Movie review - "The Story of Seabiscuit" (1949) **1/2

Shirley Temple's second last film (she made it at the ripe old age of 21) is a slice of Americana more similar to the horsey movies they would make at 20th Century Fox. A bunch of them starred Lon McAllister, 40s leading man who specialised in country boys - and he pops up here as a jockey on Seabiscuit, the famous horse.

This movie is a nominal biopic of that horse, though much fictionalised - McAllister plays a guy based on the Tobey Maguire character from the 2003 film, Fitzgerald is the Chris Cooper character. Charles Howard, played by Jeff Bridges later, is depicted here under his real name.

Temple is a fictitious character - Fitzgerald's niece who falls forMcAllister. The relationship block is that her brother died horse racing and she wants McAllister to quit which is fine. Temple's perfomance is amateturish  - she struggles with her Irish accent. Mind you it's no more painful than Fitzgerald who does his Irish thing.

There's actually surprisingly little Seabiscuit in this - he never feels like much of a character. There is some real life footage, some in black and white some in colour.  There is a comic Chinese and African American.

I actually didn't mind a lot of this - it's silly but looks good and the newsreel footage does help. And t's kind of true.

Book review - "On the Good Ship Hollywood" by John Agar (2007)

John Agar was an odd kind of movie star - the son of a meat packer, he launched into global fame by marrying Shirley Temple, which resulted in a movie contract from David O. Selznick. He lucked out with some of his early film roles, which included parts in classics such as Fort Apache, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon and The Sands of Iwo Jima. Agar was an awkward, inexperienced actor, but he looked good on a horse, moved well and didn't bring down any of these films - indeed his work in Iwo Jima was genuinely good.

He was given a few leads - Breakthrough, The Magic Carpet -but he couldn't really carry a film and his career took a nose dive when he divorced Shirley. He copped a truckload of bad publicity for this and the fact he was always being arrested for alcohol related incidents.

His career received a second chance when he was signed by Universal Studios in the mid 50s, for whom he made a number of films, mostly science fiction epics - some of them of very high quality, like Tarantula. He kept busy acting for the rest of his life, though he occasionally had to boost the old income earnings via real estate and other odd jobs. He kept relapsing with drinking and made the mistake of not renewing with Universal when he had the chance - bland handsome types like Agar were always better off under contract. But his second marriage was happy, and they had a couple of kids who seem to love him.

The book is an interesting one - Agar is a relentlessly cheery upbeat sort of chap, forever trying to look on the bright side. He decries attitudes of the younger generation, and all the swearing and violence in films today, takes the blame for his own mistakes. Shirley Temple doesn't get that much of a mention - he simply says they were very much in love, the mum was a piece of work, their marriage suffered... he denies that he cheated on her but admits to drinking a lot. His biggest regret is being estranged from his child with Temple and smoking and drinking so much.

It's a short book and disappointingly slight. There's some stuff on John Wayne and John Ford but not a lot; it's slight on his classic Westerns and war films and sci fi efforts. He talks wistfully about wanting to make more Westerns - indeed I'm surprised Universal didn't use him more for them. The book is fleshed out with some typically strong interviews Tom Weaver did with him which focus on the sci fi stuff. But all the way through I wanted to know more - I mean how many actors worked with Shirley Temple, John Ford, John Wayne, Sam Katzman, Charles Griffith, early AIP, Sidney Pink, Audie Murphy, Larry Buchanan...

Agar comes across as a likeable, amiable guy who was a bit of a goose. The book is a quick read, it's entertaining - but I feel you could do a more solid book on Agar.

