Grace Metalious' mega-selling "Peyton Place" (1956) made it to the big screen the following year, and came to represent small-town sexual repressions; moreover, it set a standard for a new kind of soap opera, with its characters' sexual practices pushed up a notch. Certainly, this was not the first movie to present the risqué themes herein; but, due to interesting characters and memorable performances, in a top-notch production, it deserves credit. The soap opera genre was greatly influenced by this film, its sequel, and the ground-breaking 1960s television series.

Unfortunately, the film whitewashes Ms. Metalious' original stories (for example, the abortion becomes a miscarriage), which sometimes leaves the characters too sketchy. Yet, the alterations are neatly accomplished, by director Mark Robson, writer John Michael Hayes, and a terrific cast. The cinematography of the Camden, Maine location, by William C. Mellor, is also outstanding. With producer Jerry Wald leading the group, they all earned "Academy Award" nominations. It is interesting that the original "Peyton Place" takes place during the 1940s - it sometimes seems set in the 1950s.

The film successfully shows young adults' limitations relating to sexual activity, higher education, and moral attitudes.

The impressive cast received an impressive amount of honors. There were "Oscar" nominations for protagonist writer Diane Varsi (as Allison MacKenzie), tightly-wound mother Lana Turner (as Constance MacKenzie), shack-dwelling friend Hope Lange (as Selena Cross), sensitive boyfriend Russ Tamblyn (as Norman Page), and alcoholic janitor Arthur Kennedy (as Lucas Cross). Undoubtedly, the numerous noms had some level of canceling out; and, adding to the confusion, Ms. Turner's was the lone "Best Actress" citation, though she was secondary to Ms. Varsi, and equal to Ms. Lange.

The "Golden Globes" nominated Lang and schoolteacher Mildred Dunnock (as Elsie Thornton) in the "Supporting Actress" category; probably, they considered Turner and Varsi dramatic leads. "The Film Daily" had Lang, Varsi, and Mr. Tamblyn making "Famous Fives" lists in the "Newcomer" and "Juvenile" categories, with Lang winning in the "Supporting Actress" category. "Photoplay" had David Nelson (as Ted Carter) winning their "Best Newcomer" award for his impressive debut in a young adult role. If they had been given, "Peyton Place" might have won some casting and acting ensemble awards.

********* Peyton Place (12/11/57) Mark Robson ~ Diane Varsi, Lana Turner, Hope Lange, Russ Tamblyn


The Granddaddy of all soap operas, Peyton Place has its place in film and television history. When the steamy best seller by Grace Metalious and film by Jerry Wald and 20th Century Fox were converted into a television series, it set a standard for evening prime time soap operas that some will argue has never been equaled.

Times have surely changed. Set in New England as it is if Peyton Place existed it's now in the vanguard of blue state America. But in 1941 Peyton Place in New England would probably have enjoyed keeping cool with native son Calvin Coolidge and no doubt voted for Hoover, Landon, and Wilkie instead of that radical FDR in the White House.

In this prim and proper New England town it's all about keeping up appearances. Everybody knows everyone so if things aren't quite fitting the America of Norman Rockwell you keep them behind closed doors.

Like Lana Turner never bothering to tell daughter Diane Varsi that she's an out of wedlock child, like poor Russ Tamblyn not being able to relate to the opposite sex in his teen years, like Hope Lange living with a brutal rampaging father in Arthur Kennedy who physically abuses her mother Betty Field and does more than that with her.

Leon Ames as the town's employer, owner of the mill where most of the town works maybe the leading citizen, but the town's moral authority is Lloyd Nolan, a very wise and caring doctor, the kind of small town doctor who's a passing memory.

It's impossible to describe the plot of Peyton Place because there are so many strands in the plot fabric. It all works very well courtesy of screenwriter John Michael Hayes and director Mark Robson. The whole thing is narrated by Diane Varsi as Allison McKenzie who grew up and wrote a book about her home town.

Peyton Place got nine Oscar nominations, but unfortunately lost a lot of awards it was up for to The Bridge On The River Kwai. Lana Turner's one and only nomination came in a year that the Academy voters gave the Best Actress Award to relative newcomer Joanne Woodward. Russ Tamblyn and Arthur Kennedy split the vote and Red Buttons won for Sayonara for Best Supporting Actor and the same thing happened with the Best Supporting Actress with Diane Varsi and Hope Lange splitting for Miyoshi Umeki to win for Sayonara as well.

The Code was still firmly in place and had it not been I think Russ Tamblyn's character would have been more explicitly gay. Here he's a timid young man not comfortable with the opposite sex and not real popular among his own heterosexist males. Then as now, gays are not real comfortable in most small towns.

Still for those who like their big screen soap operas, you'll love Peyton Place, even with changing mores the film holds up well.


This 1957 Blockbuster was cutting edge for its time, but is greatly watered down the tawdry nature of the book. Many vicious details presented in Grace Metallious' breakthrough novel were simply set aside for various reasons, likely 1950's censorship. In viewing this today, the film seems more like "Little House on the Prairie." It was just so unseemly that Allison McKenzie and Little Norman Page were under suspicion of skinny dipping even though they did no such thing.

The novel and the movie both brilliantly spell out the underlying motif of New England Puritan hypocrisy. In the novel, Ms. Metallious points out that gossipy old middle aged women castigate against young people, because they themselves are just too old, fat, and ugly to go out and party any more. Since nobody wants them, they point the finger elsewhere to through attention from themselves.

Lana Turner seems to have one mode in this film; that is, to walk around like a frigid bitter ice queen delivering harsh lines at everyone. All in all, quite a good show, but a bit dated.


An all-star cast have a field day in this excellent adaptation of Grace Metalious' novel.

There is so much going on in this town and it is told well with wonderful acting and 5 acting Oscar nominations to boot.

Constance MacKenzie settled in this town after her husband allegedly died and is raising a daughter, Alison, while the proprietor of a dress shop. Truth is that Alison is illegitimate. Constance is soon courted by the town's young new high principal, Michael Rossi played well by newcomer Lee Philips. The position of principal was supposed to go to veteran pedagogue Elsie Thornton. ( a wonderfully spinster-like performance by Mildred Dunnock who specialized in these roles.) As is so true in life, a school board stepped in and used Thornton's age to thwart her appointment for the supposedly young, dynamic Rossi.Dunnock conveyed the right stuff in depicting her disappointment but her determination to continue her commitment to teaching.

Alison's best friend, played by Hope Lange, comes from a dysfunctional family. Her emotionally wrought mother is victimized by a second husband, played with a fantastic sadistic quality by Arthur Kennedy. Alison is Diane Varsi and Lange's mom is Bette Field, who eventually kills herself.

Town gossips and other vicious people reside in the town. Dr. Lucas Swain, a marvelous Lloyd Nolan, will come to the aid of Lange, when she is accused of killing her stepfather Kennedy. Lange's scenes on the witness stand are believable and Nolan is at his best in his condemnation scene of the town.

Russ Tamblyn put away his dancing shoes and stars as the boyfriend of Selena Cross (Lange). Victimized by an overbearing mother, Tamblyn showed he could do some fine dramatic acting.

With all this, we have a fine Lana Turner performance as Constance MacKenzie. A sexually suppressed woman, afraid of a romantic involvement in her life, Turner turned in a powerhouse performance.

Lana Turner was nominated for best actress and supporting nominations went to Tamblyn, Kennedy, Lange and Varsi. While no one won the Oscar, their performances are memorable.

A truly wonderful rendition of town life with the problems of gossiping pursued.


Author Grace Metalious was known only for this single novel, here carefully crafted into a film that holds up extremely well even in today's milieu. Various entertainment media consequently milked the title and characters almost to death through the years, especially with a stillborn sequel and groaner TV series. However, this 1957 production remains a joy forever, in the Olympian halls of Hollywood achievement. Here, you will see the New England of your dreams and a character study that stands out for realism and purity. This is not Norman Rockwell's beloved New England, but one not terribly removed from it.

	The cast is headed by fine character actor, Lloyd Nolan, newcomers Diane Varsi, Hope Lange and Lee Phillips (who later became a reliable director of television films), the underrated but highly talented Russ Tamblyn, perhaps Lana Turner's best performance, and the always engrossing Arthur Kennedy. The supporting cast is equally strong. Do not look for a town in any single state that resembles Peyton Place. The film, for those of us who know New England, was shot all over and in several different states. The best regional sites were selected and beautifully composited into a town of visual elegance.

	The novel on which the film is based was once considered libertine, an overreaction by the sex phobia of the early and mid 20th Century of the United States. By today's standards, no one will noticed this. All that said, the lovely Franz Waxman score and apt Mark Robson direction took the original Metalious work, considered a soap opera, into the province of exemplary drama. This is a film many will want to acquire instead of renting, for repeated revisiting.


I read in the 'trivia' section of this website that Joan Crawford and Pat Hingle were both interested in portraying Constance MacKenzie. I think Pat Hingle would have been an interesting choice for that pivotal role. He and Mike Rossi would have set the screen afire in their lovemaking scenes together. Joan Crawford would have been too old for the part. But Pat Hingle seems just the right age. Few people remember how he oozed with almost feral sexuality back in the 50s. If they ever remake "Peyton Place" I hope they reconsider having Pat Hingle play Constance. I think he was born for the part. All he'd need is a little rouge and some pancake.


