Welcome to a new Wildcard Wednesday! This week, because of February’s schedule, I’m bumping up this month’s “potpourri” series on midcentury Broadway plays. In this entry, I’ve spotlighted three long-running comedies that premiered in the 1936-1937 season.
BROTHER RAT (1936)
Logline: Mischievous cadets at a military institute risk expulsion ahead of graduation day.
Author: John Monks, Jr. & Fred F. Finklehoffe | Original Director: George Abbott
Original Broadway Cast: Eddie Albert, Frank Albertson, Jose Ferrer, Kathleen Fitz, Wyn Cahoon, Mary Mason, Curtis Burnley Railing, Carroll Ashborn, Ezra Stone, Anna Franklin, and more
Thoughts: Perhaps there’s a quintessentiality to this lighthearted tale of cadets at a military academy and their romantic exploits ahead of a big football game — all the plot elements are conceptually traditional when it comes to our understanding of the early 20th century collegiate comedy. But I’m afraid I don’t think the text is funny or unique enough unto itself to argue in favor of it being the best of its type, let alone a great laffer compared to the nearly 100 plays I’ve now reviewed in this blog series alone. Even in terms of George Abbott’s oeuvre — which I spotlighted in last week’s entry and am sort of doing again with both this play and Room Service (1937) below — I wouldn’t call this particularly funny or insightful. In fact, I think it’s rather tame — and not by the standards of today, but even by the era itself. For instance, the whole problem caused by the fact that one of the cadets has secretly gotten married and the couple is now expecting a child is… well, it reminds me of a 1960 episode of Dobie Gillis that was forced to undergo reshoots to make it clear that Dobie’s parents mistakenly believing their son has become a father is only because they believe he’s quietly gotten married as well. It still works, but it’s not as scandalous, and in the case of this play, it feels like the comic tension never amounts to much because the stakes are so accordantly low, because the conflict is so relatively light. This is not unusual for comedies, but without hilariously big moments — or hilariously big characters — it makes for a mildness that, again, limits the show’s capacity to be comedically competitive within this survey at large. So, despite its success, I think it’s a middling, more forgettable title relative to the 1930s’ best. (The 1938 movie version famously introduced future President Ronald Reagan to his first wife, but not future First Lady, Jane Wyman.)
Jackson’s Verdict: I was expecting a little more fun.
YES, MY DARLING DAUGHTER (1937)
Logline: An author with her own romantic past struggles to accept her daughter following in her footsteps.
Author: Mark Reed | Original Director: Alfred De Liagre, Jr.
Original Broadway Cast: Lucile Watson, Peggy Conklin, Charles Bryant, Nicholas Joy, Violet Heming, Boyd Crawford, and Margaret Curtis
Thoughts: In contrast to the above, Yes, My Darling Daughter is actually provocative — and deliberately so, for its main concern is exploring our generationally enduring hypocrisies regarding sex, and in particular, the idea that we tend to be more liberal (that is, tolerant) with ourselves than with others, especially when those others are family members — specifically, our children. That’s the primary idea at the root of this play about an unmarried woman who wants to run off and be sexually intimate with her beau, despite the disapproval of her mother, who nevertheless had a premarital dalliance when she was of the same age and is, in general, an artist who is regarded as open-minded and somewhat bohemian. Such double-standards are universal — and they transcend the topic of sex — so they’re ripe fodder for any drawing room comedy, especially one in the 1930s, which was still dealing with the major cultural shifts of the post-war period, particularly for women. Indeed, many plays of this time find their drama by contrasting so-called “Victorian” ideals with those of the present day. Often, the Victorian ideals win out — as they do, here — but the fact that they’re even up for discussion, and subject to comic exploration in the first place, is a triumph unto itself. An implicit loosening of mores… But I digress. The truth is Yes, My Darling Daughter is probably more theoretically interesting than actually interesting, for despite having a strong and somewhat specific thesis, a lot of these same ideas, as I noted, have been explored elsewhere… and by better playwrights. I’m thinking of Maugham, Coward, etc. Authors with a stronger sense of dramatic craftsmanship, or at least, more of an innate understanding of how to mine comedy from natural tension within these social constructs. Accordingly, I don’t think this is a great play compared to the best of its era. But it’s got the right idea — and is a notable reflection of the 1930s and its unique sensibilities.
Jackson’s Verdict: Some interesting ideas but never exceptional compared to others.
ROOM SERVICE (1937)
Logline: A broke Broadway producer schemes to avoid eviction from a hotel while he works up funds for a new show.
Author: Allen Boretz & John Murray | Original Director: George Abbott
Original Broadway Cast: Sam Levene, Eddie Albert, Clifford Dunston, Teddy Hart, Philip Loeb, Donald McBride, Margaret Mullen, and more
Thoughts: Room Service’s 1938 film adaptation was tweaked into a vehicle for the Marx Brothers, and that’s how it’s best remembered today. But compared to their brilliant big-screen comedies from earlier in the decade, Room Service is regarded as one of the Marx Brothers’ least compelling efforts, lacking the imagination and wild whimsy that underscored their funnier, more creative offerings. That is because this movie is too narratively close to the stage play — and since said stage play, produced initially by the great George Abbott, wasn’t initially written with the Marx Brothers in mind, it naturally wasn’t made to be the finest showcase for them. In fact, they sort of feel shoehorned into it. For that reason, the film lets down its main attraction. However, if the Marxes weren’t in the picture — and an even more straightforward example of the play was photographed — I think we may be regarding the film today as a screwball classic, very much in the vein of last month’s Twentieth Century. It’s another fast-moving 1930s show biz story with schemers making big swings, and as a piece of theatre, it contains some trapped kinetic energy that, at least on the page, feels exciting. I’d love to see a full production of this original text — no Marx Brothers baggage added (much as I love them), and therefore none of the burden that comes with having to cater to their specific strengths. Indeed, I think this is probably the laugh-out-loud funniest play of all three featured in this month’s post; it’s built to make an audience roar, with opportunities for actors and directors to enhance an already well-paced farce with moments of well-staged inspiration. This feels like a hit 1930s comedy.
Jackson’s Verdict: Reads well; would love to see it on stage, as it was intended.
Come back next week for another Wildcard! And stay tuned Tuesday for more sitcom fun!