Shirley Temple Top Ten

In honour of the recent death of Ms Shirley Temple Black I thought I'd do my top ten Shirley flicks:
1) Wee Willie Winkie - Shirley is given her greatest director, John Ford, who in turn is given a milieu he knows and loves (a fort outpost... in this case a British Imperial one but still a fort outpost nonetheless) and results in a classic.
2) Heidi - oprhan schmaltz of the highest order
3) The Little Princess - high production values and a solid story make this worth watching.
4) Captain January - another orphan tale but with Guy Kibee, some great villains and the novelty of a lighthouse setting.
5) Stowaway - Shirley Temple in China with strong support via Alice Faye and Robert Young.
6) Bright Eyes - Every Shirley Temple cliche your heart could desire and more: poor mother who is killed, loving bachelor to adopt you, vicious Jane Withers, the "Good Ship Lolly Pop".
7) Little Miss Marker - this helped Shirley become a star; it's not a vehicle for her but she does drive the action and benefits from a strong cast and source material.
8) The Blue Bird - highly flawed, but fascinating and definitely worth watching.
9) The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer  - Shirley's best film as a teenager, giving a lively performance.
10) Fort Apache - not really a Shirley Temple film, she has a small role, but she's still in it and it's a masterpiece nonetheless.

Movie review - "That Hagen Girl" (1947) *1/2

During Ronald Reagan's presidency there were several movies that kept getting brought up again and again because of comic/novelty value: King's Row (considered his best work, where he lost his legs), Bedtime for Bonzo (playing opposite a chimp), Knute Rockne All American (the "win one for he Gipper" speech), Hellcats of the Navy (his one effort co-starring Nancy) and this.... where he co-starred with Shirley Temple. It's also got the yuck factor of a plot concerning small town rumours that Temple is Reagan's illegitimate daughter, yet they fall in love.

So this is melodrama - meaning at least there's novelty seeing Shirley Temple in a non-comedy. There's also Miss Moneypenny, Lois Maxwell, looking very young and beautiful as a teacher at Temple's school; a young and handsome Rory Calhoun, as Shirley's age appropriate love interest who winds up dumping her for someone of his own social class. I got a kick out of seeing Shirley do some Shakespeare, playing Juliet in Romeo and Juliet.

In fact the first two-thirds of this movie was enjoyable, which focuses on Shirley Temple and her stresses about her illegitimacy in town - it's vivid (if a tad cliched) depiction of a gossipy, small-minded town with its busy bodies and skeletons in the cupboard.  I don't know much about Peter Godfrey, the director, but his handling was vigorous and strong, and it spanks along at a fair pace.

But then Ronald Reagan comes into the story (I was surprised how late his entrance is) and takes over and everything gets a bit yuck. Shirley confronts him, asks if he's her father, he says no, then they start hanging out together, along with Reagan's age appropriate girlfriend Lois Maxwell. There is gossip, Calhoun marries someone else other than Shirley, the town discover Ronnie is involved in the nuclear program and is a bit of a hero and start to love him, then Lois Maxwell leaves town telling him that he and Temple actually love each other.

Shirley has been expelled from school, and in a rainy, windy, well shot sequence (with the star looking beautiful) she goes to throw herself in the lake before being rescued by Reagan. Reagan then explains the girl the town think was Shirley's illegitimate mother was actually ga-ga and never had a baby - shades of King's Row (a much much times a hundred better film). Reagan teaches Shirley who you are is more important than where you came from and her adopted parents (whose importance is played down in the film - they hardly appear on screen) did a good job. Then Reagan and Shirley leave together on the train... it's hinted, though not clear, that they're a couple now.

This is too well directed to be a complete bomb but it's still pretty yuck. Poor Shirley Temple, she appeared in so many duds as a star around this time!

Movie review - "Adventure in Baltimore" (1949) **

There's nothing wrong with trying to use movies to push a social message but I don't think Dore Schary every quite learned how to make them fun while doing so - which is why his output is strong in the areas of war films and film noir, but less so when it comes to comedies. Which is what this movie is meant to be (I think) when it's not pushing its message, but any sort of lightness seems to be beyond the filmmakers.

