Cast: Sydney Sweeney, Glenn Powell, Gata, Alexandra Shipp, Charlee Fraser, Bryan Brown, Dermont Mulroney, Rachel Griffiths, Hadley Robinson, Michelle Hurd, Joe Davidson, Darren Barnet
After an amazing first date, Bea and Ben’s fiery attraction turns ice-cold–until they find themselves unexpectedly reunited at a wedding in Australia. So they do what any two mature adults would do: pretend to be a couple.
A sexier romantic comedy that plays like a sex comedy. Only lacking any truly carnal action, but flirts around with it, In a more innocent manner.
The whole movie is of course a will they or won’t they. Where they feel like they are fooling their friends and their friends feel like they have the upper hand over them.
The film tries to breathe life into a tired staple or genre. The results aren’t terrible. As the film stays entertaining fluff. That you will forget about soon after watching.
It is a bunch of beautiful people in impossibly lush locations and privilege-loving fantasy lives. So it plays like a fantasy for the audience.
the film keeps trying to make Sydney Sweeney into a more physical comedian and less an object of desire but never goes fully into quite embarrassing humor or anything truly juvenile.
Luckily the movie focuses more on the comedy and less on the romance until it is needed.
Hollywood keeps moving Glen Powell into being a star for good reason. As he is a movie star handsome and charming. Though you might find yourself obsessing about his hair throughout as it is usually perfect and never movies but doesn’t look stiff.
It’s an across-the-board film as it is diverse and includes every kind of demographic a mainstream film could aim for.
It’s nice to see Bryan Brown and Rachel Griffiths on the screen again and clearly having fun Even if the movie casting seems all over the place. Though definitely filming in Australia as most of the supporting cast seem to be natives and we see all the popular sights.
Not to mention while you can understand Powell’s character being tempted by his ex. Played by Charlee Fraser, As she is gorgeous and it’s flattering she needed such a good-looking guy to replace him and get over him. Sydney Sweeney’s ex in the film played by Darren Barnet is there in appearance but gets nothing to do or any real character Arc. Really he’s the only character who really has nothing to do but is just there.
This seems like the movie the Justin Timberlake movie FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS was supposed to be, only here the leads are likable and insistent like it is chasing any trends or trying to be cool. Instead, this movie just remembers to be sexy.
This seems a starter movie for both the stars here, trying to see how much box office power they have with them as the main stars.
Cast: Kirsten Dunst, Jay Hernandez, Taryn Manning, Bruce Davison, Herman Osorio, Lucinda Jenney, Miguel Castro, Richard Steinmetz, Tommy De La Cruz, Cory Hardict, Keram Malicki-Sanchez
Carlos Nunez, is a poor but athletically gifted Latino teenager who endures a two-hour bus ride every day from East L.A. to attend the posh, wealthy Pacific Palisades High School in Los Angeles on a football scholarship. A straight-A student, Carlos is focused and driven, but his future is cast in doubt when he becomes the flirtation target of a spoiled, self-destructive bad girl Nicole Oakley, who’s the daughter of a prominent congressman. When his friends, family, and even Nicole’s own father oppose the romance for Carlos’ sake, he chooses to ignore their advice and stubbornly pursues his relationship with Nicole, whose feelings grow from simple physical attraction to something much deeper.
This is the movie in my teen years I was hoping the Drew Barrymore film MAD LOVE was going to be.
At the time this film was a rare interracial romance, where it seems to be downplayed, but then becomes a kind of class difference with a switch whereas the Hispanic character is the more responsible and stable with a rich family life, and is well respected
Whereas Kirsten Dunst’s character is a mess who might be good-hearted and is an addict with mental problems and a family that isn’t close but has money
With this film, Kirsten Dunst is trying to be more professional and take on a dangerous and challenging role. The kind that she was usually offered at the time was more cookie-cutter. This role is the one that Disney stars try to do to be seen as more adult and be seen in a different way allowing them to show range.
The film isn’t original but keeps your interest as not only a teen romance but a romantic story that has dramatic deaths and comes across better than you probably would expect.
