SDMBMLS&DS: "Love Me Tonight"

Love Me Toniight is one of my favorite musicals because no other film ever captured quite so successfully what it’s like to have a song in your heart and sex on the brain.

From the first moments, we’re introduced to a community that has an internal rhythm that speaks to its vibrancy and love for the workings of everyday life. Director Rouben Mamoulian was an innovator in many ways (his use of filters in Dr. Jekyll; the first 3-strip Technicolor of Becky Sharp), but his use of sound here was truly revolutionary, with each additional “musical” moment (broom sweeping, rug beating, nail hammering, car honking) adding to the rich texture of Paris street life.

Like many musicals, LMT operates under some basic oppositions—rich and poor, randiness and repression, propriety and impetuousness, zeal for life and stodginess, nobility by birth and sincerity of heart. But it’s the juggling of these oppositions in a myriad of clever and satirical (often purely visual) ways that places the sheer romanticism of the tone in a more tongue-in-cheek environment.

This is helped greatly by some funny Rodgers & Hart songs with even funnier deliveries. “Mimi” is hilarious in Chevalier’s over-the-top (and in-your-face) libidinousness, and the reprise is even funnier when we remember that, for the entire castle to have learned the song, Maurice has likely been regaling them for hours in earshot of the resistant object of his affection. Similarly, Maurice entertains the crowd by wallowing in the depravity of working class prejudices with his gangster ode “The Apache Song”, when we know his portrayal may be closer to autobiography than anyone actually expects. And class division snobbery is sent up when even the chambermaid resents having stooped to flirting with “the son-of-a-gun who’s nothing but a tailor”.

But even the “serious” songs are given equally subversive levity. The standard “Lover” ends with the line, “You and I will roll in the…Hey!” when her horse-drawn wagon crashes. “Love Me Tonight” is a romantic duet between two sleeping partners, physically separated but united via splitscreen to end up in bed together. And “Isn’t It Romantic?” reminds us of the mercurial power of song, with the simplest tune enrapturing cab drivers, soldiers, gypsies, and princesses as the melody wafts its way across the countryside.

In each one of these songs, ruminations of sex are never far away, and sights of MacDonald having her bust measured in a negligee or Mryna Loy doggedly chasing men (the younger the better) only play up the connection between sexual satisfaction and the never-ending pursuit of a happy ending. Compared to Charles Butterworth’s fractured flute, Maurice can’t help but bring a jolt of erotic energy to the proceedings, as he confidently prances up the stairs and, later, hosts a stag party that Jeanette drops in on.

But as fun as these characters are, when the Princess declares her love for the “Count”, he’s taken genuinely off-guard. It’s a very real and touching moment from Chevalier, and MacDonald manages to abandon some of her typical stiffness and actually become accessible in a way we rarely saw from her throughout her career. And for this, Mamoulian (who directed the likes of Garbo, Miriam Hopkins, and Cyd Charisse to career-best performances) deserves a good share of the credit. As a director, he was always a bit hard to pin down—his Dr. Jekyll is more unnerving than the Universal horror films from the period, his Zorro has better sword-fighting than any of Errol Flynn’s pics, and Silk Stockings is another musical worth some serious re-examining.

But he largely disappeared after the 30s, and the memory of him is usually eclipsed by the likes of Paramount’s Lubitsch and xxx. But Love Me Tonight remains a masterpiece in the way it giddily embraces natural impulses, both musical and carnal, in a way that, over 70 years later, few films have done as well.

Anyone else get a chance to hunt the DVD down?

Whoops! The last paragraph should read “Lubitsch and von Sternberg”. :smack:

I adore that movie–Jeanette MacDonald was adorable before they shipped her off to MGM and sewed her vagina shut.

Bumpity-bump.

I’ve got a movie-watching date set up for Sunday – I’ll be back early next week sometime.

Great–I’m glad you were able to track it down. Long unavailable on video, Kino did an excellent job with its DVD transfer, doing justice to a gorgeous film.

Anybody else?

About 2/3rds of the way through it

Finally watched it last night. A few scattered comments:

Sorry, I’m less in love than you are, Archive Guy. There was stuff I liked, but I also commented to my friend several times, “this is a Really. Weird. Movie,” to which he’d respond, “it’s a musical.” (That bit of dialogue definitely should have been going in the other direction.) I’m someone who usually has no trouble whatsoever suspending disbelief when it comes to a good musical, but I had several full-tilt WTF moments. For one, the spread of the “Mimi” song throughout the chateau – thanks for providing an explanation, I was truly stuck on how that happened.