It's set in 1905 and has Shirley Temple as the daughter of a pastor (God was always popping up in Schary movies) who is expelled from her school for having feisty opinions: suggesting the amount of petticoats that are worn be reduced, and wanting to draw nude forms. She returns home, whereupon it becomes unclear what exactly the story is: I expected Shirley to fight for women's rights but she doesn't really, only joining in a suffragette march at the end to help some women under attack; she does write a pro-emancipation speech but never delivers it herself - she gives it to John Agar to speak on her behalf.

They throw in this plot about her being an artist - she sells paintings, gets Agar to pose for her which causes a scandal.... but then there's no more of that. So the female angle is unfocused, as is Shirley's character. It's probably best to approach it as standard small town Americana in the early 20th century with a vaguely "woman's right" slant.

At least that's a point of novelty, which the film needs. It doesn't do comedy, romance or charm particularly well. Shirley Temple and John Agar were a couple in real life but don't have much chemistry here; partly their fault, particularly the stiff and awkward Agar (this worked in action films, wasn't so good in rom coms), but also because their banter isn't well written. See what I mean about it not being fun? For instance when Agar gives a pro-suffragette speech that Temple is written it's meant to be funny, I think, but it just isn't because Agar is a lazy idiot for not writing is own speech and... it's also just not funny.

Also not fun is the fact Robert Young is a pastor and wants to be a bishop - I've no doubt pastors are ambitious to be bishops but its yuck watching him have these dreams on screen when, say, a blustery businessman whose business dealings are threatened by a suffragette daughter would be more entertaining. They try to jazz up Young's character by having him box and having wanted to be a ballroom dancer but he is basically a pompous bore, giving a long monologue about tolerance at the end that we're all supposed to admire. Dore Schary later had a major hard on for Spencer Tracy when he was at MGM and Young's performance seems to channel Tracy at times (even the fact he's a boxing pastor is reminiscent of Tracy in San Francisco).

Maybe if this was in colour and had songs it would have been more enjoyable, but I simply think the filmmakers were unable to pull off this sort of combination of social message, Americana and charm..

Movie review - "Honeymoon" (1947) *1/2

Shirley Temple had a big hit in 1947 acting for RKO in a romantic comedy opposite an older male star... but that was Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer. This one, despite having all those elements, was a massive flop. Of course Bachelor also had Cary Grant, Myrna Loy and a decent script whereas this has Franchot Tone, Guy Madison and a silly script.

Tone actually gives a solid, professional performance as the American consulate in Mexico who gets roped in by Shirley Temple in her efforts to marry GI Guy Madison. Shirley does "indicate" occasionally and at times I felt that her lack of professional training (i.e. having to learn her trade on the job) hampered her performances at this stage of her career, but she's spirited and cute - it's not her fault the film is very good. That's due to the writers, who don't give her a character (is she madcap? a dreamer? a fantasist?) and never come up with a story that builds: it's just silly one thing after another stopping her and Madison from getting married (and no decent thing like a villainous gangster or an ex, but more things like a missing form, or indequate witnesses, or red tape).

And because Guy Madison is so awkward on screen, he and Shirley have no chemistry (they're also kept apart on screen for long periods of time... she easily shares more screen time with Franchot Tone), so you don't care if they get together or not. So much of the story is undeveloped - Tone has a financee who gets vaguely jealous but that's about it; his in laws hang around but don't do much; it's set in Mexico, but Mexico here just looks like an ugly backlot. In the last ten minutes Temple gets knocked on the head and momentarily thinks she's in love with Tone and you go "now that's a story" but it's in the last ten minutes and gets resolved very quickly.

It's the sort of story which might have been okay had they shot it in Technicolor and made it a musical, but they haven't so t drags. There's also an awful men-reasserting-themselves-over-spirited-women ending where Madison asserts himself over his "troublesome" fiancee by taking her up a diving board and throwing her into a pool fully clothed to teach her a lesson. No doubt this sort of thing was happening all over America at this time ("quit your job sweetheart, I'm back now") but it doesn't make it fun to watch.

