The Lady Eve

The Lady Eve is a cute little romantic comedy from ages past that I enjoyed but found didn’t live up to its reputation. It is considered by many to be among both the great comedies and great romances of American film history, as shown by its inclusion on AFI’s lists to that effect, as well as being a part of the famed comedy director Preston Sturges run of classics, including other lauded films such as The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek and Sullivan’s Travels. The movie has plenty of fun little moments but neither the quality of the gags nor the sincerity or passion of the romance seem to warrant such high praise.

At the center of the story is a con artist who falls in love with her mark, a rich but naive heir to an ale fortune, after setting him up in a card game run by her accomplices: her father and their valet. So far, so meet-cute. However, from here on out the characterization of everyone can get a tad shaky. In particular, the character motivations and intentions of the con artist are generally either inscrutable or simply non-existent. This makes her feel less like a fully realized character and more like a plot device that exists just to move the story along. Why does she fall for her mark? What about him does she find so charming? After she gets a shot at revenge (which her tone establishes as a genuine desire), why does she reverse course and opt for something else? If her game was to get him to love her (the same way she does him) all along, why does she seem to hold such venom for him during the second act?

It isn’t uncommon for movies about cons to be a sort of con in and of itself. The writer and director are fooling the audience as the mark is fooled, which makes the reveal of the trick that much more satisfying as we, the audience, share in the target’s shock when the complete nature of the game is displayed. This would explain why The Lady Eve wants to hold some aspects of the character close to the vest but by not letting us into the schemes completely, or explaining it all in a final unveiling, you can be left wondering whether the film is all that clever or just lazily written.

However, it isn’t just the con artist or her accomplices that are weakly characterized at times. The millionaire mark they are trying to swindle falls prey to this issue as well. There is a whole set up about how he was wise to their game from early on which goes nowhere and doesn’t even track with his actions later in the story. He also doesn’t get to be much of a complete character, two dimensionally defined by his love of snakes, his haplessness, and that he’s a bit of a sap.

This puts the movie firmly in the middle ground between The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek, which I did not particularly care for, and Sullivan’s Travels, which I like rather a lot. It lacks the sharp writing and well realized characters of the latter, but at least has a timelessness to its ideas and jokes that the former is missing. I particularly like how it subverts some of the typical set ups of the screwball comedy. It is the man being pursued that is the whirling ball of chaos knocking things over and causing a scene. The woman pursuing him isn’t just innocently fixing situations so they can be around each other more, as in Bringing Up Baby, but is a manipulative criminal using her guile to ensure that they are around each other more.

These subversions, combined with some fun lines and serviceable slap stick, make for a cute romantic story that is an enjoyable way to pass the time. However, I had certainly hoped for another Sullivan’s Travels and was mightily let down when what I got wasn’t nearly the same level of quality.

Would Recommend: If you love romantic comedies of classic era Hollywood.

Would Not Recommend: If screwball comedy is a genre you wish had never been invented.