It helps that you like, and admire both lead actors and their characters, and they do have solid chemistry, and they get you to care about both of them.
Happily found trays the minority character as more of a positive and Caucasian character trouble, and the one might end the future of the other. Everyone agrees that he is too good for her.
One appreciates the film, even though Kirsten as a star who was the bigger star. The film and script explore Jay Hernandez’s character and family ties. just as much as it does hers. Showing atmosphere family, culture, and surroundings can affect a person.
One admires that he tries to be deeper than just a stereotypical teen romance. it offers some depth. As it shows a shocking amount of heart throughout.
The film takes you back to when these movies would actually make it to theaters and not be some offshoot of a streaming channel.
Cast: Mark Lester, Jack Wild, Tracy Hyde, Roy Kinnear, James Cossins, June Ellis, Tim Wylton, Colin Barrie, Billy Franks, Ashley Knight
Two youngsters declare to their parents that they want to get married. Not sometime in the future but as soon as possible. The story is told from the children’s point of view.
This is a film that was hard to find and wanted to see it since hearing about it. when it was suggested as a companion to films like A LITTLE ROMANCE and BUGSY MALONE, especially the latter, as these films share the Director, the great Alan Parker, who directed BUGSY MALONE, but wrote, and came up with the story for this film. He wasn’t allowed to direct this film though he wanted to but did shoot a bit of a second unit on the film.
The film offers a narrative that allows kids to be more rebellious, troublesome, rough, but still likable where kids could actually run the risk of hurting themselves or getting hurt, but you never really worried about it because you knew they would bounce back.
Order finally titled S.W.A.L.K. (Sealed With A Loving Kiss) it takes to look at childhood and shows you all the heartbreak and pain but more of the joys and treats each misstep as it feels crushing, but also how quickly things can turn around and bounce back
It’s a coming-of-age tale that while whimsical also feels very true and charming to the cast and the period and kids at that age. as the film isn’t whitewashed or manufactured, nor do the characters feel overprotected, though they obviously are safe.
The film is mostly innocent. It’s also rambunctious with an abundance, score, and soundtrack, full of songs, not a musical as at heart it is about love at first sight. And first love.
It maintains an innocence, as well as exploring, budding, friendship, and bonding, and how jealousy can come into play when it feels like you’re losing that friend’s degree to their new bond girl in his life that leaves the friend lonely in an orphan, feeling forgotten.
It also shows them both being made fun of for their love and wanting to be happy with one another in which the adult seem to think it’s cute, but also rally against it and don’t believe in their feelings and emotions.
it also allows the kids to be kids, but have recognizable human emotions and treats them even more seriously than it does the adult characters so the film respects them maybe because they can be more honest at their age and still have that wondrous vision of the world and everything before becoming more knowledgeable as an adult and not being as openhearted.
The film feels kind of like an early prototype less star-studied version of MOONRISE KINGDOM
as you can tell Director, Wes Anderson has definitely been inspired by this film. The film might also remind some viewers of the Francois Truffaut film, SMALL CHANGE, where a narrative and story are secondary to feelings and the young characters. And the reality that is all around them.
The film is about moments, with no real plot or story, though it does offer a certain explosion of maturity and a strike against the adults that almost feels like a game.
The film offers a sweet and mischievous ending.
While I didn’t love it as much as I expected it to I think it is still charming and will enjoy it as a kind of artistic family film.
Based on The Book “Spaceman Of Bohemia” By Jaroslav Kalfar
Cinematography: Jakob Ihre
Editor: John Axelrod, Scott Cummings, and Simon Smith
Cast: Adam Sandler, Paul Dano, Carey Mulligan, Kunal Nayyar, Isabella Rosellini, Lena Olin, Marian Roden, Zuzona Stivinova, Petr Papanek, John Flanders
As an astronaut sent to the edge of the solar system to collect mysterious ancient dust finds his earthly life falling to pieces, he turns to the only voice that can help him try to put it back together. It just so happens to belong to a creature from the beginning of time lurking in the shadows of his ship.
This is an existential journey, a type of film that deals with loneliness and depression, and even though it takes place in outer space, it’s more about an inner journey than anything else.