Movie review - "Almost a Bride" (1949) **

Also known as A Kiss for Corliss this was a sequel to Kiss and Tell a popular late period Shirley Temple ("late period" being when she was a teenager). She's boy-crazy and madcap yet again, getting a crush on a handsome man about town (David Niven) and making up fantasies about the two of them going out in her diary. Eventually this leaks and her parents and boyfriend think it's real.

That's not a bad concept for a comedy - indeed, Shirley had just enjoyed a big hit with that plotline in The Bachelor and the Bobbysoxer, although in that case there was another subplot around involving Myrna Loy in her sister. The most successful late period Shirley Temples didn't rely on her to drive the action but this one does - and not for the best.

The script is the undoing of this one. I went with the set up of why Shirley initially lied - it's simple sitcom stuff - but as the complications began to mount (Niven becoming involved, the press publicising it, a marriage ceremony starting) it simply didn't make sense for Shirley to keep lying, or for Niven to start and keep lying. At any stage of the action all she or he had to say "I made it up" and it would be over. So there were no real dramatic stakes.

Another problem is Shirley Temple was 21 by this stage and looks too old to be playing someone who's meant to be a teenager. By now she was an attractive young woman who could easily play a newlywed; maybe this is through my later generation eyes but I struggled to buy her as someone who would be so immature.

In a way it's a shame because her performance is fine - bright and sparky and all that - and there is decent support, including David Niven doing his David Niven thing. He's not in the movie that much, only really in the last third, and his career was in real trouble at this stage, but few people did light comedy better and he seems completely comfortable.

Movie review - "Miss Annie Rooney" (1942) *1/2

Someone ought to do a PhD or something on the role of Shirley Temple in helping develop the image of the American teenager - while we mainly associate teenagers in from the 1950s onwards, during the 1940s she personified the dreamy, boy crazy jitterbugger.... the short of girl who would swoon over Van Johnson and Frank Sinatra during the war.

Her best known performances in this mode were in Since You Went Away, I'll Be Seeing You and The Bachelor and the Bobbysoxer - but this really was the first of her teen efforts, as she gets her first proper kiss. This had been a big deal for Deanna Durbin in First Love and no doubt Edward Small, a producer who signed Temple for this film off the back of her flop effort in Kathleen, was hoping for a similar sort of splash. As insurance he threw in Shirley's old co star Guy Kibee to play gramps and used an old faithful story - young Irish girl being raised by widowed dad and grandad falls for a rich boy whose parents don't like her on principle. But it flopped.

Part of the reason, I think, is age. She was around 14 when she made this, and comes across very young - a real bobbysoxer. And all her friends and love interest seem young, too - her car crazy poor boyfriend and the new rich one in particular seem to be acting like they're in Bugsy Malone when they are driving around in cars. There was a line where one of the boys says he's sixteen but they all seem so juvenile there's no stakes.

But the biggest problem with this film isn't Shirl (there's nothing wrong with her performance by the way) it's the character of Shirley's dad, played by William Gargan - he's an irresponsible idiot, chasing mad dreams, making stupid financial decisions ("yeah yeah buy the dress, sky's the limit"), crashing a party his daughter's attending so he can push his rubber, stupidly sticking to his guns about not taking a good job so he can chase his dream.... and the film redeems him with this ridiculous deux ex machina where he becomes a millionaire overnight. It's offensive, dumb, unbelievable and painful to watch.

The dreadful script sets up that the movie is going to be about Shirley romancing rich boy Dickie Moore (the first screen kiss is a peck on the cheek) but then the last half hour or so completely forgets this and becomes about dad and rubber. Characters keep saying the word "rubber" again and again and it drove me nuts and Shirley Temple has every right to be annoyed she was cast in this.

