This Day in Ann Dvorak History: “Love is a Racket” Wraps
Year of Ann Dvorak: Day 75
/Racket6.jpg)
On March 16,1932, Ann Dvorak finished filming on Love is a Racket. The day ended a bit earlier than usual which allowed Ann some time for an interview with a writer from one of the film magazines who noted that the young actress seemed very jittery. After the interview, Ann went clothes shopping before heading home to the apartment she shared with her mother.
Ann’s role in Love is a Racket was kind of a let down compared to the more substantial parts she had recently played in Scarface and The Strange Love of Molly Louvain. Even though her character has way less screen time than Francis Dee, who plays the main love interest, Ann still got higher billing. This was because at the time, Ann was still under contract to Howard Hughes who had agreed to let Warner Bros. borrow her exclusively for six months. This also meant that Hughes was dictating Ann’s billing as part of the agreement.
Perhaps Ann should have been concerned with Warner Bros. casting her in such a small role following Molly Louvain. However, she had other things on her mind…
Ann is looking ever so glamorous there…and who wouldnt be jittery after being around Lee Tracy all day!
i’m thinking what Ann had on her mind was a certain Mr Nails Nathan, yes?
Check back tomorrow… 😉
This is sort of a strange movie. Douglas Fairbanks, Jr, seems his normal early 1930’s self, Lee Tracy is quite subdued compared to most of his more irritable works at the time, and Frances Dee was probably still making plans on how she could catch Joel McCrea (Super star of the 1930’s variety) for her eventual spouse. And what can you say about Lyle Talbot that hasn’t been said a few thousand times before.
Then we have Miss Ann D. The first time I watched this movie I didn’t quite know how to take Ann’s role. Obviously she was supposed to be basically somewhat of a Della Street from the Perry Mason series. But she plays it more broodingly for the most part. When you think about it, if Frances Dee and Ann had switched roles it probably would have come off better. But, that’s just one opinion.. The story line is pure early 1930’s, which is OK as even all these years later it’s worth watching.
Speaking of watching, one cast member that always added to a movie back in that time period was Warren Hymer. Always the tough, but not too smart, sort of loveable gang member. There were exceptions but overall he was always a dependable cast member.
How would I rate the flick if you were to ask? But you didn’t ask so I’ll tell you anyway. It’s very watchable if you like the 1930’s movies. If you are an Ann Dvorak fan you surely won’t be disappointed; well, probably unhappy that the writers hadn’t done what they could (should) have for Ann’s role. It’s a little too late (like 81 years) to correct that carelessness; but, if you don’t own a copy of this movie run (do not walk) to your computer and order the flick. I guarantee that you will not be disappointed.
Addendum: Here is another example why I am dying to read a certain book regarding the Life and Times of Ann Dvorak. The back story of her life, especially at this time period, has to be very, very intriguing. Did I mention that it’s like a Chinese water torture routine; waiting drop by drop (or day by day) as time moves on slowly waiting for this published master piece? Well, it sure as hell is!!!
What’s actually really interesting about Ann’s role is that in the book it was based on, her character is a coked-up prostitute who for some reason always hangs out at Fairbanks apartment. It could have actually been a much more interesting part, but I guess that was even too racy in the pre-Code era!
I think it’s watchable enough, but it needs more Ann (of course), and I agree that Lee Tracy is generally very irritable, yet he seems to have a legion of die-hard fans.
Drip, drip, drip…
I am one of the “legion” of die-hard Tracy fans. I’m also a die-hard Dvorak fan. I make no apologies for either.
No apologies needed (well, unless you’re NOT a Dvorak fan)! At some point we discussed my love of Robert Benchley, which is not shared by everyone. You know, different strokes and all that.
I share your Benchley love. You’re right, we all have different(and sometimes odd) tastes. I guess that “irritable” comment just made me irritable. Hee-hee.
Although I do stand by my belief that not liking Ann Dvorak is unacceptable!
With that, I agree completely!