Bobby Breen was a very odd child actor and he's pretty much forgotten today. I say odd because he had an amazing voice as well as a great screen presence for such a young boy. You just have to listen to him in this or any one of about a dozen films he made to know what I mean. Hearing such a refined but rather feminine voice coming out of him is a bit surreal. And he also seemed to play about the nicest kid you could imagine. I have seen him in about a half dozen of his films--now all in the public domain, as no one seemed to care enough to extend the copyright on his films.
"Let's Sing Again" is probably the best of the films I've seen him in, though like the rest, it's something that probably would not play too well today. Audiences of the 1930s seemed willing to accept operatic movies and loved Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy. They also adored Shirley Temple. In Breen's films, the film makers seemed to want to combine both these loves into one child star. However, after a few films, Breen quit films to concentrate on a singing career.
The film begins with a prologue. An up and coming opera star is struggling to make a name for himself as he cares for his wife and baby. However, the wife is bored and disappears with the boy. Several years pass and now the boy is in an orphanage. The mother has died and no one knows that the father not only wants his son but is now world-famous.
One day, the orphans are visiting a local traveling show. There, Breen meets up with Henry Armetta--who plays pretty much his usual lovable Italian character. However, this time there is a twist--Armetta has lost his great singing voice and now does comedy musical numbers. When he and Breen become pals, he realizes the boy has great talent and promotes the kid. Their friendship is pretty sweet. At the same time, there is a woefully under-developed and bizarre plot involving a jerk in the same musical company that wants to adopt Breen just so he can exploit him. Will the father find his long-lost son? Will Armetta go to jail for harboring a runaway? Will the jerk take the boy? Tune in and see, though of course it's all pretty easy to predict. However, despite being predictable and having too much music that most audiences won't like very much in the first place, the film still gets a 5. That's because it's well-written and constructed as well as quite pleasant in a very non-demanding sort of way. A definite oddity, but enjoyable.
"Let's Sing Again" is probably the best of the films I've seen him in, though like the rest, it's something that probably would not play too well today. Audiences of the 1930s seemed willing to accept operatic movies and loved Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy. They also adored Shirley Temple. In Breen's films, the film makers seemed to want to combine both these loves into one child star. However, after a few films, Breen quit films to concentrate on a singing career.
The film begins with a prologue. An up and coming opera star is struggling to make a name for himself as he cares for his wife and baby. However, the wife is bored and disappears with the boy. Several years pass and now the boy is in an orphanage. The mother has died and no one knows that the father not only wants his son but is now world-famous.
One day, the orphans are visiting a local traveling show. There, Breen meets up with Henry Armetta--who plays pretty much his usual lovable Italian character. However, this time there is a twist--Armetta has lost his great singing voice and now does comedy musical numbers. When he and Breen become pals, he realizes the boy has great talent and promotes the kid. Their friendship is pretty sweet. At the same time, there is a woefully under-developed and bizarre plot involving a jerk in the same musical company that wants to adopt Breen just so he can exploit him. Will the father find his long-lost son? Will Armetta go to jail for harboring a runaway? Will the jerk take the boy? Tune in and see, though of course it's all pretty easy to predict. However, despite being predictable and having too much music that most audiences won't like very much in the first place, the film still gets a 5. That's because it's well-written and constructed as well as quite pleasant in a very non-demanding sort of way. A definite oddity, but enjoyable.