Movie review - "Kiss and Tell" (1945) **1/2

Shirley Temple enjoyed some success in the mid 1940s playing a series of lively, boy-crazy teenagers, often in support of adult stars (eg Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer, I'll Be Seeing You). Audiences seemed to enjoy her less when she was the actual star, but this was popular enough to lead to a sequel. I think this was in part due to the fact it was based on a popular Broadway hit, Kiss and Tell - which in turn was part of a highly popular genre: I guess you'd call it small-town-girls-and-GIs-rom-com, funny tales set in small towns where GIs on leave have romantic misunderstandings with teenage girls while flustered parents and jealous rivals interfere and everyone worries about sex and getting married (Dear Ruth was another one).

The plot has Temple and best friend Virginia Welles selling kisses and being romanced; Temple's brother Scott Elliot loves Welles and they get married in secret; Temple chases after another soldier despite being loved by the boy next door.

It's amiable enough with some funny lines, expert playing by Robert Benchley and Temple well cast. My main gripe was the parents were really annoying and pompous, worried about their kids' purity. It really got on my nerves and they became unpleasant to be around.

Movie review - "Kathleen" (1941) *1/2

MGM were famed as the studio who knew how to handle stars more than any other - they're the ones who discovered Mario Lanza and Esther Williams, and could treat Spencer Tracy, Jean Harlow and William Powell properly. But they had deliberately set out to sabotage Shirley Temple's career they couldn't have done better with this film than if they'd tried.

It's a really awkward, uncomfortable movie with Shirley as a day dreaming fantasist teen. She's the daughter of a widowed man (Herbert Marshall), which is par for the course; she's got a crush on him and is kind of love with him, which is also usual, although with her being older its a bit uncomfortable; she squabbles with her housekeeper, which is less effective when dad's around and she's older, and sets off firecrackers. This prompts dad to send in a shrink, which to be honest doesn't make me like Dad (especially as he's so neglectful). The shrink is Laraine Day and Shirley gets a kind of crush on her and tries to match make.

I just found this yuck - unfunny dream sequences, a lead character who is clearly traumatised about (instead of the plucky thing of her 30s movies she's whiny, vague, and suffering severe emotional trauma which is not fun); songs are awkwardly put in; dad and her have a weird relationship as does dad and the shrink. There is some nice vaguely feminist stuff ("why can't a woman chase a man"), a very unconvincing happy ending. This movie just gave me the creeps.

Movie review - "Young People" (1940) ** (warning: spoilers)

Historically significant in a way: this was Shirley Temple's last movie under her contract with Fox, a studio for whom she had made a lot of money. It's an odd piece - I'm not quite sure they made it: were they genuinely trying to change her image or were they just finishing the contract?

It's not really a Temple vehicle - she shares the lead duties with two others (Jack Oakie and Charlotte Greenwood) and the film is about three of them equally. They are vaudevillians who retire to a stuffy town, which I guess is an okay concept for a fish out of water comedy, only the filmmakers don't have that much fun with it. Temple does a slightly race school dance but it's only slightly racy - the others say a few outrageous things, but the main problem never seems to be them it's the stuff townsfolk. So the town is an unpleasant place to live, and we kind of wish they'd go back to vaudeville. That's what they intend to do too until a deux ex machina storm comes along and makes them heroes so they stay. (They only want to live in a town where people like you if you're heroes... great).

George Montgomery is handsome and confident in an early leading man role as the nice editor of the local paper. There are some decent dance routines and a potentially intriguing theme about the importance of embracing change (which could have had terrific resonance for the showbusiness backgrounds of the three leads) is completely ignored. A potentially big dramatic moment where Shirley finds out she's adopted is just thrown away too. At a time when Temple's career needed careful handling it was like Fox couldn't really be bothered (I get the feeling they always feared the day would come when she grew up and became unpopular, and when they did they gave up in advance).

Movie review - "The Blue Bird" (1940) **1/2

The film that effectively killed Shirley Temple's career as a star - a big budget attempt to match the success of The Wizard of Oz, it was the victim of what can be seen in hindsight to be an astonishing miscalculation. After a highly successful career playing plucky orphans, Fox turned her into the bratty daughter of two hard working parents. It gets this movie off to a dodgy start from which it never quite recovers - Shirley being a selfish little brat who needs a comeuppance goes completely against every role she'd played before them.

