Illicit (1931)

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

The action in this film takes place within the rarefied air of art deco penthouses with thirty-foot ceilings. There, the central characters--Anne (Barbara Stanwyck) and Dick (James Rennie)--fall in love and make decisions about their relationship.Dick is somewhat amused--and a little intrigued--by Anne's "theories" about marriage. She see it as a hindrance to love and a guarantee that romance will die. Basically, she is a proponent of free love.Different conceptions of free love have been expressed by many notables in the fields of science and the arts over the centuries. The actual Free Love movement is a more recent development with its beginnings in the 1800s. Although its proponents espoused many various views on culture, politics and the nature of man, there were common threads--primarily a condemnation of state-sponsored marriage and the view that the institution of marriage runs contrary to the nature of man and that it impinges on the freedoms of both partners and amounts to little more than enslavement, particularly of the woman.One can see where Anne is coming from, but it is not surprising that certain aspects of traditional marriage hold a romantic interest for Anne. Dick is so in love with her that he might agree to anything she wants. But they are constantly judged by others who reflect the mores of society. Eventually, the couple agrees to live apart and love from a distance.You can probably guess where the story is going, despite the fact that this is a pre-Code production. The staging feels, rightfully, like a play. Its tone is light-hearted for the most part, centering on characters whose lives seem to revolve around emptying cocktail glasses and witty repartee. But it's a stylish production and the acting is suitable for carefree banter sprinkled with Anne's "theories". Fortunately, her free love notions do not include the social engineering leanings of others who theorized in this realm.

The best part of this rather boring gabfest is getting to see ladies high-fashion outfits, circa 1930. Some of them are real doozies. Stanwyck gets more than her share of slinky finery as a rich guy's paramour. Actually, the movie's premise is a significant one—does marriage somehow kill love? Anne (Stanwyck) seems to think so and sometimes acts on the premise. The trouble is that the premise gets drowned out by all the talk from one scene to the next, without let-up. Then too, director Mayo adds nothing to what turns out to be a filmed stage play. To be charitable, his options may have been cramped by the newness of movie sound equipment.Pre-Code liberties are evident in the first few scenes where Anne, in a clinging negligee, and Dick (Rennie) discuss whether to marry or to continue living in sin. After that, the screenplay settles into more conventional marital mix-ups. But at least Stanwyck shines, showing why she was slated for bigger and better things. In fact, she's almost girlish, a really long way from the femme fatale of Double Indemnity (1944). Too bad she doesn't have more scenes with that other Warner's personality girl, Joan Blondell (Duckie). Anyway, I found the movie considerably less than I expected.

Illicit (1931) * (out of 4) Incredibly bad pre-code from Warner features Barbara Stanwyck in her first role with the studio. In the film she plays Anne, a free spirit who doesn't want to marry the man she loves (James Rennie) because she fears it might ruin their relationship but soon she's getting pressure to do so. ILLICIT is without question one of the worst films I've seen from this era of Hollywood. In fact, it's so incredibly bad that I think Stanwyck should be thankful that studios made so many movies back in the day because if this type of film was made today I think it would have ruined her career. At least back then they had one film after another being released so people could forget this poor thing. I think the biggest problem going for the film is the fact that it simply doesn't know when to shut up. This here is yet another early talkie, which is ruined because the screenwriter simply didn't know how to do anything than throw out worthless dialogue that after a while will make the viewer contemplate suicide. I must admit that I thought the film was nearly half over when I checked to see how long I had been watching it and in terror I noticed it was just ten-minutes. The entire opening bit with Stanwyck and Rennie discussing marriage is so drawn out that you can't help but thing the run of dialogue could have been handled in just a few lines. The pre-code elements really aren't naughty enough to draw much interest and the cast too is mostly wasted. Stanwyck is good in her part but the screenplay really doesn't give her much to do. Rennie is somewhat bland but Ricardo Cortez is here for some fun as is Joan Blondell and Charles Butterworth who of course steals the film as the lovable drunk. ILLICIT is poorly directed with some ugly cinematography and it's clearly the worst film I've seen Stanwyck in.

The plot of "Illicit" is similar to the plot of an early Bette Davis film called "Ex-Lady" made two years after this one. They should be similar - Edith Fitzgerald wrote both of them. "Ex-Lady" was based on an unproduced play, and "Illicit" actually was a play. Both concern women who don't want to get married and men who do. Anne (Stanwyck)(like Davis) is an unconventional free spirit afraid that marriage will destroy the romance she has with Dick (James Rennie). However, word gets around that the two have been weekending in Connecticut, and Dick's father (Claude Gillingwater) convinces her to agree to marry Dick. Thanks to an old girlfriend of Dick's and an old beau of Anne's, trouble brews in paradise once the rings are exchanged.This is an early sound film, so the rhythm is off, and some of the sound has an echo. However, a few pauses that are a little too long don't really impede the fine acting. Stanwyck is wonderful and gives indication of the wonderful star she will become. She's funny, vivacious, and likable. Charles Butterworth plays a drunken friend very convincingly, and Claude Gillingwater is dignified yet warm as Dick's father. Rennie makes an attractive lover turned husband for Stanwyck. Joan Blondell has a small role as a friend.The film is interesting because it's early Stanwyck, but also because of the independent woman angle which soon will fade from view with the ushering in of the code. Once the '40s hit, the independent woman became an uptight career woman wearing a tailored suit, her hair up, and sporting a stern attitude. Young, carefree non-virgins became a thing of the past. But these precode films are what helped mold the strong images of Katharine Hepburn, Bette Davis, and Barbara Stanwyck and are worth watching.