Part of the problem was that Chevalier’s accent was so thick – I missed about half of his spoken dialogue, and probably 2/3 of his lyrics. Plus McDonald’s operatic-style soprano (and thank god that vocal style has fallen out of favor) made a lot of her lyrics hard to understand.

Things I did like:

The opening. Truly wonderful.

The spread of the “Isn’t It Romantic” – another wonderful number. I esp. liked how the lyrics were adapted to the singers – the tailor-shop customer, who sang basically “blah blah blah, isn’t it romantic”; the cabbie and his passenger; the soliders, etc.

The whole storybook vibe of the chateau – the three fairy godmothers, the guests in Sleeping Beauty slow motion, etc. (Though again, I kept getting stuck on extraneous details, like “what’s with all the ridiculously tall doors?”)

The bit with the hunt, when the rest of them arrive, Maurice comes out and tells them to leave again quietly because the stag is sleeping – and they do.

Phooey – gotta get to work – I’m not sure if I’ve said everything I need to or not; back later if “not.”

It’s a Really. Wierd. Musical, is what it is.

Part of the reason is that it was made in 1932, when movie musicals had just about been killed off by several years of all-singing, all-dancing, all-stinking plotless revues enacted before a static camera.

Something quite different was needed, and it took an original like Lubitsch to provide it. The visual interest, pacing, and feeling of movement really made this film come alive and make up for a few doggie songs and Jeanette Macdonald’s cast-iron-underwear singing.

Later in ‘32 came Warner Bros.’ Forty Second Street and the heyday of Busby Berkeley began. That clinched it: after 1933 musicals were in again.

or Mamoulian…
:smack: …to provide it.

In my own defense, I swear I’ve seen something by Lubitsch at Paramount that reminded me a whole lot of Love Me Tonight.

Don’t feel bad, BoD–Lubitsch, MacDonald, & Chevalier collaborated on several films in that period, including The Love Parade, One Hour with You and The Merry Widow, all of which are fun but still pale in comparison to LMT.

I think sound was still too new to have the threat of musicals being “killed off” a real one, yet, but the novelty certainly had worn off, and audiences were getting tired of Broadway Melody of 19xx. Lubitsch was in the forefront of innovating the genre (w/the help of JM & MC), but Mamoulian took it up a notch with this film.

And it is a weird one, there’s no denying it. It owes quite a bit to the films of Rene Clair, who himself was influenced by the Dada movement. You can see traces from his early quasi-musicals as well as the art film *Entr’acte *. There’s a lot of this film that takes getting used to: Chevalier is easier to understand the longer you listen, Jeanette’s charms come through with good material that (as Eve pointed out) would get smothered later in her career, and the fairy tale whimsy was a more conventional trope of operetta at the time, so it wouldn’t have been quite so curious.

What would have been new for audiences would be the use of music, sound and even lighting for a talkie (the Apache song owes more than a bit to the Expressionists).

That part-talked, part-sung musical genre was very popular in Europe—see also Viktor und Viktoria (1933), in my opnion the best, far and away, version, with the delightful Renate Müller. It’s very similar to Love Me Tonight in style.

Good point on the “part-talked, part-sung” – I did notice that the rhyming would start as part of the set-up to the intro to the song.

Thanks all who have helped clarify the issues around the historic context – it really does make the whole thing make a little more sense (in terms of the ways in which the conventions of the genre are starting to develop, and also in terms of trying some stuff that wouldn’t develop into conventions). Obviously '32 is ridiculously early. So one thing my friend and I were talking about (esp. after viewing the censorship notes in one of the extras) was how surprised we were with some of the lyrics (the song about touching the part of the body that touches the chair, or however that went), and the whole thing about the doctor coming in and saying, effectively, “this young woman needs to get laid!”

And I had noticed the lighting thing – on the Apache number but also on some of the interspersed shots of the aunts.

As far as Chevalier getting easier to understand – not necessarily a whole lot. :wink:

Yeah, the aunts almost seem intended to evoke Macbeth’s witches.

And those censorship notes: the luscious Myrna Loy singing “Mimi” in bed in a black (semi-see through) negligee. :eek: I need to contact a colleague and explore that “lost” footage!

I saw this not too long back, and I think I more or less agree with twickster’s opinion. It was good, in parts very good (especially the first third or so), but all the same on the whole it didn’t completely work for me. I did like the evident “Lubitsch touch,” though.

I wish they would release the soundtrack; I’d like to have a copy of “Isn’t it Romantic” as sung in the movie.