Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

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

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Dunham16 To be honest neither Clark Gable nor Carole Lombard, in this film husband and wife on screen together enticed me as film performers. The movie seems well photographed and planned but by the time Clark and Carole had their long scene together about half way through I felt impelled to turn it off and plan not to see the second half. In my mind it is well made and edited though not for everyone a sort of cotton to it or not project.

Richard Green Recently my favorite video store acquired this movie on DVD, and I was very hopeful in renting it. As I am a huge fan of William Powell and Carole Lombard in "My Man Godfrey," I was astonished to hear the line "See you in church," dropped casually by Lombard in the middle of this film. That line, of course, appears early on in "My Man Godfrey." I had always thought that this was a comic device, used for that particular film, but apparently it was something of comic parlance in the 1930s. After all, there is a four year spread between this film and "My Man Godfrey". If it still has resonance now, it must have been doubly meaningful to audiences then.The plot itself is really thin, with Gable's character "Babe" deciding to marry Lombard's "Connie" on the flip of a coin. I don't know whether that was supposed to be THE COMIC DEVICE of the film or whether it was a throw-away notion coming from the screenwriters. It really doesn't matter much because it ruined the whole notion of the film, which is that Gable's "Babe" doesn't want any attachments of any kind to interfere with his life as a card sharp and cheat.In the social history context, it is very interesting to see a film which shows men of wealth and status in New York City -- in the third year of the great Depression ( counting 1930, '31, and '32 as the epicenter of that disastrous time ) -- casually gambling away sums of money that would easily have sustained a family of four over an entire year !!Lombard is an intriguing personality in the history of the American cinema and every one of her performances in the '30s speaks volumes about the genius she had contained within herself. She is so wistfully beautiful and her comic timing is usually impeccable. In this film she plays a woman who thinks she is wasting away in her small town, bored with her "unsteady" boyfriend and bored with her job as a librarian. The point is, however, that she was a young woman with a job in the depths of a depression that savaged the whole of the U.S. economy.For audiences of that era, her character's decision to toss that safety and security for an "instant marriage" to the rogue "Babe" would have been both scandalous and highly romantic. The fact that Gable's very nefarious alternative lifestyle -- as a card sharp and con man -- nets him a plush apartment and plenty of ready money, doubles the scandalous nature of the plot. The fact that he and his confederates fleece the social class known as "New York Swells" accounts for some of the film's popularity in that time and in that era.But Gable's "Babe" is not some Robin Hood type in a tuxedo. He and his partners cheat the rich and keep the money for themselves.They are not progressives, they are not "reformers," they are crooks.This enjoyable film earns a 5 from me for the supporting cast of actors and from Lombard's extraordinary ease of performance. The plot itself is so near to being utter nonsense that only her luminous and magnetic beauty saves the day for the entire ensemble. Clark Gable was the "good guy" with heartburn in "It Happened One Night," which is a far, far superior film. Here, he is just flat out all criminal with heartburn and no better than the bankers of that day, who foreclosed on homes and farms with nary a thought to the long-term consequences to their customers, to society, or to the health of the country which made them so prosperous to begin with. Seventy-five years later, these nuances are probably lost on people who don't know a lot about our true American history. The formulaic "happy ending" tells me that the producers ran out of story before the actors ran out of charisma or talent.

Roger Burke The nineteen-thirties saw a lot of comedies made. And this was one of many comedies made during the height of the Depression.But, it wasn't the first time for Gable and Lombard to be in comedy, although it was the first and only time that the two were together in a movie (they got married, for real, in 1939).'Babe' Stewart (Clark Gable) is the boss of a gang of card snipes, working the short con on any suckers they can find – rich ones, that is. After a bungled session, he goes on the lam to upstate New York and stops at Glendale, where he meets the local librarian, Connie Randall (Carole Lombard). He's so impressed with her, he agrees to marry her -- on the toss of a coin, no less – and they return to New York where he spends the next few months trying to keep the secret of his wealth from Connie.Before things unravel for Babe, he decides to fake a trip to South America while he voluntarily gives himself up to the cop who's been trying to pin a rap on him for years – thereby getting the cops off his back once and for all, and hence able to settle down to genuine married life with Connie whom, he thinks, knows nothing of his criminal life and duplicity.How wrong can Babe be? See the movie and find out...I'm a Classic Hollywood fan, of all genres, so I was glad to finally catch this one on DVD. The print was pretty good, so the sound and picture quality were great. And, like many other movies of that era, the settings were very much like stage productions, as though you are sitting in a live theatre: actors crisscrossing in front of the camera, very few reverse angle shots, and none-too-tight framing of the main characters, especially when in a lovers' clinch.Philosophically, the story raises an interesting aspect about their marriage: at the end, just what is the basis for their bond? Is their love based on mutual love, or mutual lies?

Ben Parker The perks of this movie are many: a fun screwball comedy set-up involving card-sharking, two beautiful stars looking young and fantastic (you'll see why women first fell in love with Clarke Gable, and found him ideal to play Rhett Butler), the only on screen pairing of said stars, who were to become husband and wife. He would love her long after she died in a tragic plane accident on a mission to sell war bonds (i think it was). Another perk is the pre-production code raunchiness. You may notice that any movie made between 1930-1934 seems a lot racier than movies made before or after then. This is because in this short period there was no censorship of movie content, and no rules to say what you could and could not show on screen. This was left to the filmmaker's discretion. So you'll find shots of Gable in the shower, and Lombard also, though she is much less exposed. Not actual nudity, of course, but open sexiness banished from movies from 1934 till whenever the Hayes code ended - such as Gable asking Lombard the librarian to fetch him a book from the top shelf so she has to climb up the ladder and he can look at her legs.If you've never seen a screwball comedy, you might be pleasantly surprised. They're all pretty fun. Bringing up Baby with Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn is probably the best one. They were all the rage in the 30's, and Carole Lombard was the ideal screwball heroine. To be recommended.