4/10
Solid foundations are troubled by a host of issues
17 March 2024
Sometimes I really feel that cinema lost something special with the advent of the talkie, and when it comes to the earliest years after sound was introduced to the medium, sometimes it's literally true. As this 1929 feature begins the use of synchronized audio at first feels emphatic, like the producers specifically wanted us to know "Yes, this is the new paradigm," epitomized with the alarm clock to first greet us. In some odds and ends of the writing - scenes, dialogue, and characters, and elements of the story - one can recognize a sense of lightheartedness that has endured to this day in like-minded comedies. Then again, most importantly: particularly in A. Edward Sutherland's direction but also in the acting, there is at many points an unnatural stilted quality to the proceedings, and a certain emptiness, that suggest everyone was still quite trying to figure out how sound was supposed to work. The sets appear larger than they are owing to the emptiness that fills them, a dearth of people that suggests uncertainty of how to filter out unwanted reverberations. At all such points 'The Saturday night kid' seems like it has less in common with its fellow movies than with television sitcoms of decades to follow, for all that's missing is a laugh track to fill the gaps where there is no dialogue or otherwise audio.

Such factors are unfortunate in the first place, deficiencies that put a mark on the whole, and moreover they do somewhat distract from the viewing experience. Further consider relatively flimsy, muddled sound generally, instances of some rough editing, and the way that plot development feels needlessly drawn out in light of all the stated issues, and this strikes me as an example of an early sound picture that doesn't necessarily hold up as well as some contemporaries. It's not that it's abjectly bad, and indeed there's much to admire here. Say what one will about how Sutherland made use of the sets, the production design and art direction are broadly solid; everyone working behind the scenes turned in good work, including costume design, hair, and makeup. There's some nice cinematography at points. Above all, this romantic comedy is founded on classic ideas, and despite difficulties in execution the screenplay is swell overall, and one could easily see the film remade in subsequent years. Still, even Hollywood megastar Clara Bow seems to be having a hard time situating herself amidst all this; some of her co-stars fare much worse, with Jean Arthur arguably being the weakest link - and she is billed just under Bow!

The sad result of all this is that 'The Saturday night kid' just isn't nearly as fun as it's supposed to be. Why, though at large it falls in the "rom-com" category, since the humor has such a hard time coming through under all these circumstances, the underlying dramatic beats are artificially made to feel much more severe; Janie, as a character, being robbed of such mirth, simply comes off as bitterly cruel and selfish. The title remains enjoyable in some measure, but in the more generic sense of providing no greater amount of entertainment than the baseline we can get from pretty much anything, a frivolous diversion of light and sound. Take into account the problems that plague it in multiple capacities, and when all is said and done watching is kind of just taxing, something we must actively work to appreciate. I don't hate this flick, but to the same extent that we initially observe some idiosyncrasies, over time straight flaws become more prevalent, culminating in an ending that's decidedly curt and abrupt, seeming to come out of nowhere. There are worse ways to spend your time, but one hour feels longer than it is, and unless you're a diehard fan of someone involved, nearly 100 years later I regret to say there's not much reason to check out 'The Saturday night kid.'
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed