WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Chit-chat, current events
User avatar
charliechaplinfan
Posts: 9040
Joined: January 15th, 2008, 9:49 am

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by charliechaplinfan »

I couldn't imagine Onibaba in colour, it has such beauty in black and white.
Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself - Charlie Chaplin
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

I have just watched the sentimental 1955 Henry Koster film "Good Morning Miss Dove" (1955) which benefits of a wonderful performance by Jennifer Jones as the stiff, stern, spinterish but nevertheless lovable title character. The movie depicts the events in the life of woman who sacrificed her life in order to save her diseased father's prestige and honor. Beautiful vignettes told via flashback of the many students Miss Dove taught and tried to guide during her life. Robert Stack co-stars as one of her students who becomes a doctor and treats her when she suddenly falls seriously ill. Chuck Connors plays another student who became a policeman and simply worships the soil Miss Dove walks on. The storyline is very involving and the film is quite touching at times. Finely paced. Filled with lovable characters. A good film.
MikeBSG
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by MikeBSG »

I watched a terrific Soviet film yesterday. "A Cruel Romance" from 1984 was directed by Eldar Ryazonov, who was normally noted for his comedies. However, this is based on a 19th Century play that bears a family resemblance to "Anna Karenina," although it is set among people of lower social status.

The movie looks wonderful, think of a Russian "Merchant-Ivory" production, and there is a lot of humor up until the shattering climax. Very well-done, and it should be much better known than it is. It is on DVD, available from Facets multimedia.
User avatar
movieman1957
Administrator
Posts: 5522
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
Location: MD

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by movieman1957 »

I finally caught up with Fritz Lang's Man Hunt. Walter Pidgeon plays a famous big game hunter who, for the sport of it, tries to position himself as if he were to assassinate Hitler. (This is set before the war begins.) He is captured. He will be released if he signs a letter saying the British government had him do it. He then manages to escape. This then becomes the basis for the rest of the movie. The Nazis send people under cover to England to catch him. The Germans are well played by George Sanders and John Carradine. Many noir components to it. Pretty exciting hunt of Pidgeon by the Germans through London. Pidgeon is aided by Joan Bennett who easily falls in love with him.

Fairly exciting chase film as Pidgeon does his best to outwit the Germans. A little disappointed at the very end of the film but all the talk of sport and the way the two main characters handle their face off is most interesting. Certainly worth a look.
Chris

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

I finished watching "Wise Girl" (1937) an engaging little comedy released by RKO and starring Ray Milland and Miriam Hopkins, about a rich socialité who falls for an artist who's the uncle & guardian of her two nieces -sounds a little bit complicated, doesn't it? Many funny moments and a good supporting cast lead by Henry Stephenson, Walter Abel and Guinn "Big Boy"Williams. The Boxing match sequence is a hoot! And the two girls who play Miriam's nieces are very natural and charming. I do not recall seeing them in any other films.
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

Since Friday I have watched a variety of films:

"Les Croix de Bois" (Wooden Crosses) (1932). Simply one of the most harrowing Anti-War films I have ever seen. I have read it was made to rival with "All Quiet on the Western Front" (1930). The film has a different style though because I almost felt I was watching a documentary and the real WWI was going on onscreen -which does not detract from AQWOTWF which is still my favorite War film. Everything is so real, so truthfully depicted. The battle scenes are among the best ever made. Stunning! Some scenes were so hard to take; so harsh, grim and tough! When all the soldiers were moaning and dying after a tremendous battle, I was in awe and completely moved. One of the main assets of this film is that it achieves to depict War as an absolute stupidity; as something so senseless and useless, in terms of suffering and loss of valuable human life. Human life is above all richness, territory or power and if Man does not understand it we will never be able to improve and move on to the next stage of evolution. Some of the featured players were actually veterans of WWI and the two of the leads were among the finest actors of the French Cinema: Pierre Blanchar, whom I recently saw in the excellent Silent "Le Capitaine Fracasse" (1929) and Charles Vanel, a very prolific actor who played, among many other roles, "Javert" In Raymond Bernard's "Les Misérables" (1934). This film is very different to any Hollywood picture that was being made in those days, especially since more than focusing in one particular character or developing specific relationship between the characters, it focuses on the situation as a whole, like a slice of real life. Impressive and very unique.

