Goodbye, My Fancy (1951) User Reviews

one of Crawford's Warner Bros films

[blanche-2 · 6/10 · 8 November 2012]

"Goodbye, My Fancy" stars Joan Crawford, Robert Young, Eve Arden, and Frank Lovejoy and was made in 1951. It was originally a play by Fay Kanin that enjoyed a run of over a year. Madeleine Carroll starred.

Crawford in 1951 was 44, and in those days, after an actress turned 30, she went into supporting roles. It's to Crawford's credit that she stayed a leading lady well past 30, albeit in lesser films.

This film is actually a good one. Crawford plays a Congresswoman, Agatha Reed, who is invited back to her old college to receive an honorary degree. She is thrilled, for more than one reason. She has happy memories there and has never forgotten her old love and, though she doesn't state it, she's hoping to see him again. Also, she finds it amusing that she's been invited -- she was expelled from the school for staying out all night and didn't graduate.

Agatha and her able assistant (Eve Arden) travel to the college, dogged the entire way by a photographer (Frank Lovejoy) with whom Agatha had an involvement a few years back.

Agatha has filmed a documentary that she wants to show at the school. The film is about what happens when people are denied their freedoms, and deals with book burnings, persecution of teachers, etc. She is shocked to find that there is some question as to whether or not the film will be shown.

"Goodbye, My Fancy" is about going home again, and underneath Agatha having two men interested in her, it makes a statement about McCarthyism which was so rampant at the time. It's also about standing up for what you believe in and having integrity -- true ethics kick in when you've got something to lose.

I saw some comments about Crawford being miscast - I'm not sure why - she played strong career women for many years. The casting is off, but it's not Crawford. It's partly the script and partly the casting. Robert Young is very good as the President -- handsome, charming, and formal. Eve Arden is funny as the assistant, wisecracking her way through the role. Shirley Booth played the role on Broadway.

The role that's miscast is Frank Lovejoy as Matt Cole. The role called for a macho, attractive tough guy and instead we get the rather sloppy, wisecracking Lovejoy. The ending of the film seemed to come out of nowhere.

Otherwise, fairly enjoyable, good cast.

Correction of location information.

[hweisberge · 6/10 · 11 June 2017]

I'm glad to see that TCM has chosen to include this film in its lineup. I have, however, noted an error in the TCM and Wikipedia summaries regarding filming location. Both cite Occidental College in Eagle Rock, Calif. as the site for outdoor scene filming. In fact, most if not all were shot on the University of Redlands campus in Redlands, Calif. I attended the U. of R. for 4 years and graduated in the outdoor Greek Theater that appears in the film. Other scenes show the U. of R.'s distinctive chapel with the San Bernardino Mountains beyond, as well as the school's administration building on Ad Hill, its quadrangle and residence halls. The movie was shot two years before I enrolled there. Perhaps Warner Bros. had originally intended to film Goodbye My Fancy on the Occidental campus (much closer to the studio) and for whatever reason had to switch at the last minute to Redlands, but the planned LA area location remained on the studio's records.

The ending of this film absolutely 100% ruined this film

[nomoons11 · 5/10 · 15 October 2011]

I can't describe the disappointment at the ending in this film. It was like a punch in the gut.

I don't agree that Ms. Crawford was miscast in this. I think she did an admirable job. My main problem is the story that we get weaves to an ending that's just...stupid...i dunno...I can't think of anything else to match how I feel.

The basic outline is a congresswoman gets an invite to get an honorary degree at her old college that she was expelled from. She's happy to accept but at the same time, an old boyfriend from the war turns up 5 years later as if he's still in her life. She obviously hasn't thought a thing about him but he just happens to be a Life magazine photographer and will be at the College to photograph the story.

Well, she accepts the honorary degree because the love of her life is the school president. Before they give her a degree they want to show a film of a speech she made but one of the main trustees of the college doesn't like it and wants it not to be shown. In the meantime she and the president decide to get married. She soon finds out that he's like all college presidents in that...he bows to the alumni pressure on things as they decide they want the film to not be shown. She doesn't like this because she sees that he's weak. By and by the old boyfriend keeps throwing jibes at her any time he can to break up her idea of him. She decides not to marry the president and get back together with the annoying guy who won't take no for an answer.

