LOVE IS A RACKET

 

As I have mentioned in an earlier post, this month the Turner Classic Movies cable channel is having a celebration of the 100th anniversary of Warner Bros. by having a marathon of movies made (or at least released) by the company. 

Among the lesser-ones being shown is LOVE IS A RACKET, a 1932 story about a New York City gossip columnist. I had high hopes for this one, considering that it was directed by the legendary William Wellman, a man who made some of the most notable productions of the Pre-Code era. I have to say that in my opinion it's not one of Wellman's better entries. 

Douglas Fairbanks Jr. plays Jimmy Russell, gossip columnist for a major NYC newspaper. Jimmy's status makes him almost as famous as the celebrities he covers (especially with the ladies). Jimmy's latest flame is ambitious actress Mary Wodehouse (Frances Dee). Jimmy wants Mary to be his wife, but she's more interested in getting a major part on Broadway. Mary's high spending leads to her writing a series of bad checks, and that gets her involved with notorious gangster Eddie Shaw (Lyle Talbot). Jimmy will do just about anything for Mary, which worries his friends Stanley (Lee Tracy) and Sally (Ann Dvorak). 

What hurts LOVE IS A RACKET the most is the casting. Douglas Fairbanks Jr. was only in his early 20s when he made this film, and at this time in his acting career he seems too proper and clean cut to be a popular newspaper columnist who knows everything about everyone, and isn't all that worried about ethics. Lee Tracy would have much better suited for the role (except for the idea that Jimmy is a handsome ladies man). 

The female casting could have been improved as well. Frances Dee acts too soft and simpering as Mary--I think the role needed a performer who had an edge to her. Ann Dvorak would have improved the character considerably. Dvorak had the undefinable ability to draw the viewer's attention whenever she's on the screen. Dvorak's character in LOVE IS A RACKET is smitten with Jimmy, but in time-honored classic Hollywood movie fashion, he doesn't notice, although it's made abundantly clear to the audience. 

It's strange that Lee Tracy and Ann Dvorak are given underwhelming supporting parts in this movie, considering that not too long before the duo had the lead roles in Warners' THE STRANGE LOVE OF MOLLY LOUVAIN, a much better film which gave both of them plenty of chances to show their stuff. 

Ann Dvorak in LOVE IS A RACKET

I also believe that LOVE IS A RACKET lacks the zip that the early 1930s Warners product usually has. (It also lacks the expected snappy dialogue.) Lyle Talbot isn't much of a threat as Eddie Shaw--he seems more like the type of guy who would work for a tough gangster instead of actually being one. 

Toward the climax of the film, a murder is committed, and successfully covered up. One expects that at the end some of the characters suffer some consequences over this, but nobody does, leading to a weak finale which also has Jimmy finally come to the conclusion that "love is a racket". (You would think with all that Jimmy has seen and heard as a big city gossip columnist, he'd have learned that lesson a long time ago.)

To be fair, William Wellman and Warner Bros. were cranking out movie after movie in 1932--not all of them were going to wind up being excellent. Stronger, more assertive performers in the roles of Jimmy, Mary, and the gangster would have made LOVE IS A RACKET much better, along with a much more dramatic ending.