After watching the former film I had to see Hawk's take on the story: "The Road to Glory" (1936) and I knew it was going to be totally different: more Hollywoodized. Well it was, but it's not bad. It's better not to compare it with the 1932 masterful film and take it for what it is: a good drama. There's a romantic subplot that's thrown in to the story and one of the main characters -Warner Baxter, who plays the tortured captain- is reunited with his father (Lionel Barrymore) who's too old for War, but still wants to fight near his heroic son. Some portions of the story do not ring true and the situations are more overly dramatic and sentimental, but this does not mean that the film does not have its merits and entertainment value. June Lang, who plays the love interest is very beautiful and has a contemporary look; I mean, not only does she not look like a lady from 1916 -when the picture is set-, but not even a girl from 1936! She's so slim and slender that she looks like a model from the 1990s. Her hairstyle was made -I guess- to make her look more "French" & sophisticated, which is a little bit out of place, since she's supposed to be a small-town girl, not a Parisian. Also, to make her look more attractive, she wears a suit that does not look like a nurse's outfit. On the other hand, she performs quite well, except in her first scene with Warner Baxter, where she plays a dramatic scene a bit artificially. Warner Baxter and Fredric March (who plays a Lieutenant under Baxter's orders) are very good in their roles and Lionel Barrymore and Gregory Ratoff ditto. What is a real shame is that all the action scenes and some scenes shot in the church were completely borrowed from the 1932 French film. And since I had just seen it I noticed it very much. In all, a good dramatic film in Hollywood's terms, but very different and inferior than the 1932 French original. As an anti-war film it pales in comparison to "Les Croix de Bois" and most certainly in comparison with AQOTWF.

"Slumdog Millionaire" (2008). I do not know why, but I thought this film was happier. I was wrong. It revolves around the Who Wants to be a Millionaire? TV Show in India and the premise is good. The first part of the film was hard to take because of the harrowing reality it depicts in Bombay's poor slums. As the story moves it gets more typical, until the semi-expected ending. The film goes from more to less. Anyway it was worthwhile to watch, but not a masterpiece by any means.

"One Touch of Venus" (1948). A quite silly, mildly amusing musical comedy that would have benefited from Technicolor. The best things about this film are Ava Gardner's stunning beauty, Eve Arden's priceless wisecracks and Kurt Weill's wondrous song "Speak Low". Robert Walker's performance made me feel a little bit embarrassed at times. I felt he was out of his métier, especially in the first part of the film. Dick Haymes and Olga San Juan fared better in semi-comic, farcical roles. Fluffy but lacking sophistication.
MikeBSG
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by MikeBSG »

Yesterday, I watched "Young Man With a Horn."

I guess I liked the story better when it was called "Humoresque."

there are some movies that you watch and say, "Well, there were some scenes that don't work, but I can enjoy the stuff that did work." and there are some movies that you watch and say "There were some bits that worked, and they suckered me into watching the whole movie that didn't work." "Young Man With a Horn" is one of the latter.

To me, the movie kept changing direction. Was it a doomed love story of two strong characters with inner demons (Douglas and Bacall)? Was it the story of how hard it was to be a jazz man? Was it a story of how you can have a happy ending no matter what? Turns out that's what it was. I just sat there and cursed the ending of this film. How much contempt for your audience can you have?

