The Love Parade - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Love Parade Reviews

Page 1 of 2
Super Reviewer
February 8, 2016
want to see this because it was nominated for best picture at the oscars and as a best picture by NBR
½ August 29, 2014
Frothy, incredibly sophisticated Lubitsch musical comedy. MacDonald sings "Dream Lover," and Chevalier is a delight. Great supporting work from Lane and Roth.
December 11, 2013
Enjoyed this the most out of the MacDonald/Chevalier/Lubitsch "musicals." This is the only one that actually feels like a musical as well, having more than two songs. Along with being very lovely Jeanette MacDonald has a pretty voice. Maurice Chevalier doesn't even annoy me in this movie, as he has with the other ones I've seen him in. The story is pretty light, but I found it interesting enough. I think it's gender politics is the most interesting thing about it. About halfway through the movie, Chevalier's character becomes a bit of a dick. Although he didn't seem to mind "doing nothing" as a Count his whole life before marrying the queen, he suddenly takes offense about it once married. Although most likely unqualified to balance a checkbook, suddenly he hands in a "government budget" that he wants to be implemented, and goes on a hissy fit and whines when it's not and blames Macdonald for clearly his insecurities with his ego. He can't seem to be content that his wife is the one with importance and power, and whines and complains the rest of the movie. He then uses Macdonald's feelings for him against herself, where at the end of the movie he requires her to "surrender" her royal power basically over to him (and of course in the dynamics of husband and wife). Although this is supposed to be a happy ending due to the times it was made, it is really interesting to see from a "modern" perspective that in a way Jeanette MacDonald's Queen basically loses her position and job as head of state to a weak man who can't abide her higher position over him (even though he knew the terms when he married her). I'm probably making more of this than I should, and it clearly wasn't the intention at the time, but it's what stands out to me watching it now.
Super Reviewer
December 11, 2013
I am really a fan of the Chevalier films. They have a modern quality despite the fact that they exist at the beginning of the film making era. Here we have a comedy of errors that is not tacky and speaks to genuine feelings.
Super Reviewer
½ December 26, 2012
His introduction to Hollywood earned him 6 Academy Award nominations, and its glamour is shown since the very first, impressive shot. Random musical numbers were rare by the time but Lubitsch was careful enough to adapt them to the plot so he didn't resemble a lunatic. Joyous performances and funny in a pure way, you can really spot the elements of the romantic comedy genre in Hollywood.

½ December 21, 2012
another early talkie from the master Lubistch musical lavishly filmed but still dated.
Super Reviewer
May 18, 2012
lubitsch's first sound film and the first hollywood musical with integrated songs, it's delightful to watch and remarkably modern for 1929. the gender swap and 'battle of the sexes' themes would soon become de rigueur and the film's stars, chevalier and jeanette macdonald would have long careers in hollywood musicals
August 21, 2011
A womanizing military attache finds himself married to the Queen of his country and a battle of the sexes ensues. This is another classic pre-code musical courtesy of Ernst Lubitsch and Maurice Chevalier. The film will be viewed as rather sexist today and the songs are not that memorable but the wit, charm and filmmaking artistry will definitely win most people over (yours truly included). Oh, and it's also quite funny.
July 26, 2011
I saw little to no people call this movie bad.
½ May 30, 2011
Delightfully naughty, with a sweet innocence.
April 10, 2011
Did not love this one although I do recognize it is a charming musical that was very popular back in 1929. Maurice Chevalier was captivating even though I fell asleep twice.
½ February 17, 2011
The Early Days of the Movie Musical

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure why [i]Oklahoma![/i] gets so much press as allegedly being the first American musical. Let's even leave aside the [i]Show Boat[/i] debate. If the important issue is a combination of a cohesive story and relevant songs, Hollywood was making musicals long before [i]Oklahoma![/i] was even thought of. Of course, the origins of few art forms are traceable to a specific moment and a specific work, and there are often arguments decades after the fact as to whether certain works qualify or not. Definitions can be slippery things. In fact, there are people who will argue the definition of a movie musical. However, I will say that this only barely meets my standards for a "book musical," in that I don't think the songs are as well integrated as people keep telling me they are.