This film was basically a backdrop for the communist witch hunt times. It was hot off the presses at the time this film was made. It's not a hidden plot in the film, it's disguised a bit as "free speech in education" but to me the whole film hinged on the 3 leads and their personal issues...and she chooses the annoying guy who has nuthin but ill will in mind. How does this make women look? She chooses the guy that keeps harassing her? The president makes an error in not letting the speech be heard...but then decides to go ahead with it and she says...nah...but they remain friends. Gimme a break.

It comes down to Crawfords character showed no interest in the guy she ends up with throughout the entire film. There's no lead-in anywhere to show he would be the one she walks away with. This wasn't a bad film at all really. I just can't recommend a film with a really dumb ending like this. Total disappointment.

An engrossing romance with a strong anti-McCarthyism subtext

[bergman-6 · 5 April 2000]

What plays on the surface as a "romantic triangle" film carries a strong anti-McCarthyism message. Robert Young is the once-idealistic President of an exclusive Women's College who years earlier had trysted with Joan Crawford, a Congresswoman who has made a film depicting aspects of injustice. Crawford wants to reunite with Young and have the film played during Graduation Weekend. The school's trustees don't want the film shown, thinking it too "dangerous" for their students to see. The characters' arguments about democratic values play well with a modern audience, and both the political and the romantic aspects of the plot unfold in an engrossing and entertaining manner.

Surprise Ending

[traceybulldog · 6/10 · 8 June 2020]

I was shocked that Crawford ended up with Frank Lovejoy at the end of this movie. First of all, Robert Young was a much bigger star, and the stars usually get the girl in movies of this era. While I've seen dozens of movies with Robert Young, I don't think I've ever seen Frank Lovejoy in another film.

But mostly it's that his character is such a jerk, I can't imagine why Crawford would choose to be with him. He basically blackmails her, stalks her, and undermines her throughout this movie. While Young's character wasn't perfect, he did stand up for her at the end and admitted his mistakes.

Whose idea was it for Joan to choose the photographer? He's rough and crude and not even attractive in my opinion.

Forgotten Crawford drama

[nickandrew · 6/10 · 27 December 2002]

This was one of Crawford's last films under her Warner Brothers contract and was probably here first big box-office failure since her MGM days eight years earlier. The film is not too bad, but not as good as "Mildred Pierce," "Possessed" or "Flamingo Road." Crawford plays a congress woman who returns to her alma mater to receive an honorary degree, but finds romance with professor Robert Young.

IMHO, Crawford is miscast here

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 7/10 · 3 June 2011]

Although I gave this film a "7" last time around, I was still a bit harsh about it. Now, having watched it a second time, my "7" will remain, but I'm going to chill out a bit about the film.

Here a brash Congresswoman (Crawford) Agatha Reed returns to her alma mater to receive an honorary degree, although her prime motive is to rekindle an old romance with the college president (Robert Young). But, a reporter is after her, too (Frank Lovejoy).

It's not the "Mommie Dearest" thing, but -- particularly this late in her career -- I have a difficult time seeing Joan Crawford as a sentimental character, or even being in a romantic comedy. But, Crawford comes across pretty well in the other half of her role here --a Congresswoman. So. it's a balance.

Having Crawford as a brass Congresswoman is just about enough brashness for any film, but here we also have -- as her secretary -- Eve Arden. Arden excelled at being brash, and is no less so here. And only she could have pulled this off without the film going overboard in the brashness department.

In a way, it almost seems to me that Robert Young was trying out his "Father Knows Best" persona here...just 3 years before that iconic role came his way. I enjoy him here; this is one of his better performances.

It's a little difficult to understand why a mellow Young would be so attracted to the brash Congresswoman here. That's one of my biggest problems with this film. She seems more suited to Frank Lovejoy's newspaperman character...but of course, in real life they'd almost certainly end up in a divorce court a few years down the road.

There's an interesting subplot about a teacher's freedom to teach students to think...although it falls flat at the end of the film...seems to have been forgotten about.

The bottom line here, for me, was why this film grates on me a bit. And I think I finally figured it out. Joan Crawford as a Congresswoman...well maybe. But Joan Crawford fighting for education and freedom and democracy? I just can't buy that. Pretty good movie, but terribly miscast in terms of Crawford. (And her eyes drive me crazy...spooky!).

Well worth watching it...once. Oops. Guess I should say twice.

