David: “Don’t lose your head!”
Susan: “I’ve got my head—I’ve lost my leopard!”
by Brandie Ashe
Bringing Up Baby (1938) is, without a doubt, the funniest movie I have ever seen, a textbook example of the screwball comedy and a hallmark of the romantic comedy genre. In fact, it is one of the first films I show when introducing “newbies” to the world of classic film, because I have yet to meet a person who is not thoroughly delighted and/or ready to collapse from laughter by the time the credits roll. It is, in a word, a marvel (let’s just say, there’s a reason it was the unquestionable number-one entry on my comedy ballot!).
Baby stars Katharine Hepburn as a dizzy heiress, Susan Vance, who falls head over heels in love with a hapless paleontologist, David Huxley (a sexily disheveled and bewildered Cary Grant). Through her machinations, David loses a very valuable bone–the “intercostal clavicle”–that belongs to the skeleton of a brontosaurus. Susan also inadvertently jeopardizes David’s attempts to secure a million dollars’ worth of funding for his museum. And to add to the craziness, Susan has recently received a rather intimidating gift–a large leopard named Baby–which she plans to take to her family’s farm in Connecticut, of all places. Toss in a nosy aunt, a bumbling big-game hunter, a concerned psychiatrist, and an idiotic constable, and you can imagine the chaos that ensues.
Considering how hilarious and utterly charming this film is, it’s amazing to think today that this movie was once considered a notorious flop, leading to its director, Howard Hawks, being fired from the production of Gunga Din (1939) after Baby ran late and went severely over budget. In the end, it was no matter—Hawks made the film he wanted to make and was, by all accounts, pleased by the result. Hawks was an instrumental director in the realm of screwball comedy—his 1934 classic Twentieth Century was one of the first films of the genre, and he would go on to direct other comedy classics such as His Girl Friday (1940) and Ball of Fire (1941). Hawks’ comedies were marked by rapid and clever wordplay, frenetic pacing, and inconceivable plot contrivances that become only more incredibly unbelievable as the film progresses. Nowhere, however, does he bring all of these elements together more successfully than in Baby. A shame, then, that contemporary critics and audiences did not quite grasp the movie’s appeal …
The poor performance of Baby contributed to Hepburn’s assignation as “box office poison” in the late 1930s. Strange to us now, as it’s difficult to think of a time when Kate Hepburn wasn’t considered a monumental success and a pinnacle of movie stardom. Her legendary career came complete with four Academy Awards for Best Actress–a feat unmatched by any other actress (or actor!) in the history of film–and a litany of iconic film roles opposite some of the biggest names to ever grace the screen—among them, Grant, James Stewart, Spencer Tracy, Humphrey Bogart, and John Wayne. And yet in the wake of her performance in Baby (and a regrettable string of unsuccessful films), Hepburn’s stock with Hollywood was almost bankrupt. She chose to buy out her RKO contract to avoid being cast in the low-budget drama Mother Carey’s Chickens (which had been assigned to Hepburn as a sort of studio punishment because of her poor box-office performance). She would spend the next two years on the stage until her triumphant return to the screen—again opposite Grant—in 1940′s wildly popular The Philadelphia Story, which reignited her career (and then some).
Hepburn and Grant made a total of four films together; in addition to Baby and Philadelphia, these included the lovely Holiday (1938) and the cross-dressing romantic comedy Sylvia Scarlett (1935). In each of their pairings, Hepburn and Grant are a wonder to behold–not only do they play off of one another very well, but their on-screen interactions demonstrate a true camaraderie and mutual respect that only heightens the chemistry between them. And that chemistry was never more sparkling than it was in Baby. Grant, whose career began in vaudeville, returns to those roots, throwing his body around without reservation, all in pursuit of a laugh. And Hepburn is right there with him, shattering the normally reserved guise she had crafted in many of her previous films and demonstrating a comedic timing that had heretofore only been hinted at in her earlier work. Her Susan is appealing and fun, punctuating her ill-conceived schemes with breathy laughs and moon-eyed gazes at “her” David. Each brings out the best in the other, and neither was ever really able to capture that same effortless, effervescent magic with another co-star (though Hepburn came close with some of her later screen partnerships with Spencer Tracy, particularly 1949′s Adam’s Rib).
