Having rewatched "How to Marry a Millionaire" '53, recently, I was struck by how similar the plots of these movies are. In both films, we have 3 unrelated poor, but beautiful, single women who rent an upscale apartment together, rather than separate dingy apartments, in hopes that will suggest to their dates that they are better off than they are. Actually, between these films, there were several other films with the same basic plot, if differing in some details. This includes "Three Blind Mice" '38, "Moon Over Miami" '41, and "Three Little Girls in Blue", in which 3 sisters or other relatives, rather that unrelated women, are involved. Loretta Young, who is one of the women in this film, was also one of the women in "Three Blind Mice". Curiously, near the end of the present film, she was singing "Three Blind Mice". In addition, I just came across the '31 film "Three Girls Lost", which also includes Loretta(as well as John Wayne!) and, from the summary, sounds like it had a basically similar plot. Obviously, a popular plot to redo! ......Fortunately, Fox chose 3 charismatic beautiful actresses who are easy to tell apart at a glance. There is also a 4th girl(Simone Simon, as Marie) who worms her way into the relationship between wealthy John(Paul Lukas) and Constance Bennett(Yoli). Somehow, twice, she got into John's house to surprise John and Yoli when they arrived. Yoli doesn't want to go to South America, where John's business is about to take him, providing teenage Marie with an opening. John is quite hesitant, but eventually agrees, provide they marry before he goes. Yogi must find another wealthy prospect........Petite Janet Gaynor, as Martha, develops tenuous relationships with Don Ameche, as Dr. Rudi, and with Alan Mowbray, as magician Paul Sandor. Both are initially grouchy toward her, as she is an assistant to them. However, both eventually appreciate her company. But, apparently, Sandor said something that ticked her off, and she left him, going back to Rudi and his experimental rabbits. Martha would later become the victim of Susie's(Loretta) attempt to poison herself after losing handsome wealthy Karl(Tyrone Power) to his fiancé. Dr.Rudi was called to try to help resuscitate her, and this further cemented their attraction to each other. Not long after, they married. Martha had achieved at least part of her wish to snare a nice husband, who might not be very wealthy. By the way, Susie must have been kidding herself when, at the outset, she claimed she wasn't looking for a husband. She just wanted to run a hat shop. One look at Tyrone and she forgot about this claim! He escorted her to a few functions, not telling her that he was engaged to soon marry a countess(Virginia Field). Eventually, she found out, and tried to poison herself, only succeeding in poisoning Martha by mistake......The finale of the film is entirely too rushed! We know that Martha found her man, but what about the others? Martha mentions that Susie finally got her hat shop. But, how did this come about? Is she still looking? I think I heard Yoli mention a Ben, presumably Ben Horvath: a wealthy man she met at a party he gave. But, it would have been nice to confirm this suspicion, and detail the events leading up to this. Apparently, all were satisfied that they had accomplished their goal, as they simultaneously moved out of their apartment in a gay mood.

The only thing I can really say in praise of this very disappointing waste of effort, money and time, is that I really enjoyed the delightfully inappropriate Viennese music score directed and conducted by Louis Silvers. The script by Melville Baker (who later wrote the excellent "Above Suspicion") can only be described as a screaming bore. Admittedly, Baker probably didn't have much to start with in Ladislaus Bus-Fekete's 1930 Hungarian stage play which was translated by Victor Katona and Guy Bolton (of all people!) and which was published by Dutton of New York in 1937 - that is AFTER the movie was released. Presumably, Dutton anticipated that the movie would be a really big hit. It was certainly packed with star power: Janet Gaynor, Loretta Young, Constance Bennett, Simone Simon, Don Ameche, Paul Lukas, Tyrone Power... Alas, Only Alan Mowbray really delivers (and perhaps Simone Simon). The director, Edward H. Griffith, was not exactly a director of renown. And even if he was, almost everyone else assigned to this movie seems to be working at half steam, including my favorite photographer, Hal Mohr.

Ladies in Love (1936) ** (out of 4) Janet Gaynor, Loretta Young, Constance Bennett, Simone Simon, Don Ameche, Paul Lukas and Tyrone Power highlight this all-star cast but the final film doesn't do any of them justice. Set in Budapest, three women (Gaynor, Young, Bennett) move into an apartment and soon we see them struggle with love and work issues. The cast here is extremely good but the screenplay is extremely poor. It's clear Fox wanted to throw all their stars in the pot but it's too bad they didn't bother coming up with a better screenplay. The movie is pretty much all dialogue and there's way too much of it and none of it comes off too interesting. The actors all do fine work on their own but the screenplay doesn't give them too much to do and the relationships never come off believable. Gaynor steals the film as a poor girl who sells ties trying to make ends meet. Ameche is also very good as the doctor who doesn't realize he's in love with Gaynor's character.

An early example of Darryl Zanuck's favorite formula: three young ladies share an apartment [see THREE BLIND MICE, MOON OVER MIAMI, HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE, THREE COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN, THE BEST OF EVERYTHING]. This time the setting for their various romantic difficulties is Budapest. Squeaky-voiced Janet Gaynor gets top billing as a poor girl who hawks neckties on streetcorners but also feeds rabbits for young doctor Don Ameche and still has time to perform valet duty for self-absorbed magician Alan Mowbray. Over-eager Loretta Young, on the other hand, obsesses over wealthy nobleman Tyrone Power. As a sophisticated gold-digger, Constance Bennett has the best role, allowing her to underplay effectively. Her plot thread involves an affair with wealthy Paul Lukas, complicated by the unexpected arrival of Simone Simon [who is introduced as a nymphet in a sailor suit]. With all these comic/romantic/tragic ingredients [poison is also involved], this stew is not completely digestible. However, despite awkward shifts in tone and rather flat lighting, it remains interesting as a showcase for a variety of film personalities, some on the rise and some not. Ironically, the most striking performance comes from a subsidiary character: Wilfrid Lawson, who implies an entire world of sophistication in his few scenes as an aging playboy.