The Barretts of Wimpole Street

source: The Barretts of Wimpole Street

Moviecut—The Barretts of Wimpole Street

Laughton is great as the monstrous, tyrannical father, but there isn't much else to recommend beside the dog. Boring story filled with melodrama and standing around! Very dated and not very interesting, but a well made movie.

In 1845 London, invalid poetess Norma Shearer (as Elizabeth Barrett) finds reasons to live, after meeting fellow writer Fredric March (as Robert Browning). "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" focuses on one particular Barrett; not surprisingly, it is the one played by Ms. Shearer. At the time, she was considered one of the best actresses of all-time, and this MGM production captures Shearer's appeal perfectly. Unlike many of her contemporaries, Shearer approached most of her later roles from a movie star perspective, and stayed there. So, rather than trying to inhabit Elizabeth Barrett, she brings the character to Shearer. Herein, it works. This was the last time Shearer had the use of her greatest behind-the-scenes collaborators, director Sidney Franklin and husband Irving Thalberg. The latter assembles the usual top talent, and Franklin expertly presents his star. With William Daniels' loving camera, Shearer is given numerous close-ups and medium shots, made to showcase her acting. So, you will see the litany of Shearer looks. Much of it is unnecessary, but it certainly makes the picture fun to watch. And, Shearer's performance is one of her best. The "Academy Awards" took notice, and Shearer finished #2 behind Claudette Colbert in the annual "Best Actress" race, ahead of Bette Davis. Many people think Ms. Davis was "robbed" that year; but, Shearer was even more slighted. The film was "Best Picture" according to "Film Daily" and "Photoplay" while Oscar placed it second. There were no "Supporting Actor" awards yet, or Charles Laughton would surely have been noticed; if only for the way he practically commands Shearer to fall on their home's imposing staircase. Franklin is also award-worthy; when maid Una O'Connor glides into the screen, you know he intends to lift a stagy story about a mostly immobile woman up off its heels. ******** The Barretts of Wimpole Street (9/14/34) Sidney Franklin ~ Norma Shearer, Frederic March, Charles Laughton, Una O'Connor

"The Baretts of Wimpole Street" released in 1934, has the stamp of MGM's great production values. Norma Schearer wonderfully plays Elizabeth Barrett, the invalid poet. She is overly protected by her father, brilliantly played by Charles Laughton. We later learn Laughton is really a tyrant of a man who is incapable of really loving anyone or being loved. Elizabeth meets the fellow poet Robert Browning (Frederic March), and they fall in love. Maureen O'Sullivan give one of her finest performances as Elizabeth's sister, who also falls in love with a Captain. Her father finds out and forbids her to see him again, in a cruel and heartbreaking scene where he makes her swear on a bible. The interplay between Laughton and O'Sullivan and Schearer is fascinating, as the family dynamics are brought to the foreground. "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" was originally a stage play, but translates just fine to the screen. The supporting case is top notch, but this is Norma Schearer's show. It is difficult to take your eyes off her. Laughton is great, as is O'Sullivan. Frederic March at times seems a bit off as Robert Browning, although he is very handsome and the chemistry between he and Schearer is credible. It is a shame that Norma Schearer left the movies by the 1940's. But we are fortunate that this gifted actress left such an amazing legacy of films - "The Barrets of Wimpole Street" is certainly one of them.

The love story between Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett is legendary, and her 'Sonnets from the Portuguese' contains some of the beautiful love poetry ever written. They were both already established poets when they began corresponding, but she was an invalid, and had doubts and insecurities that he helped overcome with steady, persistent, genuine love. What I had forgotten about their story was how poorly her father behaved towards her and the rest of his children, and this movie really shows us that, in what appears to be a pretty accurate way. Charles Laughton is brilliant as the overbearing, controlling, overprotective, borderline incestuous Mr. Barrett, father of 12, whose wife had passed away, and whose own frustrations in love had led him to forbid his children to marry. He's hard to watch at times, but certainly gives the best performance, and the movie is probably more about his inability to let his children go – indeed, he disinherited each one who married – than it is about the extraordinary love between Robert and Elizabeth, though Frederic March and Norma Shearer do have some tender scenes. I enjoyed watching it, but I suppose that's the reason I didn't give a higher rating. How much better would it have been had they incorporated even more of their relationship, and some of their letters and poetry. The movie would be remade 23 years later by the same director, Sidney Franklin, and would be a great choice to be remade (with script changes) again today.