So if you’re gonna do a movie that is practically mostly almost a one-man show where you spend time with the lead you’re going to want to cast an entertainer who here is trying to be more of a dramatic actor, but is definitely someone you know the audience is a fan of and identifies with Who they won’t mind spending time with throughout, even if he is not offering his usual type of performance.
Most are coming to this film for its star to see him in a different type of role, more dramatic than he takes from time to time, and not as rarely as before.
The film like the character sounds downtrodden throughout
Technically an art film is not bad and is actually impressive. It has plenty of artistic flourishes among the mundane story as the effects are, but this feels more like a Spotlight more focused on the character and his story.
The film is about heart, but it feels like it lacks it, though Carey Mulligan seems to be the heart of the film and of the character’s existence, they are mainly kept apart most of the film.
As her character stays somewhat unsupported by him. The main problem with the film is that his character seems to be the same from beginning to end, even in the flashback so since she seems to be more lively, we never quite are sure why she fell for him, even though she explains it, but we never quite see it. so that this love story or romance kind of makes no sense as even when we see old pictures of them, it looks awkward and uncomfortable
The film might have been more noteworthy before streaming as it definitely would have probably made it to theaters with high hopes here it just seems like a regular expensive experiment or his yearly release through Netflix, focusing less on his usual type of comedies, yet still rocking his production companies, side project comedies. Shaking it up a bit with films like this.
The film is not as effective as it should be or tries to be it has good, technical filmmaking. It’s very meditative and slow as we live through his trauma
Love the cast, Carey Mulligan, Lena Olin, and Isabella Rossellini, who finally gets a role that is more than a minor one scene, the appearance of Kunal Nayyer. One just wishes they had more to do and a project that utilizes their talents more.
Nothing in particular makes this film noteworthy for all its peculiarities. It still feels oddly familiar as it is never quite warm, even when it wants you to feel something.
The one that makes the film and the characters come alive is a memory of a date at a public swimming pool.
Maybe if the film was more independent production, it would mean more as a project of passion to put all of a vision into, and it would feel like maybe a story that needed to be told. Here it comes across as entertainment that wants to have depth.
The second half of the film offers more heart. The film strives to be philosophical and romantic at heart. And after spending so much time, watching the film. You kind of surrender yourself to its charms, like Stockholm syndrome to make it feel like it was all worth it.
By the end In the film you can identify with him, but never quite feel anything. You wonder Is that the point?
Cast: Brooke Shields, Benjamin Bratt, Miranda Cosgrove, Sean Teale, Chad Michael Murray, Rachael Harris, Michael McDonald, Wilson Cruz, Tasneek Roc, Dalip Sondhi
Lana’s daughter Emma returns from London and announces that she’s getting married next month. Things become more complicated when Lana learns that the man who stole Emma’s heart is the son of the man who broke her years ago.
This is pretty much romance novel, a romantic comedy for an older audience as it shows. It’s never too late to find love.
This tale starts out seeming like it’s for a younger audience. It slowly reveals itself to be more of a romance for the parents or the Older Crowd.
It’s nice to see many familiar faces amongst the cast who are clearly enjoying themselves. so that you can’t help but feel comfortable with the cast and characters. The film still feels a bit slight but then again I’m not the audience for this film.
follow the formula of romantic comedies, seemingly to be aimed at older characters. I don’t know if it’s because feels like the air of Romantic comedy came and went and while there is an audience for it, it’s only the audience that was a fan of those movies in the 90s and 2000s, who are around the age of the characters in this movie?
Watching this film, you’re not going to see this for the filmmaking or the script you know what exactly is going to happen so you just sit there and wait for it or see how it’s going to happen on this beautiful foreign island with beautiful characters surrounded by nothing but opulence and money so that it is a fantasy come true.
The characters might seem ungrateful and annoying as mishaps happen throughout. As this is a film nothing offensive really happens and it feels like a more cinematic hallmark movie. As it has various cultures throughout and representation of most.
