4.7/10
Senior Film Conservator

A definitive 4.7/10 rating for a film that redefined the boundaries of cult cinema. Her Splendid Folly remains a cornerstone of transgressive art.
Alright, so, should you watch Her Splendid Folly today? Look, if you’re big into early cinema, or just have a soft spot for really outlandish plots, then yeah, totally. It's a fun, if sometimes baffling, peek into old Hollywood. Anyone expecting modern pacing or subtle character work will probably find it a bit much, though. Definitely not for the impatient!
The whole premise here is just wild, right? Solomon Ginsberg, the studio head, is in a real pickle. His big star, Laura Girard, kicks the bucket, but the movie isn't done yet. So, what’s a money-hungry exec to do? Find a stand-in, of course! Enter Joan McAllister, an unemployed stenographer who just *happens* to be a dead ringer. 🤷♀️
Now, the 'dead ringer' bit is always funny in these old films. You have to really suspend your disbelief. Like, no one suspects? Not even the crew who worked with Laura every day? It’s a classic trope, and here, it’s played to the hilt.
Joan, bless her heart, is kinda thrown into the deep end. One minute she’s typing, the next she’s a famous actress. You see her trying to navigate this new life. There's a scene where she’s practicing Laura's signature, and it’s a tiny detail, but it makes you feel for her. She’s not just faking it; she’s *learning* to be someone else.
Then there's Wallace Morely, the leading man, who is also in on the secret. He’s the one who gets Joan into the whole mess, really. You can kinda tell he's got a thing for Joan, even as he's helping her pretend to be his dead co-star. It’s all very tangled.
The film doesn't exactly dwell on the ethics of this whole charade. Ginsberg is just worried about his investment. He’s a hoot, though, always pacing, wringing his hands. His desperation is almost comical sometimes. You can just about hear the dramatic music swelling when he’s on screen.
What's really interesting is how Joan, as 'Laura,' becomes *more* popular than the real Laura ever was. It’s like the fake version of the star has more spark, more something. You wonder what the real Laura was like, you know? Maybe a bit of a diva? The movie doesn't tell us much about her, which is a choice.
The pacing is very much of its era. Some scenes feel like they linger a little too long, especially during some of the more emotional beats. Other times, things happen so fast you almost miss a major plot point. Like the mention of bigamy? That just gets dropped in there, and suddenly things get even messier for poor Joan. Talk about a curveball! ⚾
I was watching this one bit, Joan is supposed to be giving this big, emotional performance for the cameras. And it’s silent, so you're relying on her expressions. It's _really_ exaggerated, which is typical for the time, but you still kinda root for her. You want her to pull it off. Even if the entire premise is absurd. The whole thing feels less like a crime and more like a very elaborate, very public theatre play.
There are these little touches, too. The way the studio sets are dressed, even simple offices look quite grand. Or the costumes, they’re really something. You can tell they put effort into making it look expensive, even if the plot is, well, *inexpensive* in its logic. It’s not quite as visually stunning as, say, something like Monna Vanna, but it has its own charm.
Ultimately, Her Splendid Folly is a charming, slightly bonkers piece of silent film history. It's got melodrama, a dash of romance, and a whole lot of 'what were they thinking?' moments. It doesn't take itself too seriously, which is probably its biggest strength. If you enjoy a good old-fashioned identity swap, even if it's utterly unbelievable, give it a shot. It's a fun ride. Just don't expect it to make perfect sense.

IMDb 5.6
1932
Community
Log in to comment.