In some ways, this seemed like a dress rehearsal for "New York, New York." That movie didn't entirely work either, but the fuller version, with the "Happy Endings" number left in, is much better than "Young Man With a Horn."
User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8024
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by moira finnie »

Young Man With a Horn seems to ring most true when Hoagy Carmichael shambles into view for me. An actual friend of jazz legend Bix Beiderbecke, whose brief life inspired the novel of the same name by Dorothy Baker, Carmichael lobbied with the producer Jerry Wald and the director Michael Curtiz to give him a part in the film. Though it's not Hoagy's fault, the watered down version of Dorothy Baker's book, (which had the central character dying of alcoholism at the end and made the ambiguity of Bacall's character clearer) met with critical thumbs down from most reviewers at the time--save for Carmichael's "effortless" role as Smoke, the piano playing conscience of the driven horn player (Kirk Douglas)--who does not appear in the book. It probably didn't help the movie that Doris Day hated her role, which reminded her painfully of long nights and groggy days on the road singing with bands on the road when she was a teenager.

According to Carmichael, who participated in story conferences, and tried to inject some authentic jazz flavored background into the story line, the ending of the movie, with Curtiz and Wald favoring the downbeat version, was promised. Of course, when Hoagy saw the finished project, it seems that Jack Warner nixed the dose of reality in favor of a laughable recovery for Kirk.

I found that, after reading the novel Young Man With a Horn, the books of the late Richard Sudhalter, who was a musician as well as a gifted writer, are great resources for learning more about music and movies. Much of the above info came from a couple of terrific books by Sudhalter, called Stardust Melody: The Life and Music of Hoagy Carmichael and Bix: Man & Legend.

I like your idea that New York, New York (1977) was a later version of this same story. I do have some trouble with that sometimes incoherent movie as well. Despite all the dazzling visual and musical talent on display, there's nary a character to like, (well, maybe Lionel Stander). Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I've always suspected that, like many films in the '70s, some behind the scene cocaine abuse affected this production's evolution.

But what an intriguing double feature Young Man With a Horn (1950) and New York, New York (1977) would make!
Avatar: Frank McHugh (1898-1981)

The Skeins
TCM Movie Morlocks
User avatar
srowley75
Posts: 723
Joined: April 22nd, 2008, 11:04 am
Location: West Virginia

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by srowley75 »

Here's some of what's been in my DVD player as of late:

*Slightly Scarlet (1956, Allan Dwan) - Widescreen color noir starring John Payne as a man employed by a tough crime boss (Ted de Corsia). Payne's ordered to dig up some dirt on an honest mayoral candidate when the candidate threatens to tackle the city's organized crime racket if elected. Payne meets the candidate's secretary (Rhonda Fleming) and her fresh-out-of-jail kleptomaniac (and nymphomaniac) sister (Arlene Dahl). Payne winds up falling in love with Fleming and gives her incriminating information about his boss. Fleming passes the information along, causing the crime boss to leave the city. Meanwhile, Payne takes over the syndicate's operations. Dahl returns to her thieving ways and begins to fall for Payne. Eventually the crime boss returns and havoc ensues.

Despite the abundant intrigue, double-crossing, killing, etc. I still struggled to stay awake, probably because the film's most interesting characters (i.e., de Corsia and Dahl) were regulated to such minor roles. Payne and Fleming are front and center, and aside from Fleming's va-va-voom figure (she looks like one of those buxom secretaries that constantly gave Young Mr. Grace palpitations on Are You Being Served ), neither commands your attention. Their performances lack the depth and their characters the nuances that would make you care about whether or not they come out of their predicament alive. Unless you're a noir completist, there's nothing special here.

*The Ghoul (1933, T. Hayes Hunter) - On his deathbed, a professor and devout believer in ancient Egyptian religion (Boris Karloff) orders his Christian servant (Ernest Thesiger) to ensure that he is buried with a valuable and sacred jewel wrapped in his left hand. The jewel's intended to give the professor passage into heaven. The servant steals the jewel, but unfortunately he's not the only one who wants it. The professor later rises from his crypt to retrieve the jewel.

It took me three sittings to finish this dud. Even given its promising story and a rolls-royce horror cast that also includes Cedric Hardwicke and Ralph Richardson, I can't name a more boring horror film. It's neither thrilling nor campy. It's just a dry, talky mess, with various characters scampering around and either looking nervously over their shoulders or creeping menacingly through the dark - I've been far more entertained by forgotten poverty row "old dark house" movies. Karloff has barely any screen time, and the other actors are either grating or listless. There are two extremely brief confrontation scenes near the end, and those finish almost as quickly as they begin. Not recommended.

