Made for Each Other

source: Made for Each Other

Your enjoyment of "Made For Each Other" is entirely dependent on your appreciation for Jimmy Stewart. If you're a big fan of his, you should find this movie mildly entertaining. If, however, you find Jimmy Stewart vastly overrated as an actor, like I do, then you're in for a painful slog. All of Stewart's quirks, gimmicks, affectations, and stammers are fully on view here. In this movie, he plays a wimpy lawyer who lets everyone and everything in his life overwhelm him. That would be fine if the movie gave us any kind of story to attach to the character he plays. It doesn't. There's a co-worker at the law firm where Stewart works who seems to be the film's villain early on. They're competing for a firm partnership, so it seems like we might get some heated office politics. We don't. Stewart had been dating the boss' daughter before meeting his wife, so it seems like we might get some interesting romantic rivalry sparks in the movie. We don't. Stewart's boss (Charles Coburn) pushes Stewart around, possibly because Stewart ditched his daughter, so we might get some "boss vs. employee" friction. We don't. Stewart's new wife and his mom rub each other the wrong way, so we might get some interesting family in-fighting. We don't. In fact, not much really happens in this movie at all. After about an hour of listlessness, Stewart and Lombard decide to get a divorce. At this point, I thought, "Well, maybe their baby will get sick and die and that'll end this dreary movie." Shazam! The next scene, that very thing started to happen! All of a sudden Stewart is sobbing on the phone, demanding help from his boss, praying for help, all in the most melodramatic way possible. Some random pilot decides to fly from Salt Lake City to New York during a raging blizzard (in an open air bi-plane!!!) in order to save the day. Why couldn't the movie be about THAT guy? Stewart's character is such a mama's boy that its hard to root for him at all. I could never see what Lombard's character saw in him in the first place. Charles Coburn's character started off as really irritating, with the old "hard-of-hearing" schtick that seems to be prevalent in so many old movies. He really takes control of the situation (and the movie) by becoming a man of action once the baby gets sick. His role became the most interesting part of the movie at that point. If you want to see Jimmy Stewart at his best (in 1939), stick with "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington".

Is it a melodrama? Starts out more like a lighthearted comedy, then veers into a slow-paced slice of life before ending with a cliffhanger ride in a single-engine plane through a cross-country blizzard. Hmmm......The cinematography was good though - the chiaroscuro of the close-ups made it almost worth price of admission. The endless procession of hired help was fun too. Best line - "Don't let the seeds spoil the watermelon." Sorry, there's only so many seeds I can spit out.

Pity the poor screen writer. She has more than one nearly impossible maze to navigate. She's got to create something that is clear enough for the audience's sensibilities, and in this genre that means there needs to be a moral to the thing and it needs to be plain. You also, incidentally have to have some dramatic arc, or so the conventional wisdom of the time would have. You won't see this; at any rate, I hope you don't. So let me describe it. Stewart is a lawyer, which in these sorts of films is a surrogate for a writer-performer. He is in the midst of a big case, Huggins versus Huggins. (Though it is a civil suit, the inference is that the plaintiffs are related.) In this case, his "performance" is superb, a hit. Meanwhile, he is employed by a stodgy coot who is hard of hearing (get it?) and who doesn't appreciate our boy. There's a device we are introduced to at the beginning: everything through writing — the wife writes letters to her new husband even though he is next to her on the train. And the "theme" of the thing, the point is the he has to be clear and direct in expressing himself. He is to her. And he is on the stage of the courtroom, but not in larger life. By the end, he learns to and our couple presumably live happily ever after. So one can imagine our screenwriter sitting down and worrying about clean writing. Precision. Its what she wants and what she writes about — her on screen double (Lombard) providing the guidance. But there has to be a dramatic trigger, and here it is the son who will die unless he gets some special serum, which can only be obtained by our mouse becoming a man. He does. In amazingly self-referential fashion, this movie is a disaster, largely because it rambles. It spends all its wealth of our attention on insignificant elements: the honeymoon ship that has to be abandoned; the lone pilot who flies the serum through a dangerous storm to arrive at the last minute. These take up half the movie and should have been footnotes. My own guess is that screenwriter had things in a clean perspective, but studio bosses blew those two elements (plus the comic mother-in-law and the wise black maid) up because they thought thats what was required. So the deaf boss wins in making the movie even though he is transformed within it. Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

James Stewart plays Johnny Mason, lawyer. Carole Lombard is Jane Mason, wife. Lucile Watson the mother-in-law Harriet Mason. Johnny sees Jane and quickly marries her. Mother is disappointed. Mother lives with them. Many troubles are ahead. Jane can't cook. Can't set the table. Can't do many things according to mother. The interaction between daughter-in-law and mother are the highlights of this film. Stewart and Lombard are married but just don't have any real magic on screen. Stewart is Stewart. He is good as a timid husband and son but this doesn't carry the film. Can baby Mason build bridges between Jane and Harriet? A believable film for those that are married.

Terrific comedy which soon falls into dramatic overtones with Jimmy Stewart, Carole Lombard and Lucille Watson providing great acting. Stewart marries Lombard after meeting her during a business trip. He brings her home and she is immediately disliked by mother-in-law Watson. Watson takes the role of the find-fault mother-in-law with relish and in comedy never lets Stewart forget that he could have married Charles Coburn's (the boss) daughter. The young couple can't seem to make it. When Stewart asks Coburn for a raise, Coburn beats him to it and tells that with hard times, everyone must take a 25% pay deduction. When the baby comes, everything seems to go downhill. Now, the picture takes on dramatic overtones with a new year's bout between Lombard and Watson. It looks like this marriage is going, going gone. With the baby's sudden illness, we see how people can come together in times of distress. The cooperating boss, the pilot flying the serum, the understanding maid, quite a difference from nasty Alma Kruger, who quit during a dinner party, and the couple that called the hospital when they came upon the collapsed pilot holding the serum. This sequence basically shows what America is all about.

