Back Street (1932) Reviews

• fine movie...

  berengeria2001-10-31

  I have seen the later versions that were done of this movie, and none compare to this one. Irene Dunne is superb, and brings a lot of depth to her role...you really get to care about her character, and sympathize with her plight. Only saw this movie once on television years ago, and have not seen it aired since. As far as I can tell, this 1932 movie is not available on tape or dvd at the present time...a real shame, for it certainly needs to be!

• Masterful Performance

  jlanders132001-04-05

  This is one of Irene Dunne's finest performances and proves that even a soapbox opera can be engaging when a performance is so real it's uncanny. Her performance is almost overshadowed by the humaness and irony of the plot. I highly recommend this movie.

• Two Great Stars Make It Work

  overseer-32003-08-27

  Irene Dunne and John Boles classically pull off what easily could have been a smarmy pre-code movie with the usual clichés about extra-marital affairs. Rae (Irene) misses the chance to marry the man she loves, due to helping another woman, her step-sister, who is in trouble. Years later Rae meets Walter (handsome John Boles) again in New York City; he's a rich banker-stockbroker now, married, with two children, yet the old sparks are still there and she agrees to be his mistress. The affair lasts years and there is genuine affection there. At one point Rae almost marries a childhood friend to escape her back street romance, but Walter begs her to return to him, and she does. Now twenty years go by, his children are grown and learn about the long-term affair, though we are to believe the wife is clueless. Walter has a stroke and his last thoughts are of Rae, and Rae gives up the ghost shortly thereafter, unable to continue living without her lifelong love. It's nice to see the transition between the Gilded Age through the 1930's; it's nice to see two pros give touching performances in this film. As per the style of that time, there was no background musical soundtrack, except for a few brief scenes, and this is not a distraction; in fact I think it helps keep one's concentration going on the actual storyline not to be interrupted by Max Steiner-like musical notes soaring over the action. This film has never been released on video or DVD and is never played on TCM or Fox Movie Channel. Very unfortunate; it needs to be readily available for precode fans.

• Very gentle predecessor to the women's film from the master of substance

  mb_cine_films2007-09-19

  At our recent film society screening of this film (we very luckily have a 16mm print in The National Film and Sound Archive here in Australia) it was very apparent of the skill of director and his star in what is an subtle and underplayed telling of this Fannie Hurst tearjerker. There is an absence of musical underscore very typical for the period prior to 1934, and this added to the potency of the effect of Dunne's absorbing and masterful performance, illustrating her as not just a star but an actress as well. Overall this film has a very gentle feel with slow fade-outs used frequently in giving this effect. Dunne is wonderful in her playing earlier in a lighter fashion and makes a skillful transformation into the section of the film where she is older and more serious. I had sympathy for her character in spite of the sacrifices she makes for John Boles, remaining in the "back street" of his life. I see director Stahl as a sort of predecessor to Sirk in his handling of solid fare such as this and "Leave her to Heaven" (1945).

• "Back Street" gives early view of Irene Dunne's talent

  chuck-reilly2008-03-04

  Irene Dunne stars as Ray Smith, the mistress of a well-off married man (John Boles) who lives her life selflessly for him, relegating her forever to the "Back Street" of the title. This film and Dunne's performance were the ultimate in "soap opera" entertainment for the early 1930's and audiences loved it. Boles, a wooden actor if there ever was one, is actually quite good in this movie as Walter Saxel, the man Dunne just can't seem to get enough of. Unfortunately, since he's married and raising a family, there isn't too much of him to go around. The tear-jerking ending is worth sticking around for, however, and it's a good idea to keep a box of tissues handy. Despite the year (1932), the film tackles an issue that was somewhat taboo for the times (i.e. extra-marital sex and its consequences). It's all done tastefully and relatively true to the original novel by Fannie Hurst. For those unfamiliar with her work, Ms. Hurst was the Danielle Steele of her day, although she's largely forgotten now. So is this film, but it's worth seeing if only for a view of an early performance by the incredible Irene Dunne. Of course, the talented Ms. Dunne went on to star in more famous movies than this one, but she gives a worthy effort to the proceedings here and raises the film far above the norm.