For his part, Grant is an absolute joy to behold as David. The actor had introduced the “Cary Grant” persona (the suave, sophisticated, charmingly sly romantic schemer) the previous year in the wild screwball farce The Awful Truth, and it was a development that would change the trajectory of his career and make him an international star. But here, that persona is tested in uproarious ways: the smoothness is hidden behind a pair of dorky glasses (aping silent screen comedian Harold Lloyd), the self-assuredness robbed in a moment of inadvertent cross-dressing, as David is forced to don Susan’s negligee after she steals his clothes (this moment in the movie is made even more memorable by the subtext in David’s subsequent explanation of his attire, “Because I just went gay all of a sudden!” Some critics claim that this is the first instance of an actor using the word “gay” in a homosexual context on film). The more Grant’s character suffers—the more we witness the urbane bachelor’s descent into a zany hell not of his making—the more we sympathize with his plight, even as we laugh while he crawls around on the ground, chasing a dog and digging holes in the dirt.
The film is not all about Hepburn and Grant, however; there are some great supporting performances, too. Charlie Ruggles is amusing as the befuddled Major Horace Applegate, who can’t understand why he’s hearing leopard calls in the middle of Connecticut. Walter Catlett, who plays the overzealous constable, Slocum, and May Robson, who plays Susan’s Aunt Elizabeth, are both sharply funny. And classic film fans might recognize the little terrier playing George, the dog who steals David’s bone: the same dog, Skippy, also played Asta in the Thin Man movies and almost stole the show from Grant in 1937′s The Awful Truth.
Bringing Up Baby may not have been recognized for its monumental comedic achievements immediately upon its release, but in subsequent years, it has gained a well-deserved reputation as a quintessential classic screwball comedy. And it remains one of the best, filled with boundless humor, infinitely quotable lines, and a genuinely warm and engaging chemistry between its lead actors. I simply cannot sing this film’s praises enough.
How Bringing Up Baby made the Top 100:
Reading your review, Brandie, is like sipping nectar of the gods. As you may see from my #3 ranking, I adore this film as well — and find myself wondering why I didn’t rank it even higher. From what I’ve read, Hepburn took a lot of time while on set taking pointers on how to play comedy. Of course we now know the results were well worth the effort as her lines glide from her lips with effortless ease, not to mention the breathy laughs you so astutely point out. I would say that the greatness of this film rests on the shoulders of the perfect comedic performances of the two stars — but that would be selling short all the other components you discuss, not the least of which are the fine supporting players and the wonderful lightness of the script — all held together by the expert direction of Hawks.
I recently bought the DVD of this film and have been hankering to show it to some of my movie-fan relatives, including an 8-year-old girl, who need an education on the earlier classics. I can’t think of a better place to start than this gem of gems. There are so many hilariously moments I can’t even begin to list them. Thanks for the highly entertaining piece.
Thanks, Pierre! I was tickled to see how many folks ranked this movie so highly on their ballots!
It’s interesting that you mention Hepburn’s on-set pointers. From what I understand, she got many of those straight from Walter Catlett, who plays the inept constable. In fact, I’ve read that after Hawks recruited Catlett to “tutor” Hepburn, she repaid the favor by making sure that Hawks cast Catlett in the film with her! And thank God for that, because he’s perfection in the role.
Once again, your detailed knowledge is much appreciated. And guess what? I’ve scheduled a screening of the film next week for my cousins and their 8-year-old daughter! Can’t wait — popcorn, too!