Peyton Place anticipates the on-coming youth culture mantra of the 1960s wherein it is advisable to not trust anyone over thirty. Almost all the parental characters in this movie are focused on raising their offspring in such a manner that the kids will undoubtedly spend years in intensive therapy. Luckily the future looks bright for Peyton Place. There is a courtroom scene at the end in which a character, in this case a common sense doctor played by Lloyd Noland, is able to give a speech within the context of his testimony that sets the town in the proper moral direction. Where would Hollywood be without courtrooms for this type of scene to take place? Many conflicts are resolved and seemingly there is potential for living happily ever after, at least that is, until Return To Peyton Place...

The cinematography and location shots give the film a nice visual vibe. Lorne Greene would have made a good Perry Mason. Hope Lange was definitely a talented beauty back in the day.


There are many timeless issues and interesting characters in this first-rate melodrama. There are secrets and lies aplenty lurking within the respectable facade of Peyton Place. Lana Turner plays against type as Constance Mackenzie, an uptight mother of an 18 year old girl. Her daughter and her friends have their fair share of problems and conflicts. The characters are realistic, they make you feel for them and want to follow their development. There is never a dull moment and I can thoroughly recommend this great slice-of-life drama!


Grandiose soap opera drama (isn't life a big soap opera?), beautifully acted, photographed, scored, written, directed. It features incest, pre-marital lust, a teen with a domineering mother, suicide, illegitimate children, murder, more. Lana Turner gives her best performance ever, minimizing any annoying postures, heading a mostly noble ensemble cast, with the possible exception of Lee Phillips, handsome as the small town's new principal, but somewhat grating in character. Diane Varsi, as Turner's daughter is also the narrator, occasionally brilliant, but somewhat monotone in voice. Hope Lange is superb, along with Arthur Kennedy, Betty Field, Mildred Dunnock, Leon Ames, Russ Tamblyn. The New England locations are stunning in Deluxe color Cinemascope, set to a stirring, symphonic soundtrack. The setting is 1940s before and after World War II, but it's most definitely 1957, via the costumes and hairstyles. Based on a bestselling book, and supposedly toned down a bit, the picture was a huge hit for Fox, spawning a mediocre 1961 movie sequel and a highly watched 1960s television series. But don't miss the original classic!


This movie has few pretensions at being great art. Instead, it's a very glossy and high quality soap opera that deals with so many sleazy elements in an entertaining way that it will keep your attention throughout. In many ways, this film came out to capitalize on the publicity surrounding Lana Turner's own screwed up family life (her daughter killed boyfriend Johnny Stampanato in 1958)--instead of running from the negative publicity, the movie exploited it, as the film is about a supposedly conservative small town that instead seethes with a cauldron of rape, murder, illegitimacy and hypocrisy! You might have expected Ms. Turner instead to have done a movie akin to THE SINGING NUN after the much publicized trial, but instead chose this tell-all tale. All-in-all, an excellent movie with a great script, wonderful acting and terrific production values.


When you consider the definition of soap opera-- "A drama characterized by stock characters and situations, sentimentality, and melodrama"plenty of admirable movies come to mind, including Oscar winners from the very first, "Seventh Heaven," through "Rebecca," "The Greatest Show on Earth," and "Kramer versus Kramer" to recent movies like "Chicago" and "Crash." "Peyton Place" is certainly a soap opera, but not an admirable film.

The litany of flaws would take more than the 1,000 words IMDb allows, and anyway I'd use up every synonym for mundane, including conventional and corny. The characters are so uniformly muttonheaded that I inferred extensive inbreeding in Peyton Place. The cockeyed motivations of two particular characters-- actually, make that four-- serve as proof:

First: Selena Cross is facing trial for murdering Lucas Cross, her sexually abusive stepfather. She begs Dr. Swain not to come to her defense by testifying that she had miscarried Cross's child years before. Her reason? She's in love with a soldier named Ted, and believes Ted's life would be ruined if her secret were revealed. She argues (get this) that she'd rather face life in prison than live without Ted. And Dr. Swain, as dim-witted a practitioner as I ever hope to encounter, doesn't think to point out that life in prison is also (duh) life without Ted.

Second: Allison MacKenzie wants to be a novelist. She shows some short stories to the high school principal. He likes them but with reservations, so he wisely recommends college. But she doesn't want to go to college. She doesn't want to read stuff like Shakespeare. She wants to find out about writing for herself, at a typewriter. Her passion convinces him, so he takes her to the newspaper editor. Who hires her. So make that five cockeyed characters.

So Allison goes on to write crap like "Peyton Place." The End.


I've been looking forward to seeing this for a while now, as I am a fan of the novel. Censorship ripped a lot from "Peyton Place", but the guts are still there-- and it's a good result. An entertaining, epic melodrama that never outstays its welcome, despite the long running length. Mark Robson directs and he handles the intertwining story lines with flair. The colour photography is gorgeous, and the cast is equally good. Many people seem to have ragged on Diane Varsi's performance as Alison, but she's fine and Lane Turner also turns in one of her best performances as her mother. Hope Lange steals the show as the heartbreaking Selena. Although her performance and her 'look' as Selena Cross were nothing like I had expected, I still thought she was excellent. The same can't be said for Lee Phillips, who is nasal and kind of annoying. I find it interesting how much they cleaned up the character of Rodney Harrington (Barry Coe) for the film. In the novel he dies at the wheel of his fast car, drinking and womanising, having pretty much dodged the WW2 draft. In the movie, he actually marries Betty and is killed in WW2. And Ted Carter ultimately rejects Selena.


The scandalous best-selling novel by Grace Metalious is brought to life in this somewhat watered-down 20th Century Fox production, although it was still considered shocking and controversial for the time. Filmed on location in Camden, Maine with some interiors at the studio, the movie has an authentic feel, particularly in comparison to previous pictures shot entirely on backlots. Lana Turner, whose career needed a shot in the arm, took on the role of Constance MacKenzie, a woman who hides her teenage daughter Allison's (Diane Varsi) illegitimacy, and strives to control the girl from making the same mistakes that she did. Although this is the main storyline, several others intertwine, exposing the underside and hypocrisy of small town life. Next in line is definitely the plight of Allison's best friend, Selena Cross (Hope Lange), whose poverty-stricken existence isn't even the half of what goes on in her luckless life. Her despicable stepfather Lucas Cross (Arthur Kennedy, who at this stage in his career masterfully portrayed drunken lowlifes), rapes her (which results in a pregnancy which Selena later miscarries), and her mother Nelly (Betty Field), who also happens to be the MacKenzie's maid, discovers this and commits suicide. Betty Anderson (Terry Moore) is the town "fast girl" whose romantic liaisons set the community's tongues wagging, while Constance tries to fight her attraction to high school principal Mike Rossi (Lee Phillips), again afraid of history repeating itself. Betty loves Rodney Harrington, son of the most prominent family in town, and the two manage to marry before he goes off to battle in WWII.

Allison finds innocent love with Norman Page (Russ Tamblyn), which sets off her mother's suspicions. Distraught over Constance's revelation over the truth regarding her father, Allison angrily leaves Peyton Place for New York. Rodney dies in the war, Norman finally comes into his own with the war service (the incestuous relationship with his domineering mother is hinted at, but never expanded upon). The tug of war waged between mother and daughter comes full circle as does everything else when Selena murders her stepfather in self-defense, goes on trial, and so in a sense, does Peyton Place. During the climatic courtroom sequence, the town's secrets and faults are exposed. The wonderfully wistful narration by Varsi adds an air of poignancy. Mildred Dunnock, Lloyd Nolan, Leon Ames and Lorne Green also have notable roles. Director Mark Robson would go on to direct the 1967 film version of "Valley Of The Dolls", while Peyton Place would inspire a sequel book and film, as well as a primetime soap opera from 1964 to 1967.

A box-office smash upon its release in 1957, more than partly due, no doubt to the scandal which immediately followed the 1958 Oscars for which Turner, Varsi, Lange, Kennedy and Tamblyn received nominations for their performances in the film. Lana Turner's mobster boyfriend, Johnny Stompanato, was stabbed by her teenage daughter, Cheryl Crane, during a violent argument in which he threatened to kill Turner, as well as her mother and daughter. (Turner is wearing jewellery given to her by the mob figure in some scenes). Lana's testimony at Cheryl's trial was seen as a direct parallel to her performance as Constance in the courtroom scene in the movie, and in later years, Crane revealed that her mother's husband prior to her involvement with Stompanato, Lex Barker, was molesting her, another coincidence that did not go unnoticed by Crane when she first saw the movie. Author Metalious reportedly based both books on her own hometown, and the characters of Allison and Selena were apparently based on herself.

Not as explicit as the novel or as films of today, Peyton Place nevertheless is an intriguing, dramatic and watchable movie that definitely captures an earlier time, and it remains an interesting example of how art can imitate life.

The DVD: Commentary by Russ Tamblyn and Terry Moore (recorded separately, alas, so no interaction), on the flip side, AMC Backstory documentary on the filming, theatrical and teaser trailers, as well as the Photoplay Awards.


...this is an extremely well-conceived, well-written, well-acted, and well-made film. The dialogue, in both its everyday scenarios and heated exchanges, is excellent; and the mockumentary style meshes perfectly with the nicely segmented, ever-twisting plot. Then, after making light of some serious history, the ending takes a dark, ironic turn to drive home its message that whatever political system you choose, the worst elements in human nature are here to stay...


As a son who grew up in a family of communists, I found this movie very insightful: the twists and turns of what fervent idealists took to be worker's paradise through the 50s, 60s, 70s and then to the end of the dream in the late 80s/early 90s was very well portrayed, especially with Judy Davis' stalwart commitment, which was portrayed quite sympathetically; the dark side of her family relationships was also poignantly sketched, as were her son's struggles with history: both global and personal; all in all, a superb blend of the comic and the dramatic: a genre it's very easy to screw up and is rarely, if ever, handled as deftly as it was here.