It Is Not Joan!

[olarko · 6/10 · 9 June 2006]

While this picture ranks as a pretty heady Joan Crawford fantasy, this picture is NOT Joan! It is, however, Joan as she wanted to be seen -- younger than her peer Clara Bow, glamorous, caring about mothers and constituents and others, and hopelessly romantic. Truth be known, her only care for others was for her fans -- that they continued to write her, to adore her, to idolize what they believed to be her! Only one other reviewer tells the truth about the tawdry life of Joan before she was 18; none tells of the continuance of that life when she embarked on Hollywood and had her three or four careers there.

That same reviewer, incidentally, is the only one who mentions that "Goodbye, My Fancy" was a hit play before it fell into the clutches of La Crawford, so while its premise and material might be heady for behind-the-times Hollywood, Broadway and the "road" had seen and enjoyed the play for a while before Hollywood tackled it! The 6-star rating is for the fact that this Crawford epic is meatier than the films-about-nothing that she usually made!

While Robert Young played the usual stalwart, faceless, and characterless version of Robert Young that he usually played, and while Eve Arden managed to steal every scene in which she appeared -- even if only in the background -- no one mentions the name of the real man in the film, the really masculine character and actor who could more than handle La Crawford: Frank Lovejoy! He waited in the background, as he says, until she stops playing Little Nell from the Country and comes back to Earth! He and Arden are easily the best actors -- and give the best performances -- in the film.

"Goodbye, My Fancy" is better for these two actors, for the rest of the supporting cast, and for the production values than its two stars -- Crawford and Young, in case you forgot -- deserved!

Not much fancy here

[TheLittleSongbird · 4/10 · 23 August 2020]

Despite the low rating and mixed reviews, there was no doubt about seeing 'Goodbye, My Fancy' anyway as part of my quest to see as much of Joan Crawford's filmography as possible. Crawford gave so many great performances, as well as some not so good ones during her twilight period, and Eve Arden was always a plus to any film she was in. Vincent Sherman was an uneven director but did do some very good films such as 'Mr Skeffington' and 'The Damned Don't Cry'.

'Goodbye My Fancy' is not one of those very good films. Actually thought it was towards being of Crawford's weaker films, though she did do worse, and am going to agree with those that felt that she was miscast. That's being said with a heavy heart. It does have its good things, namely two good performances that remarkably rises above their material, but 'Goodbye My Fancy' fails to live up to its potential and Crawford deserved a lot better than this.

Shall start off with talking about the good things. It looks good, the one exception being Arden's frightful hair here that does not flatter her. Crawford looks typically elegant and the photography is at its best luminous. Arden has some nice witty lines.

The two good performances come from Arden and Robert Young. There was no surprise that Arden would be good, she very seldom disappointed and despite deserving better she brought a dry wit and elegance to what she is given. Young has a rather underwritten character but remarkably his acting wasn't bland, actually found it very distinguished and easy to like with him being by far the most rootable of the three leads.

As said already, Crawford didn't work for me. She tries hard, too hard in fact, and the role needed a lighter touch than what she actually gave it. Here she overacts and it overbalances the film in my view, it was like she thought she was acting in a melodrama. Worse was Frank Lovejoy, who really got on my nerves fast to the extent that one is at a loss in understanding what anybody sees in him. Lurene Tuttle could have done with a toning down, too shrill. Very few of the characters are easy to get behind, Matt especially is just obnoxious, due to being annoying or dull. Woody held my attention most and that is namely down to how Arden played her.

Moreover, the script could have done with a lot more bite and also subtlety, as well as wit. Too filmed play-like and on the too heavy side. The story tended to be dull and the primary subplot felt underdeveloped. Will agree too that the ending is a real let down, very contrived with a final decision that doesn't make sense in the slightest and feels like a cheat. Sherman directs with too much of a heavy hand and fails to do any kind of reigning in, while also being quite leaden.

In conclusion, rather lacklustre with two good performances and nice production values but Crawford fans best look elsewhere. 4/10

all the pieces

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 22 July 2023]

Hard-driving U. S. Congresswoman Agatha Reed (Joan Crawford) is invited back to her alma mater to receive an honorary degree despite being expelled as a student. She had a fling with a professor, Dr. James Merrill (Robert Young), who is now the President of the university. Her wartime fling Life magazine photographer Matt Cole (Frank Lovejoy) still holds the flame for her and has been sent to cover the event. The old romances and progressive politics soon become drama during the reunion.

