Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

MisterWhiplash The premise of the story is that a woman, the gorgeous Larita, is caught in a scandal when she is divorced from her husband (he was a drunk louse, and the 'Easy Virtue' name comes from the sort of scandal at the time: she went into another man's arms, an artist who cared for her, and then he got into a big fight that ended with a gun going off).In other words, she was found guilty and found a "Correspondent" or whatever that means, so she decides to high tail it to the Mediterranean/South of France and happens to meet a nice young man, John, who just falls head over heels for her... except he doesn't know about her past, and doesn't care to ask even when she asks why he lovers her without knowing about her. Then it's time for a 'Meet the Parents' scenario. You can see where this might go.At first I thought this might be somewhat of an unintentional trial run for Hitchcock for Rebecca, also about the terrors that come to a woman when she is brought home by her new beau to the family and the mother doesn't take a liking to her in the slightest. But this isn't Gothic melodrama, this is more about morality and class mores. There's a on one hand on the other hand with this scenario: on the one hand, it's now 2016, and divorce, though not something that's very pleasant and often can end acrimoniously and Ireland only allowed it as a thing 20 years ago and so on, is something that is a societal norm. So in 1928 it was not at all normal and, on the contrary, if one became a scandalous figure for it (for, GASP, possibly favoring another man over a drunken brute!), it could be seen as something unfavorable.But on the other hand, to the stories credit, the way the story ends up rolling out not all sides see this past of Larita's omething that's even they're business, when it does surface (at first her face is a 'you remind me of someone' thing, but it can't be placed until it's seen in a newspaper, somehow the medium change makes it clear which is a clever touch by the way). I liked the moments where John's father takes Larita aside and says 'do right by my boy, I don't care about what you did before.' It's a mature moment, just as when she tells them all when the big revelation comes out, 'it's my business, I have to live with it, not you' to that extent.So there's some drama to unpack here, but I think for the most part Hitchcock finds a way to navigate this story with entertaining direction and moments that really make you keep attention. He can't help that some of its contrived to the point that one might see in a modern romantic comedy or drama - i.e. if the main couple just sat down and had a damn conversation it'd be the end of it, and the "I love you without knowing you" seems a little weak, albeit it does end up being part of the commentary on how flawed John is when he is in one place like the South of France vs with his family - but there's many moments for terrific acting Isabel Jeans as Larita and the mother played by Violet Farebrother.I think one can pick apart this movie and see the holes in it, or how the ending is a bit rushed, and at the end of it all its still a credit to how sharp Hitchcock's craft was by 1928, near the tail-end of his work in silent productions, that he could make the camera dynamic (watch for those shots in the courtroom early on that make things seem bent out of shape, the way those views-through-the-monocle for the judge gives an entrapping quality, at least it did for me), and probably puts in some comedy where I can't see it being in the play. A highlight is when John and Larita are in a horse-drawn carriage and it's a moment where love is professed though he doesn't care about her past (at that moment)... and then Hitchcock cuts to a wide shot and shows that the carriage driver has dozed off (!) and the horse has stopped in order to, yes, have the equivalent of making out with another horse in front of him, or her (!!) It's genuine laughs to be had there, and it's all from staging and timing (I can't picture that happening on a stage unless it was with horse costumes or something), not to mention the comedic highlight with a telephone-switchboard operator (Benita Hume is the actress) eavesdropping on a call between the two love-birds and just how her face and eyes change in one minute is uproariously funny. Hell, even a shot showing the full dining room for the Whittaker family, with Christian saints hanging large and looming on the walls, is amusing.Jeans has some glamorous moments and times to shine, and the acting across the board is solid. It's dated in certain significant ways, and predictable in some others (i.e. the 'other' girl who could've been John's who is always on the sidelines like the platonic woman or something), and not least of which the ending. Yet at least it's a story that, for the time, attempts to wag a finger at people who think Divorce = Bad, and Hitchcock tries to overcome the lack of what would usually be necessary in adapting a Noel Coward play, like *dialog*, and can still make some interesting cinema out of it.

