Watch The Last of Mrs. Cheyney For Free

Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Just perfect...

Absolutely the worst movie.

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

I have mixed feelings about The Last of Mrs. Cheyney. There is the wonderful performance by Jessie Ralph as the Duchess. There are charming bits and moments that are subtly humorous. But The Last of Mrs. Cheyney, given its cast and budget, should be better, snappier, wittier, more fun, more deliciously wicked and...it isn't. Instead of a showcase for a large cast of talented stars and supporting actors who each get his/her striking moments, the film just seems jammed and jumbled with characters. It's unbalanced. For instance, a film with two male leads needs to balance those two leads. In The Last of Mrs. Cheyney, there's too much Robert Montgomery and not enough William Powell. To continue on the subject of balance, there's no reason why any film shouldn't be enhanced by having the support of two well-known scene stealers, Frank Morgan and Nigel Bruce (think of the joys of both Edward Everett Horton and Eric Blore in the Fred and Ginger movies). But in The Last of Mrs. Cheyney Morgan and Bruce seem too much. Finally, the film is marred by a truly bad ending.

Joan Crawford is miscast as a wealthy American widow who relocates to London and mixes it up with the high society Brits. Lethargic comedy, previously filmed in 1929 with Norma Shearer, does have one plot twist, though many viewers may tire and tune out by the time it is revealed. First-half is so slow setting up the story, I could easily understand why this was such a flop in 1937. The second-half does improve, with jazzy supporting performances including Frank Morgan's as a befuddled would-be suitor (he's very funny). As for Crawford, she's too tough and inflexible for this kind of flippant character. Originally based upon a play by Frederick Lonsdale, with the material's stage-origins are all too apparent. *1/2 from ****

What a wonderful cast. Some of the best Thespians of the 1930's or any decade for that matter. William Powell, Robert Montgomery, Joan Crawford, Nigel Bruce, Frank Morgan, Jessie Ralph, Melville Cooper, to name the main ones. Then what went wrong? The answer is in the weak script and ho-hum direction. Based on a play, the movie is stagy, much too talky. There is little wit nor many clever lines in the wordy script. So all the viewer has left is a bunch of good actors talking themselves to death and putting the audience to sleep in the process. The script is also predictable. The plot is actually a good one. The charming and mysterious Mrs. Cheyney woos rich eligible bachelors and one not so eligible to gain their confidence so she and her accomplices can fleece them. Unfortunately Mrs. Cheyney falls for one of the eligible bachelors. Will she go through with the fleece? The answer lies in the last half of the film. Since Hollywood today is remaking so many movie classics that don't really need remaking, why not remake some of the movies such as this one that could use a good make over? As noted by critics there is a degree of miscasting involved as well. Joan Crawford just does not fit as an adventurer passing herself off as a social big-wig in England. William Power would have played Robert Montgomery's role better than the role assigned him. Robert Montgomery on the other hand is well suited for his role as is Nigel Bruce and the rest of the cast.Even if you are a fan of the stars of this fluff and an admirer of 1930's Hollywood cinema, you may still find this movie slow moving and hoping that this is truly the last of Mrs. Cheyney.

Many earlier reviewers have said the Crawford was "mis-cast" as Mrs. Cheyney. I have to disagree. It is not her best performance (for her best acting, see her small but scene-stealing role in The Women and for a Crawford feast, see her Oscar-winning turn in Mildred Pierce), but it is far from her worst. The blame cannot be entirely placed on Crawford either. Nor can it be placed on the director. It must be placed on the production code administrators who sheared Hollywood scripts after 1934, cutting out anything considered "risqué." The original play by Fredric Lonsdale is a surprisingly hilarious and fresh send-up of the class sytem in England. Butler and footmen who are actually thieves in disguise get to act veddy propper and then (when the guests leave) get to drop their phony apparel. Its really quite funny. In the play, when Crawford's would-be suitor catches her at robbery, he forces her to spend a night in the closet with him. This was wonderfully handled in the 1929 Norma Shearer original of this picture. But the production code said that thieves had to always be punished, and sexual actions could not be forced or blackmailed. Thus, this is an extremely bowdlerized version of the play. It is interesting to watch the stars interplay, and I'm a bit surprised that it flopped so largely in 1937. Seeing some of the junk that goes over big nowadays, one would think that with a cast like this and high production values, it would have at least made its mark. See the Norma Shearer version, if you can find it. Unfortunately, its very rare (there is a laser disc version of it on The Dawn of Sound Volume III), but totally worth it. It is risqué and hilarious. Or see Trouble In Paradise, another early pre-Code comedy about jewel thieves, who in that film, don't have to face punishment for their actions.