"Back in Circulation" is very much a film like "The Front Page" or "His Girl Friday". So, if you liked them, you're bound to enjoy this Joan Blondell picture.The oddly named 'Timmy' Blake (Blondell) is a journalist with a bent towards the sensational and sleazy. Through much of the movie, her mantra seems to be 'anything for a story' and her sleaze-loving boss (Pat O'Brien) encourages as much muck-raking as possible...all in an effort to boost circulation. However, after spending much of the story pushing for an investigation into the death of a rich guy by poisoning, she suddenly has a crisis of conscience....though I was at a loss to figure out why considering her actions through the first 2/3 of the movie! Still enjoyable...just not completely consistent.By the way, if you do watch the film, take a look at Timmy's two right crosses. That woman packs a terrific punch!

Although reporters are barred from the scene, a deadly train wreck doesn't stop enterprising Joan Blondell (as Timothea "Timmy" Blake) from covering the story. Pretending to be a doctor, Ms. Blondell gets the scoop. Her editor and love interest Pat O'Brien (as William "Bill" Morgan) gets an anonymous tip stating that an automobile manufacturer did not die of heart failure, but was poisoned. He assigns Blondell the story and she suspects beautiful widow Margaret Lindsay (as Arline Vivian). We wonder why Blondell is interested in Mr. O'Brien and, even more, why he seems so uninterested in Blondell. The plot unravels between two dubious letters. The main reason to watch is Blondell. She is strong and sexy in this film. And, although second-billed, Blondell is the star.**** Back in Circulation (9/25/37) Ray Enright ~ Joan Blondell, Pat O'Brien, Margaret Lindsay, John Litel

There were a few films in the '30s that set the stage for a lot of imitations. One was "It Happened One Night," which gave rise to dozens of films about heiresses, and the other was "The Front Page" from 1931, about a reporter and an editor. "Back in Circulation" is the latter, from 1937.Here, the reporter is beautiful Joan Blondell, as sparkling and energetic as ever, and her editor is Pat O'Brien (who also appeared in "The Front Page"). Blondell is Timmy, a crafty reporter good at getting in on the most important stories, no matter what she has to do. O'Brien is Bill Morgan, who knows Timmy is the best and is constantly sending her out.When a wealthy man dies, Bill receives a letter saying he was poisoned, so he dispatches Timmy to investigate. She's able to stop the funeral and convince the medical examiner to do an autopsy. Turns out he was poisoned, and suspicion falls on his wife (Margaret Lindsay). The paper goes after her in a big way, but after Timmy spends some time with her, she begins to suspect that the widow is innocent and hiding something. This puts her at odds with Bill.Thanks to Blondell's performance, this movie manages to come off, though it isn't the tightest script. It flip-flops between comedy and heavy drama, and the alliance is uneasy.John Litel and Regis Toomey are featured. Lindsay gives a '30s-style performance, and today it sticks out as being melodramatic. That was the style, and that's the way many roles were written. This was on its way out of style due to stars like Bette Davis.Entertaining. Always a pleasure to see Blondell in a film.

This is a prime example of a movie that doesn't know what it wants to be. The first half of the film is a snappy little screwball comedy, obviously inspired by "The Front Page" (just like about a zillion other newspaper comedies), in which star reporter Joan Blondell tries to cope with hard-driving editor Pat O'Brien. It isn't brilliant, but it's good enough to get by. The second half is a typical Warners social crusading film of the thirties, an expose of the dangers of yellow journalism. This half doesn't work very well at all, partly because Margaret Lindsay's performance is wooden, and partly because the change in tone is so abrupt that you're liable to suffer from whiplash. O'Brien and Blondell are both cast to their strengths, and they work well together. This film was never going to be a masterpiece, but it might have been modestly successful if it had maintained the tone of its first half. As it is, the movie just doesn't work. Warners couldn't help themselves; they never passed up an opportunity to hoist the gauntlet of a social crusade. Sometimes they did it well, but in this case they should have let well enough alone.