'Lloyd's of London' 1936 Movie Review - Episode #102

1936 Lloyd's of London
Directed by: Henry King
Starring: Freddie Bartholomew, Tyrone Power, George Sanders, Madeleine Carroll
#LloydsofLondon #TyronePower #FreddieBartholomew #MovieReviews

I hope you all like the new set! I'll be moving things around for my next review. The next review should be Episode 100! Thank you all for the support over the years!

[robert]

I like that Flynn poster. I’ve noticed it in other videos but it’s nice getting a better shot of it.

Have you considered doing a video on your favorite books about movies/movie stars?

[robert]

I like old biopics. They were usually uplifting and fun instead of just focusing on the faults of the people depicted like they do today. The ones MGM made were especially classy.

I haven’t seen this one. I’ve only seen a handful of Tyrone Power films, most notably Mark of Zorro and The Razor’s Edge (which I love).

[holydiver]

Lloyds of London is an excellent movie.

[iloveclassicmovies]

We differ on this one, quite a bit actually. I love it, and think it's easily one of the best adventure movies ever made. It's even a bit of a family favorite, with my brother and my parents loving it also. We've seen it multiple times.

For me, the fundamentals of a story, and the interesting elements and undercurrents stirred up by those fundamentals, is what makes a movie interesting. The side elements, such as accents, and adherence to historical accuracy, are way down on the list for me. I'm to the point where realism, especially ultra-realism, really bothers me (ala, method acting). It bothers me because it's often used as a crutch to compensate for a story that's lacking. So many modern movies lack a good story. If one thinks about it clinically one has to ask, what's the benefit of realism? How does it help a story?

This movie doesn't lack a good story. Far from it. Lloyd's of London is both a rousing adventure, where the good guy wins big and the bad guy loses big, and it's a touching melodrama, with many layered undercurrents between the characters. I can see why it was successful when it came out. Every time I watch it I find myself rooting for the characters, and audiences back in the day probably felt the same way.

And this is one of those rare movies that is able to span a large amount of time, without feeling episodic. That's because it stays focused on the friendship between Jonathan and Nelson, and on Jonathan's rise through the business world. The pace of this movie is also very fast.

I think you sell Polly's character way too short. I think she has a lot of moxie. I find it fascinating how she loves Jonathan, and rather than resort to pettiness when he doesn't respond to her attentions, she helps him with his problems, no matter what the risk. His lack of love for her doesn't budge her love for him, in a healthy way. Maybe some people find that corny, but I don't. To me it's the purest form of love when someone is gracious, and deeply wants the other person to prosper, with no strings attached. Today she would be completely different and would likely become petty and spiteful. Not so in old movies. Also, she may be a lowly servant, but she's leagues above Lord Stacy in morals, even though he's an aristocrat. I could never see her owing a debt. She works too hard for her living. I love the scene where he's losing to her at cards, and she doesn't flinch when he's rude to her, and looks down on her from his high horse. If she can keep her chin up while George Sanders is giving her a hard time, you know she has moxie.

I find the opening vignettes with the younger actors very touching and satisfying. Especially when they part company. When Nelson doesn't strike Jonathan, he chides, "Softy." They even repeat "Softy" at the very end, with a flashback. I'm not sure why you found that corny. Also, even though it may be shorter than the screen time Freddie Bartholomew had in David Copperfield, a lot more happens. He learns a lot through his adventures, which I thought were very exciting. If only my youth had been so memorable. And it wasn't just adventure for the sake of adventure. It shapes him. He learns the importance of trust, which is the foundation that helps make him successful later in life. These are the undercurrents I'm talking about, which breathe life into a movie. Unlike Lord Stacy, he honors his debts, even when they could bankrupt him. I think that's what this movie is about, at its core. Trust. He can be trusted because he'll honor his debts, no matter how difficult the obligation. The movie makes this glaringly clear. Trust is at the core of insurance, and all business transactions, for that matter.

Speaking of trust, I think that's what the pact between Jonathan and Nelson is about. That's why Jonathan does what he does with the telegraph signals. You saw this as a misstep in his character, but it was the very opposite of that to me. It was a true test of his faith in Nelson. He's risking everything on Nelson winning, and unlike Lord Stacy, if he fails he will not run and hide. The audience knows that if he fails he will face the consequences, no matter how severe. Besides, what kind of friend would he be to Nelson if he doubted his success? He believes with all his heart and soul that Nelson will win, so he risks everything on his faith/trust in Nelson. Nothing wrong with calculated risks. "No matter what the cost." He literally repeats this phrase before he does it, because he knows it will cost him everything if he's wrong. The risks he's willing to take, along with his determination to honor debts, is what makes Lloyds of London thrive as a company.

Apart from the story, this movie looks unbelievably awesome. Henry King never disappoints on this.

Another thing that pushes this movie over the top for me is the chemistry between the two main stars. When I first saw this, years ago, I was riveted by the tender and contemplative boat ride they share back from France. When she left him at the inn I was crestfallen, and a team of mules couldn't have hauled me away from the screen at that point. I was hooked, waiting for their paths to cross again. As I've mentioned before, I love it when people from two different worlds meet. Another great scene is near the end in the courtyard when she consoles him. Her pleas for him to accept her aid are very genuine. And the close-ups of Madeleine Carroll are the stuff of legend. No joke, when I quit working and pick up painting again, I'll paint a scene from this movie, for sure.

In summary, this is another one of my all time favorites. For me it's a 4 star movie, easily. As adventure stories go, I think it's one of the best there is. I love it from stem to stern. The pacing and momentum of the story is perfection. It builds to a very effective crescendo. I'll also add, the free copy on YouTube is okay, but the official DVD from Fox is markedly better. I'm proud to have it in my collection, though I had a much rougher copy when I originally watched this years ago.

I urge everyone to give this movie a try, particularly if they're in the mood for a rousing adventure story.