Agatha is the old "modern girl" who sacrificed love for a career. I wouldn't mind more time with Ellen Griswold and a couple of students. It might work better if Pitt is a woman although that would be tough for the time. That whole story of fighting-the-system needs a bit of work. This love triangle does struggle to lay out the new path of romance in modernity. I can see the idea, but it's not really working. Jim is the more obvious match and she definitely spends enough time on him. Matt should go with Woody. They are a perfect personality match or maybe he should just be cut out. This movie has all the pieces, but they aren't quite fitted properly. It may be too much stuff and too many pieces.

So incredibly awful

[HotToastyRag · 2/10 · 13 April 2019]

I'm sure there is a worse romance to come out of the 1950s, but after watching Goodbye, My Fancy, I can't think of one. This movie is so awful, it's hard to describe; but since that's the purpose of this review, I'll have to try.

Joan Crawford stars as a mannish congresswoman who let love pass her by twenty years ago. Lately, she's had a fling with an obnoxious, coarse, crude magazine reporter Frank Lovejoy. Is this romantic: Frank took a photograph of her sleeping in his train compartment then sent it to her as a threat that he could blackmail her at any time during election season. When Joan gets invited back to the college that expelled her for staying out all night with a man to be given an honorary degree, she jumps at the chance and unfortunately so does Frank. He stalks her down there intent on making trouble, and between his un-romantic, creepy gestures, secretary Eve Arden's Debbie-Downer quips, and Lurene Tuttle's endless screeching, the movie isn't very enjoyable.

Where's Robert Young? He's President of the university, and the man Joan stayed out all night with twenty years ago. They're given a second-chance romance, but underneath it all, there's the feeling that something's going to go wrong. When it finally does, to provide the script with a plot, it's very disappointing and incongruous to the rest of the movie. The film subscribes to the 1950s view of "a woman is nothing without a man" so if you don't agree, you're not going to like it. Joan's extremely masculine features, walk, and speech, seem to make that phrase inapplicable, but she must have insisted on the makeup artist applying an incessant amount of cleavage makeup to convince audiences that she was indeed a woman, who was nothing without a man.

Goodbye, My Fancy Promotes Academic Freedom ***1/2

[edwagreen · 9/10 · 19 November 2013]

A very good Joan Crawford 1951 vehicle. As a successful Congresswoman, she returns to receive an honorary degree from her Alma Mater. There she meets up with an old flame, her former professor, now the college president, a widower with a daughter in the school. They keep hidden the secret that she was expelled from the school years before, but left so as to avoid his embarrassment with the school.

You would think this is a definite comedy when Frank Lovejoy enters the story as a Life camera man sent up to the school to photograph the issue. Appears that the Lovejoy character and Agatha (Crawford) had something going when they were war correspondents. This along with Crawford uniting with Eve Arden, her co-star in 1945's "Mildred Pierce." Wise-cracking as ever, Arden plays Crawford's secretary.

The picture is a good one as it soon turns into one talking about academic freedom and the right to teach what one wants taught as opposed to the stuffy college administration, represented here by Howard St. John.

There is definitely a relation here to the McCarthy witch hunt which was sweeping the nation at the time.

An Ending Marred by Miscasting

[merridew-2 · 6/10 · 1 February 2024]

Most films of this era are predictable. The leading lady winds up with the leading man. She doesn't end up with the guy billed further down. And especially when the leading man is tall, handsome, and elegant, and the other guy is short, gruff, and charmless. Robert Young versus Frank Lovejoy? Young, of course. So it was both jarring and unsatisfying when, in the end, Joan Crawford's Agatha Reed rejects Robert Young for Frank Lovejoy.

It wasn't so much that Agatha rejected Jim Merrill for Matt Cole. It was that she rejected Young for Lovejoy. Take the identical script and cast, say, Gregory Peck as Matt Cole, and the ending would have been neither jarring nor unsatisfying. It's no criticism of Frank Lovejoy. He was simply wrong for the part. And the film's ending suffered as a result.

If it's supposed to be a lightweight confection, someone forgot to inform Miss Crawford...

