by Sachin Gandhi
The phrase “Love is Blind” is thrown around so much that it has become a cliche. However, in the case of Preston Sturges’ perfect comedy The Lady Eve the phrase actually sticks. In fact, the film is a literal depiction of the phrase because love causes the protagonist Charles (Henry Fonda) to blindly ignore all obvious evidence in favor of his heart; not once but twice.
One can understand Charles tripping over love’s heel in the first instance because encountering the delightful Jean (Barbara Stanwyck) after spending a year in the Amazon is not really a fair match-up, especially since Jean has planned to seduce him. Jean wouldn’t have noticed Charles but he inadvertently makes himself a target not only for her but all the other woman on a traveling ship. When Charles is able to halt a traveling ship to get on board from his private boat, he alerts everyone that he is someone important. Jean, along with her father ‘Colonel’ Harrington (Charles Coburn) and Gerald (Melville Cooper), learn that Charles is wealthy due to his family brewery business, Pike’s Ale (The Ale that Won for Yale). The trio are professional card sharks and make a living out of conning people. So, a wealthy person like Charles becomes an instant opportunity. Charles’ wealth also makes him attractive to every other woman on the ship, who try to get his attention, but he is not impressed by any of them. However, Jean trumps them by getting Charles all to herself. Of course, it does not take much effort for Jean to win over Charles. He is intoxicated by her perfume and with a few maneuvers, including getting him to kneel down to put a pair of shoes on her, she gets Charles light headed and blurry-eyed. Charles’ bodyguard Muggsy (William Demarest) suspects a trap is being laid out by Jean and the Colonel but Charles ignores Muggsy’s warning, especially since he wins $600 off the Colonel and Jean. In an expected turn of events, Jean also starts to fall for Charles and plans to settle down with him to leave her criminal past behind. She even tries to minimize Charles’ loss in the next round of cards against her father’s plans. When she leaves the card table, Charles asks the Colonel for permission to marry his daughter. The Colonel has no problems with their relationship and uses the marriage topic to con $32,000 out of Charles. For his part, Charles is not bothered at such a loss because of his family wealth which increases with each passing second: “everytime the clock ticks, 14 people swig a bottle of pike”. After acquiring the Colonel’s permission, Charles proposes to Jean on a moonlit deck and she genuinely accepts his offer. Colonel Harrington finally believes his daughter’s seriousness and asks her to wait to reveal the truth until they get off the ship in order to preserve his and Gerald’s dignity. In the meantime, Muggsy’s investigations uncover a photo where Jean, Colonel and Gerald are documented as professional card players. Charles feels betrayed and does not give Jean a chance to explain matters. She is heart broken and wants revenge as they disembark the ship and go their separate ways.
The second instance of Charles falling for Jean takes place in his own home after she comes up with a revengeful con. While Jean along with the Colonel and Gerald are busy gambling away their money at a race track, they run into Pearlie, a colleague going by the name of Sir Alfred McGlennan Keith (Eric Blore). Sir Alfred talks about his successful cons in Bridgefield which happens to be the hometown of the Pikes. His words open the door for Jean to finish matters with Charles. She queries Pearlie if she can visit as his niece and declares her vengeful intentions with one of the sharpest dialogues in the film “I need him like the axe needs the turkey”. Jean is so confident that she does not change her appearance but simply puts on a British accent and ties her hair up to transform into “The Lady Eve of Sidwich”. Off she goes to a party hosted by the Pikes and charms the hell out of Charles’ father, Horace Pike (Eugene Pallette) and all the other guests. Muggsy is convinced that Eve and Jean are the same woman but Charles is not sure. His queries to Eve don’t cause her to blink or hesitate so Charles is doubtful. Alfred senses Charles’ hesitation and concocts a story about Eve and Jean being siblings born of an illicit affair with a ‘coachman’. He asks that Charles never repeat a word of the Sidwich family secret to anyone lest their reputation gets tarnished. This story eases Charles fears and he promptly falls in love and asks Eve to marry him.
