Playwright Gaylord Esterbrook scores a hit with his first Broadway play, both with the critics and with leading lady Linda Paige. He and Linda are happily married until a patroness of the ar... Read allPlaywright Gaylord Esterbrook scores a hit with his first Broadway play, both with the critics and with leading lady Linda Paige. He and Linda are happily married until a patroness of the arts convinces Esterbrook to forget about comedy and concentrate on writing a tragedy. The e... Read allPlaywright Gaylord Esterbrook scores a hit with his first Broadway play, both with the critics and with leading lady Linda Paige. He and Linda are happily married until a patroness of the arts convinces Esterbrook to forget about comedy and concentrate on writing a tragedy. The end result nearly destroys his career and his marriage.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 2 wins total
- Philo Swift
- (as Charlie Ruggles)
- Frank
- (as Lawrence Grosmith)
- Actor in Show
- (uncredited)
- First-Nighter
- (uncredited)
- Waiter at Wyler's Party
- (uncredited)
- Police Sergeant
- (uncredited)
- Actor in Show
- (uncredited)
- Young Actress in Show
- (uncredited)
- Little Girl
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Disruptive Shift
Stewart shines in this first part, clearly in his natural element. The movie's problem is Gay's sudden personality shift from down-home charming to churlish alcoholic. At the same time, the movie's mood and substance also alter and in unpleasant ways. I guess maid Clementine's (Beavers) snappy remarks are supposed to carry the comedic aspect, but unfortunately they're more caustic than funny. Then too, the plot becomes pretty implausible as Gay hooks up with ditzy Amanda (Tobin), and we're supposed to believe that their lengthy relationship never gets intimate. But then if it did, we wouldn't be as accepting of the movie's upshot.
On the other hand, the acting is good, except maybe for Tobin, but the real problem is with script and direction and the sudden rupture into mismatched parts these entail. The basic idea of a naïve rural lad trying to adjust to urban sophistication remains a workable one. But it needs a smoother more plausible treatment, especially with the transition, than it gets here. Sorry to say that, all in all, the 90-minutes amounts to a waste of outstanding movie performers.
Has To Be Different From the Stage Version
It also starred Laurence Olivier which leads me to believe the stage version has GOT to be a whole lot different than what we are seeing. Usually James Stewart and Laurence Olivier were never up for the same parts so their must have been a real big rewrite to make this part playable for James Stewart.
Imagine George Bailey if for amusement in Bedford Falls he wrote plays and you've got the character of Gaylord Estabrook who Stewart plays in No Time For Comedy. The film opens with the play about to open out of town and being produced by Clarence Kolb. Kolb has second thoughts though when he meets country rube Stewart from some small town in Minnesota and backs out of the production. But star Rosalind Russell has faith in the play and she pulls together the money to have it produced. Of course she falls for Stewart and they're married.
I don't know about you, but I sure can't see the future Lord Olivier playing the part as Stewart presents it.
The rest of the film is about Russell's and Stewart's marriage and the trials they're put through. Another married couple, Charles Ruggles and Genevieve Tobin, take an interest in each of them. Ruggles does well in a very unusual role for him, a sophisticated banker with pretensions to superiority.
No Time For Comedy is decidedly a second level entry in the credits of both the leads. Fans of Stewart and Russell should like it though.
Underrated Stewart Performance
shows within a show - mixed bag
Not bad...but not good either
Comedic drama adapted from a stage play. It's actually pretty funny with many good lines but it just lacks that spark to make it great. It certainly isn't the actors' fault---Russell is beautiful, funny and completely at ease--Stewart comes across as an immature, alcoholic jerk (but that's what he is playing)--Tobin is quite amusing and Charlie Ruggles makes to most of his small role of Amanda's husband. And it's always great to see Louise Beavers even if is in the demeaning black servant role. So--it is good but not great. It just misses the mark. But it always great to see Russell and Stewart so young and full of life. I give it an 8.
Did you know
- TriviaWhen Linda blows out Carrell's match in the bar, she's reacting to the old "three on a match" superstition.
- GoofsA montage dramatizing Gaylord's writers block includes three day & date calendar pages. The first two calendar pages are consistent with the year 1938, but the closest years for which the third page would be correct are 1930 or 1941.
- Quotes
Gaylord 'Gay' Esterbrook: [speaking to his wife Linda] Well, now, just what's behind that dark innuendo?
Clementine, Actress in Show: Aint nothing behind me, boss.
- ConnectionsFeatured in MsMojo: Top 10 Funniest Bloopers from Classic Hollywood Movies (2023)
- SoundtracksThe Wedding March
(1843) (uncredited)
from "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
Music by Felix Mendelssohn
Played after the wedding
- How long is No Time for Comedy?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 33m(93 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1







