Heartbeat (1946)

The Worst Film Ever

not horrible nor great

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

It's a reunion for Ginger, With director Sam Wood ("Kitty Doyle", with Adolph Menjou ("Stage Door "). Then why is it such a fiasco? Ahead of its time? Perhaps, but that doesn't make it good. Out of the ordinary for Ginger Rogers' usual works? Definitely as well, because her character is like nails down a chalkboard, and not really likable. Ginger's other side of the track characters at least had some class and knew when to shut up. Another major issue is that she's about 15 years too old for this part, a young waif out of reform school becomes a professional pickpocket, trained by Basil Rathbone, and later taken in by the suave Menjou whose really out for no good as well. Along comes Jean Pierre Aumont to sweep her off her feet, and it's on the path to reform for the out of her element Ginger who wasn't having much success in films in the mid 1940's in spite of still being considered an A lister.This seems to be striving for the European style of films, not the Italian or French new wave, but an operatic elegance that was present in the films of Cocteau but seems forced and overstuffed here, ultimately seeming pretentious. Indeed, it is a remake of a French film. Ginger has one scene where she gets to screech like a teenager, making me wonder if dogs were barking in the San Fernando valley as she filmed this scene in Hollywood. She's forced to speak like a much younger character and dresses closer to how "I'll Be Seeing You" co-star Shirley Temple did. Menjou seems like he's still acting in the romantic comedies of the early 1930's, as if he was in another film altogether. This is pretty much an almost fiasco, but it looked so good in its lavishness that I just couldn't bear to give this a bomb. I give Ginger credit for wanting to try something different, but with all her talent and grace, she just wasn't right for this part.

HEARTBEAT is one of the most overt adult fairy tales that you'll come across, its storybook wedding at the end dropping any hint of realism. Such movies live or die by their charm or lack of such, and while I've little doubt that the French original was oozing with that quality, HEARTBEAT only sporadically compels a quiet smile on its audience's faces. Too much of it leaves us waiting for something to happen, and not much ever does.Ginger Rogers was certainly too old to play her character effectively (she was nearly twice Arlette's given age) and you can see her trying too hard to convey a girlish freshness and naivete with her performance (ironically, these are qualities that she specialized in during her dances with Fred Astaire). I originally thought Jean-Pierre Aumont's performance to be very dull, but a second viewing suggested that it was much more the writing than anything lacking in what Aumont was doing. Adolphe Menjou has little to do, and while Basil Rathbone brings energy and a sense of fun to proceedings that desperately needed these qualities, he disappears through the final 2/3 of the picture. A movie about his school for pickpockets would have been a lot easier to sit through than the plodding romance that we got.I was surprised to learn that HEARTBEAT, despite being a fairly high- budgeted project, earned a decent profit for RKO Studios. It's not terrible, but that's a bit more than it deserved.

Lets get this out of the way right off the top, Ginger Rogers is too old for her part in this film! True she looks very lovely and far younger than the 35 years she was when this was made, perhaps 25 or 26, but she is supposed to be an 18 year old escapee from a reform school and there is no amount of soft focus that could make that believable.As far as the rest of the film its a mediocre effort wasting the other two assets it has on hand, Adolph Menjou and Basil Rathbone, in small parts. The story itself is rather ridiculous held up by the talent involved but it's wasted effort. A forgettable enterprise, all the stars have made better films that should be sought out instead.

This movie starts out great in the first half hour. Basil Rathbone, Ginger Rogers and Aldolph Menjou play some very funny scenes. Unfortunately, Jean Pierre Aumont shows up and the comedy disappears. We get a love story that doesn't really go anywhere. There's little chemistry between Rogers and Aumont. Plus, there's the problem of having a real Frenchman playing with an American actress who is supposed to be a French woman, but does not have a French accent.The movie also doesn't take place at any particular time. At first I thought we were in the 1890's in Paris, but then it sort of shifted to the 1920's and 30's. In the narrative, the movie takes place over a few weeks, so this is not a deliberate time jump, just a result of sloppy film-making.The movie should have stuck with Rathbone and Menjou, but they disappear for much of the second half of the film and we are left with the much duller character of Aumont. This forces Rogers to supply whatever comedy and passion the film is capable of showing. She looks like she's waiting for Fred Astaire to show up. Alas, he never does.