Brandie, you captured the essence of this film in the very first sentence of your wonderful post. I would have to agree with you that on the sheer basis of laughs per minute, this is the funniest movie I too have ever seen. The first time I saw this on TV years ago, my father, who watched part of it with me, asked if the actors were aping the Marx Brothers (this was during the sequence when everyone is at the jailhouse). I guess he saw the same spirit of anarchic silliness (for me the thing that makes this movie so great) that you find in Marx Brothers movies, actually a pretty astute observation for someone who was no big fan of movies aside from Westerns and certainly not of anything as frivolous as this film must have seemed to him. It’s one of those rare instances where everything in the movie slots together perfectly, so much so that today it’s astounding that audiences and critics didn’t see it at the time. If today Cary Grant’s character seems familiar, Katharine Hepburn’s doesn’t, because it’s the only film I can think of where she plays this kind of screwball character (and manages to give what might be the definitive performance of this type).
Thanks, RD! “Anarchic” is a great word to describe this movie, and Hepburn’s performance in particular, because she seriously stepped out of her comfort zone to play Susan. I can’t recall any other film in which she comes close to fully letting loose as she does here, and it’s a shame, because she’s magnificent. This is my favorite KH performance ever, by far, and I wholeheartedly agree that her screwball heroine is perhaps THE definitive archetype for that type!
You know, for some reason, I knew there was only one person that could bring the sweet charm and classic craziness of BRINGIN UP BABY to a review for this site and, TAAA-DAAA, Brandie DID write it up!!!!!
Marvelous job, Dear BRANDIE, on what has to be one of the greatest and most influential slapsticks of all time (my own No. 1 choice-though it was a tough call and I allowed the “laugh meter” to, ultimately, point in this direction).
When I voted, I was perplexed as to what to annoint No. 1. Yes, I think CITY LIGHTS is a greater FILM, I connect to IT’S A GIFT far more, but no better made comedy has, per minute, as many out-n-out laughs of complete stupidity, style, smarminess and grace as BRINGIN UP BABY. Hawkes film is like a ballet of insanity that goes from pure intelligence to out-right absurdity in a flash. It’s like a hurricane and, once it has you in it’s grip, it doesn’t let you go.
I could go on and on as to the many moments of this film that just have me busting with giant laughter. The “jail cell” sequence, the moments in the restaurant that find Cary being embarassingly abused by Hepburn over and over again (including the tearing of the tuxedo jacket as seen in the picture above), the collapse of the Dinosaur and EVERY facial reaction Cary Grant makes in this film (one of the most under-rated great comic actors of all time-shit, he even makes NORTH BY NORTHWEST a riot).
The two central performances are legendary and proved what great comic timing Hepburn and Grant were capable of. For me, this is one of Grant’s shots at the stadium seats and no other film, with the exception of NORTH BY NORTHWEST, saw the actor in better “Cary Grant” mode. He up-stages everyone that shares the screen with him and I am often perplexed that this legend of the silver screen was never, once, awarded the Oscar for his amazing bravado in everything he did in films like this.
This is a marvelous, loving ode of a review by BRANDIE and I couldn’t think of anyone better to pen this one….
Take a bow!
a ballet of insanity that goes from pure intelligence to out-right absurdity in a flash. It’s like a hurricane
That’s very apt wordage, Dennis.
And I should add, that although my first comment focused on Hepburn, I agree that Grant was never better. The absolutely perfect foil — and it’s he that gets the last, perfect line of the film.
Dennis, you flatter me! Thank you kindly. I loved reading your comments about Grant–he is my favorite actor of all time (and not just because he was so devilishly charming), and I think his abilities, both as a comedian (Baby, His Girl Friday, The Awful Truth) and as a dramatic actor (especially under Hitchcock’s direction), were criminally undervalued, both then and now.