That is all positivity and hope and the problems that are brought up. Seems so minor that you wonder why the characters are making mountains out of molehills.
this is a pretty simple film and I believe you will enjoy it as long as you go with it and you will know if you’re a fan just by either watching the trailer or reading the synopsis because what you see is what you get with this movie.
Directed by Mark Waters, who also made the original MEAN GIRLS movie. He knows the territory. He knows the genre and he makes everything pretty and everyone looks amazing.
Cast: Andrew Scott, Paul Mescal, Claire Foy, Jamie Bell
A screenwriter drawn back to his childhood home enters into a fledgling relationship with his downstairs neighbor while discovering a mysterious new way to heal from losing his parents 30 years ago.
First off before you even redistribute, this is a film that it’s best to go in blind to to get the most out of it. So please watch the film before you read this review as there will be some spoilers.
This is definitely a movie that would’ve been in my top five had I seen it in 2003 when it was released.
The film plays more like therapy sessions of unresolved issues that still exist, mentally, which can also be seen as a vivid confessional. Which might come across as a bit more theatrical or staged for some audience members.
At heart, it’s a love story in the midst of all that develops like his relationship with his parents there’s an unknown history that is slowly brought to the forefront of its kind of acceptance, even though it does have its problems and issues by the end of the film it’s still heartbreaking nonetheless. As we witnessed the breakthrough more was revealed.
Director Andrew Haigh manages to make everything look like almost every frame could be a photograph in a museum.
Watching this film lead actor, Andrew Scott, as always can do no wrong as an actor for me at least he is similar to Sterling K. Brown, as he truly inhabits, their characters, deeper and deeper Sterling K is more of a chameleon who always has a different look with his roles and characters, Andrew Scott here the more his character opens up the more comfortable he becomes with himself, and also the more vivid the performance and memorable.
The director has a way of making the normal look extraordinary at times in simple ways.
It’s a story of nostalgia coming of age and finding peace within yourself as well as acceptance.
At the end, it shows you can go home again not entirely. Always ghosts from the past waiting that need to be released no matter how much you want them to stay.
It’s truly hard to describe exactly the emotional strength of the film how powerful it is and where it leaves you at the end but it’s definitely worth watching.
Cast: Harry Hamlin, Michael Ontkean, Kate Jackson, Terry Kiser, Wendy Hiller, Arthur Hill, Nancy Olson, John Dukakis, Dennis Howard, Asher Brauner
Follows a young, idealistic married couple, Zach and Claire. They seem to be the perfect couple: college sweethearts with similar tastes and opinions, they are each very intelligent, sensitive, and caring individuals who can be both fun-loving and serious, in turn. Zach and Claire like one another as people as well as lovers. Each one is rising in his/her career and they talk about having kids someday; Claire, especially, wants them to have a boy and name him Rupert. When Zach meets a guy named Bart, Zach has a very personal human crisis: Is he happy?
This movie is a dramatic romance from each point of view in an unknowing love triangle.
This is one of the first films to show, gay male characters in a loving relationship. And being intimate the development of their relationship from meeting to being charmed to seduction to finally consummating and having feelings for one another. That might be love or might not be.
No, they have great chemistry.
There are no villains here as each has their reasons for what happens and gets to explain their point of view. Captures great character moments throughout.
You feel sorry for Kate Jackson as she and Michael Ontkean seem like a perfect couple and truly did love one another.
You can definitely feel the love story and dynamics. It’s simple and plain yet has its own clean-cut basic style. That offers a no-frills and conventional film. which leads to some blandness at times. Which makes it come across as a television movie material. That was directed by Arthur Hiller who also directed the movie LOVE STORY might be one of the reasons why it feels this way.
Also brings you back to a time when if you had a big enough budget star and offered a hook that material could still make it to movie theaters even if it seemed like a controversial subject which was a selling point.
The movie goes along with Kate Jackson’s character gaining success as her relationship deteriorates, though that is not what drives her husband into an affair. Even before happy times to flirt with homosexual feelings, though it seemed like it was more out of frustration. With his lover, can’t seem to get it up with her. As it seems he’s a romantic, and he can only be intimate like the one who intrigues him or where his heart or attraction lies.