Good on Fox for trying to expand her range, and it does give her character somewhere to go - but Shirley had never played a character which had any sort of development before. I can't understand why the studio risked such an expensive project on a new template when they so easily could have made her character likeable, poor and struggling at the beginning. I guess they figured that would rob the piece of its point - but it meant we had to spend over half the running time in the company of bratty Shirley. She doesn't even sing any songs.

It's a shame because the movie has much to admire - colour photography, impressive sets, a support cast that includes such reliables as Gale Sondergaard and Nigel Bruce, a genuine sense of magic and some really moving scenes, such as reviving her grandparents.

I know studio executives were worried about Shirley Temple growing up but her transformation to teenager could have been achieved with better handling - Deanna Durbin and Judy Garland pulled it off, and Temple grew up quite pretty. A Hollywood hypothetical: had this been changed into a musical about Shirley the plucky orphan and her adventures in this colourful land, then I believe it would have been a hit.

Admittedly event then it wouldn't have been perfect - that weird sequence with the unborn children is creepy, the plot seems to start and stop.  But it deserved better.

Movie review - "Susannah of the Mounties" (1939) ***

Kids who were the sole survivor of an Indian massacre were an old Western standby so in a way its kind of surprising it took 20th Century Fox a while to get around to using that as a plot for a Shirley Temple film. Or maybe not... it does mean this is a more serious vehicle for the moppet, beginning with her severely traumatised after her family and friends have been wiped out.

But this enables her to be an orphan and charm a military outpost, something she was very experienced at doing. For variety it's set in Canada and the cowboys are mounties; there is Randolph Scott wearing a mustache that makes him look really old as the main mountie dude, whom Temple kind of seems romantically keen on; a young Indian is held hostage for Shirley to have tween urst with; Margaret Lockwood (looking not very comfortable) pops up as Scott's love interest, who Temple spends most of her time trying to separate; the Indians are extremely whimpy except Victor Jory and a few firebrands; Shirley puts her head into the lion's den by visiting the Indian camp at the end to save the day. Shirley also takes a few drags on a peace pipe and gets a head ache.

There are many echoes of Wee Willie Winkie; it isn't as good but there's action and novelty.

Movie review - "The Little Princess" (1939) ***1/2

A schizophrenic Shirley Temple film, as if Daryl F Zanuck was trying to cover his bets - its an adaptation of a classic children's novel, which is very British in its nature. Indeed, I was surprised how British it was - set during the Boer War, with talk of sorting out the Boers, celebrations on Mafeking night, Indian colonial subjects and cameos from Queen Victoria; there's also lots of costumes and set design (as in you really notice it). The drama is mostly treated straight and quite seriously; there's several intense moments such as Shirley talking to severely traumatised war veterans in hospital, and going into hysterics over her father.

To make sure all this pro British sentiment and full on drama isn't too much, they also throw in some poorly motivated song and dance numbers (one of the people who work at the girls school is a former song and dance man) and a dream ballet sequence. The latter is reminiscent of the dream sequence in Heidi; other features from previous Shirley Temple films include Marcia Mae Jones (here a bitch instead of a friend), Cesar Romero as an Indian friend, plus mean girls and little old ladies as well as kind friends (working class girl).

It is odd to see Shirley playing a Pom and a rich girl, although the latter is soon fixed up. There's a terrific cast - Anita Louise and Richard Greene are engaging lovers, Sybil Jason is a likeable cockney girl, Jones is a great bitch and Mary Nash a wonderful villain. It's all a little bit inconsistent (and how happy is the ending when her dad is clearly still brain injured from his war experiences) but this is easily one of her best movies.