*Strangler of the Swamp (1941, Frank Wisbar) - The superstitious denizens of a swampland are living in terror. It seems that years ago, an innocent man (Charles Middleton) was convicted of murder and sentenced to hang. Before he died, he leveled a curse against those responsible for his conviction, vowing that he will return from the dead to wreak revenge against them and their families. Only through the self-sacrifice of an innocent one will the killings cease. Numerous individuals are found strangled, including an old ferryman. His sweet daughter (Rosemary La Planche) arrives to take over the ferry, and soon after, the hunky son of one of the swampland's leading citizens (Blake Edwards - yes, that one) also returns home. The two fall in love, but the strangler threatens their bliss.

This poverty row shocker, shoddy as it may seem on the surface, has nevertheless aged better than many a studio horror film of the same time period. Its special effects are laughable and Middleton's stentorian voiceovers are over the top (though enjoyably so), but the exciting story, foggy and tense atmosphere, and occasional shots of the ghoulish-looking and emaciated Middleton are enough to maintain your interest and give you some minor willies. And at just under an hour, you won't complain of losing your time investment. Recommended.

*Oh! Mr. Porter! (1937, Marcel Varnel) - With the help of his sister, incompetent railroad employee Willie Porter (Will Hay) snags a job as stationmaster of the small, rural town of Buggleskelly. He arrives to find that the station is in shambles, his lazy co-workers (elderly Moore Marriott, portly Graham Moffatt) use the goods that arrive at the station for themselves, and the townspeople avoid the station at night because they believe it to be haunted. Porter attempts to bring some organization to the station through several ill-fated ventures, including organizing an excursion and offering tickets to the local villagers, but all of these yield typically disastrous results.

This film was my introduction to Will Hay and his brand of comedy, which judging by this film rests somewhere between The Three Stooges and Monsieur Hulot, with a British accent thrown in. It seems to rely more on situation and slapstick than witty repartee. I chose this particular title as I'd seen it featured on numerous "best" lists and read that it's often considered one of the best British comedies ever made. My copy was only average quality and while I found myself constantly having to backtrack the DVD to decipher Hay's lines (his heavy accent and speedy delivery often made his words incomprehensible to me), the eccentric characters helped to make it charming and amusing, though it's not the laugh riot others claim. Recommended.
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

Yesterday I watched three films:

Transsiberian” (2008). A thriller that had me on the verge of my seat due to its suspense, Emily Mortimer’s character’s wishy-washy, stupid behaviour and some extremely violent and graphic scenes. It stars Woody Harrelson, Mortimer, Eduardo Noriega, Ben Kingsley, Kate Mara and Thomas Krentschmann. Corruption, violence, greed and lust in the Transsiberian train. Good contemporary film, but not for people who can’t abide graphic violence.

Mandingo” (1975). A Cult film which is not as bad as the BOMB ratings in Maltin’s and Scheuer’s TV Guides had lead me to think. It is no great film of course and it’s not PC at all in regard with its subject matter, but there are some interesting performances.

"In Name Only" (1939). Excellent, adult drama in the vein of Dodsworth with Cary Grant, Carole Lombard and Kay Francis at their very best. Sensitive treatment of the beautiful relationship that develops between widowed Lombard and unhappily married Grant. Francis plays a selfish woman -Grant's cynic wife- skillfully in a multi-layered portrayal. There are no one-dimensional characters here. I feel that between 1937-1945, Cary Grant delivered his best performances, especially in drama. In this period, in my opinion, he still had that "fresh" quality, just like Cary Cooper in the 1930s, -especially up to 1936- and Loretta Young in the Pre-Code Era. When these stars became household names and "institutions" that freshness was lost. I hadn't realized this with Cary, who might well be my favorite male star, but after realizing that "Penny Serenade", "Holiday", "In Name Only", "Only Angels Have Wings", "Bringing Up Baby", "The Philadelphia Story", "The Howards of Virginia", are among my favorites films of his and that the roles he played around this time are the ones that most appeal to me, especially due to that special fresh quality he instills in them, I did. His dramatic work here is first rate and his chemistry with Carole Lombard perfect. Great direction, script, supporting cast et al. Maginificent, superior film. It ought to be restored properly though.
melwalton
Posts: 503
Joined: October 14th, 2007, 5:58 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by melwalton »

LI'L ABNER.
It's very difficult( impossible?) to transfer a comic strip to the screen, unless music is added. Norman Panama and Melvin Frank did and came up with a winner.