[moonspinner55 · 4/10 · 3 April 2011]

Miscast, highly-contrived screen-adaptation of Fay Kanin's play about a U.S. Congresswoman and her devoted secretary going back to the same all-girl college the fiery female politician was expelled from twenty years ago. Seems the President of Administration wants to give her an honorary degree, however the Board of Trustees are concerned over the Congresswoman's 'radical' political views--and are as yet unaware of the President and the Congresswoman's scandalous past together! In the lead, Joan Crawford anxiously strides up and down like a woman possessed; the role doesn't require it, and the star's angst is as misplaced here as is Frank Lovejoy's crass portrayal of a combat-photographer from LIFE who used to date Crawford and now wants her back. Joan dabs at her eyes and shoos away male suitors, yet we never know what she's doing to cause so much emotional turmoil (this Congresswoman is all business, no fun). Eve Arden (dry as ever) and Robert Young (with overstated gray streaks in his hair) come off best, but Lurene Tuttle plays to the rafters as Joan's former roommate whose husband just happens to be the most vocal objector on the Board. The young woman who now occupies Crawford's old dorm-room happens to be Young's daughter, who tells the Congresswoman after a chat, "I grew up a little today, thanks to you." A stilted nosegay, designed for blue-hair audiences of another era. ** from ****

An absolutely brilliant, underrated movie

[SHAWFAN · 9 June 2000]

As a devoted fan of old movies which were released when I was a little boy and in those days already an ardent film fan and moviegoer, I was highly surprised to see this film on TCM today because I had never heard of it. But I was certainly glad to have finally caught up with it. As the plot unfolded it became obvious that this must have been originally a finely crafted stage play from the way it led you sympathetically from one character to another and kept you in complete suspense as to different possible denouements for the action. In fact it reminded me of some of Terrence Rattigan's finer plays. But now I see that the play was written by the wife(?) of Garson Kanin. I thoroughly agree with the first review that the romantic side of the plot, though very touching, was by no means all there was to it. Strong statements on wider issues such as academic freedom, ability of big money to call the educational tune, the growing up out of illusions which must be discarded (very Ibsen or George Bernard Shaw) all were pithily and dramatically dealt with and skillfully presented to the audience. The side roles (especially Eve Arden) were all brilliantly executed in that wise-cracking, zany style that made the plays of the 1920s and 30s such favorites. And the main leads (Crawford, Young, etc) were equally outstanding in their emotional portrayals. This film was at least 10-15 years ahead of its time. When the 1960s finally rolled around American youth finally took the blinders off just the way Kanin and the makers of this film advocated. A brilliant and enthralling accomplishment. I wish we could all personally congratulate all the makers of this film of 50 years ago.

Poor Joan...she couldn't not overplay a role if she tried...

[cbryce59 · 5/10 · 13 July 2012]

or even a scene, for that matter. She is a stiff broad in this one, right down to a short, severe stiff hairdo. I am not a huge Joan Crawford fan, although I liked her a lot more in her earlier films, when she was still loose and a bit floppy. Once she became a "star" she changed her whole acting style so she could appear, as her ex-flame says "refeened." It is a shame she couldn't just go with the flow once in a while, instead of playing herself in different occupations.In this one, she is Joan playing a tough congresswoman. But of course she does a classic Joan melt when she sees Robert Young again after all these years...heart on sleeve as always.

She enters the reunion at her old college to the strains of a song being "sung" by by the co-eds, which incorporates her name, yet sounds like a heavenly choir. The girls come forward one by one to hand her a bouquet and each one is a cliché; there is the butch athlete, the drama queen, the good girl, etc and Joan ends up clutching a veritable rose bush as she launches into a speech, gazing off into the bright and shiny future.

Of course Robert Young is now a widower. You'll have to see the movie to see if his marital status changes.

This movie is a fifties movie, in that it is prim, everyone is a cliché of a type, right down to the wise-cracking assistant (Eve Arden)and the women are stuck with the hairdos and clothes of the period, which were never flattering to anyone.

But if you are a Joan fan, she is here, in her glory.

