Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Roman Sampson One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Karl Ericsson A man is deeply wronged by smart businessmen and acts upon it. He is morally in the right, since the culprit being acted upon would go on with his mayhem if he was not stopped and there was only this way to stop him.I cannot tell much more without Writing a spoiler but I wanted to Review this film because it tells about a moral code that seems lost today. Today everybody in America seems so committed to business that they would not react like the man above because I hear of no such stories although there must be a billion of them around and seemingly nobody is reacting on them.Maybe it will happen some time and then it will come like a big Avalanche and sweep most of it Clean - who knows? If it happens though, it will be the end of all business and the beginning of decency.

vincentlynch-moonoi I should preface my comments by saying that Spencer Tracy is one of my two very favorite movie actors. The first time I watched this film, I panned it. Today I watched it again, and I'm going to revise my review a bit.The problem with this film is not the acting. Spencer Tracy -- in his first MGM film -- does rather well in that category. There are times that, without words, Tracy characterizes a man with deep inner turmoil, which is exactly what this film needed. Virginia Bruce does well as the love interest. Lionel Atwill is acceptable as a police investigator. James Stewart has one of the most irrelevant roles of his career here, but then again, it was his very first film. The problem here also isn't the general story line. In a general sense, it works.But, as they say, the devil is in the details. For example, yes, reporter Tracy could seemingly report the news before it even happened...well, while we later learn that he knew things first hand, he didn't know how a police detective or a lawyer or a judge would react to certain events, so a newspaper -- even back then -- wouldn't be printing stories that might very well not pan out as reported. I don't expect film trials to be realistic, but here, each lawyer asked each witness one, or at most two, questions. Totally unrealistic. And then there's the first 10 minutes of the film -- a total waste of celluloid and adds little to the story; once Tracy shows up...asleep on a carousel, it does get more interesting, but everything is just a little too convenient for Tracy's character. But the, without warning, the last 20 minutes of the film comes alive as we find out that Tracy is the actual killer.With a good manuscript, this could have been a great film...but you have to at least give some hints to the audience that something is amiss. Not so here. The first half was so bad, that were Tracy not a personal favorite, I would have turned the film off.So watch the film to see great acting by Spencer Tracy. Tolerate the script.

David (Handlinghandel) Spencer Tracy is the title character. He is a newspaper's ace crime reporter in this very good movie that could have been great.I've read quite a lot about Tracy's life. The character he plays seems to have many traits and behavioral patterns in common with the real Spencer Tracy, who was apparently a far darker person than many of the benevolent roles he played.This moves along at a good clip. At times it's upsetting, at others it's exciting.Virginia Bruce is the lonely-hearts columnist at the paper. She has crush on Tracy but he has secrets and a past that have kept him from allowing a relationship to develop. (A couple years earlier, before the Code, it well might have developed anyway.) Bruce was a beautiful woman, with a poignant, ethereal quality. Here, however, she is unflatteringly costumed, made-up, and/or lit. She comes across more as a mannish, dowdy old maid schoolteacher than the romantic leading lady she was."Fury" is not a sunny movie, to say the least. This is another movie that shows a different Tracy we know from his two 1930s Oscar-winning roles, the collaborations with Katharine Hepburn, and "Father of the Bride" and its sequel.The very darkest of all his movies, however, is "The People Against O'Hara." I consider that one a classic. This is not quite a classic but it's unique and gripping.

BaronBl00d Two financiers and swindlers get theirs when one is shot and killed and the other is accused and tried for the crime in this early, somewhat creaky film from the 1930's. The film has at its core the story of one newspaperman's spiral into drunkenness as the wife he once had has died and his father has lost all his savings to said swindlers. Spencer Tracy plays the newspaperman as only he can essay any role: with complete conviction and enormous talent. While this film is not great, it is a solid film on all fronts and has an intriguing conclusion. I enjoyed the look at what newspapers were like back then, the relationship to police that reporters had, and the wonderful character acting with the likes of Lionel Atwill, a young Jimmy Stewart, Virginia Bruce, William Demarest, and Robert Barrat as a hounding editor. Sure, lots of the journalism clichés are used here, but let's remember that for its time they were a lot fresher than they are now. Director Tim Whelan is solid behind the camera and manages to give Tracy(with his help) and Bruce some depth. The mystery isn't too hard to figure out, but the way it was handled was what struck me as somewhat inventive.