Fantastic stuff Brandie and you’re right it just might be the funniest film ever made. It definitely needed a top 10 position on this list….I’m amazed that more than 10 of us didn’t rank it AT ALL! I have it at #2, only behind a film that for me holds powerful sentimental value. It’s really hard to top this film for laughs and comedic timing and chemistry. Amazing that Hepburn/Tracy is the couple most talked about when actually it was Hepburn/Grant that turned out the better films. I will be showing my two young girls this film soon….I think they will love it.
Thanks, Jon! And ditto your comment re: Hepburn/Grant vs. Hepburn/Tracy. With the exception of Adam’s Rib, I’ve never been too enamored with the latter pairing. With Tracy, it always seemed as though his characters were determined to bring her to heel, and that just doesn’t appeal to me–whereas with Grant, Hepburn always feels like an equal (even in Philadelphia Story, when the script dictates that she must eventually bow, she still has a spark of individuality left). I have a feeling your girls will love this movie as much as you do!
Brandie -
This post is a labor of love, and more than does justice to the dizzy delights of BRINGING UP BABY. You mention that when you show this film to anyone as an introduction to classic comedy, they instantly love it, and I have found that to be true in my experience as well.
One of my most treasured travel memories was seeing BRINGING UP BABY in a small Paris cinema in 1992 – it was shown in the original English with French subtitles, and I read French just barely well enough to tell to you that translaitons were inexact at best. But it didn’t matter. The Parisian audtience loved it.
Thanks for your kind comments, Pat! I’m so glad to see how many people truly love this film as much as I always have. And oh, how I envy you that Parisian experience.
Bringing Up Baby may not have been recognized for its monumental comedic achievements immediately upon its release, but in subsequent years, it has gained a well-deserved reputation as a quintessential classic screwball comedy.
Indeed Brandie. I am told it was actually a flop upon release, but such is the way with so many screen masterworks. The film is hugely popular at this site, which can be seen by some of the #1 placements and high rankings. This delirious, madcap work suffused with staccato dialogue and deliriously frenetic pacing that is impeccably timed. It’s the textbook definition of screwball comedy, and it’s driven by the ferocious energy of it’s iconic stars who are at the top of their game and perfectly wed. Charile Ruggles is a hoot as major Applegate, who imitates a leopard’s mating cry at the table. Of course the very idea of a “domesticated leopard” is the crowning conceit in this gleeful enterprise. May Robson shines too as Aunt Elizabeth, and Barry Fitzgerald is one hand to lend his incomparable charisma to the proceedings. Brandie, you have performed mightily with a series of reviews for this countdown that take their place among the very best written. To thank you is hardly sufficient, since in addition to injected your writing with energy, passion and expertise you have expanded the boundaries of these archives and have made our own appreciation that much more resonant. Kudos to you!
Sam, thank you so much! I’ve thoroughly enjoyed participating in the countdown and getting to revisit these great comedies through my own reviews and through those of the fantastic contributors you lined up for this event. And to be able to wrap up my own contributions with Baby, my very favorite laugh-fest of all time, is just a delicious cherry to top it all off.
This is a timeless film that never loses an once of it’s force and energy on repeat viewings. Brandie Ashe shows she is perfectly attuned to this kind of film, but I think I’d say that with all her other countdown pieces. Hepburn and Grant are remarkable. And all the aspects that are impossible to believe seem perfectly normal.
Thank you very much, Frank!
For your amusement, here’s a link to the source story by Hagar Wilde as it appeared in Collier’s for April 10, 1937. This’ll give you a good idea of how much Hawks and his writers added to the story: David’s paleontological profession, for starters, and pretty much everything except the hunt for Baby. And before we quit Collier’s, here’s an awesome bit of trivia. The very same issue has Ernest Haycox’s “Stage to Lordsburg,” the source story for Stagecoach.
