"
system\nclassify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative
\n
user\nRidiculous 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.
\n
assistant\n0
\n"