Love in a Hurry (1935): A chaotic mess, or just enough?

Is it worth your time?

Honestly, only if you’re a glutton for punishment or you have a weirdly specific obsession with 1935 cinema. If you enjoy movies that move so fast they forget to explain why anyone is angry, you’ll love it. If you need a coherent story that respects your intelligence, skip this and go watch Stella Dallas instead.

The whole thing feels like it was written on a cocktail napkin during a very loud dinner party. Characters enter rooms screaming, exit rooms screaming, and in between, they fall in love because the script demands it. It's exhausting.

The Sylvia Froos Factor

Sylvia Froos is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. She has this spark that the rest of the cast just… doesn't. Whenever she’s on screen, the movie almost works. Then she leaves, and we’re back to watching people run in circles.

• The pacing is frantic, bordering on aggressive.
• The dialogue sounds like it was spat out by a malfunctioning typewriter.
• The background extras in the party scene look like they’re waiting for a bus.

There’s this one scene where Warren Hull is trying to explain his predicament, and he’s talking so fast he actually trips over his own feet. They kept it in the final cut! That's the kind of movie this is.

It’s not as polished as The Amazing Quest of Mr. Ernest Bliss, that’s for sure. It feels like a rough draft that somehow ended up in a projector. But there’s a weird charm to how desperate it is to entertain you. It’s like a puppy that doesn’t know its own strength and keeps knocking over the furniture.

I found myself zoning out halfway through, only to be snapped back by a random sight gag involving a hat. It’s that kind of film. Don’t look for logic. You won't find it. 😵‍💫

Ultimately—wait, I promised not to use that word—at the end of the day, it's a relic. A messy, loud, occasionally funny relic. Watch it with a drink in your hand and your brain turned to the 'off' position.