When I saw this film in the TV listings, I thought "could be some good tack." It's much better than that. It starts off almost comedic like, culminating in Stalin singing. Then it enters into the emotional problems Anna has over killing Stalin. The film then focuses on her son Joe, and his problems in finding out he is the son of Stalin, and his gradual descent into Stalinism. The film serves as a warning against Stalinism, about how any abuse of power, no matter the end, is wrong. The interest is held with some superb acting by the cast and the idea of Stalin producing a child and "heir." The movie could use more of an ending, and it does treat itself as being "true" particularly at the end. Having said that this is well worth watching and I recommend it to anyone intrigued by Communism and Stalin.


This must be one of the most refreshing surprises I saw in a long time! Looks boring but it's ultrahilarious. In documentary style we learn something about Australia's dirty history (well this is a satire so don't check out the net for verification, okay?) We go back in the early fifties at where we find an Australian communist Joan Fraser (Judy davis) who really would give her life for the red star, it goes so far that she can arrange to meet the man Stalin himself (all of course before the public knew of his slaughters) and what Joan never expected...she ends up in bed with Stalin but as the man is walking on his last feet, he dies... Agent Nine (Sam Neil) tells her she's a hero who saved Russia and that same night she also ends up in his bed.... Not knowing what to do Joan returns to Australia finding out that she is pregnant. She doesn't tell her Australian boyfriend who the father of her child is....but the poor b*****d accepts. But soon trouble happens when agent Nine returns to the land of the kangaroos...cos the question is : who is the father? He or Stalin? Things of hilarious things are following and we follow the days of the child Joe welch (Richard Roxburgh). For communist mum he's a perfect child...always to be seen at manifestations against the Vietnamwar but then the nightmare strikes...Joe falls in love with a female cop! Really it's totally hilarious even if the personages always stay sober but it's the kind of script that leaves you not one minute in silence. A perfect film from a rather unknown director, see it!!!!


"Children of The Revolution" is one of those well-executed dark comedies, that the Australian Film Industry excels at. If one enjoys dark comedy with a heady twinge of surrealism, you're really going to enjoy this movie. Our best scene (without spoiling it) is when the three start dancing and handing out flowers, with Louis Armstrong crooning Cole Porter's "You're The Top" in the background. My friends almost fell off the couch with laughter. It's a gem!


I had never heard of this film, and so last night I had an unexpected pleasure in watching a clever movie. What a marvellous satire on communism. There were some very funny scenes, especially the dancing trio. Judy Davis was wonderful as the pro communist mother -- what a performance! This movie is a dark Australian comedy and worth seeing.


Judy Davis is a young communist in 1950 Australia. She corresponds with Stalin and gets an invitation to Moscow. The trip changes her life (of course) which we get to follow for the next 40 years. You'll be hooked after the first two minutes of this very original film. Great performances (especially from Judy Davis) and unique plot twists made this film worth watching.


This movie has a promising premise: A near-fanatical pro-communist young woman travels to Moscow and has a dalliance with Stalin (and may have unwittingly killed him!). Upon her return to her native Australia and discovery that she's pregnant, she marries her eager, long-suffering suitor and continues in her work for the party.

The movie appeared to be two in one. The first half was promising, providing decent political satire in the form of black humor. But the second half developed into a dark drama devoid of any humor. In the end, I wasn't sure exactly what was being conveyed.


I'm a huge fan of Judy Davis, so I was eager to see her in a movie from her native land for a change, and this ranks with her best performances. It's odd to find a mid-90's film that's a satire on communism, but writer-director Peter Duncan and Davis do a good job here. Although Davis' character, Joan Fraser, is so single-minded, she and Duncan don't make the mistake of caricaturing her, instead making a strong, energetic person who happens to be a zealot.

The movie does stumble with F. Murray Abraham's portrayal of Stalin. In his hands, Stalin is a caricature, and so the potential unease we might have on Joan's behalf (though she's fiercely dedicated, she wouldn't stand behind a mass murderer) is passed over, and he comes off like a marshmallow. On the other hand, the ever-reliable Sam Neill is a perfect fit as the secret agent Joan comes in contact with, Geoffrey Rush is good as the long-suffering Zachary, who Joan dominates with the same fervor she dominates political meetings, and Richard Roxburgh is funny as Joan's son Joe, who, naturally, becomes a police leader. The best support, however, comes from Rachel Griffiths as Joe's girlfriend, also a cop.


While Judy Davis and Sam Neill give their usual fine performances, the script is so weak that the entire film crashes. It's supposed to be a chronicle of a wild-eyed Communist who has sex with Stalin and gives birth to an extremist who enjoys being handcuffed. Sight gags (walking into a tree) and silliness (Stalin's successors act up like the three stooges at his death) provide the only comic relief from this dreary tale that seems to go on for hours.


Brilliant performances from the whole cast set a unique story line ablaze with sparkling moments. Dark turns of plot are relieved by fascinating psycho-sexual revelations, and the whole effect is one of uplift as disaster is averted through enlightenment and personal sacrifice.


Quirky what-if flick about young Australian communist Joan Fraser Welch (Judy Davis), who gets impregnated by Joseph Stalin (F. Murray Abraham, who seriously does manage to look like the dictator) on the day that he dies, and has to raise the son without letting the boy know the whole story. "Children of the Revolution" gives one a sense of the sometimes tense situation down under in the '50s, which prompts Joan to go to the Soviet Union in the first place. But more than anything - in my opinion - it shows how, even though the USSR clearly betrayed its ideals, Joan maintains hers. She and her family never give up hope of a better future. Definitely worth seeing. Also starring Geoffrey Rush, Richard Roxburgh and Sam Neill.


The Pros

To me, the premise is hilarious - Stalin's love child.

I'm always happy to spend two hours watching Judy Davis. I think she's just great.

I saw this movie just before I got sick of seeing Sam Neil everywhere and I remember thinking he was neat.

The world of Stalin is absolutely hilarious. F. Murray Abraham pulls off a number of macabre gags with great presence.

Also, it's a wry look at political activism and some of the poses that resemble it.

The Cons

Gets boring after the first half and the premise doesn't add up to much.

Worth seeing just for the courtship of Stalin alone.


I knew absolutely nothing about this film before I saw it and I don't think I had any an preconceptions. The story sounded oddly interesting--a woman who claimed her son was the bastard of Joseph Stalin! Well, despite the quirkiness of the premise, it just bored me immensely. It certainly wasn't funny nor was it particularly entertaining. I think part of the problem is that IF it originally was meant to be a comedy (and I'm not sure that really was the intention), how can Joseph Stalin be funny?! You would think that the fact that he was one of the greatest murderers in human history would preclude any attempt at comedy! If that WAS their intention, it was a very sick joke and may perhaps illustrate a problem with whoever was responsible for this film. Was this film, perhaps, meant less as a joke and more as a homage to Stalin or to paint him as not such a bad guy? Who knows. For that matter, who cares? All I know is you shouldn't waste your time.

FYI--if you think I am being too narrow-minded or unfair to the picture, try substituting "Joseph Stalin" for Hitler, Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer as the focus of this movie. Do you think all their victims would find this movie a barrel of laughs?


This is a somewhat entertaining cat and mouse thriller with Brosnan, Hayek and Harrelson at the top of their game. The film starts out promisingly enough with a diamond heist which is more slapstick than suspenseful.

After the heist Harrelson follows the pair to an island where he believes they plan another big job. As the two male characters get more closely acquainted throughout the film we start to wonder who's tricking who.

Brosnan displays rare emotion in this film. Harrelson escapes his Cheers role by excellently portraying the many sides of what would have been a simple character.Hayek doesn't miss a chance to show off her body, and Don Cheadle's villain was superb. The only problem with that character was that we didn't see enough of him.

The film has some nice scenery and entertaining scenes, particularly the shark capture.Rush hour director Ratner has made a great film, which only really lacks style and good pacing. this film would have been better handled in the reins of, say, Steven Soderbergh.

But nonetheless, a very funny enjoyable film which will please fans of the cast and crew, as well as the movie-going public. It's not up to the standard of Oceans's eleven yet it beats the likes of Ocean's 12. Any fan of the comedy/thriller genre should go see this film, but I will be looking more forward to Rush Hour 3.


This movie gets high marks for five things and low marks for three, so overall it's a keeper.

THE GOOD - (1) A very colorful film, with wonderful bright colors from the Bahamas scenery; (2) an interesting story right from the get-go; (3) originality in the story; and (4) yes, to be honest, Hayak's figure, which is seen in abundance throughout the film. She knows it's good and isn't shy about showing it, and (5) overall a good mixture of crime, comedy, romance and suspense and just right amount of time at just under 100 minutes.

THE BAD - (1) Insulting gratuitous sex and really stupid sexual dialog at times; (2) once again subversive Hollywood making the FBI character a moron, for the most part; (3) some Rambo mentality (bad guys miss from close range, good guys never miss, etc.).

It's an outlandish story but don't analyze it for credibility or you'd be turned off and quit after 10 minutes. Just go along for the ride and enjoy the entertainment....and entertaining it is!


This movie was a pleasant shock, because it wasn't typical high octane adrenaline-pumping Pierce Brosnan action flick of recent memory! The action was more subdued and less far-fetched as a typical Brosnan movie. I laughed my butt off in parts, and the cast pulled off their roles in a badass-yet-comical way!

Salma Hayek adds some necessary female steam in this otherwise masculine tale! As always Pierce Brosnan delivers a wonderful performance helping to make this movie a real delight!