Kate Jackson is a powerhouse in her role going through so many emotions and situations and she is so fetchingly beautiful throughout.
This was something new and different to general audiences and offered some representation of a community. It’s not all lovey-dovey so much but offers real communication and emotions that take their time with the material.
In particular, I was taken by the character’s love of movies and references throughout On a Roof as a constant reference and character working in the entertainment business.
This is actually the best role. The two male leads have come and they come off as more natural than anything.
There are some strange twists in the film, like one of the characters’ reluctance, and afraid of being emotionally available. His lover has admitted his truth and love virtually destroying his marriage, which seems to scare Harry Hamlin’s character, the single writer off, especially when we learn of his past that might have damaged him.
The psychobabble at the end, manages to let out the feelings, but feels a bit of an overkill as it explains too much rather than ambiguous and lets us make our own decisions and information. It offers an explanation.
Didn’t expect it to be more meaningful. it’s not a true romance or love story. As it allows the characters to open up about something allowing each other to be truthful. Even if it gets overly saccharine probably due to a sensitive subject at the time. Also not looking to. Offend offers a too-safe love triangle. Leaving it to be meaningful if not, a grand romantic tale.
The ending is heartbreaking. as her husband ends up being her first love and best friend and you don’t feel like she truly is over him but must go on with her life, Just as he has.
Cast: Dan Bucatinsky, Richard Ruccolo, Adam Goldberg, Sasha Alexander, Lisa Kudrow, Andrea Martin, Joanna Kerns, Christina Ricci, Michael Harris, Doris Roberts
While the flame of Jackie and Brett’s attraction intensifies, Eli and Tom, the unlikely pair they attempt to bring together, appear destined to spiral out of love rather than make any sort of progress toward becoming a genuine couple.
I can remember seeing bits and pieces of this film before I don’t know if I’ve ever watched it from beginning to end, but now that I have watched it from beginning to end, I have quite a few thoughts and things to say
The way this film is edited for some odd reason. The cuts seem to be perfectly made for a TV movie, which shows you how deep the film gets.
This is ironic, considering this is a gay romantic comedy that has a couple in it that I am guessing helps certain audience, members or allies feel a bit more comfortable in the film or seems to want to parity or be irony of how gay relationships are in straight, romantic comedies where they’re given Very little to do except either be support Relief or help set up the main couple and get them back together in general.
Hear the Straights portrayed by Sasha Alexander and Adam Goldberg feels so predictable in their own way and stereotypical playing the straights or the street best friends of the couple at the heart of it seems to be intentional
This film is filled with irony as it either condemns or criticizes, other gay romantic comedies at the time that are more mainstream while itself being kind of light when it comes to the material that at least gets deeper into the characterization and sex lives of its gay characters
Maybe, because it takes place in Los Angeles major city it seems like none of the films is all that controversial everybody accepts everybody for who they are. There is no prejudice, which is nice as it has a positive supportive message while working that is obviously taking place in the 90s, maybe early 2000s and all of the culture of that time is on full display if it had been made modern-day and at that time it would be accused of over saturation of a time. Because this is totally a time capsule, including the leads and the situation they find themselves in OK because it’s supposed to be a comedy so it works within the perimeters. It doesn’t get too deep, but it is entertaining for what it is.
No color whatsoever like an Ally ship movie it’s written and produced by its star Dan Bucatinsky and a lot of the big-name members seem there to help fill out the cast list, but obviously seem here more for support or doing a favor someone associated with the film because it’s their roles are pretty much cameos as they are not too much to shine in except for maybe Lisa Kudrow And Andrea Martin, who seems to can’t help but be funny when she’s in a film or show, though she has a big role that most of the other big names and she ends up being the most memorable part of the movie. S they get the best material. Especially Doris Roberts’s monologue near the end
No, I am highly critical of the movie watching it through modernize. I’m sure at the time it made its Mark as it was one of the few mainstream, independent gay romantic films back when that was still considered either controversial taboo or strictly for the art housing oh, how the times come, even though the material feel so basic.
The only depth of the film seems to be in one character’s alcoholism, which is more dealt with in the background, than as a major part of the film.
