Was not impressed

You forget--the theatre was as big a deal as Hollywood was in the 1930s. I'm not entirely sure, but the decline of Broadway happened in the 1950s when TV became such a big deal--and ironically, TV killed Hollywood's heyday as well.

I wasn't impressed because the movie was typical of the early thirties which tended to have sketchy character development. So I was left confused when Eva went from this batty, hungry young aspiring actress to the self-assured, slightly hysterical woman at the end of the movie. The movie showed Eva's breakdown (the modeling, the circus performance), but the next time we see her, she's understudy to Rita (Wtf!) and Joseph has been grooming her for stardom. In fact, Eva's ascent to stardom wasn't that arduous because she was so kooky, Joseph and Lewis never forgot her--how many aspiring actresses knocking on the theatre's doors could say the same? I did like the scene where she was drunk and began to act, but the following scenes killed the impact it could have had. But then again, like I said, many films from the early thirties lacked well-executed character-building and scene-and-sequels. It's an interesting Pre-Code (yes, Eva did sleep with Lewis, which was a bad thing in that he could kill her career b/c he didn't want to see her once he broke it off with her [which he tried to do, but Joseph being in love with her made him feel guilty]).

[deleted]

There are many better films from this era so it is not just the age of the film that makes it a dud. Hepburn was bad in this but she can't be blamed exclusively because the character was poorly written for. She had acted like this in other films and this is part of the reason I have not admired her career at the level most others do. Bette Davis could act circles around her and in much more varied roles.

I did not find anything special about Fairbanks, Jr. in this at all though. Several times he looked like he was reading cue cards especially in one scene with Menjou. He seemed to be going through the motions.