no man of his own
by Douglas Messerli
Milton Herbert Gropper and Maurine Dallas Watkins
(screenplay, based on a story by Benjamin Glaser and Edmund Goulding, based, in
turn, in a novel by Val Lewton), Wesley Ruggles (director) No Man of Her Own / 1932
The reason
why it’s so interesting in this earlier film derives from its major actors:
Clark Gable and Carole Lombard. As a sophisticated gambler, Clark name in this
film Babe Stewart, is almost literally swept off his feet by the smart-cracking
beautiful small-town librarian Connie Randall (Lombard). And even though they
marry on a toss of a coin, it is clear that even such a con-man like him will
not survive long without her.
When Randall
finally begins to guess his true avocation, she switches his marked deck of
card, forcing him to lose. She is also visited by Babe’s former lover, Kay
Everly (Dorothy Mackaill) who helps wise-up Randall on her husband’s doings and
his scuffles with the law. Yet love holds sway, even when Babe ponders a voyage
to Rio de Janeiro with his fellow card sharks. Instead of leaving, the gambler
unexpectedly turns himself into the police who have been trying to get
something on him. He’ll serve several months in jail if after that they clear
him and stop tailing his actions.
Months
later, he returns to his now pregnant wife, pretending to have just arrived
home from his transatlantic voyage, without realizing that she knows of his
deception, allowing the couple of live, presumably, happily-ever-after, he now
actually playing the loving husband who works as a Wall Street exec.
In short,
the story is a standard fairy tale about the powerful effects of good and
loving woman, like Randall, who are perfectly willing to be seduced if they can
change their man’s ways—as the famous Frank Loesser ditty, “Marry the Man Today”
promises. Even though, reportedly, Gable and Lombard sparked no romantic
moments during the shooting of this film—Gable purportedly found Lombard far
too bawdy and outspoken and she saw him as conceited—it is clear from this,
their only film together, that they represented a kind of “pepper-and-salt”
match.
Yet,
there’s something wrong with this picture that begins with its title. Who “has
no man of her own” we must ask, when it is clear from the first moment that
Randall and Babe meet, he will be her “man?” Doe the title refer to his ex,
Kay? If so, nothing is made of it, and she quickly backs off from any
challenges against Randall for Babe—even if the trailers (not from the completed
film) tend to suggest this possibility.
Nor was
the original working title, taken from the story on which it was based, No
Bed of Her Own any more illuminating. Once she marries Babe, his wife
certainly does have “a bed of her own,” primarily since she spends most of the
real movie time waiting for him as he serves his symbolic penance for his previously
bad deeds in jail.
And there
are so many other questions. Why is such a dapper, wealthy man spending time
with such thugs as Charlie Vane (Grant Mitchell) and other such small-time
crooks? True, the money is easy takings given the braggart moneybags with whom
he plays. But this high-time spender sems to have everything, including a
beautifully furnished penthouse, while his partners live in fleabag hotel
rooms.
How could
such an obviously sentimental figure as Babe, who so quickly falls in love, be
a cutthroat gambler? Even if we accept him as a kind of Nicky Arnstein, of Funny
Girl (1968), figure, things still don’t quite add up—particularly since he
is so equally adept at Wall Street gambles.
The
director Ruggles makes absolutely no attempt to “explain” Babe’s bad-boy
behavior and his truly quite speedy transformation into a loving “normalized”
husband. Maybe it’s better that such fairy tales are not analyzed too carefully.
Besides, as we’ve discovered in so many movies, Lombard, as daffy as she is,
always gets her man. Perhaps it might be more appropriately titled, No Man
of His Own, without suggesting any secret gay coding, but simply pointing
to the fact that Babe is just what his name suggests, a kind of child who has
utterly no control over his own adult male identity.
Los Angeles, February 21, 2016
Reprinted from World Cinema Review (February
2016).



No comments:
Post a Comment