Don't Bet on Women: A Classic Case of 'What Were They Thinking?'

Is it worth your time?

Honestly, only if you are a completionist for 1930s romantic comedies. If you get annoyed by plots that rely on people acting like complete idiots to keep the story moving, you might want to skip this one. It is not exactly a masterpiece, but it has a certain breezy, old-fashioned charm that makes it watchable if you are bored on a Sunday afternoon.

Cinematic perspective: Exploring the visual vocabulary of Don't Bet on Women (1931) through its definitive frames.

The whole premise is just absurd. Roger Fallon, played by Edmund Lowe, acts like he is the only man on earth who has ever had his heart broken. He is so dramatic about it. It makes you wonder how he manages to get through a lunch order, let alone a social engagement.

Cinematic perspective: Exploring the visual vocabulary of Don't Bet on Women (1931) through its definitive frames.

Then there is Jeanette MacDonald. She is the only reason to really stick with it. She walks into the room and immediately the movie gets a little more life in it. You can see why the writers needed her to be the target of the bet, even if the whole setup is gross by today's standards. Watching her navigate the awkwardness is actually kind of fun.

Cinematic perspective: Exploring the visual vocabulary of Don't Bet on Women (1931) through its definitive frames.

The humor is very much of its era. There are a lot of witty one-liners that land about half the time. Other times, the dialogue just feels like it is trying too hard to be sophisticated. It reminds me a bit of the frantic energy in Who Hit Me? where everyone is just talking over each other.

Cinematic perspective: Exploring the visual vocabulary of Don't Bet on Women (1931) through its definitive frames.

Some random notes:

• The lighting in the party scenes is weirdly dim, like they were trying to hide the cheap furniture.
• Every time Roger Fallon speaks, you just want to tell him to go sit in the corner and think about his life.
• The pacing is weird. It starts slow and then suddenly, we are in the middle of a high-stakes bet that makes no sense.
• Is the butler the best part of the movie? Maybe.

It’s not as gritty or interesting as something like Rain, but it’s not trying to be. It is just a fluff piece. Sometimes you just want to watch people be messy in formal wear, right? 🍸

Cinematic perspective: Exploring the visual vocabulary of Don't Bet on Women (1931) through its definitive frames.

I found myself checking my phone halfway through, but then Jeanette MacDonald would deliver a line and I would look back up. That is the cycle. Don't expect a revelation here. It is just a movie about a guy who needs to get over himself.

Maybe it’s just me, but the way they handle the ending feels rushed. Like the writers suddenly realized they had a deadline and just wrapped it all up in five minutes. It is funny how these older films do that. They just stop. Credits roll and you are left wondering if anyone actually learned a lesson. Probably not!