Not to mention a bit of top culture in the form of the Planet of the apes obsession, which gives it a kind of Tarantino tint, and also just helps the geek culture
What are the problems with this film? Is that one character seems to of course, be the more manly and messed up character from years of alcoholism and his family, and not getting along with his parents, or as the other one more uptight, even though his parents have been nothing but supportive, and this is the usual character type in romantic movies, everybody, obviously everybody has a reason for why they are who they are but yet, once a couple seem to be attracted to each other and their basic personalities or even at their worst, but must go through before they can be happily together, which is probably the truest part of these films.
look everyone deserves love, but it’s not that interesting watching too such bland characters. Take their time and finally come together and get their issues in order to try and accept love and have a romance. it seems like you’re asking for much with this film and maybe it’s just me. I just really found these characters not that interesting.
The film offers no real surprises, but at least it’s fun
Cast: Andrea Risenborough, Harry Melling, Demi Moore, Karl Glausman, Ryan Simpkins, Jaz Sinclair, Dana Ashbrook, Mary Lyn Rajskub, Alisa Torres, Cole Escola
Newlyweds Suze and Arthur become the dangerous obsession of a greaser gang that awakens a sleeping quandary into the couple’s sexual and gender identities.
This film is certainly original. It plays like an homage to biker movies of the 1950’s a bit with the gangs of WEST SIDE STORY and THE WILD ONE thrown in. Though the film Dwells on the homoeroticism of the times while being a send-up and satire of them. That offers the characters not as misunderstood but actually very violent and unrepentant.
As the story of the film is a throwback that works. As a kind of lgbtq west Side Story 1950-inspired set. Though supposedly modern. That seems to be more about repression and a bit of fetishization. As well as being free of gender norms. Though showing the hardships of dealing with it in a supposedly repressed society.
Where everyone seems to be doing it in the shadows themselves. While also seeming to take a look at and send up the time it depicts. Making it more of a camp romp. Though it seems like a farce it tackles these subjects head-on and in a brave and revelatory way. That goes a long way for representation and not as a fetish of any kind.
We are with a couple who are witnesses to a murder by a street gang. Who seem to invade their lives and territory more and more. It awakens a wanting feminization for the male in the couple and more of an aggressive masochistic side in the female of the couple.
Demi Moore has an extended cameo that comes out of nowhere but adds to the action. As her character becomes very important overall.
The film is exciting as you watch it. As the audience never knows what is going to show Next. So we are on our toes. The film is campy and avant-garde at the same time. As the film seeks to say something, but the message always seems a bit off. Yet never quite reaches a level of true awe.
Cast: James Cagney, Olivia De Havilland, Rita Hayworth, Alan Hale, Jack Larson, George Tobias, Una O’Connor, George Reeves, Lucile Fairbanks, Edward McNamara, Helen Lynd
Biff Grimes is crazy about Virginia Brush, but his “pal” Hugo Barnstead marries her himself and makes Biff the fall guy for his shady dealings. Though Hugo seems to have everything Biff wants, Biff learns that having what one wants and wanting what one has can be two very different things.
One of the reasons why I love this film so much is I have never heard about this film before. Now while I am a film fan I can admit to having blind spots especially when it come to older black and white movies which to me are considered classics at times because of the time period in which they were made. A peek into a bygone era . Where certain roles were set up and portrayed but even back then knew that everyone was more than what they were told to play and more savvy than they let on.
This is truly the first James Cagney starring movie I have ever seen so while I have seen him in other films in smaller roles and heard about him. This is my first experience with him where I can see the talent and charms all on display. Even in playing someone not necessarily all that smart but watching him start to get the point and realize what and who is best for him.
It’s also fun discovering a film that was out there and many never mention that is practically an undiscovered gem. As it’s a film that while you can beleive the dramatic and romantic moments. It feels like everyone is having fun in and with their roles and one another. It’s heartfelt and entertaining. It’s a show but you take it with you once it’s done. Even though you know It’s not necessarily close to reality.