The premise of Charles falling for the same woman twice defies belief if viewed through conventional reason. However, the magical spell of love is blinding and requires suspension of belief. Preston Sturges smartly lets this ‘love is blind’ depiction take center stage by allowing the actors performances and dialogues generate witty humor. In order to pull off such a perfect comedic film, the acting and timing of everyone has to be perfectly in sync. All the cast deserve credit but Barbara Stanwyck steals the show with her mesmerizing performance. Her character oozes confidence in each frame and is completely in control when seducing Charles and gently nodding him to fall in love with her. Even in moments of weakness and anger, her character maintains composure and is sure of herself. When she is hurt by Charles, she doesn’t sulk for too long and starts to immediately think of revenge. Yet, at no point in the film does her character appear cunning but instead always maintains a sweet side underneath her confident yet calculative exterior. In fact, her character also desires a bit of romance. On the ship, Charles proposes to her on the ship’s moonlit deck which Jean refers to as a “woman’s business office”. In the second instance, Jean purposely leads Charles on a horse ride that ends with both of them observing the sunset. Even though she was expecting to get a proposal, she appears to relish getting attention in such a traditional romantic setting. A few smart gags are also tightly woven into the film to enhance the humor and emphasize a character’s state of mind. For example, Charles gets nervous and clumsy only in the presence of Jean. It is not shocking to see him trip up when around her although Jean does her part in forcing him to fall over in two instances. But in a memorable scene, Charles trips over a family sofa that has been in the same spot for 15 years as noted by Horace. Muggsy is a running humor track on his own. He is suspicious of everyone and in his quest to prove the guilt of Eve, he stumbles his way through the elaborate party hosted by the Pike family causing havoc and embarrassment for Charles.
The Lady Eve is not short on symbolism with the most obvious reference being the Garden of Eden. The opening credits show a happy snake licking his tongue while observing some apples before proceeding to place three apples with the film’s title on the screen. Charles’ career involves dealing with snakes so it is not surprising that he is seen reading a book titled “Are Snakes Necessary?” in the ship’s dining area. Of course, as he is reading the book, the room is full of women waiting to pounce and devour him. An apple also subtly makes an appearance in the film as Jean throws her partly bitten apple on Charles’ head as he is trying to board the ship. The Adam-Eve connection is also referred to in a dialogue by Muggsy after Charles tells him he believes that Jean & Eve are not the same woman. Muggsy responds with “You trying to tell me this ain’t the same rib was on the boat” [sic], a reference to the fact that Eve was fashioned out of Adam’s rib. Another humorous usage of symbolism comes during Charles & Eve’s wedding night. As the two are traveling via a train, Eve decides to narrate stories about her past affairs with multiple men causing Charles anguish. Predictably, the weather outside gets stormy mimicking the internal storm that is ripping Charles apart. Stories of her past affairs are too much for him to handle and he stops the train to jump off. Naturally, as he jumps off he slips into mud indicating the state of his reputation if he were to stay married to Eve.
Overall, Preston Sturges has crafted a perfectly balanced film that contains the right mixture of gags, jokes and dialogues to generate humor. Nothing in the film is over the top and the tone is consistent from start to finish. In fact, it won’t be a stretch to compare this film with a finely crafted beer because of the few beer references in the film. When Jean asks Charles what the difference is between a beer and an ale he responds “My father would burst a blood vessel if he heard you say that.” He tries to explain the difference but then admits that he doesn’t like beer and goes on to list a few different styles. “I don’t like beer. Bock beer, lager beer or steam beer. And I don’t like pale ale, brown ale, nut brown ale, porter or stout.” It is remarkable that in almost seven decades since The Lady Eve, very few films have ever mentioned different beer styles. Of course, there have been very few films like The Lady Eve! Just like a finely crafted beer, Preston Sturges’ film is unique, packed with great characteristics and pleasurable till the end.
How The Lady Eve made the Top 100:
#6 Tony D’Ambra
#11 Dennis Polifroni
#12 Dean Treadway
#13 John Greco
#14 Bobby McCartney
#16 Steven Mullen
#19 Mark Smith
#20 Allan Fish
#23 Brandie Ashe
#24 Sachin Gandhi
#25 Sam Juliano
#28 Ed Howard
#31 Jon Warner
#32 Pat Perry
#37 Peter M
#41 Pierre De Plume
#52 J.D. La France
The Lady Eve is not short on symbolism with the most obvious reference being the Garden of Eden. The opening credits show a happy snake licking his tongue while observing some apples before proceeding to place three apples with the film’s title on the screen.
