On With the Show!

1929 "It had to come! This newest triumph of Science and Art- Motion Pictures in Natural Colors!"
5.8| 1h44m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 13 July 1929 Released
Producted By: Warner Bros. Pictures
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

With unpaid actors and staff, the stage show Phantom Sweetheart seems doomed. To complicate matters, the box office takings have been robbed and the leading lady refuses to appear. Can the show be saved?

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Warner Bros. Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

atlasmb Released in 1929, On With the Show was filmed during the transitional period when silent films became talkies. Some films seemed little more than a collection of vaudeville acts strung together (a tradition that lasted, to some extent, even through the forties). Much of the acting is over the top and overly broad, because silent film stars were directed that way and vaudeville/stage performers have to play to the last seat in the theater. It is precisely the fact that OWTS captures that transitional period that makes it so interesting and so entertaining.The film is basically a presentation of a stage musical, similar to Showboat, with some backstage scenes involving characters in the stage show. In its attempt at authenticity, the camera often films too broadly, sometimes including the entire proscenium arch.The sets for the play with the film are beautiful, even when viewed in B&W. The play is a lavish production, sometimes reminiscent of a Busby Berkley production. The action includes a motorcycle, mounted horsemen and dogs running across the stage.In the dance numbers, we see plenty of minstrel-like troupers dancing in rows. The actual dances they perform are rather amateurish by today's standards. Only the black tap dancers display superior talents and demonstrate that tap dancing has not changed so much, fundamentally, over the years. It was already a mature art form.A few performances had little to do with the stage play, if anything. But that seems true to the times. Most notable is Ethel Waters. who performs two enjoyable numbers that highlight her vocal talents.Joe E. Brown is a lot of fun to watch. His comedic timing is precise in this film. He also performs a specialty dance that shows him to be a real athlete.Three actresses play significant parts in the story. It is interesting to note their backgrounds.Betty Compson plays Nita, the actress who portrays the Phantom Girl in the musical. Betty had a strong background in Vaudeville, where she started out as a teen violinist. She appeared in 9 films release in 1929.Sally O'Neill plays the part of Kitty, the coat check girl who saves the play by going on stage. Sally also had a solid vaudeville background and appeared in 8 films released in 1929.Louise Fazenda plays an actress whose sole contribution to the play is a wild, offstage laugh. Louise had a background in silent films, but made the transition to talkies. She appeared in 10 films released in 1929.I found much of the music enjoyable. Some had silly lyrics, which was common. Consider the lyrics "Drink your julep with your two lips"--fun to hear.In the end, OWTS is very dated and that is why it is such a hoot to watch. It captures many bits of the era's humor and preserves actual pieces of vaudeville.
MartinHafer "On With The Show!" is a very typical musical of its period. It features lots of stage-bound singing and dancing--like you'd see in films like "The Broadway Melody", "42nd Street" and "Footlight Parade"--but even more stagy in style. And, as for the plot, again it's pretty familiar. The show is in financial trouble and it always seems on the verge of being shut down. And then, out of the blue, someone robs the box office! Can these troopers manage to find the crook and become big stars?! Well, I assume the odds are DEFINITELY in their favor! Historically speaking, "On With The Show!" was a pretty important film. It was the first sound film made entirely in color. BUT, there are two important caveats. First, the color was Two-Color Technicolor and even when restored to its original look, it isn't true color but tends to have red-orange and blue-green tints. Colors like yellow and tertiary colors simply aren't possible with this early process. Second, and most importantly, the only surviving print is black & white (though a minute of color was recently discovered)! How I would love to have a time machine to go back and see it in its original form (and so I could invest a few bucks in Microsoft around 1980).The film features Arthur Lake (who gained fame in the Blondie and Dagwood films), Joe E. Brown and Betty Compson. And, although it's a small role, you get to see and hear Ethel Waters