While other users will disagree with the accolades I give this movie, I was throughly impressed with Carole Lombard. While her legacy is her indisputable talent as a screen comedian, she was very touching and cogent in this serious role. What I like about the golden age of Hollywood was how they could take such simple plots and parlay them into unforgettable classics. What newlywed couple today couldn't relate to the problems Stewart and Lombard contended with in this movie? Their tenacity and devotion to one another under duress was very simple and poignant. I have a funny feeling if I ever get married, I would want my future wife to watch this movie with me! Stewart's role in this movie is not as heralded as his characters in Mr. Smith goes to Washington or in Its a wonderful life. That is certainly understandable. However, I will watch any movie which pairs up Hollywood legends. Any movie featuring James Stewart and Carole Lombard definitely warrants a look. If this movie came out any year other than 1939, it would be highly esteemed.

Made for Each Other (1939) "Last year there were half a million divorces in this country. Congratulations." And that is the beginning of a sometimes-screwball comedy that turns very serious by the end, with James Stewart leading the charge. It could be screwier, and Jimmy Stewart is more lovable than hilarious, so the humor revolves around him as the foil. Carole Lombard, his partner in crime, can be more zany, for sure, but even there, she is more restrained than other films (like "Twentieth Century"). It's the situation, and the rest of the cast, who make this funny...and eventually tragic. How exactly it drags at times is hard to say. Oddly, even Stewart is a little off base, exaggerating too much. The plot, overall, lacks drive. You might think this doesn't matter in a silly comedy, but it does very much. In fact, because this comedy is laced with a fair amount of normal drama, it needs a basic conflict that dramas need. There are some terrific scenes--the New Year's moment is really moving, and the scenes after that--and these are the reason to watch. On some level, this is a type of drama/comedy that is aimed at new parents, or newlyweds. The couple's focus on the baby reminded me of "Christmas in Connecticut," and "Penny Serenade." I wish it just worked better, but too often it bumbles along, one little moment after another, the result of imperfect direction (John Cromwell) and a weak script. So it does the best it can, and the last half hour is its best, with high drama kicking in. This is a David O. Selznick production in the same year as his slightly more famous movie, "Gone with the Wind."

As a whole, this movie doesn't work at all. Different parts of the story jump around here and there and fail to form a cohesive piece -- the result of a poorly written script. For instance, halfway into the movie and you still get no idea of where it is all going. You get a vague sense that Johnny's (Jimmy Stewart) inability to support his family and the consequent strain on his relationship with his wife is part of the main plot, only to be completely thrown off by a new development in the story, which doesn't fit into the first portion of the film at all. It's almost like watching two different stories at the same time. Despite this serious flaw, the film is "saved," so to speak, by its superb cast. Both Charles Coburn and Lucille Watson give their typical character portrayals. Jimmy Stewart gives his usual touching performance that is so well-known to film-goers. Meanwhile, Carole Lombard tries a hand at a dramatic role -- and succeeds. As a wife, she is charmingly believable, and as a mother, simply shines. Thus the unfortunate film is held together -- albeit weakly -- by the performance of the cast. Otherwise there isn't much that would convince one to keep watching. However, it may be worth your time if your main object is to enjoy the performance of either Jimmy Stewart or Carole Lombard, or both.

"Made for Each Other" stars resident scatterbrain, Carole Lombard and congenial James Stewart as Jane and John Mason, a couple on a whirlwind romance to nowhere. John works for a curmudgeon judge, Joseph Doolittle (Charles Coburn), a professional alliance that is at odds with the effervescence of his newlywed life. A greater hurdle to overcome is Jane's live in mother, Harriet (Lucile Watson) who intrudes upon the couple's idyllic domestic paradise with all the tact and humility of the proverbial bull in a china shop. By the time New Year's Eve rolls around the edges of martial Shangra-la have become so frayed that both John and Jane contemplate the longevity of a future together. Their sudden realization that their marriage may be over, which takes place amidst the gaiety of romantic couples celebrating the New Year, reaches a level of heartbreaking poignancy that, alas, the rest of the story lacks. Financial stresses brought on by a change at work eventually culminated with a devastating illness that may claim the life of John and Jane's infant. Director John Cromwell spins a cinematic tapestry of lives that are the embodiment of those proverbial ups and downs we all encounter in life – at least during the first two acts of his story. Cromwell's sprite and accessible direction allows even the sensitive charm and poignancy of secondary characters their chance to shine. Unfortunately for all concerned, the last act of this story is maudlin melodrama and an insane layering of cliché that drives the story into a downward lack of restraint. Though the effervescent triumph of the human spirit is never far from Cromwell's vision for the film, it's ultimately that old fashioned sentiment that salvages the whole affair from becoming overly sweet or dire. MGM's DVD is impressive. The B&W picture exhibits a very nicely balanced gray scale with smooth, solid blacks and very clean whites. Age related artifacts are present throughout but do not distract. Some minor edge enhancement crops up and there is more than a hint of pixelization in infrequent spots but overall the picture will surely not disappoint. The audio is mono but more than adequate for a film of this vintage. There are no extras.