Movie review - "Just Around the Corner" (1938) ***

Shirley Temple later became a Republican - as most child stars seem to do in Hollywood - so it's fun to see scenes between her and her father (Charles Farrell) where he explains about the Depression to her: people are nagging Uncle Sam, he's giving out too much money, they've got to help him for a change. No doubt Daryl F Zanuck would approve!

It does provide the plot for the movie - Shirley gets inspired, but thinks a crochety old millionaire called Sam is the Uncle Sam and sets about arranging a benefit concert for him. This is a fun idea and this was a fun movie, with Shirley getting up to escapades around a hotel (her father is a now impoverished architect working as a tradie at a hotel), playing pranks on a butler and having urst with a young rich kid.

None of it is original but its high spirits with an excellent support cast (including Joan Davis, Bert Lahr, Claude Gillingwater and Bill Robinson who dances with Shirley). Amanda Duff is an engaging love interest, Farrell impressed me in a thankless role and there's some cute stuff with Shirley mucking around with the equivalent of the Dead End Kids (she pretends to be a G-woman).

Movie review - "Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm" (1938) **1/2

A surprising number of Western stars wound up supporting/co-starring with Shirley Temple: Gary Cooper, Joel McCrea, and here Randolph Scott. They actually worked a lot better than some of the whimpier male leads because they seemed less dodgy.

Like Poor Little Rich Girl this is a remake of an old Mary Pickford movie with a show biz subplot shoved in. Even with that the movie feels padded - Shirley wins a radio singing competition but doesn't know it, goes to live on a farm with an aunt who doesn't want her to sing, the singing comp organiser (Randolph Scott) happens to be a neighbour and recognises her, but she does it on the sly to not upset the aunt.

It's a dodgy flimsy script stuffed with musical numbers - Shirley even does a medley of her old hits from earlier films as well as a dance with Bill Robinson (in his last appearance with her - he's a servant but this is the least racist Temple movie to feature blacks). It kind of feels lazy story wise, with nasty relatives turning up to take her away (including William Demarest who is too likeable for his role - he should have played a Shirley ally), and a romance, and a kindly aunt whose heart is melted.

But the cast is excellent (including players like Helen Westley and Slim Summerville), Jack Haley adds some comedy, Scott has a fun romance with Gloria Stuart, Phyllis Brooks is a pretty rival love interest.

Movie review - "Heidi" (1937) ***1/2

It is to the great credit of Daryl F Zanuck that although he made millions cranking out crappy Shirley Temple films, he then tried to improve them - basing them on stronger source material, working on the scripts, hiring better writers and directors, etc. The result is the quality of her vehicles actually improved as they went along, and the 1937/38 period saw her hitting her peak.

This isn't as good as Wee Willie Winkie (Allan Dwan was good but no John Ford) but still holds up well, especially in the second half. The first bit is solid rather than sensational, with Shirley's Heidi arriving in a little village and melting the heart of her gruff grandpa (Jean Hersholt). Then Heidi gets kidnapped by a nasty lady and is forced to be a slave for a rich crippled girl... then the climax involves an attempt to sell her to the gypsies.

There's lots of emotional, heart wringing scenes - Shirley really going for it, screaming as she's separated from her grandfather; the little crippled girl learning to walk (yeah yeah, I know, but it works); singing "Silent Night". Mary Nash goes all out as the villain, Marcia Mae Jones is good value as the crippled girl and Arthur Treacher fun as a butler. There is a silly fantasy song number and a bit too much God, but even that has camp value.

Movie review - "Wee Willie Winkie" (1937) ****1/2

An absolutely first rate picture - easily one of Shirley Temple's best and it ranks surprisingly high in John Ford's output too, although common critical perception does not seem to treat it so. My own feeling is that having to make a Shirley Temple vehicle helped the director pull back on his indulgences - he was given limitations (all Shirley Temple vehicles had inherent limitations) but rose to them magnificently.