as well (and, not surprisingly, she sings her standard "Am I Blue"). Some other highlights would include Brown's really athletic and exciting dancing (I never knew he could do that!), the costumes beginning at the minute marks (and I felt sorry for the guys dressed as guards), Interesting film techniques such as rack of clothes at about 9 minutes into the film, 3/4 angles of performers (and it looks like you are in the audience watching a revue) and lots of backstage shots make it seem like you are there at the show instead of just watching a film. As for sound, it GENERALLY is very good for an early talkie. When the actors speak, they are easy to understand and clear--and not as stiff and obviously standing very near microphones like in many early sound films. But, the singing is seriously tinny and poor. It's a shame the film doesn't have captions--it would help to understand what they are singing, as I was clueless.As for the film's watchability today, I would agree with most of the other reviewers who feel that most would probably be turned off by the film's antiquated style. Compared to musicals made just a few years later, it's VERY dated and I'd never show this film to someone who isn't familiar with the genre and who isn't open-minded. However, if like me and most of these other reviewers you DO like transitional films (early talkies), then by all means watch it. Just understand the technical problems with the film and put them in a historical context. In other words, don't blame "On With The Show!" for not being more than it is because it's among the film musicals and so much we later came to expect just hadn't been developed yet. The only thing I can't forgive is the INCREDIBLY talky ending. Wow...she just won't shut up and I couldn't wait for the film to end! It's a shame, as up until then I was rather impressed by the movie.By the way, get a load of Calvinnme's review and his comments about Sally O'Neill! I couldn't agree more--and I'll buy the arrows! Lake wasn't great either and I am glad he found his niche as Dagwood--he certainly hadn't found it here in "On With The Show!"!
lshelhamer Early Warner Bros. musical, stagy, slow, and mostly of historical interest. The poor quality film available for viewing doesn't help. It's interesting to see how much the movie musical improved between this movie and, for instance, "42nd Street" (also a Warner Bros production) just a few years later. The dialog portions are very static, presumably due to the requirements of early sound pick up systems. However, the result is to bring the action to a halt. The overacting is almost unintentionally laughable. Betty Compson finally has a decent scene near the end of the movie. Arthur Lake is just plain irritating, and I couldn't even warm up to Joe E. Brown. Some of the singers seems to be recorded live, and others poorly dubbed. By far, the most interesting scenes are Ethel Waters singing "Am I Blue", and the quartet of black tap dancers who are unidentified.
drednm A true backstage musical (like MURDER AT THE VANITIES) that weaves the onstage and backstage action into one plot. ON WITH THE SHOW is a tad creaky but bad sound and hammy performances aside it was a total pleasure.A fascinating look at what 20s musicals were really like: the stage crammed with performers, long numbers, reprises of the main tunes, etc. The show within a show, THE PHANTOM SWEETHEART is a loony plantation musical that looks like a cheap rip-off of SHOW BOAT but that's of little consequence since the "real story" occurs backstage. It's a plot we've seen before and seemingly borrows from every contemporary musical yo ever saw.But several of the performers are total standouts. Betty Compson plays the temperamental star but has little to do until the last section of the film. She has a great face, a good voice, and for some reason is a fave of mine. She's a good old "broad" with a heart of gold and is excellent in her final scenes. Joe E. Brown is also very good, although I think his eccentric dance was repeated in BRIGHT LIGHTS a few years later. Both have star quality.Louise Fazenda has an odd role (she laughs) but is always likable. Ethel Waters is terrific singing "Am I Blue?" and "Birmingham Bertha" but is not involved in the backstage plot.The rest of the cast doesn't come off so well. Arthur Lake is the juvenile lead, William Bakewell and Sally O'Neill are the "innocents," Sam Hardy is the producer, Wheeler Oakman is the nefarious Mr. Wallace, Lee Moran (related to Ray Bolger?) is the stage manager, and the Fairbanks Twins dance and cause trouble.Compson has a great entrance line when heading onstage someone says something like "there's Nita French!" She turns and says, "In the flesh, baby, in the flesh!" while clutching her shear robe around her......