I can't tell you much more about the movie without spoiling scenes, so, see this movie; it's worth the whatever price you pay.


The Seven Seas Navigator is docking in Paradise Island in the Bahamas for a solid weekThey're having a nice promotion for the maiden voyage, calling it the Diamond Cruise: a gem exhibit whose star attraction is the third Napoleon Diamond It's, allegedly, the only priceless remaining 'cute little rock' Max Burdett and Lola Cirillo haven't stolen

The unlocking Special Agent Stan Lloyd of the FBI (Woody Harrelson) suspects that the two are planning to purloin it But how could they with six cameras plus 24-hour rotating guards, unbreakable polycarbonate display?

Max (Pierce Brosnan) knows he can easily clip Napoleon III and make Lloyd look like a jerk again For him, it's more about the challenge and the alibithat's his work of art But he affirms that the two are a couple of retirees trying to enjoy the island life

The gorgeous Lola (Salma Hayek) knows that, with Max, they went out at the top of their game, undefeated They were great together But, now, she feels it is the best time to quit For her, now, the challenge is to find joy in simple things, as a life filled with sunsets

Lloyd was chasing Max for seven yearsever since the first Napoleon Diamond went missing That day, he got to the scene, and took a few shots at the getaway car Next day, a bottle of champagne arrives at FBI Headquarters with a note saying, "Aim for the tires next time."

In the island, Lloyd teams up with the beautiful Sophie (Naomie Harris) a local intriguing cop who requires a big arrest

On the scene also appears Henri Mooré (Don Cheadle)the biggest gangster on the islandwho affirms to Max that the impoverished people of the island need his help, and that a cash injection in tens of millions of dollars would relieve the entire Caribbean So, he suggests to Max a partnership He would give him what he doesn't have: access to the marina, the crews, rotation schedules, whatever he needs

With picturesque sunsets, this colorful caper comedy has plenty of beauty, fun and humor


After the Sunset sees Pierce Brosnan play an ex-jewel thief in a simple "will the old pro come out of retirement for one last job" movie that is far more entertaining than its unoriginal premise sounds.

Pierce Brosnan takes to his dressed-down James Bond role very well, and the jokes and his style make him a very likable character. Woody Harrelson, the rival FBI agent, puts in a similarly enjoyable performance, and his inept bumblings around the island create some unexpected comic situations between the cop and the thief. It's the relationship between these two (and the compromising situations they find themselves in) that makes the film, as they antagonize each other and almost become buddies toward the end. Their encounters add something fresh and unexpected to the movie's simple formula and make it really entertaining.

Oh, and special mentions have to go out for Don Cheadle and Salma Hayek. Don's character is very funny, and he plays both sides of it well, and as for Salma...let's just say the directors are aware of what their male audience wants to see.

All in all, it's funny, quick, easy to follow, and contains enough little quirks to make After the Sunset an enjoyable and entertaining experience.


A movie with the great Pierce Brosnan can't go wrong really, everything he does, he makes look effortlessly cool.

The story about the diamond heist though, seems secondary to the beautiful locations, and Brett Ratner's obcession with filming Miss Hayek's chest from all conceivable angles (not necessarily a bad thing). Although Hayek is SO botoxed that she can barely move her facial muscles to express any kind of emotion.

Woody Harrelson and Brosnan make a really funny team, and if they make a sequel, I hope it concentrates on their two characters, because they have a great screen chemistry.


Someone commenting in these pages put it better when he said that we could rehash this film, analyze it, and make it into what it was not intended to be, but the fact remains that if we had a pleasant time while we were watching, it was well worth the price of admission.

Director Brett Ratner seems to be having great fun directing the movie. He was lucky to get the genius of Dante Spinetti's cinematography to create a movie that is entertaining with great locations. It's a good excuse, as any, to spend time in the theater. While Mr. Ratner is not breaking new ground in this genre, he makes "After the Sunset" fun to watch.

Pierce Brosnan is his usually suave self. His take on Max is to play it with an economy of gestures, as though he is bored by being told what to do. Salma Hayek, on the other hand, adds a beautiful presence to the proceedings without being too obvious. Woody Harrelson is a goofy FBI agent. Heaven help us if they ever are this dumb! Don Cheadle doesn't have much to do, as his character looks as though he was an after thought.

Just pretend you are on vacation in the Bahamas. Nassau never looked this good before!


The bold thief Max Burdett (Pierce Brosnan) retires with his girlfriend Lola Cirillo (Salma Hayek) in a paradisiacal island after stealing an expensive diamond. Stanley Lloyd (Woody Harrelson), the FBI agent assigned to protect the stolen stone, chases Max expecting him to try to robber a valuable diamond in a passenger ship and commit a mistake.

"After the Sunset" is a forgettable but attractive movie: the screenplay is full of plot points, the locations are wonderful; and the cast is very nice, leaded by the delicious Salma Hayek, the ironic Pierce Brosnan and the funny Woody Harrelson. The situations are very pleasant and the viewer will certainly spend 97 minutes of good entertainment with the twists in the story. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Ladrão de Diamante" ("Thief of Diamond")


I rented "After the Sunset" because it looked like a fun flick. If you delete Woody Harrelson from the cast, you get a pretty reliable threesome headed by former 007 Peirce Brosnan and rounded out with sexy Selma Hayek and the ever wonderful Don Cheadle. "After the Sunset" is about ex-jewel thief Max (Brosnan) and his lover, Lola (Hayek) who retire to the Bahamas after being unbeaten in all of their heists. However, FBI Agent Stan Lloyd (Harrelson), who Max and Lola harassed on several occasions during their career, won't believe that the two unbeatable master criminals are done - so he finds them out in the Bahamas and tempts Max with the last Napolean diamond which is on a cruise ship docking in the local bay. Max and Lola say no, but Max is further tempted when suave gangster Henri Moore (Cheadle) offers Max an offer he can't refuse. Lola is adamantly against it but poor Max is pathetically attracted. Meanwhile, Max and Stan become friends.

This movie is horrible. Brett Ratner does the WORST job directing and the script is really lame with only one or two really memorable lines that made you laugh. The rest of the time, you are just so embarrassed for these actors that you want to shake them and say, "WHY DID YOU DO THIS MOVIE?!?!?!?!" Selma Hayek puts on all her sexual charms for the role of Lola and would have probably done really well if she had actually had a really well written role. Peirce Brosnan, well, we miss him as 007. And who casts Woody Harrelson?! He is what makes this movie so bad. Woody, do us all a favor and never act again, k? The only person in the movie who does a good job acting is Don Cheadle who has probably never done a bad movie in his life. But his role in the film is so small that he is unable to really make up for the bad jobs that some of the other actors did. Plus, the climatic scene where (sorry to ruin this) Max steals the diamond is probably only 3 minutes long and looks like they did it in a rush at the end of filming.

All in all, don't see this movie. It is LAME and a total waste of your time.


Did I miss something? Was there a contest going through all the Grade Schools of America to find the best story for acclaimed director Bret Ratner to bring to the silver screen? If so, why wasn't there a calendar made for those who didn't make the final cut? Oh, wait, apparently children did not write this film, but instead a guy that wrote for the TELEVISION SERIES the Weakest Link. That surely makes him ready by all means to tackle the caper genre and inherit a big payday  right? You are the weakest link  good-bye. This movie was a disaster from the beginning. With cardboard acting, an aging (and girth growing) sex symbol, and a corny ending that incorporated nothing that we were shown through the entire film, it is a big wonder how After the Sunset ever saw the illustrious "green-light". Perhaps it was the size of Salma's boo  name, or perhaps the fact that Pierce Brosnan's The Thomas Crown Affair was such a cult film, or maybe because Don Cheadle was in it, because it had really no pull with just Woody headlining. So, how did this film get made? This film targeted pre-teen boys and retirement communities, and with their great pull, the financing behind this film became very easy.

This was a caper film right? We are supposed to go on this roller coaster ride of who's conning whom, coupled with lies, deceit, and a surprise ending that will make you want to re-watch from the beginning to experience anything that you missed. That is the focus, goal, and overall tone that a film like this should have followed. Instead, Ratner decided to just make a movie without any sort of excitement or drive. As I watched this film, I never once felt excited about the plot. Why? Because there was nobody getting me excited. The acting in this film was well below par for anything that Hollywood has released. Pierce tries, but just can't seem to capture the essence of the film. There is no little demon inside you rooting for anything. Salma's role was basically for eye-candy. She provided nothing spectacular either. I can literally say the same for Woody and Cheadle as well. Here we have strong actors doing absolutely nothing during the course of about two hours. These characters never drive the plot, they bring nothing but clichés to the table, and by the end we really don't have any true grasp as to whom they are. Honestly, cardboard cutouts could have replaced the actual actors and After the Sunset would have been a better film. There was no depth to the characters, no emotion, no structure, just the simple direction of "step here, say your line, step here, look surprised". It was embarrassing for all that were involved.

I think a major flaw to this film was that Ratner did not fully understand, or was prepared, for the caper genre. From the opening moments until the end of the film, you can tell that Ratner is just trying to use his friends in the industry and show the world that he has some power as well. I say this because I saw no true direction or moment of impressiveness where he defines himself as a director. He reuses the same ideas throughout the entire film, he doesn't give anything strong to his players, and nothing stood out in this movie. Sure, it was a beautiful location, but am I to believe that Salma spend a majority of the film building a deck for them to sit on? Am I to believe that Pierce is still a sex symbol even with a HUGE gut sticking out? Am I to believe that Cheadle is a bad guy/imported American who is at the top of the community? Finally, am I to believe that Pierce could still move as quickly as Ratner defined? I swear that in the final unclimactic moments of this film, I could hear Pierce doing some heavy breathing to get from point A to point B. Maybe he isn't ready for the next Bond role.