Joan trips and falls...again

[style-2 · 3/10 · 31 January 2005]

Ridiculous fluff, that compounds its error by trying to have meaning. Joan, this time as a congresswoman, Agatha Reed, chairwoman of a committee dedicated to "investigating the high cost of food." Says Congresswoman Reed, "The housewife has been getting it in the neck too long. I'm going to keep fighting long enough so that the American family can take a vacation once a year, see a movie every week and feed an occasional peanut to an elephant." She's all business, but becomes all gushy when she is awarded an honorary degree from Good Hope College, where she was expelled for the crime of having stayed out all night (the parallel to Joan's real life is unmistakable here, as it is in all Joan Movies). The degree causes much consternation on campus ("That would make it the most broad-minded institution in the history of education!") – but Joan is unaware of this as she arrives. The college president, Jim Merrill, played by Robert Young, at his handsomest, happens to be Joan's former teacher – and lover. It was with *him* that she spent the night out, all those years ago, but Joan felt it was better to just disappear rather than try and explain to the skeptical college that they were about to be married. Naturally, this high-profile event will be covered by *Life* magazine – and who does the photographer turn out to be? Yet another of Joan's old lovers – this one, she hung out with in China "during the war", and he thinks Joan might be headed for trouble with her old flame. Eve Arden, playing Joan's assistant, "Woodie," is at her butchest and most smart-alecky in this movie – with her flippant and unnecessary remarks that would make you dismiss her from her job, if you didn't like her so much. But you not only like Eve in this, as in all her roles, you adore her. She is so droll and no-nonsense, you'd like to pay her just to hang around and be one of the boys. When Joan cries upon arriving at her alma mater, Eve tells her it "looks fierce." But Joan says that maybe others only see a collection of buildings, she, Joan, sees youth – herself at 18 "eager, expectant – a little frightened, asking 'What is life? What am I?'" But, of course, if we actually go into depth about Joan at 18, the truth may be a little different.

For me, this is the major problem in watching any Joan movie. You can call her characters whatever you want to, but it's always all Joan, all the time. So, since what we're always seeing is Joan being herself, it's easy to dispense with character's names. It's just that it gets confusing when Joan tries to tell us something patently untrue, like her description of herself at 18 – when we know that at 18, Joan had already been around the block several times. Many men would have described her as eager, and as far as being expectant, she had already had several abortions at this point. But that's a personal problem, and I digress, but I simply wanted to explain why I say things such as "…and then Joan does…" this or that, or "We see Joan as..." when we are not literally watching a home movie.

There is an unintentionally hilarious moment in which Joan is given the Clara Bow doll that she left behind in college – quick arithmetic tells us that Joan and Clara were contemporaries and this is a transparent ploy to make us believe Joan is much younger than she actually looks. It fails. What also fails is an attempt at early-50s political correctness. In the story, Joan has written a book about free speech and made a film (no, not the one about the plumber), and she attracts the attention of an early 50s campus radical, Dr. Pitt, who is about to be fired for his views, which are shockingly similar to Joan's. This is where the movie mysteriously becomes a morality tale –a weak one, to be sure, but perhaps the only thing that keeps it from sliding into oblivion.

Joan in Roz territory

[jjnxn-1 · 9/10 · 12 July 2012]

In a part that was tailor made for Rosalind Russell but that she had to pull out of at the last minute Joan Crawford gets a chance to shade her diamond hard persona somewhat in this tale of remembered love.

It's really a story of how we remember people and how time changes them. The part and Joan aren't a perfect fit but she does try and does a decent job of it. As in Mildred Pierce she and Eve Arden interact wonderfully and their few scenes have a nice snap.

Actually Joan's casting isn't the only one that seems off. While Robert Young is fine as the conflicted college president Frank Lovejoy is wrong as the inquisitive reporter. He was a good tough guy actor but Robert Montgomery or Clark Gable would have been more suitable, the part is the second lead so neither would have considered it.

Someone who is perfectly cast however is the wonderful Lurene Tuttle, as the seemingly simpleminded college chum of Joan. She is funny and touching and steals any scene she's in with ease.

The film does have a message about being true to your ideals but is mostly a bittersweet romance and an enjoyable one at that.

not a terrible movie but among Crawford's worst performances

[planktonrules · 4/10 · 1 March 2006]

The basic plot in this movie isn't bad. A lady makes it big and comes back to her alma mater to be adored. But, despite good acting by Robert Young and Eve Arden, the movie is a mess. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the director or both, as her performance is just awful. Instead of being a real person, she does a wonderful impersonation of a deer caught in the headlights. In other words, she stares off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO stunned" expression. After just a few minutes it really became annoying for me. Now this is certainly not the only Crawford film I dislike for her performance, as she had done more than her share of overacting--in films such as JOHNNY GUITAR or many of her later films, such as BERSERK! My advice is to try a different Crawford film--there certainly were better.