Count Alfred Renard (Maurice Chevalier) is a military attaché from the imaginary country of It Doesn't Matter. He is stationed in Paris, which he loves. This being pre-Code, it is a joke that he's sleeping around, and with married women to boot. His conduct is considered so appalling that the ambassador (E. H. Calvert) sends him home again. In part because one of the women he's sleeping with is the ambassador's wife. At home, Queen Louise (Jeanette MacDonald) is being pressured to marry by her advisors, as single queens generally are. However, she points out that few men are inclined to just sit around and let their wives run things. A man wouldn't marry a woman for a crown if the crown didn't come with any power. But she meets Alfred, and he seems like enough of a gadabout that he'd welcome a cushy chance to have no responsibility. He thinks he'd like that, too. But of course if he did, hilarity would not ensue. In that 1929 hilarity where it's vaguely uncomfortable to the modern perspective.

Arguably, this movie should hold a record or tie for a record or something for percentage of Oscars it was nominated for. This is because there were a lot fewer Oscars in those days; it was eligible for all of them. Jeanette MacDonald wasn't nominated for Best Actress, and the screenplay wasn't nominated, either. It didn't win any, but it was nominated for the remaining six. This year, there are twenty-four categories. The highest total number any given film is eligible for is eighteen, though no movie has ever been nominated for that many. If it had, that would be the same percentage, and maybe digging around would produce another film which managed to be nominated in three-quarters of that year's categories. It would have had to have been a long time ago, though, probably not long after this one came out. [i]Return of the King[/i] was nominated for fewer than half in its eligible year.

The film makes the point that Queen Louise is treating her husband like a wife. She schedules him bridge and tennis and tells him to take a nap in the afternoon. Her servants won't take any commands from him. They won't even bring his breakfast until she is there, and if I saw that right, he didn't get breakfast when it was established that she wasn't coming. What the film never considers is that maybe a wife wouldn't have been happy with that, either. Yes, it's a shame that his talents were wasted when he wanted to do more. He produces a balanced budget which won't require the loan the country is trying to procure from I think Afghanistan, and they refuse to even look at it. That's wrong. But would it be any better if Maurice Chevalier had refused to look at a budget Jeanette MacDonald had produced?

I will say that it's a lot more civilized than it used to be. When Alfred gets frustrated, he decides to move to Paris. He's going to get a divorce. Oh, it may well bankrupt her country--since they're ignoring that budget he produced--but it's still all he plans to do. Whereas This sort of thing brings to my mind the battle Mary Queen of Scots had with her second husband. He was declared king, but it seems there were two kinds of king in those days. He was king consort, but he wanted to be king regnant. She had excellent reasons for not giving it to him, though it still didn't buy her reign that much time. I think, though, that it was his desire for it and her desire for him which brought her down. I guess the main difference here is that Alfred wasn't as much of a petulant child. Adolescent, yes. A little more rightfully upset, honestly. But it would never occur to him to do all the things Darnley did to his wife, which is good for both Alfred and Louise and for her kingdom.
Super Reviewer
½ January 1, 2011
A nice musical, pretty funny, especially towards the end, but it reminds me of The Taming of the Shrew a bit. Anyway, it's a fun musical.
½ June 29, 2010
lavish & good but not my cup of tea.
½ February 19, 2010
A charming musical. Outstanding art direction, costumes and sound, some really great songs. Suave performance from Maurice Chevalier, good support from Lupino Lane and Lillian Roth. Stylishly light direction from Ernst Lubitsch. Jeannette McDonald's performance is a bit wooden though. Overall though it is a fine film.
September 16, 2009
tiene mucho carisma y me hizo reír a carcajadas
August 30, 2009
This kind of musical is so much better than those cinemascope, 1950's, 3-hour ones that are supposedly classics. This kicks West Side Story and The Sound of Music in the ass. This is funny, sweet, and has an actually good love story at its heart.
½ April 13, 2009
Another nice Lubitsch-Chevalier-McDonald musical comedy. The sexual politics are pretty effed, and the runtime feels padded, but the performances, especially by the supporting players, make it worth a look.
½ December 27, 2008
Pre-code, which is half the fun of it, as you see the maneuverings used to get around the obvious. Still, I liked some of his stuff better.
½ November 4, 2008
Pure Lubitsch although very political in-correct
Maurice Chevalier is charismatic and Jeanette MacDonald is a goddess!
Page 1 of 2