So, without a good story, or decent characters, maybe there was some humor in it that could pull us away from the sour sensation cultivating in your mouth. Well, guess who is placed in to do the humor element? Woody Harrelson. Now, I don't mind Woody, but in this role, he just wasn't believable and his humor was so cliché that I had trouble believing that he brought anything to this character. He literally plagiarized his entire role. Teachers, and film viewers of the world, should be very upset with him. Instead of bringing a new twist to his character, he resorted to weird sex humor, skimpy bully humor, and that ever-popular drunken humor while fishing that is sure to make that senile woman in the front burst out with laughter. To me it was pathetic and a worthless attempt to make a joke out of already dead film.

Overall, this was a massive disappointment. Here you had a decent director, some strong players, but the worst story ever written by a man who wrote for a game show. Which piece does not fit? There was this huge sense of apathy throughout this entire film and clichés riddled it that I just couldn't get past. Brosnan had trouble with this film, and I couldn't tell if it was because he just didn't care, or because he was working with such low-talent that his heart just wasn't in it. The ending hurt as well. There was no excitement or intensity, just plain  "here it is  like it or not". I personally couldn't digest this film with its poor acting and below-par story. This may be a good film for some that are not familiar with the caper genre, but for me it was just hogwash.

Grade: * out of *****


The movie is an absolute waste of time. As in all bad heist movies, the actual heist is all of 10 minutes. The cast has big names, however, Don Cheadle is wasted in a meaningless role that does not contribute to the film. Woody Harrelson's character of a cop is a mockery to the actor's potential. Well, Salma Hayek's curves are eye candy, however, does not justify having to sit thru this travesty of a film. If salma is the reason, you can always hire From Dusk to Dawn again and again. Pierce Brosnan sleepwalks to the role that he has essayed many times before ---a smooth, slick operator who has thought of everything and for whom things fall into place as if my magic. There is a force fed twist in the end, but its so plastic that it ain't funny. Guys, please don't waste rental money on this one.


'After the Sunset' is about Pierce Bronsan, a retired jewel thief. At the beginning he steals a diamond, but the heist scene isn't very good at all, and neither is this movie. So the movie starts where most heist movies end, in paradise. This movie is so stupid because Pierce Bronsan doesn't really want to steal the diamond until this idiot of an FBI agent comes and tricks him into it. The whole movie is pretty dumb, its just Brosnan, Hayek and Harrelson goofing off on an island, then eventually some sort of plot picks up, Don Cheadle recruits Brosnan to steal the diamond, then he gives Don Cheadle the plans on how to do it, but he really is just using that as a decoy so he can steal the diamond. This film has a very loose plot that isn't very gripping, and the actual heist scene is very childish and simple.

I spit on this movie, Mwahah!


Anyone who's been following movies for the last few years probably has a strong opinion of director Brett Ratner. Personally, I think he's a mediocre director at best, who simply makes faceless, anonymous popcorn flicks that make lots of money. I guess what irks most Ratner-haters is the fact that he seems to think he's the second coming, plays the Hollywood PR machine, and overloads his DVD's with WAY too much information about himself, as if anyone watching Rush Hour 2 wondered "Wow, did Truffaut direct this? I've got to find out more about this guy!" After the competent yet totally un-necessary Red Dragon, Ratner's moved on to After the Sunset, which at first glance looks like a high-tech crime caper, but grows into a fairly adult, mature character study, not unlike Tarantino's Jackie Brown. And like that film, audiences may find themselves confused and bored over the lack of action and plot twists (this film has probably the least amount of surprises of any heist film in recent memory - but when you become emotionally invested in the characters like this, that's a good thing).

Ratner's gone on record in interviews in saying that this is a love story, not between Brosnan and Hayek, but between Brosnan and Harrelson, and if you look at the film that way, you'll probably enjoy it a bit more than if you were expecting a Bond film or a slam-bang actioner. Their relationship is the center of the film, and provides a few touching scenes as well as some good laughs.

As for the heist itself, well, it's kinda rushed, totally unbelievable, and VERY reminiscent of Brosnan's remake of The Thomas Crown Affair, but all in all, it's a quick, fun 90 minutes, with fun performances, lots of eye candy for the guys (and girls), and shows Ratner may be maturing as a film-maker.


A popcorn flick for sure, Brett Ratner's "After the Sunset" gets so wrapped up in showing us exotic locales, sunny beaches and gorgeous women - OK, one stunningly beautiful woman - that it often seems more like a travelogue than a heist caper.

Screenwriters Paul Zbyszewski and Craig Rosenberg try to mix a buddy picture with a heist film and wind up with something not wholly satisfactory, a film devoid of any real surprises or grit. True, they have some attractive stars. But they also needed an engaging story.

"After the Sunset" is supposed to be breezy fun. We accept what's happening on screen because we want to. After all, if we thought too much about it, the opening sequence would make little sense. It's also a set-up for a later payoff. Unfortunately, that's just another of many cinematic clichés that riddle this film.

This film desperately wants to be different. It wants to tell us not about the planning and execution of a heist, but what happens when two robbers - Max Burdett (Pierce Brosnan) and Lola Cirillo (Salma Hayek) - retire to a gorgeous island away from FBI jurisdiction and find out paradise isn't exactly all that it's cut out to be and that robbers get bored. Well, at least one does. Fine, but then give us something exciting, a story we can get involved with.

Brosnan plays Max much like he played Bond - suave and light. Harrelson mugs most of the time and Don Cheadle, the best of the bunch, is wasted in a role that had tremendous possibilities.

The lovely Hayek's the film's strongest asset. Clad in tight dresses, bikinis and showing off plunging necklines, she struts about the screen oozing charm and sexuality. She even makes building a deck look hot. And when all else fails, she leans forward to allow us to glimpse her cleavage. That's about as exciting as this caper gets.

Although the film's about an FBI agent (Woody Harrelson) tailing Max because he's convinced the crook is going to steal the third "Napoleon Diamond" from a visiting cruise ship, this really isn't a cat-and-mouse picture. That would have been something - to turn this into a battle of wits between two fiercely competitive and charming men. Instead, the writers rely on unfunny bonding rituals replete with homophobic jokes and one-liners that don't have any zing to propel their story. Throwing Harrelson and Brosnan in bed together for a lame sequence is what counts as funny to the writers and director.

Lackadaisically directed by Ratner, who made the "Rush Hour" films and turned "Red Dragon" (2002) into simply another serial-killer flick, "After the Sunset" just doesn't know when to quit. It's as if Ratner and the writers kept thinking of endings until they found one they liked. And then they put them all in. What's even more galling is that these chaps are so sloppy and unoriginal, they devised the most hackneyed ending to a crucial shoot-out.

What this boils down to is terrible, by-the-numbers storytelling and film-making. Not only are the actors seemingly merely going through the motions, but so are the director and the writers. When it comes to heist films, give me "The Asphalt Jungle" (1950), "Rififi" (1955), "The Killing" (1956) or "Topkapi" (1964) any day. Forty, fifty years later, these films remain gritty, fun, exciting and entertaining as they ever were.


I give this movie 4 stars out of 10. It was entertaining now and then but overall, it was too slow and not enough plot to make it worth going to the theaters to see it. On the flipside, the ending was too unbelievable and made the whole movie not palatable.

The movie is about two retired jewelry thieves (Brosnan and Hayek) who retire to a Caribbean Island. They are pursued by an FBI agent, Harrelson, who try to lure them back into thievery with the prospect of stealing a jewel from a cruise ship. Into this mix is a local gangster who wants Brosnan to steal the diamond for them.

Overrall, it was an OK movie. Maybe I was too harsh in giving it a 4 instead of 5. Oh well.


Personally, I loved this movie! I went to the theater not expecting much and I came out loving everything about this film. It is a slightly suspenseful drama, with a few funny one-liners to make you laugh. The background of the island is breathtaking and it made me want to go to Paradise Island desperately. Salma Hayek is beautiful, and while she and Pierce Brosnan may not make the most believable couple, they do have a certain chemistry throughout the movie. I disagree with people on here who claim this to be a "guy's" movie. I am a female and I enjoyed this film very much. I think everyone needs to lighten up and enjoy a good film when they see one. I will recommend it to anyone who asks me.


This film is puree of heist movies: the Comic Heist (Ocean's Eleven), the Sexy Heist (The Thomas Crown Affair), the One Last Heist (The Score), and the "Gee, I Kinda Like the Guy I'm Chasing/Being Chased By " Heist (Heat). The result is a bland time-waster. Salma Hayek is gorgeous (duh!) but she and Pierce Brosnan have zero chemistry. Brosnan's relationship with Woody Harrelson has some good moments, but gets scuttled by heavyhanded are-they-gay? jokes that play like the first draft of a "Will and Grace" episode. Don Cheadle's talents are wasted in a thankless role as the villain--just when you've forgotten he's even IN the movie, he turns up again to bring the film to a halt. I kept waiting for one great plot twist, but every would-be Big Shock is telegraphed far in advance. As a caper film, this is petty larceny.


Max Burdett (Pierce Bronsan) is one of the best jewel thief in the world, along with his partner/girlfriend Lola (Salma Hayek). When they fooled an straight-arrow FBI Agent (Woody Harrelson) from stealing, one of the most expansive Diamond in the world. When Max and Lola decides to retired from stealing. They think, they could live the good life in the Bahamas. They find themselves being stalked by the FBI Agent, they fooled and Max finds himself threaten by a local Crime Boss (Don Cheadle) to steal an Diamond that worth about $30 million dollars. Max tries to do something to get himself out of this mess.