Rainey Dawn Divorces were getting popular in the 1920s - yes they were happening - but it was still a taboo subject for some people to talk about or even accept as being "okay". Films like this one were made with the taboo subject of divorce in mind to help bring divorce to mainstream discussion and acceptance. Divorces were considered to be a "problem" during the 1920. Films like "Easy Virtue" really helped with shedding light on the subject in the social consciousness/awareness and divorces became socially acceptable.I'm not big on most "romance" films but there are a few of them I really enjoy and this Hitchcock film is one of them. I found this one pleasant to watch since it deals with a subject that was still considered to be taboo during the time era this film was made in.A good film if you like romance films, the history of films in general or simply love Alfred Hitchcock.7/10

Dan Franzen (dfranzen70) In Alfred Hitchcock's Easy Virtue, a woman has some explaining to do when the family of her second husband finds out there was a first husband. That's because back in the day, divorced women were considered damaged goods, and upstanding families would steer well clear of such flighty harlots. Easy Virtue's tagline asks "Can she be blamed for a past she didn't create?" And the answer is yes, because she did create her past when she started making eyes at the man painting her portrait. But perhaps I am getting a little ahead of myself.Larita Filton (Isabel Jeans) is married to an unnamed guy. Well, he probably has a name, but the movie doesn't tell us. Anyway, they're rich, and she's having her portrait done by a professional artist. One day the artist notices marks on Larita's wrist, and she mentions that her husband sometimes drinks too much. Thus a relationship is born, at least as far as they went in the 1920s, which meant it's possible Larita and the artist smooched once. Anyway, one fine day the husband comes home to find the two of them in an embrace. A gun is presented, and a shot is fired, and the artist dies. This is all told to us in flashback at the divorce trial, where the jury quite naturally finds in favor of the husband. Larita is shamed and shunned.She finds herself chillaxing on the Mediterranean, and a chance encounter with a tennis ball leads Larita to meet John Whittaker (Robin Irvine), who's from a well-to-do family himself. They romance, yadda yadda, and soon they're wed. He brings her home to meet his parents and his two sisters for dinner. The stern matriarch is fairly sure she recognizes Larita, and eventually she pieces it together. Haughty hilarity ensues.This is a silent film, obviously very early in The Master's career, and much more of a melodrama than a thriller with a twist. There's no twist, and because there are few sight gags one must rely on the intermittent title cards to follow the mouthed dialog. That's all well and good, but there was just too much predictability afoot, and the quality of the print did the movie no favors, either. That all makes Easy Virtue a curio in Hitch's long, long career, and little more.

Daniel Richardson As you may or may not know, I've decided to type reviews for all my DVDs ("May or may not know." Like you guys actually read one of my reviews and said to yourself "Wow. I've got to read more from this guy.) When it came time to type my review for "Easy Virtue" I was drawing a blank. I once cited "Murder!" as a forgettable Hitchcock film, but in this case I really could not remember a thing. As I started reading other reviews and such, the movie started coming back to me. And I realized I was just suppressing bad memories. One problem with this picture is (and maybe it was just my copy) there was no music for this silent film. I mean none. Now I could probably watch "Nosferatu" or "The Phantom of the Opera" with no music, but those are good movies with great story/plot/action. This on the other hand was just dreadfully boring. I mean I had to sit up in bed just so I wouldn't fall asleep watching it. Now you may be thinking what if there had been music? Would it make it better? No. The story itself just did not interest me at all. I stated once that "Champagne" was the worst Hitchcock film that I ever saw. I gave that film a 2. Despite the horrible story, it had good directing. Here however I didn't see anything special about the direction in this film. That's why I gave this movie a 1. And like I stated in the title it is quite possibly the worst Hitchcock movie ever. "Quite possibly" because I haven't seen all his early work yet. And there's a couple of his other films I haven't seen as well. I probably could have combined those last two sentences. So in closing I recommend this only to the Hardcore Hitchcock fans. The rest should avoid this film. Trust me.