Indeed Sachin, and you have come to the laugh party here with a stupendous review that not only stands among the most accomplished of the countdown, but one that brilliantly serves one of the cinema’s most endearing and often hysterical romantic comedy, but one of the form’s most iconic architects. The film of course is a deft slapstick/satiric hybrid that examines a number of themes with gender inversion taking center stage. The characters have two names, and once again Sturges proposes that luck, timing an fraudulent activity will often lead people to the top. Love is painful in the world of THE LADY EVE, and the exquisite Ms. Stanwyck gives one of her signature performances, with Henry Fonda close behind, and a plethora of notable supporting turns including ones by Charles Coburn, William Demarest and Eugene Pallette. Love the way you apply beer here metaphorically!
Thanks so much for your kind words Sam. I didn’t think of the two names regarding Charles but he is also Hopsie 🙂 And Jean always used one name while Eve stuck with Charles for obvious reasons.
Looks like Sachin Gandhi is the right man for the job. Usually Sturges fans mention this or Sullivan’s Travels as their favorite. Stanwyck is as quick-witted as Fonda is slow-thinking. And Coburn is the perfect con. This is one of those films where nothing can go wrong, and the first half is a model of screen comedy.
I certainly agree with this:
Overall, Preston Sturges has crafted a perfectly balanced film that contains the right mixture of gags, jokes and dialogues to generate humor. Nothing in the film is over the top and the tone is consistent from start to finish
It’s always tough to say which is greater, this or Sullivans Travels. I’ve given both as answers depending on when I am asked. Mr. Gandhi’s informed and engaging review would be perfect for an after-screening discussion starter! (and finisher!)
Thanks Peter. Truth be told even I am not sure which I would rate as higher between this and Sullivan’s Travels. I placed Sullivan’s Travel higher in this poll but on second viewing, I think The Lady Eve would overtake it.
Thanks Frank. I wish we had gotten to see more of Coburn because he was perfect in his few scenes. Although, Eric Blore provided a worthy comedic taste in the second half with his mysterious background story.
This film is one of Sturges’ best and maybe his most funny, although this countdown has proved that he has a few underrated gems that might even be funnier, but which haven’t gotten the “Criterion” treatment. I do well love this film and Stanwyck is a hoot. Of course it’s ridiculous that Charles would fall for the gag, but that’s what makes it so deliciously funny. Nice work Sachin.
Thanks Jon. As I mentioned above to Peter, right now I am leaning as this being Sturges’ most funny film as well.
This is an epic review of one of my absolute favortie comedies and, absolutely, one of the best and most lasting of the genre.
Sturges never allows you to think there is something more profound going on as the fun of it all takes you by the throat and never lets you go. But, always smarter than the people viewing his films, the director embues every scene and situation with a kind of moral and social implication that whallops you after the final end title card flips and you walk away from the whole thing knowing something far deeper than just a fantastic comedy has flashed before your eyes.
In my mind, this IS Preston Sturges’ greatest film, one that reveals more and more every time you see it, and is totally repeatable by necessity. Stanwyck, again in my mind, gives her finest turn as the lovelorn con-artist and it reminds us all what a great presence and talent she was. Was there a genre she couldn’t master in her time as one of the most influential and sought after movie queens of the era? The moment she hangs over the side of the boat and asks her father the question: “Do you think I can clunk him on the head with this?” and then drops an apple on Henry Fonda’s head is the moment I KNEW that Sturges and Stanwyck were taking no prisoners and offering up one of the most acidic and brilliant comedies of all time…
Wonderful review!!!!
A second reading of this great review confirms what you say here Dennis about “epic.”
Thanks again Sam. Glad you liked the review.
Wow, thanks Dennis. As you note, this perfect is infused with a lot of depth that may not be apparent on first viewing as one is busy laughing at events. I found mysely noticing a lot of details in repeat viewings & if I had to vote again, this would occupy a much higher position than #24.
Sachin, I must admit I didn’t really like this film at all – all the scenes of Henry Fonda falling over left me cold and I just didn’t find it funny, even though I love both Stanwyck and Fonda. But I may just have been in the wrong mood, of course, which is always a possibility when not warming to a comedy that other people love. Anyway, you have written a great piece which I will definitely return to when watching the film again, and I’m intrigued by the Adam/Eve parallels you draw out here.