Part of this film’s charms is that it’s not a big story with high steaks, but more a character comedy that is charming and it’s own right Word not only the star shines, but the supporting characters help.
As the film is about romance and love, and what truly matters in it, so it is full, and we see its nurturing grace, with a note of the next stage, and never or rarely being disguised.
This was one of my first James Cagney films, and definitely my first James Cagney comedy, though not one of his more famous titles or not considered a classic amongst his other films. So far, it is one of my favorites of his, and truly shows he was a star who seemed to be able to do it all saying, dance act, he could be a hero or he could be a villain and quite scary.
This is only the third film of James Cagney that I have seen. I think I appreciate it because it’s not as talked about as his other films.
His performance, here is more as a romantic, and a man, with a quick temper, who threw out, seems to be taken advantage of by those around him yet never let his anger out on them but directed at Phantom threats and challenges whose ultimate goal is to become a dentist.
The way he plays it is genuinely his own as in most of his comedic performances it’s fast and he seems to get so worked up over nothing that the performance is grand, and half of it is watching his history as he gets himself more and more worked up, but gracefully, he also comes down or how much trouble his anger and fast-talking gets him into.
As he is such a force of nature that it seems like the film and characters, more or less revolve around him, and react only in this film, they all get their time to shine, even while he is huffing and puffing.
As the one person who truly does care for him, and looks out for him, he is oblivious to Eventually he wakes up and opens his eyes as he realizes what he has, or what he could lose.
The best thing for him was not getting what he wanted, as it also showed him what was important, which seemed to be the moral of the story.
The film has an earnest story and it’s quite simple but gets so much mileage out of it that it’s no shock that it’s the James Cagney of his films and the Director of the film Raoul Walsh also says it’s his favorite that he made.
The intentional comedy of his character being a hothead, yet always losing fights until it truly matters is a quality the film seems to try to introduce subtly. This also showcases that his character is not that smart, but is good with quips. Is that the character who ultimately is the villain of the story? Did his actions seem intentional, but always seem to take advantage of Cagney’s character or lead his character to ruin.
This also leads to one of the few problems of the film is that his other friend played by Jack Larson, is not that good-looking nor charismatic, So it’s hard to believe him as his rival as the only thing that he seems to have over Cagney is maybe a certain smoothness, which I guess is what works as it is obvious and is really the defining point of his character.
Later, it seems like he envies his friend’s life but eventually can see why it’s best. He didn’t get the girl and had the fate of his friend.
Rita Hayworth’s character is a gold digger but has a soft spot for James Cagney which is romantic, but troublesome as she is the one who has her husband get him a job that proves to be his undoing.
There is even a chance that the romance between him and Hayworth could have worked, but and wouldn’t have been ideal or true. She ultimately buries herself and her chances later in the film. She shows all the things in her character that his character doesn’t like in a woman, yet is more ravishing in her lead scenes physically, though always shows why her character and Cagneys could work especially early in the film when they go on a forced date.
James Cagney and Olivia de Havilland’s chemistry is not the flashes they have so much chemistry and Rita Hayworth is truly his even in comedic scenes with her talking about her ideals and her strange flirtation with some Lothario (Played by Herbert Anderson, who played the father on the show DENNIS THE MENACE) who keeps winking and she can’t help winking at them with Chelsea her character is looking for love and excitement and is just as open to making the wrong decisions.
Though it’s hard to believe that she’s so passive when finding out we’re figuring out that her married friend Rita, Hayworth kissed James Cagney and the lights-out spaghetti scene.
It’s one of those stories where one finds the perfect partner with someone they weren’t really looking at or for and that other person falls for them anyway. Despite knowing they are a runner up. Though making their way to truly being number 1
Cagney’s character played by Alan Hale, is hilarious steals all of his scenes, and proves to have great chemistry with the star. As well as George Tobias, who plays his Greek friend, and who ends up being his only true friend, they are both hilarious.
The film’s more comedic scenes aren’t as physical but more verbal and witty. It is even lensed by legendary (not at the time) cinematographer James Wong Howe (THE THIN MAN, SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS)
It’s a comedy with dramatic moments, but a heart for romance.
Cut To The Chase 