Paddy O'Day (1935) Review - Jane Withers is loud, messy, and surprisingly fun

If you have a low tolerance for loud children in old movies, you should probably skip this one. But if you’ve ever found Shirley Temple a bit too saccharine, Paddy O'Day is a weirdly refreshing alternative.

Jane Withers is the star here, and she is basically the anti-Shirley. She’s messy, her hair is a bit of a disaster, and she spends a good chunk of the movie yelling or scheming. I kind of love it.

The movie starts out way darker than I expected for a light musical comedy. Paddy arrives in New York from Ireland, expecting to meet her mother. Instead, an official tells her—pretty coldly, actually—that her mom died while she was on the boat. It’s a brutal way to start a family film.

You’d think the movie would stay sad, but it pivots almost immediately. Paddy doesn’t want to go back to Ireland, so she hides in a crate. This leads to a whole sequence involving a dog and a very confused baggage handler.

Eventually, she ends up living with a bunch of Russian immigrants who are all performers. This is where the movie gets its energy, even if the accents are... well, they’re 1930s Hollywood accents. You know the type. Lots of rolling 'R's and heavy gesturing.

There is a scene where they are all eating in a cramped apartment that feels surprisingly lived-in. It reminded me a bit of the atmosphere in The Coiners' Game, though obviously much less serious. The clutter on the tables looks like actual junk people would have in 1935.

Jane Darwell shows up as a cook, and honestly, she’s the anchor of every scene she’s in. She has this way of looking at Jane Withers that feels like actual exasperated affection. Not the fake kind you see in modern commercials.

I noticed a very young Rita Hayworth (credited as Rita Cansino) playing a Russian dancer. She doesn’t have much to do, but you can tell she’s going to be a star. She just has a different glow than everyone else on the screen. It’s almost distracting how much better she moves than the other extras.

The plot is pretty thin once she gets to the boarding house. It’s mostly just a series of excuses for Jane Withers to show off. She sings, she dances, and she does impressions. Some of it is actually impressive, and some of it is just loud.

There is this one moment where she’s trying to hide from the immigration officers and she pretends to be a mechanical doll. It goes on about thirty seconds too long. I found myself checking my phone, but then she did this weird little facial twitch that made me laugh. Burstiness, right?

The movie really leans into the 'immigrants are good for America' theme, which is nice to see from that era. They use her talent as an argument for why she should be allowed to stay. It’s a bit simplistic, but it’s earnest.

Compared to something like Rose of the Rancho, which feels very stiff and staged, this movie has a bit of dirt under its fingernails. The sets feel dusty. The clothes look slightly too big for the kids.

I did find the ending a bit rushed. One minute she’s about to be deported, and the next, everyone is singing and everything is fixed. It’s that classic 30s logic where a good tap dance can solve legal residency issues. I wish life worked like that.

I also kept thinking about The Big Killing while watching the more slapstick moments. There's a similar kind of desperate energy to the comedy. It’s like the actors are trying so hard to make you smile that you feel a little bad if you don't.

The songs aren't exactly 'bangers' as the kids say today. I can’t remember a single melody now that it's over. But the way Withers performs them is what matters. She’s 100% committed to every note, even the ones she misses slightly.

Things I jotted down:

• The dog is a better actor than the guy playing the immigration officer.
• Rita Hayworth’s hair is already iconic even in this tiny role.
• The Russian tea ceremony scene feels like it was written by someone who once saw a picture of a samovar.
• Jane Withers has a very aggressive way of eating bread.

Is it a masterpiece? No. It’s a B-movie meant to keep people happy for an hour. But it has a soul. You can tell the people making it weren't just punching a clock, even if the script is a bit of a mess.

If you're in the mood for something that feels like a time capsule of 1930s New York (or the Hollywood version of it), give it a look. It’s much more interesting than the polished stuff Shirley Temple was doing at the same time. It’s more like Sing a Song in its scrappiness.

I’ll probably forget the plot by tomorrow, but I’ll remember Jane Withers’ face when she’s trying to look tough. She’s a force of nature in a very small package. 🍀

Anyway, it's better than The Weakling by a long shot. At least something actually happens here.