I was surprised how Fordian this was given it starred little Shirley - it's very much also a life-at-an-outpost movie in the vein of Fort Apache, They Were Expendable or She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, with the difference being it's Imperial India 1897, the soldiers are British and the "Indians" are Pathans. There's Victor McLaglen (excellent form) as a sergeant, details of fort life (drills, routine, comic relief, funerals, outbursts of action, ritual, parades, waltzes), the women are part of people's lives, there is much talk of duty.

There are still familiar Shirley Temple elements - she melts hearts of common soldiers, gruff sergeants, natives and crusty superiors, battles snobs, helps matchmake - but it's done incredibly well. Shirley is a very positive role model here - sensible, smart, questioning the bloodthirsty ways of British and Indian, brave, fun, always up for a laugh, keeping things in perspective. She doesn't brook any nonsense from Victor McLaglen or C Aubrey Smith, both of whom adore her and with whom she has great chemistry. There are also some lovely moments with Cesar Romero, as a local chieftan - none of it has the whiff of dodginess that hung over other Shirley films. (Shirley even has her first kind of romance, via a bantering relationship with a cocky drummer boy).

The actors who play Shirley's widowed mother and mother's lover aren't that great, but their scenes are handled well and it's actually a decent sub plot - he romances mum at the dance while there's an attack, and C Aubrey Smith rouses on him about duty. (From what I recall the love interest isn't reall redeemed, either - he's arrested and that's that.)

There is some British Imperial propaganda, but its mostly about keeping the peace, doing duty and encouraging tribespeople to settle down and make money rather than fight, and why can't we talk instead of shoot each other. The ending isn't that realistic, with Shirley brokering a peace treaty, but is enjoyable wish fulfilment and is a lot more positive than many Hollywood movies from this (or any) area.

Superb photography, vigorously shot action, a wonderful death scene from McLaglen, with Shirley unaware he is dying, and a fellow soldier playing the bagpipes (the movie does struggle to recover from this, but the death serves to motivate her action in the third act). Temple regarded this as her best movie and she was probably right.

Movie review - "Stowaway" (1936) ***

An actually really decent Shirley Temple film, helped by the novelty of the setting - war-torn China, where little Shirley is an orphan (missionary parents were killed) who winds up in Shanghai fleeing a warlord attack. She hooks up with millionaire Robert Young, who adds some badly needed professional polish - male leads were often weak and/or creepy in Temple films and Young achieves the no mean feat of not looking like a kiddie fiddler. He's helped by the fact he has a bit of a character and emotional journey to play - to wit, a spoilt playboy who matures by looking after Shirley - and has a nice romantic subplot where he falls for Alice Faye, who is engaged to someone else.

I did feel for that someone else at times - while a dull stick obsessed with his mother and working in Bangkok (I wonder what happened to him in World War Two?) he didn't really deserve Faye leading him on.

Still, there is lots of colourful 20th Century Fox backlot production value, Shirley speaking Chinese, singing a few good songs, imitating Al Jolson (there's also a Chinese guy imitating Bing Crosby), shipboard shenanigans, a kindly judge and a bossy old lady.

Movie review - "Dimples" (1936) **

Charles Dickens was famous for tales of orphans, colourful characters and poverty, so it's surprising in a way that he was never adapted into a Shirley Temple film (maybe they were afraid of making Oliver Twist a girl)... but his influence is all over this vehicle, set in 1850s New York.

Shirley is living with Dickensian pickpocket grandfather, Frank Morgan, and a loyal dopey black servant (Stepin Fetchit). She charms a rich old lady (Jane Darwell) and winds up in an early production of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" then in a minstrel show. There's a subplot about a young theatre producer dumping his honest fiancee.

Like all too many Shirley films of the 30s it is full of racist moments - Stepin Fetchit's performance, various actors in blackface. (Associate producer was Southerner Nunnally Johnson whose other 30s movies have similar racist bits eg Prisoner of Shark Island.) But when it steers clear of that this is quite enjoyable, with the Dickens flavour suiting Shirley, the star in good form (her dancing kept getting better and better) and Frank Morgan offering excellent support.