The movie version of Bringing Up Baby is the summit of screwball, made at the moment of its obsolescence, judging from the box office numbers. The star turns are transcendent. Hepburn is less a representative of the flighty idle rich than a force of nature, while Grant is an early master of the comedy of a matinee idol losing his composure. Brandie’s right to note the evocation of Harold Lloyd in Grant’s glasses but I also get a hint of Clark Kent, who first came to four-color life that same year. The time may not have been right for the film, but the film itself is timeless, one I can always stop to enjoy when I come across it. Since comedy isn’t often my first viewing choice, that is high praise and Baby earns it.
Great find with that Collier’s issue, Samuel. Baby and Stagecoach! Fascinating how the stars align like that. It reminds me of an issue of something J. Hoberman wrote on the occasion of Manny Farber’s death: “Part of that message is embodied in a key 1962 essay that originally appeared in Film Culture. (The same astonishing issue also contains Sarris’s “Notes on the Auteur Theory,” Jack Smith’s “The Perfect Cinematic Appositenness of Maria Montez,” and Kael’s review of Shoot the Piano Player.)” Those were the days…
The time may not have been right for the film. . . .”
Thanks, Samuel, for reminding us of the factors involving time, which has so much to do with the success or failure of pretty much anything. It’s worthy to note that 1938 was a much different world. The undeniable effects of a long Depression and the rise of Hitler, for example, were realities of the day as opposed to the distant past whose outcomes we now know. Such realizations help us better understand the past and, I believe and hope, teach us to look at the present a bit differently.
Pierre, it’d be interesting to attempt to correlate the rise and fall of screwball with domestic and global trends as well as business imperatives in Hollywood. I tend to think of screwball as a product of Code Enforcement from 1934 forward, but the 1934-37 heyday probably correlates with economic optimism, while by 1938 the economy was slumping again and, as you note, Germany’s (and Japan’s) ambitions were growing harder to ignore. But Baby’s specific fate must have had something to do with perceived hostility toward Hepburn and maybe lingering uncertainty about Grant. And it does seem like a film more ahead of its time than other screwball films. It reminds me of a lot of later films where weird friends take hapless protagonists on odd adventures.
Seems like a daunting task, Samuel, and very hard to pinpoint. More than 70 years after the fact we have the benefit of hindsight to draw broad strokes, but there are so many inexact factors at work, I’d say. The comedies of Surges, for example, appeared into the 1940s, during the war. It all gets so mooshy. Earlier in the 30s, people wanted to escape — screwball gave them that while making them feel better about themselves as opposed to those nutty rich people. The Busby Berkeley-type films, as well, were escapist. By 1939, though, we see The Grapes of Wrath and Of Mice and Men. People were getting more and more nervous – I mean really nervous – about Hitler. Films like Baby were yesterday’s news, I guess. Hepburn had to reinvent herself to survive — along with a bunch of other stars. Garbo wasn’t one of them.
Fascinating find, Samuel, and thank you for posting it! I look forward to sitting down and reading Wilde’s story. It’s interesting that you would label Baby as the “summit” of the screwball era, because it really does seem as though the genre began petering out soon after. And while there were still good films to be made that would easily fall under the “screwball” category (His Girl Friday, Arsenic and Old Lace, The Palm Beach Story and Ball of Fire among them), for various reasons, they don’t quite reach the same madcap heights of this movie (though Palm Beach comes damn close). The screwball genre was such a product of its time, it’s hard to imagine that it could ever be successfully revived or revisited in modern times.
Great stuff Brandie. You manage to convey your love of the film nicely. It is indeed a hilarious film that grabs one instantly which is why I am surprized to learn that this was a considered a flop at time of its release. But then again, history is packed with many examples of films which were appreciated decades after their release. And there are many examples of directors who only got proper acknowledgement long after they faded from the world.
Also, it is remarkable to see the high number of overlapping votes in the top 10 spots for this film. So far it appears that is the film with the most tied #1 votes? I never saw Allan’s full ballot so I was guessing which film he had at top spot. Now I know
Thank you very much! I, too, was pleased to see the number of high placements for this movie in the countdown. Needless to say, I believe it deserves every accolade it’s received …!