The Richest Girl in the World (1934)

the audience applauded

Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

Disapointment

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

When a movie stars Joel McCrea, you can pretty much guarantee it will be enjoyable...and so I wasn't surprised that I enjoyed this film. It's cute and enjoyable and Miriam Hopkins is quite nice as well.When the film begins, you learn that the heiress Dorothy Hunter is a bit of an enigma. No one knows what she looks like and folks about to meet her are curious what she looks like. However, what they don't realize is that this 'Dorothy Hunter' is a fake...hired by the real one (Hopkins) because she wants to retain her privacy. This has created a problem, however. How will she meet men and how will she handle it when she meets a nice guy? Well, she gets to try this out when Tony (McCrea) enters her life. She CONTINUES to pretend to be someone else and her assistant continues to pretend to be Dorothy. The problem is that Tony finds he's falling for BOTH women!This is a sweet film and the stars do a nice job...almost nice enough to give this one an 8. The script isn't easy to believe but the cast do their best to breath life into it.

Miriam Hopkins was an excellent Broadway actress who found a wonderful career in films, even if she never achieved legendary status. In this 1934 movie, she plays the richest woman in the world, undoubtedly a take-off on Barbara Hutton. Desiring to find a man who can love her for herself and not her money, she and her secretary switch identities when there's a potential suitor around.The game gets dicey when Hopkins meets the man of her dreams, Joel McCrea, and let's face it, he was the man of many women's dreams - tall, handsome, boyish, and athletic. The story continues from there with the usual mix-ups.As one of the posters pointed out, the secretary, played by the beautiful Fay Wray, is a married woman, which means that Hopkins is actually posing as a married woman and Wray as a single one - this is a long way of saying the film was probably released before the code hit.Hopkins and McCrea made a good duo, and good thing, because they appeared together several times. This is a pleasant and short comedy, worth seeing for its stars and '30s ambiance.

The Richest Girl in the World in 1934 meant Barbara Hutton. Her exploits made her the Paris Hilton of the day. Did anyone seriously think that by titling the lead character Dorothy Hunter that RKO wasn't trying to cash in on Hutton's reputation?Miriam Hopkins as Dorothy Hunter is naturally concerned with both privacy and wanting to know if she would really be marrying someone for love. She's hatched a scheme with her secretary Fay Wray to in public exchange identities. But that may come to an end soon as Fay is looking to marry Reginald Denny.But along comes Joel McCrea who's got his own ideas about supporting himself in the true McCrea tradition. Hopkins crushes out on him big time and he falls for her thinking she's the secretary.I can't say more, but any movie fan can take this plot from here. Still the leads are at their best and the film is good entertainment.But who was RKO kidding?

Miriam Hopkins, The Richest Girl in the World, wants to be loved for herself and not her money, so with Joel McCrea as guinea pig, she poses as her own secretary, while her secretary, played by Fay Wray, takes on her role. McCrea is supposed to prove his true love for Hopkins -- in secretary guise, mind you -- by choosing her over what he thinks is Wray's immense fortune, but if he does, he will have a lifetime's supply of really good scotch... What starts out as a fairy tale plot soon becomes a decimation of the very notion of secure identity, a hint that there is no such thing as individual personality. What does it mean to be loved for "yourself"? Is "yourself" a form of purity that exists only in relation to something impure, like a rich woman who could turn you into a gigolo? What if the choice is between two poor women? A scene near the end presents an inescapable labyrinth of contradictions that makes you want to tear your hair out.SPOILERS.McCrea has proposed to Fay Wray, and she has pretended to accept, much to the dismay of Miriam Hopkins who realizes that her chance for true love has flown out the window. The mood is grim as Hopkins and her servants prepare to, essentially, execute McCrea by casting him out of the paradise he thinks he's won. But that same night, McCrea is sitting on the stairs and sees Wray's REAL husband sneak into her bedroom. The next day, in a huff, he breaks off the engagement with her, suggesting that her wealth has made her a perverse tramp, only to be told by Hopkins, desperate to make herself as unattractive as possible and thereby more qualified for "true love" as opposed to mercenary considerations, that she had switched bedrooms and that she was the tramp. Instead of apologizing to Wray, as any normal man would do, McCrea grabs Hopkins and carries her bodily out of the house to the altar!Now, why and how could this happen? Why doesn't McCrea, hearing that Fay Wray was faithful, stick with her, since he thinks she's rich? The movie suggests that Hopkins's supposed promiscuity has inflamed McCrea's lust to the point where he no longer cares about money, and must have her sexually for himself, even if this means losing his potential fortune. But on top of this Freudian ploy, there's a much deeper, more haunting suggestion. McCrea, the film seems to wink at us, has figured out the trick that's been played on him. And he is then returning the favor and playing another trick by pretending to be inflamed by Hopkins, because he knows that will flatter her ego and her sense of truth about herself, even though his eye is firmly on the prize -- and I mean the one that's NOT between her legs. The final shot of the movie shows the happy couple on board of a boat, both of them still pretending not to know the other's secret, while an anonymous man, some kind of spy -- but on whose team? -- affixes a mustache.The truly sinister aspect of this movie is that everyone gets exactly what they want. Far from a slapped-on happy ending, the ending of this movie suggests that all happiness is likewise compromised, artificial, but then again, Hopkins was on the verge of spinsterhood... Isn't a fiction, any fiction, better than that?