Directed by Brett Ratner (Rush Hour Trilogy, X-Men:The Last Stand, Red Dragon) made an entertaining crime comedy with full of laughs and some moments of suspense. The cast seems to be having an great time, including:Noamie Harris in a nice supporting role as the local detective. Only the disappointing performance is Cheadle, which his supporting role is very thin for this talented actor. This lively movie turned out to be an box office disappointment, probably due of marketing or simply an bad release date. Because "After the Sunset" is more of an Summer Movie. This film was released in the fall instead in November 12, 2004.

DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an good:Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an interesting often funny commentary track by the filmmakers, deleted scenes with optional commentary by the filmmakers, outtakes and more. This entertaining caper will certainly plays better on DVD. It's an forgettable but extremely pleasant film from Ratner. Watch for The late Chris Penn, Jeff Garlin, Dyan Cannon, John Michael Higgins, Shaquille O'Neal and Edward Norton appears in cameos. Super 35. (****/*****).


I have expected more suspense but what I saw here was boring. Only the first 10 minutes and the last twenty minutes were interesting. The remaining two third played on a real comedy level and has nothing to do with a thriller. Okay I have to admit that the FBI cop was very funny until the end but the story itself was very poor. I am sure that they could have done more about but as I mentioned you have to wait till the last twenty minutes that something happens. Only Lola was very hot in this movie and the nice setting place. Sometimes I had the impression that AFTER THE SUNSET should be a wannabe James Bond movie but it failed completely. Therefore the picture was very fine and clear but all that is not enough to get an average rating. The votes on IMDb are too high with actually 6.0. My wife didn't like it at all and so our vote is 3/10.


Things we might learn thanks to dross films like After the Sunset: 'Latino' women are scorching hot; there exists within the F.B.I. agents so inept that upon catching a shark whilst fishing, they will shoot them for good measure; women are nothing but mere objects that should dress in bikini's and keep their mouths shut when two epically superior men talk business with one another; stealing things is a good thing to do and theft is generally sexy.

These are the things that After the Sunset, directed by Brett Ratner and starring Pierce Brosnan, glamorise. These are the ideas After the Sunset bring to the plate and exploit for mere entertainment. Make no mistake, this film is written by men; made by men; for men and I'm not talking about in a constructive manner like Oliver Stone's Wall Street. After the Sunset is close to dead in almost all departments. The thinking behind it is that a director will pull together a couple of actors everyone will recognise, a smoking hot actress everyone will like due to the range of outfits they'll get her in and then clear off to the Caribbean for a few months  oh, and they'll be shooting a film while they're there. But that's the grating thing with this film, all the actors and actresses have a smug sort of smirk on their faces throughout the experience as they potter about in a film that they know deep down is absolute junk and are there to merely enjoy the locale whilst systematically getting paid.

Ratner does not even need an interesting story, if it's a few months in the Caribbean he'll take it. The film signals Brosnan's first post-Bond adventure and it feels very much like Brosnan's Bond himself has retired from British Intelligence, found himself a partner and gone off to a paradise to live out his days. The film opens with a Bond type stunt in which Max Burdett (Brosnan) and partner Lola Cirillo (Hayek) rob the F.B.I. of a diamond in a case cuffed to Stan Lloyd's (Harrelson) hand. What I found rather uncomfortable here is how a man (who is absolutely terrified) can be shown to be locked in a jeep while gas seeps through one of the heater vents and slowly either kills or knocks him out. This is juxtaposed with the two thieves kissing passionately as a cheesy song plays through the radio. From here After the Sunset announces itself as the sort of sick, uneasy and messy film it is and never until it has ended does it rise above the level it peaks at during the heist two minutes in.

From here, Burdett and Cirillo retire to the utopia that is the Caribbean. Theft is their fetish, it is their non-sexual object or activity that really turns them on. At the mere mention or thought of stealing something, even in the process of stealing, these two characters are thrust wildly into the mindset of passion. In fact, this film carries a strong air of sexuality be it women as the object of desire or a homoerotic undertone. The first thing is that while the film glamorises theft and stealing, it maintains that air that everything done in this film is 'sexy'. Selma Hayek exists in this film to merely wear a bikini and look attractive, that is it. In fact the film is so distasteful that her attractiveness and general sexual presence has to act as the film's main source for comedy with the secondary source being Harrelson's bumbling and inept federal agent antics. Throughout the film, Hayek will slowly remove outer pieces of clothing; come onto the character of Max Burdett and in one instance act out a fake sadomachistic act over a two way radio to con an eavesdropping character, all in the name of comedy and all in the instance of pointlessness. Is this a film or a lingerie advert?

Then there is the unoriginal idea for a narrative that consists of Burdett going for 'one last job'; the job in question a diamond on display on a luxury cruise ship in the area. Max doesn't even know it's there until Agent Lloyd points it out to him, lucky he did otherwise they'd be no story. From here, Max is a man in crisis. He ignores his vows that he should be writing for the love of his partner; he becomes confused over his sexuality once his marriage threatens to fall apart and then sleeps with Harrelson's character in one of a few homoerotic scenes after this. But Agent Lloyd is equally out of his depth in a film that doesn't have any. Shooting a gun at a shark, down into the floor of a boat stating "You have the right to remain silent!" has to qualify as one of the dumbest excuses a film has to offer for mere petty laughs. Then there is the further evidence that this film exists for mere comedy driven romances when Lloyd begins to develop a relationship with Jamaican police officer Sophie (Harris). She begins strong and independent and I had a scrape of respect for the film in having her that way. But the film then has the male character of Lloyd chip away at her personality and soon enough, they're together in a mindless and somewhat silly series of scenes.

So the film fails as a heist film even if the final act revolves around one. The film also grotesquely fails as a study of relationships and what we find attractive. Women are mere objects and if they're not to begin with then they will be tamed eventually. Burdett and Lloyd go through separate crises themselves and must share beds and rub suntan lotion on one another before the film gives us a final weak and incomprehensible twist. If the film does do something right, it's that it ends when we want it to.


This might not be the greatest story ever told, but who cares if Salma Hayek is in it?! (...and wearing practically nothing throughout the whole film!) Same old story: Police officer (Harrelson) is hunting thieves (Hayek and Brosnan). They develop some kind of relationship. He never managed to catch them and now they are retired. But will they come back for one last job... and can he catch them this time?!

Well, to be honest, it isn't actually that bad. I was expecting worse! There are a couple of nice jokes and really beautiful locations in this movie...!

I recommend: If you have a jealous girlfriend, better watch this movie on your own. Unless she likes Pierce or Woody... then it's even and all can be happy! ;)


After the sunsets a great comedy and I think Pierce Brosnans great. Don Cheadle was very poor I think but Salma Hayeks tops were nice. In After the sunset there is too much sex and nudity for the rating I mean eight year olds could go see that and Pierce Brosnan has his shirt off for like half the film. 30 percent of the film is shot of either topless men or women with hardly anything on apart from bra and knickers or a bikini! Sometimes sex scenes make a movie but in this case it just ruins it. The language is great though, not too much swearing but where there is swearing its funny.I love Pierce Brosnan, I think hes cool and the movies cast well. Woody Harleson is good too, he makes the film fuuny. Overall this is a great film, so get tickets and go see it, but a message to all the crew from After the Sunset - next time miss out most of the sex and nudity!

From David Nicholson, Film Critic, Texas


"After the Sunset" - Pierce Bros- nan, Salma Hayek, Woody Harrelson, Naomi Harris, Don Cheadle. Master thief Max (Brosnan) and his lovely accomplice Lola (Hayek) are retired on a paradise island. Or so they say. FBI agent Stan (Harrelson), whose tracked them there and isn't buying that for a minute, reckons that MaxÕs sights are on a fabulous diamond about to arrive on a touring cruise ship exhibition. But a local gangster (Cheadle), who also has plans for the diamond, befriends Max and now the twists and double-crosses begin. Compared to Brosnan's Õ99 "The Thomas Crown Affair," this is heist film-lite, having less-than-satisfying details and various lapses in logic. Brosnan, however, is just so cool, and Hayek breathes sexuality nonstop


I just watched this movie today on cable and was pleasantly surprised. Not being a big fan of Pierce Brosnan, I was a bit apprehensive to even watching this movie. However, the movie started at a nice pace and continued that way throughout, making it very entertaining.

Brosnan and Selma Hayek are diamond thieves and lovers. Woody Harrelson is an FBI agent who is duped by Brosnan and Hayek and they become his "white whale." The thieves disappear to the Bahamas to retire. Harrelson then catches up to them because a cruise ship is in port that is displaying one of the world's largest diamonds. Don Cheadle, a local mob boss, then attempts to hire Brosnan to steal the diamond for him.

The movie is then a series of cat and mouse type charades between Brosnan, Hayek, Harrelson, and Cheadle. The acting is great from all these stars; Harrelson and Cheadle are both hilarious. Also, Naomie Harris absolutely sizzles in her role as local Bahamian cop and love interest to Harrelson.

If you like light-hearted thrillers with a little romance thrown in, you will enjoy this film. Perhaps one of the greatest attractions is the locations; filmed in the beautiful Bahamas. Rating 8 of 10 stars.


The story of a jewel thief who may or may not have retired and who is lured out of that "retirement" has been done before and done better by most other versions of the tale. On paper this should have worked, you have a good cast, a good director, a decent script (in theory) and enough money to do something special. The problem is that none of it comes together and you end up with a very big mess. Actually its like a beloved uncle who comes to cheer you up after a horrible disfiguring car crash but all he manages to do is depress you even more.