Uneven Mix of Laughs, Romance and Drama

[Michael_Elliott · 28 January 2014]

Goodbye, My Fancy (1951)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Rather bizarre and uneven mix of comedy and drama features congresswoman Agatha Reed (Joan Crawford) going back to her college to receive an honorary degree. Her main reason for wanting to go back is so she can see a former love (Robert Young) who she was expelled from school for sneaking out to see. Once back on campus she ends up caught between him and a photographer (Frank Lovejoy). GOODBYE, MY FANCY has pretty much been forgotten over the years and it's easy to see why because it's really not part of Crawford's high standards, which she started six years earlier with MILDRED PIERCE and followed with some very impressive bits of work. This film here is mildly entertaining on a few levels but overall you've got to consider it a pretty disappointing picture. One of the biggest problems is that it runs 106-minutes and probably could have lost a good sixteen-minutes if not more. I say this because there's just so much going on in this picture and with so much happening the film just seems too long and uneven. The early portion of the film makes you think that we're in for some sort of weird comedy and we're given various silly scenes. Then the film because a rather bland romantic-comedy but things change yet again when we get a rather long political debate about freedom. I think the final twenty-five minutes or so are actually the best part of the film as the Crawford character tries to fight to get a film shown that tells young people some of the horrors that are out there. As for Crawford, she turns in a good performance but there's certainly nothing all that memorable here. This is the type of role should could do without trying but it's always nice seeing her. Young is pretty bland in his role but thankfully Lovejoy adds some energy when he's on screen. Eve Arden is good as the secretary and Janice Rule is also nice as Young's daughter. GOODBYE, MY FANCY really isn't going to appeal to many except for Crawford fans wanting to see everything she did.

Joan Acts Her Age

[utgard14 · 4/10 · 24 January 2014]

Right off the bat I'll say I hated this movie. But it was refreshing to see Joan playing a part in her own age range instead of trying to pass for younger and more beautiful, as she had been doing for most of her parts since turning forty. This is a soft drama with a few comedic touches about a congresswoman (Joan) who returns to her college to receive an honorary degree. Actually, she really returns to see old beau Robert Young, now the president of the college. She's followed along by her annoying reporter ex that's in love with her.

Crawford's performance is mixed. Most of the time she's solid but there are scenes where she acts like she's never been in a movie before. Particularly the more sentimental scenes. Young is good, even with the added gray to his hair and the mustache designed to make him appear older. Robert Lovejoy is terrible. His character type -- the guy who won't take no for an answer but if he just keeps pushing eventually the woman will give in -- is a gross one that unfortunately popped up often in older films. Modern day stalkers must watch movies like this and long for the old days when no meant yes. I couldn't stand this obnoxious a-hole. The saving grace of the film is Eve Arden. How many times has that been the case? If I made a list of great actresses who played supporting parts but should have been leading ladies, she would be number one. The only bad thing I'll say about her is this: Eve and Joan were apparently having a "worst hair" contest in this movie and Eve won. Anyway, this is a poor effort with few bright spots and a huge downer of a romantic plot.

The McCarthy Era Subtext is Not Made Clear to the Audience...

[tr-83495 · 4/10 · 11 April 2019]

The transition from play to film did not work. Crawford did not gel with any of the other characters and there was no chemistry between any of them. It was very dry and matter of fact, when it was intended to be an important drama, emphasizing the need for free speech in a time when right-wing book burners were making headlines in Congress.

This film really falls flat on what it was supposed to be and the way it was written. It should have been a biting sting against the McCarthy excesses, but no one would receive any kind of message from the finished product.

The Marketplace Of Ideas

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 29 April 2010]

Goodbye My Fancy finds Joan Crawford taking over a role popularized by fellow film star Madeline Carroll on stage as a member of the House Of Representatives coming back to her former college to accept an honorary degree. She's invited by college president and former boyfriend Robert Young.

There's a lot of history here and this is the only degree she'll have from the College Of New Hope for women located in rural New England. Back in the day apparently Crawford was a wild child, at least wild by those standards back then. She got into a compromising situation with Young and she took the fall by herself and got expelled for it. In the interim Young in addition to rising to the presidency of the college married a woman who died and has a daughter, Janice Rule, who is going to be one of the graduates at the ceremony Crawford gets her degree.