Some good songs (Johnny Mercer / Gene de Paul), grade A choreography ( Michael Kidd / Dee Dee Wood), and some terrific dancing.

The story really doesn't get in the way ..even has some laughs. The singing is good, especially Leslie Parrish ( probably dubbed).
A good musical ... I especially liked the song PAST MY PRIME . mel
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

Today I watched a very intimate, beautifully done film "Indiscretion of an American Wife" (1953) aka "Terminal Station" (Stazione Termini), starring Jennifer Jones and Montgomery Clift.

The film was produced in Italy by Jennifer Jones' husband, David O. Selznick, from a story by Cesare Zavattini, directed by Vittorio De Sica and with dialogue by Truman Capote.

It chronicles the last day of the passionate love affair between a middle-aged married American woman and a younger Italian teacher. The plot, in a way, reminded me of David Lean's masterpiece "Brief Encounter" (1945). I remember there was a thread at the TCM Boards about "your favorite train movies"; well I must add this great romantic film to my list.

In barely over 60 minutes and in spite of some editing flaws of the print I watched (which wasn't of very good quality either) I was totally enthralled by its passionate, romantic atmosphere. Jennifer and Monty completely conveyed the despair of two lovers who passionately desire and love each other, in spite of the fact that they realize they must part -especially Jennifer, who has a husband and a little daughter waiting for her in Philadelphia. The whole movie was filmed on location in Rome at Cinecittá studios and at a Train station. A very young Richard Beymer, who was later to star opposite Natalie Wood in "West Side Story" plays Jennifer's nephew.

The cinematography is very good and the constant use of close-ups of Jennifer Jones' and Montgomery Clift's faces adds to the tension of the film. Their expressions say it all.

This is one of Jennifer's most heartfelt and sincere performances and De Sica truly takes out the best of her. There isn't almost a trace of artificiality in her portrayal of the despairing wife trapped between love and duty. Her chemistry with Monty Clift is absolutely marvelous. I did not expect such a wonderful picture, since I had read some lackluster reviews of the film. This confirms to me one more time, that one can't trust anyone, one has to actually to see the film.

Thoroughly recommended.

Has anyone seen the 90 minute print of the film? How does it compare with this 63 minute version? Thanks for any feedback.
User avatar
moira finnie
Administrator
Posts: 8024
Joined: April 9th, 2007, 6:34 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by moira finnie »

Hi Fernando,
I've only seen the 63 minute version of The Indiscretion of an American Wife but I see that Criterion has issued a dvd with both a shorter version and De Sica's 89-minute version of Terminal Station . This disc, which was originally 39.99 from Criterion is available in used form on Amazon here. Since I love Vittorio De Sica's movies in general, it might be worthwhile to look for this dvd. I've had good luck purchasing used dvds from them before with no trouble. I would like to see it in its entirety to make a better judgment of the movie, which seems a bit rushed in the shorter version. One thing that struck me last time I watched this one: Montgomery Clift never looked more vulnerable. The scene when he tries to explain to the American woman (Jennifer Jones) what it would be like if she stayed with him was very touching, and heartbreaking to see his longing and his shame.
Image

If you like Jennifer Jones, have you ever had a chance to see Gone to Earth (1950) aka The Wild Heart, the Michael Powell-Emeric Pressburger film? Some people don't like it compared to the more refined Powell-Pressburger works, but I loved the film's romantic excess, blending Welsh mysticism, country life, and a touch of madness into a heady brew. It probably didn't help that David O. Selznick was reportedly trying to keep his hand in the production, even though he was rather unwelcome, to put it mildly. I believe that the film is available as a Region 2 dvd and on vhs.
Image
Avatar: Frank McHugh (1898-1981)