WHat were these people thinking?

It's awful, it's terrible, and I never want to see it again.

Unfortunately I probably will, repeatedly on cable.


Sorry but I have to say this film was truly awful. A repeat of the Thomas Crown affair, which was only good because of the originality of the 1960's script. Yes Ms Hayek does seem to get a lot of top and bottom shots, I wonder why that is? And Mr Brosnan squaring up to the physically inferior Mr Harrelson.

Plainly the scene that said it all for me was when Mr FBI is getting some TLC from that Barbados copper, crap accent, and they repeat the scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark. The one where Mr Ford is getting TLC from Ms Allen on the pirate boat, when Mr Ford is pointing to the bits of his face that hurt and Ms Allen is kissing them.

So this movie has absolutely no imagination in the script. The acting is non-existent as the performers seem only to be massaging their ego's. Oh and that bloke from Neighbours the Aussie soap, as the ships captain, what accent was his meant to be? And the best part is, with no expensive sets, CG effects, crashing cars etc, this film would have been very cheap to make. And will make stacks of money. Like Mr Paul Zbyszewski's other production effort "The Weakest Link" what a talent! Sadly the rating scale does not go to Zero....


Awesome movie. Salma and Pierce were great together, clever plot, big twist. And of course, it features my board game, Tanbo. Besides Salma, there were a lot of beautiful women in the movie. Tall slender women with nice round asses bouncing to and fro in tiny little bikinis. The twist at the end wasn't just a little twist, it was a turn-the-movie-upside-down type of twist. Very clever. My compliments to the writers, directors, etc. And as I mentioned, Pierce and Salma were (pretending to be) playing my board game Tanbo, a game I invented 12 years ago. An abstract strategy game which is played on a Go board, with Go stones. Information on Tanbo is easily found on the internet, and can be played at tanbo.com.


AFTER THE SUNSET is the new movie by director Brett Ratner, it stars Pierce Brosnan and Salma Hayek as lovers and retired thieves living at the Bahamas. Woody Harrelson plays Stan, an FBI agent who has spent 7 years looking for them and has finally found them apparently living a quiet life making love and watching sunsets.

Max (Brosnan) is not as comfortable as Lola (Hayek) with their brand new life style. Max is fighting with temptations coming from local kingin Don Cheadle who has his eyes on the $$$Napoleon Diamond$$$. The movie doesn't focus much on the heist and it focuses on the great chemistry of its characters.

Salma Hayek and Pierce Brosnan have great chemistry as lovers, Brosnan and Woody Harrelson also... ? and Don Cheadle is great in his brief. Salma Hayek is hot and charming, Brosnan is smooth as usual and Harrelson is hilarious and that makes a perfect combination of talent and charisma that saves AFTER THE SUNSET from being boring or meaningless.

The plot at the end is not going to shock audiences with something they don't see coming but the movie is more a comedy about heist with nice elements of romance and thriller than a serious heist film like The Italian Job,

If you like good fun movies or simply, you loved Rush Hour, then you know what you'll get from After the Sunset

8/10


I read the comments about this movie before I saw it and was afraid I might not like it. One comment said they were disappointed by the ending of the movie. Another said it seamed as if Don Cheadle was thrown in as an afterthought, and Woody Harrellson was too much of a "dummy". However, I was not disappointed in the least bit. I loved the entire movie. It had just the right amount of action, suspense, and even some comedic moments. It is a perfect movie to watch if you just want to relax and be entertained. The only thing I might change about the movie is the frequent make-out moments between Pierce Brosnan and Salma Hayek. Overall - 2 thumbs up!!!


This film is really entertaining. It has drama, action, and a good plot line. Filmed in beautiful locations the director and scriptwriter should be awarded along with brilliant acting from Pierce, Woody and Salma. It makes a film well worth watching time and again - which I do. Most people I know do seem not remember it showing at the cinema, but it is still great to buy on DVD - which I have - and it includes extra scenes, bloopers and the making of the movie. This movie and Pierce's remake of the Thomas crown affair are both outstanding and enjoyable. This movie "after the sunset" is one of my favourite films. I hope the Director makes more of these movies! Thank you so much!


The reason this show works so well is that unlike certain other ghost hunting shows it is not full of believers. There are only 2 presenters, Chris Fleming and Gail Porter. Chris is the 'sensitive' with the gift of being able to communicate with, feel and 'see' the dead. He has been developing his talent since he was a young boy and is definitely one of the best I have seen. Gail Porter on the other hand is a skeptic and needs a bit on convincing. Together they travel America looking for the spirits of the 'Dead Famous'. They are both rational and don't freak out at the slightest little noise which is where I think a lot of paranormal shows are going wrong at the moment. They are willing to admit when they don't find anything and this makes the show refreshing and unfake! An excellent show.


I wanted to like this show, and the hosts are a likable pair, but the show is the same show over and over. Never any real proof of a haunting anywhere they go. Just some photo's of orbs (most paranormal researchers don't consider orbs paranormal) and Chris contorting and making weird noises, sorry Chris but I can do the same thing if I wanted to. Also the choice of locations leave a lot to be desired. If you want to catch a ghost's spirit you should go to actual places they lived, not a restaurant they went to at some point in their lives....

I like Gail Porter, she is cute and perky, even after losing her hair I think she is awesome, but they show just doesn't deliver the goods. However, it can be entertaining as long as you know you aren't going to see a haunting.


As some have already noted. this show can't even do a decent bio on the "ghosts" they try to conjure up (usually in places where the ghost has never been or was only present once!) Well, at least they looked for Lucille Ball at the sound stage where she worked on the first Lucy show in the 50's.

It's not even good on the unintentional comedy scale as the girl in it is a precious cupcake who jumps at every creak. She reminds me of Bob Hope back in the day. These show won't look good on anyone's resume.

Still, I like watching it because of the location shooting. Its interesting to see Hollywood, The Queen Mary and all the other famous spots they film at. The rest is adolescent nonsense. And yes, I believe in ghosts. I just don't believe any self respecting ghosts come within 9 miles of this show. Smart.


This show could actually have good potential. Unfortunately I think it's a bad misfire. Gail Porter does do a good job as a presenter, but I think I would have believed more in Chris Flemmings paranormal abilities if he hadn't gotten information about the places they went beforehand and gotten the some of the stories as he was walking through the places. There are a lot of shows in this paranormal category which I think are much better than this one and I could name the British Most Haunted and A Haunting which is shown on Discovery Channel. The thing about this one is that it seems to present no skeptics to come up with an alternative to the findings of Chris and Gail! The funniest thing about the show is the X-Files rip-off theme, which is so alike the original that it's shameless!


"Upper World" is almost unknown today, but is an interesting and enjoyable movie with a high powered cast and a well constructed story.

A plutocratic railroad tycoon (Warren William) is drifting away from his social-climbing wife (Mary Astor) and begins a liaison with a good-natured showgirl (Ginger Rogers). The showgirl has a sleazy, opportunistic protector (J. Carroll Naish) who plans a little blackmail. When he springs his shakedown, guns go off and two people fall dead, leaving the tycoon in a situation which will ruin his reputation.

Made in the early 1930s, the film is very discreet about the nature of the showgirl's relationship with the two men in her life, but this does not damage the narrative flow. (If remade today, of course, the sex angle would be graphic and blatant.) The film does however have two weaknesses. First, although he had genuine screen presence, Warren William had no talent for close-ups, where his wolfish smile is alienating and undoes his good work in medium shot. Second, the ending is a cheat and an evasion of the dramatic issues the film has raised. Later movies like "A Place In The Sun" and several directed by Fritz Lang were much more resolute in following the drama through to a plausible conclusion.

"Upper World" presents a young Ginger Rogers who was just beginning her partnership with Fred Astaire. Katharine Hepburn's famous remark that Ginger gave Fred sex-appeal while he gave her class is relevant here, because Ginger is much sexier in this movie than in any of her musicals. (In her one musical number in "Upper World", Ginger wears a revealing dress which flatters her legs while the camera ogles her at thigh height.) Mary Astor, as always, is excellent, and brings out her character's craving for social status while keeping her human. The audience does understand why the tycoon married her in the first place. Both John Qualen's performance as a corruptible janitor and J. Carroll Naish's as the aspiring blackmailer make interesting contrasts with their work in John Ford movies.

"Upper World" is a minor movie, but should certainly be sought out by fans of Ginger Rogers and Mary Astor.


Within the context of B-dramedies, this is undoubtedly a great movie, but within the overall context of movies as a whole, it falls just short. While it utilizes an "A" cast, led by the superb Warren William, the plot just loses too much steam at the end to really feel like it meets its potential. The build-up in the movie, especially the sharp dialogue that is given to the aforementioned William, makes the movie feel even shorter than its hour-plus running time. It certainly never drags, and the grey characterization given to the various roles even makes the film food for analytical fodder. Unfortunately, the trial and cop-out yacht cruise ending come so fast and non-furious that even the most accepting of viewers will feel at least a bit cheated. Nonetheless, if you ever stumble upon this on TCM and have a little time to spare, it is more than worth your while, and is remarkably non-dated.


I read another review and thought I would offer what I thought were the good points of this film. The film was a typical period B film of man finds girl when wife doesn't pay attention to him. The music is great and was later used as backdrop for short films. Also, we get to see Sidney Toler(who later became Charlie Chan) playing a Chan-like policeman; J. Carrol Naish, who starred as a gangster in many later films; Mary Astor, a star of "The Maltese Falcon", who showed some of the great facials she did in that film; and of course, and early Ginger Rogers. The dialogue is snappy and the direction more than adequate. Enjoy this one, it certainly isn't the greatest ever made, but it never claimed to be - just a film of the times. I gave it a 7 out of 10 for its overall against similar films.