Crawford went into journalism and then politics. She's combining the two at this point having produced a documentary about the current social problems of Europe and how Fascism by curtailing free speech contributed mightily to them. She's hoping to show the film while she's at the college.

Her opponent in this endeavor is the chairman of the board Howard St. John who also happens to be now married to Crawford's former roommate Lurene Tuttle. He's got the part that actors like Eugene Palette and Charles Dingle normally were cast in, the arrogant, self righteous right wing blowhard who thinks he ought to be controlling the educational process. Not that he's against free speech mind you, but he feels that kids should not be exposed to this kind of serious work. He in fact donated the campus movie theater and he'd like for them to show entertainment that he approves of, such as his favorites Abbott&Costello.

Young's dependent on St. John's good will for his job. But one who isn't and is also a rival for Crawford is Frank Lovejoy, a Time&Life war photographer who is covering this event. He'll expose Young's timidity if for no other reason than to shame him in front of Joan.

Goodbye My Fancy was written by Fay Kanin and ran for 446 performances on Broadway during the 1948-49 season and was directed by Sam Wanamaker who also played the Frank Lovejoy part. The college president was played by another former movie name, Conrad Nagel.

The play took home a Tony Award for Shirley Booth who played Crawford's Congressional aide and has some really funny Eve Arden type lines. When the film came out the Eve Arden part was played by Eve Arden.

The play draws heavily on themes expressed in James Thurber's The Male Animal. If anything it's more serious here because whereas in The Male Animal, trustee Eugene Palette objected to the content in reading Nicolo Sacco's letter in class, St. John just objects to the idea of material that is mind challenging in the classroom in general. What does this imbecile think they're going to college for. In fact there's a minor role played by Morgan Farley as a physics professor who is intending to leave the college because of the limits he's being put under and Farley plays it well.

Coming out as it did during the House Un-American Activities Committee days and after Joe McCarthy started finding Communists in all kinds of places, Goodbye My Fancy was quite the courageous project for Warner Brothers at the time. It's a timeless tribute to the value of free speech and the marketplace of ideas that a university is supposed to be.

This is a film that I think needs a remake. Can you see some trustee on a university today throwing his weight around and maybe filling the campus cinema with reruns of Saturday Night Live in order that students not concentrate on serious issues?

I think it could be done.

Too smart for the average viewer

[ivan-22 · 19 August 2000]

A great movie with three of my favorite movie stars: Robert Young, Eve Arden and Joan Crawford. This movie makes no concessions whatsoever to "popular" taste. It doesn't insult one's intelligence. It makes a passionate plea for free speech. Some would surely call it communist propaganda. Joan Crawford was however absurdly miscast as a flaming liberal politician. The real Joan was, I think, conservative. She ended her life as the chair of Pepsi! But somehow she captivates. Her diction is solid, her acting measured, always dignified, and her movies are darn good (she never played the Queen of Sheba, or some other "historic" nonsense). Robert Young is impeccable too, far more impressive, intelligent, than a whole host of bigger stars, but his non-muscular persona confines him to the parlor. I can hardly believe he was an alcoholic.

I thought STORM CENTER (1955) was the first free speech movie. Still, the fact remains, that STORM CENTER is more direct, powerful, dramatic and dashing. Unfortunately, the censors seems to have had the last word about THAT anti-censorship film. STORM CENTER has never been shown on TV (as far as I know) and it is not available on video. Something should be done to bring back this and other forgotten classics.

Much Better than some reviews

[ftljeff40 · 8/10 · 27 August 2009]

OK so this isn't Mildred Pierce, but it's not horrible either. Typical 1950's melodrama about a congresswomen (Crawford) who ends up caught between two men and fighting fascist censorship at the same time. Tame by today's standards I'm glad to see that Joan was not scared to throw some mud in the eye of the evil McCarthy witch hunt. (in real life Joan did testify at the McCarthy hearings and basically told them to go to hell, but in a nice way only Joan could pull off). Don't write this movie off, it is now available on DVD through Movies Unlimited as is Joan's last picture for Warners "This Women Is Dangerous". If your a Joan fan these are musts for your collection.