gridoon2018
"Bachelor Apartmet" suffers from some rough edits, however those may be the fault of the DVD print I saw (a Spanish copy), so I won't judge Lowell Sherman's direction on that front. But as an actor, he is miscast as a ladies' man; in the silent era perhaps yes, but in 1931 he was 46 years old, his looks were average, and the character he plays has a smarmy demeanor (just because William Powell could pull it off well into his fifties, does not mean that everyone else could). Irene Dunne, with the exception of a single scene, has a dull straight role; Charles Coleman (the butler) and Mae Murray (she has a hearty laugh) fare better. The film is predictable, and any pre-code quotient will NOT get your heart pumping, ** out of 4.
MartinHafer
Back before the newer, tougher Production Code was enacted in July, 1934, films were often quite bawdy--far bawdier than most folks today would expect. While nudity was rare (but NOT unheard of), topics like homosexuality, promiscuity, infidelity and even abortion were talked about in Hollywood films. While not among the more risqué films of the day, "Bachelor Apartment" is very Pre-Code in its sensibilities!Wayne Carter (Lowell Sherman--who also directed this film) is an unabashed womanizer and playboy. He uses a wide variety of pickup lines and routines to get women to sleep with him and in this Pre- Code world, the women are more than eager to oblige. However, when he meets a nice lady, Helene (Irene Dunne), he has second thoughts about his life. While he loves the hot sex, he starts to realize that he's missing out on something. So, to be near Helene, he hires her to be his secretary and through most of the film admires her without telling her he loves her. Does this dirty old man have a prayer with Helene? And, is he capable of changing to get her?I liked this film. Sherman was a terrific actor and if he hadn't died so young, he'd probably be remembered today--both for his stage and screen work. It talks about the old double-standard and exposes both the positive side (it can be fun) and negative (ultimately, it's rather lonely) without being preachy or heavy-handed. Well worth seeing.
dougdoepke
It may be 1931, but there's no hint of an economic depression among the well-upholstered lounge lizards of Manhattan. It's pretty much a steady round of casual couplings and uncouplings among the urban sophisticates. Not much of a plot except for middle-aged Lothario (Sherman) slowly falling for nice girl Helene (Dunne). Movie's main interest is in its provocative pre-Code liberties—innuendoes fly fast, while some clinging gowns leave little to the imagination. It's a talky script with some clever lines, and if there's little action, at least director Sherman keeps things moving. The comedy is more occasional than sparkling, but does have its moments, even though Dunne surprisingly gets few laugh lines. All in all, it's a fairly entertaining antique with a good glimpse of bygone fashions.
edwagreen
Expert direction by Lowell Sherman. He acts up a storm as well as playboy, wanting to become more ethical in his life. This is especially so when his friend's wife tries more than just flirting with him. The wife, Mae Murray, steals the show here with her threats, laughter and qualities of a woman who just didn't know when she had it so good.Sherman lives on Park Avenue and has built up a business dealing with the market all by himself. On the other side of town, would-be-stenographer Irene Dunne lives with her selfish sister, the latter wanting to break into Broadway. When the latter is fooled by Sherman's butler, thinking that he's the wealthy playboy, the fun begins. Dunne meets the Sherman character and the wonderful coincidence is that she applies for the job at the company he heads.This is really a story of about how people feel about themselves. It has comical and dramatic overtones.
AD