The Skeins
TCM Movie Morlocks
User avatar
silentscreen
Posts: 701
Joined: March 9th, 2008, 3:47 pm

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by silentscreen »

I watched "Other Men's Women" from my new Forbidden Hollywood collection. While it had it's moments, especially those that featured James Cagney and Joan Blondell as a hard bitten depression era waitress, this was not one of Wellman's best freatures. I'm not complaining though, any classic that they choose to bring out is still a diamond in the rough.

The story was rather dated looking and cliche, but it has it's moments like when a tortured and blind Regis Toomey is wandering in the rain in a deserted railway station trying to find a locomotive. This is the first movie I've seen Grant Withers in as well. (the first husband of Loretta Young.) It was also good to see Mary Astor, she's always a welcome addition. You realize how much times and morals have changed when you see these types of pictures with Lily (Astor)and Bill (Withers) agonizing over a forbidden kiss as she's married to Jack, (Toomey) who happens to be Bill's best friend. Today they would've jumped into adultery without a second thought. :shock: Of course no actual adultery was committed, but the "thought" of it was to have tragic results, even in a precode.

Without giving any more away, the story does cop out with the ultimate happy ending. All in all, I've enjoyed this set thus far, and I recommend it.
"Humor is nothing less than a sense of the fitness of things." Carole Lombard
feaito

Re: WHAT FILMS HAVE YOU SEEN LATELY?

Post by feaito »

Thanks for that info on the Criterion Disc and for your valuable insight, Moira. I also feel that Monty Clift seems more vulnerable here than in any other film of his I've seen. I've been reading very mixed reviews abou the film on the net, but it worked for me. In spite of the abrupt editing, cuts, flaws, it moved me, it affected me deeply. I read that Jennifer Jones fell madly in love with Clift during the filming of the picture. And now I've realized that Miss Jones was actually only a year older than Monty Clift. He looked younger.

I have never seen "The Wild Heart" and I'll look for it in the DVD Rental shop where I am a customer now; they have lots of PAL Zone 2 DVD Releases! Thanks for the recommendation! :D

Today I watched Nicholas Ray's "Born to Be Bad" (1950) where Joan Fontaine plays one the most manipulative and selfish characters she ever portrayed -she must be a descendant of "Ivy" :wink:

In spite that "Ivy" (1947) is a very amusing, attractive picture, I felt that Miss Fontaine gives a better, subtler and more nuanced performance as Christabel Caine. In her scenes with Robert Ryan -who plays the writer she really loves, better say wants- you instantly realize that this two hardly could have more than a sexual chemistry, especially because of Christabel's fondness for money. Joan Leslie is very good and looks prettier than ever as the well intentioned Donna. Zachary Scott is the dumb guy who gets cheated by Miss Fontaine's charms. Mel Ferrer is a cynical painter. Clever drama with a noteworthy performance by Joan Fontaine, playing one of the few "baddies" in her career. This is one picture of the Golden Era in which the bad woman isn't really punished.

I ended the day with a film I hadn't seen since my school days: "Rosie!" (1967) in which Rosalind Russell deftly portrays the high-spirited, full of enerrgy title character: a rich widow who instead of daughters has two "crows", who crave for their mommie's millions. The two crows are played by bitchy Audrey Meadows and wishy-washy Vanessa Brown. Leslie Nielsen is Rosie's son-in-law, probably the most despicable character in the whole film. Sandra Dee is Rosie's grandauaghter and she's very fine. So are James Farentino as a young lawyer who loves Dee and Brian Aherne as Rosie's lawyer and best friend. Many familiar faces in the wonderful supporting cast: Reginald Owen as a deaf butler, Margaret Hamilton as a loony maid, Doris Lloyd as the cook, Juanita Moore as a nurse and lovely Virginia Grey as Aherne's secretary. An amusing comedy-drama.
Post Reply