Cebalord Very best movie i ever watch

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

LeaBlacks_Balls In this quaint, serviceable comedy, a mystery writer and his wife move into a basement apartment at 13 Gay Street in Greenwich Village. The whole house has a sinister air and the other tenants seem hostile and frightened. The discovery of a murdered body outside the couple's back door doesn't help the atmosphere.What this film really is is a knock-off of the popular 'Thin Man' series starring William Powell and Myrna Loy. 'A Night to Remember' tries to reproduce the witty banter and screwball crime solving done so wonderfully in those films, and it is only somewhat successful.Young and Aherne have good chemistry, and the supporting actors are all game, but most of the humor is forced, and the mystery, taking a backseat to the comic antics, is only somewhat intriguing and borders on implausible. The cinematography is pretty good, making the dark shadows of the apartment sinister, but the entire production reeks from budget constraints and looks cheap.If you've seen the brilliant first three 'Thin Man' films, don't bother with this one. You've already seen the best and you'll be disappointed here. However, if you haven't seen them yet, check this out, and then rent 'The Thin Man' movies and you'll appreciate them so much more.

moonspinner55 Pithy, breezy knock-off of "The Thin Man", here with mystery writer Brian Aherne solving the murder of man near his Greenwich Village rental with help from fluttery, eternally-game spouse Loretta Young. The pieces of this comically convoluted set-up are almost impossible to put together on one's own, and the Columbia back-lot provides a samey visual look throughout the picture which feels cheap. Aherne, with his upper-class diction and chipper chit-chat, works hard at his double-takes and pratfalls; Young works even harder at playing the feminine sidekick. Neither star is embarrassing, and in fact are superior to the material. Gale Sondegaard stands out in an otherwise weak supporting cast. A product of its time, and probably dated already in '43. ** from ****

tedg I watch all sorts of movies. Some I watch because they transform, they are touchstones for building and affecting imagination. They help build a life, our primary enterprise.Other movies are watched because they contribute to the context: they establish the language used elsewhere. They aren't particularly transformative in themselves, but they provide a lucid understanding of the vocabulary we need for the greater work. The greater joy.Many of these "background" films for me are from the 30s. Its between the time that talkies were invented and the war changed everything, cemented by "Citizen Kane." It was a period where film didn't know what it was, where film narrative was a matter of experimentation, where amazing and strange things were attempted. I believe that you cannot be a lucid human unless you understand how you think, and that means you have to understand narrative dynamics, which means film (mostly), which means you need to wade through the 30s, with at least one focus on detective stories.If you get that far, you need to look at the afterglow as well, those films from the 40s that referenced the older experiments. While the US was at war, this is particularly strong.Here we have an afterglow film that is pretty bad watching. Its only interesting if you plug it into this lucidity project where it has a place.Like the older films, the narrative device is a writer of mystery stories puts himself and wife into a situation where he can write another. He, the writer becomes folded into the detective. A second device has to do with place: all the characters are inexplicably forced to live in the same apartment building. There's an "explanation" for this but there's no logic behind it. Its there, because the form demands it. What clues there are in the mystery come from sussing out other locations. Other reverberations: the cop here is the guy who pretends to be Chinese in the Chan series. Many of his moments are Chan moments. There's a banter borrowed from the Thin Man series. And because at this late date (three years after the death of the form it references) we can't possibly take this seriously, it is transformed into a comedy.Bad watching. Interesting for giving us fences for the paddock we play in.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Sharclon8 From the Title, I expected to see yet another Titanic movie and was pleasurably surprised by this charmer. I love a good mystery story and a witty comedy mystery is always an extra pleasure. This is a delightful little Mystery/Comedy in the same genre as Topper Returns and The Ex-Mrs. Bradford: Both knock-offs of The Thin Man series. Ms. Young and Mr. Aherne play a young married couple that move into a Greenwich Apartment to soak up atmosphere so he can write a Mystery novel. They find themselves involved in a real murder mystery which Briane Aherne sets out to solve himself so that he can write about it and thereby write a good murder mystery; as he explains to his wife, all his stories up to now have been "corny". It's not the mystery being clever that makes this such a good movie, but then The Thin Man movies are not known for their Mystery stories either; it is the byplay between the husband and wife that makes the movie so very enjoyable. It is the same with this movie, the Mystery is clever enough to keep you watching and the stars of the movie have charm and charisma aplenty to make this movie a real keeper.