up for herself, and she does it with intelligence and with genuine kindness. The example set for her at home by her lazy father and brother portends the problem she's going to have with her fast-talking, no-good husband. But she tries to make the best of her marriage and even when pursued by the wealthy and moderately charming Spencer Tracy, she is true to her husband. It's when her long-suffering mother, another female character written and played respectfully, encourages her to think of herself first, that she realizes she's better off on her own. There's so much more, but just watch it. It's really a good one!
- susand1108
- Jan 13, 2023
- Permalink
I had seen "mannequin" a long time ago,at a time when I hardly knew Borzage's name .Since I saw most of his talkies and some of his silent works,and when I saw "Mannequin" again,I was a bit disappointed: it is a good film,well played by Joan Crawford and Spencer Tracy but it does not hold a candle to such works as "little man what now?""three comrades" "strange cargo" or the sublime "mortal storm" my favorite Borzage.
In "mannequin" ,we feel the director's touch nevertheless.The first scenes depict a milieu where the heroine has got to fight to get out of it (see also "humoresque " (1920) " the seventh heaven" "street angel" (1927).The search for true love is a permanent feature in Borzage's canon,but Tracy/Crawford ,except in the moving final scenes are not given the same chance to shine as Margaret Sullavan /James Stewart or Janet Gaynor/Charles Farrell .Crawford becoming a mannequin is the main weakness of the plot.But in the end,anyway ,"the love you take is equal to the love you make" .Not a great Borzage ,but worth a watch.
In "mannequin" ,we feel the director's touch nevertheless.The first scenes depict a milieu where the heroine has got to fight to get out of it (see also "humoresque " (1920) " the seventh heaven" "street angel" (1927).The search for true love is a permanent feature in Borzage's canon,but Tracy/Crawford ,except in the moving final scenes are not given the same chance to shine as Margaret Sullavan /James Stewart or Janet Gaynor/Charles Farrell .Crawford becoming a mannequin is the main weakness of the plot.But in the end,anyway ,"the love you take is equal to the love you make" .Not a great Borzage ,but worth a watch.
- dbdumonteil
- Jun 12, 2007
- Permalink