THE BARRETTS OF WIMPOLE STREET was remade in the '60s with Jennifer Jones as Elizabeth Barrett Browning, but most movie fans prefer this earlier version of the tale starring NORMA SHEARER as the ailing poetess, FREDRIC MARCH as her lover and CHARLES LAUGHTON as the control freak of a father. MGM gave it lavish production values and Sidney Franklin's direction is first rate. He would later direct the remake. MAUREEN O'SULLIVAN is charming as Elizabeth's spirited sister in love with a soldier, RALPH FORBES. Performance-wise, it's probably Shearer's best screen performance, ranking with her MARIE ANTOINETTE as the best work of her career. Her quiet resignation to living under the firm domination of her father is well realized, even in the earliest scenes. Trivia note: I don't understand why the decision was made to have UNA O'CONNOR floating into the room as though she was on a track and appears not to be walking at all. It does nothing more than create an artificial effect, especially since O'Connor's performance is more understated than usual. The character-driven story is heavy with stage dialog, moves leisurely and is not likely to find much appeal with today's film-goers. FREDRIC MARCH, who makes his entrance into the story after the first half-hour, is a lively presence but almost overdoes the youthful eagerness in his first scene with Shearer. His boundless energy seems a bit forced. CHARLES LAUGHTON is convincingly devious as the stern parent but looks a bit too young beneath the whiskers and age make-up. Shearer seldom looks as sick as she's supposed to be and is given some radiant close-ups, as if to prove that MGM's make-up department was as efficient as ever. Summing up: Never one of my favorite stories--or films--but worth watching for the performances of an excellent cast.

I'm not surprised that Warners took a long time to put this one on DVD, even though the movie was extremely popular in its day. Alas, it's now mainly of curiosity value as it comes across as a filmed stage play, an impression reinforced by the fact that there is only ONE reverse shot in the entire movie! With this single exception, it's like a filmed stage play except for the fact that it is a very, very wide stage, large enough to accommodate some non-dialog scenes such as the tracking shots in the park. As for the dialog itself, it is generally put across in long, static takes. Despite all, Charles Laughton does deliver a performance of some depth and subtlety, while Maureen O'Sullivan makes her Henrietta a spirited foil. Unfortunately, March's endeavors as Browning are facile and superficial. Norma Shearer, alas, is equally inadequate, while a simpering Katherine Alexander provides some extremely wearisome and dated comic relief.

Ho-hum. 1934 wasn't exactly a stellar year for Best Picture nominees. After It Happened One Night - considered a classic by many - and perhaps the even better The Thin Man, there is nothing much worthy of the honor and The Barretts of Wimpole Street is among them. The biggest problem with this film from the outset is it's just not a interesting story. In fact, it's extremely uninteresting. If the real romance between Elizabeth Barrett Browning and Robert Browning generated sparks, it fails to flicker here despite the marquee cast, which includes Norma Shearer, Frederic March. Maureen O'Sullivan and the late, great Charles Laughton. Simply put, the story just never clicks and the film never develops any kind of credible depth to the characters or the relationships between them. The performances by Shearer, O'Sullivan and Laughton are generally fine, though by no means their best work. Laughton is a little over the top in the role of the overbearing, controlling father. March's performance as Robert Browning comes across as hackneyed and even a bit forced. Worse, there is no semblance of chemistry between him and Shearer's Elizabeth. The relationship between Browning's sister Henrietta (played by O'Sullivan) and the captain is not persuasive either. So, what are we left with? A typical, early era Hollywood film that just doesn't hold up if it ever did in the first place. Unless you have a bucket list like I do to watch every BP nominee, this is one you can comfortably pass up.

I had seen the 1957 version of "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" so I wasn't going to take time for this one. My scheduling changed, I ended up with time and decided to watch the 1934 film. In it were Norma Shearer and Fredric March. I was surprised to note that they were superb. They played off of each other's characters. That spark of emotions were there. Edward Barrett's (Charles Laughton) lustful feelings for his eldest daughter, Elizabeth, become obvious right away. You know he's intentions are not honorable. The fact that he forbade any and all of his children to marry and have a life and family of their own shows that he is mean and self-centered. He isn't above belittling and tearing them down until they give up any idea of breaking away from the family. Edward Barrett wants total control over his complete family. This becomes obvious in the treatment of his own niece in front of her intended husband. How would you like to have the old monster sucking face with you? Ugh! Then comes Robert Browning who reads several of Elizabeth's poems. He falls in love, decides to meet her and convinces her to leave her father, family and marry him. Elizabeth agrees. They leave together with Wilson her maid. (Una O'Connor has that role.) They, also, want to take Elizabeth's beloved spaniel, Flush. Barrett is furious when he discovers their leaving. His cruelty quickly becomes definite. He is going to do away with Flush to get even with Elizabeth for leaving her father for Robert. Will his attempt succeed? Will he ever see his daughter again? What happens with the rest of the family once he loses his hold on Elizabeth? Will Flush make it to the wedding? There's one way to find out, see the movie.