In early 1930s films, Warren William generally played ruthless, unscrupulous rich guys. Here, William stars as Allexander Stream, a wealthy, non-evil financier who is lonely because his wife (Mary Astor) is away for weeks at a time. A chance meeting starts an unlikely romance between Stream and showgirl Lilly (Ginger Rogers). After a time Lilly's manager, the very evil Lou (played expertly by J. Carrol Naish) wants to blackmail Stream using love letters. Murder and investigation ensue, leading to an unsatisfying conclusion.

Rogers, Naish, Andy Devine, Sidney Toler, and John Quaylen (excellent as a corrupt witness) are very good. However, William carries the movie, in his usual elegant way. Mary Astor is not given much to do, despite her star billing. I recommend "Upperworld" for fans of 1930s cinema, even though I was extremely disappointed with the abrupt ending.


This would have to be the most depressing film. There are no nice people in this movie (suprisingly even Dickie Moore plays a pretty bratty kid)...except Ginger. The moral of the film is everyone has their price - even the lowly janitor played by John Qualen. SPOILER ALERT: Mary Astor plays Hettie Stream, a society wife, who has little time for her husband and son. As the film opens Dickie Moore is bawling out the butler because he is not allowed to play in the ballroom. Throughout the film the father is often seen giving tips to his son on how to be more like him. Warren William plays Alex Stream, who is used to having his own way in all situations. A chance meeting with Lily Linda (Ginger Rogers) a burlesque dancer creates a diversion for him but Lily begins to fall for him. In Lily he finds someone who is sweet and good and delights in simple pleasures. I couldn't believe when Lily is shot ( it happens about half way through the film) Alex callously cleans the apartment to get rid of evidence that would incriminate him. Lily is a good person but no-one cares about her - except a policeman (Sidney Toler). He has been demoted for daring to give tycoon Stream a speeding ticket and he is determined to see justice done. From then on it is as though she doesn't exist. Stream is completely unremorseful and he and his wife renew their love for each other and plan to go away. But Hettie doesn't intend to stand by her man. The ending has to be seen to be believed - especially since it was made in 1934 - so it isn't a pre-coder. Fortunately Ginger would soon leave these sort of thankless roles behind her.


I assume this is a first-half of 1934 release (and, thus, technically a "pre-Code") as there is no Production Code certificate # displayed on the beginning credits. For a pre-Code, however, it is extremely tame and toothless. With Warren William and Ginger Rogers, this movie could've really been fun if only it had been a little more racy.

In brief, Warren William plays Alex Stream, a railroad magnate very much in love with his wife Heddy (Mary Astor) who is more interested in her social parties and dinners than in spending time alone with her husband. This leads Alex to start spending time with Lily Linda (Ginger Rogers), a burlesque dancer whom he happened to meet by chance when he was out in his boat and she was swimming in the river in distress.

Lily is the burlesque dancer with a heart of gold -- she has no interest whatsoever in squeezing the big bucks out of her rich new sugar daddy. Lily's boyfriend cum manager, Lou, has other ideas and steals Alex's love letters to Lily in an attempt to blackmail Alex. Before Lou can leave Lily's apartment with the letters, however, Alex comes in, there is a confrontation, Lou ends up shooting Lily, Alex ends up shooting Lou.

From there, the movie becomes a cat and mouse game with a policeman whom Alex recently had demoted doggedly determined to prove that Alex is the second murderer (the police found Lou's prints on one gun and an unknown person's (Alex's) prints on the second gun).

I expected more from a W.William/G.Rogers pre-code vehicle. For instance, when Alex has kept his secretary and chauffeur waiting on the street for more than an hour while he's been in Lily's apartment, the secretary finally goes upstairs to fetch Alex. What does the secretary see when he opens the apartment door? Warren William dressed in a feather hat and pig snout singing "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf" while Ginger Rogers plays the tune on the piano. It doesn't get much more wholesome than that, folks. This should've been my clue to turn the danged movie off!

A couple of funny flubs - one big, one minor. Marcus the secretary is waiting in front of Lily's apartment for Alex. He announces it's 2:30, and Alex has a 1:00 meeting. Then up in the apartment Lily cooks a brunch for Alex, they eat it, clear the table, and start singing. Cut back to Marcus and he announces it's 2:45. How did Alex and Lily have time to cook a meal and eat it within a span of 15 minutes? Then, after fetching Alex and dragging him back to the car, the gang gets stopped by a policeman who gives the chauffeur a ticket. Finally, they are on their way again and make their way to the skyscraper "Alexander Stream" building. The camera pans to an upper floor, indicating this is where Alex is. We then see Alex walking past numerous employees who greet him. In the background there is a clock, which reads 2:45! How can it be 2:45 NOW when it was 2:45 back before Marcus ever went upstairs to Lily's apartment to fetch Alex. Then they drove, got stopped by a cop, given a ticket, drove further to the office building, rode the elevator to an upper floor, and it is STILL 2:45!

The tiny flub is Ginger Rogers's character's name is spelled "Lily" in the film -- on the marquee outside the theater where she's performing and in the newspaper headline after she's been killed. However, in the opening credits her name is spelled "Lilly".

I'm guessing the continuity person at Warners wasn't very good at their job. However, that's the least of this tame, tame film's problems.

I wouldn't waste my time with this if I were you. Unless you're a big G.Rogers fan and want to catch an early flick of hers. This one's not even worth it for Warren Williams's fans.

Good supporting roles by Andy Devine as Oscar the chauffeur, Ferdinand Gottschalk as Marcus the secretary, and Robert Greig as Caldwell the butler.


Irene Dunne stars as a factory-town woman who wants a better life (like Barbara Stanwyck in Stella Dallas, Katharine Hepburn in Alice Adams and Joan Crawford in Possessed). She's in love with factory worker Charles Bickford. They marry and she runs a boarding house to make extra money. One of the boarders is a shy immigrant (Eric Linden) who has discovered a great new dye. Dunne talks Bickford into throwing in their savings and open a dye works. They become rich. But Bickford travels a lot and falls into the clutches of a bad woman (Gwili Andre) who wants more than money: marriage.

The court room finale is a doozy with J. Carroll Naish playing a sleazy (Italian in this case) lawyer who has cooked up a scheme to get his girl friend (Andre) married to Bickford. So they line up a bunch of false witnesses against Dunne. But Dunne turns the tables when they try to grab custody of the baby as well. Excellent plot twist.

Dunne is one of the greats, and she's terrific here too. She's even believable as a factory-town girl. Bickford is an acquired taste and I never liked him as a "leading man." Linden is good is his usual "soft" role. And Naish is always fun to hate. Leila Bennett, Hilda Vaughn, and Christian Rub co-star.

No Other Woman is famous as the film that derailed Danish Gwili Andre's career because her character is so nasty. She battled for another decade to regain a foothold in films but only landed small parts. She committed suicide in 1959 by surrounding herself with publicity photos and press clippings and setting them and herself on fire.


is a highlight of this short-but-snappy soaper. Irene Dunne (great as usual) plays an ambitious woman who pushed husband (Charles Bickford) to partner with friend (Eric Linden) to create successful business. But Bickford has a yen for babes and links up with a conniving one (Gwili Andre) who pressures him to get a divorce. Film culminates in nasty divorce led by hateful lawyer (J. Carroll Naish). Somehow this all works even tho is pretty far-fetched. Chalk up another success for Irene Dunne.


Irene Dunne marries Charles Bickford soon after the movie begins. She longs to leave the steel town where they live but he's content to stay in his job as a laborer. However, through her determination and frugality, she is able to eventually convince him to take a gamble and strike out on his own. Fortunately, perhaps, they strike it rich and their life seems perfect. Perfect, that is, until Bickford starts running around with a money-hungry tramp who urges him to dump his long-suffering wife--leading to a super-melodramatic conclusion in the courtroom.

I love old movies, so it takes a lot to turn me off of any film from Hollywood's Golden Age...but this terrible film managed to do it. Despite having the excellent Irene Dunne in the lead, this film just isn't worth your time--mostly because the last 20 minutes of the film manage to undo any good feelings I had for the rest of the movie! Here's the problem. Irene Dunne is the perfect wife in this film...too perfect--Mary Poppins perfect. Even when Bickford proves that he's a wretched jerk and cheats on her, Dunne is like some sort of saint and she refuses to divorce him. Then, when Bickford and his sleazy lawyer drum up fake charges that SHE is committing adultery, Dunne is just too sweet to really fight back. In a courtroom scene that is just too melodramatic to be true, her ultimate niceness convinces the evil Bickford to admit it is all a frame-up and he is taken away to prison.

The worst part about this terribly over-the-top scene is not the silly way Bickford, now stricken with guilt, jumps up and admits the truth (though this is a ridiculous scene), but the way that lawyer J. Carrol Naish is allowed to attack Dunne on the witness stand! Even courts in the old Soviet Union might flinch at such a brow-beating--and yet her lawyer never objects and the judge seems content to preside over a sham of a hearing! This is just the sort of film they should show young law students in order to elicit a few laughs at all the histrionics.

Believe me that there are thousands of better films out there from the 1930s waiting to be discovered. Try almost ANY film of the era and you're bound to be better off than with this silly dud. And, additionally, almost any other Dunne film is better than this creaky old pile of...melodrama.


NO OTHER WOMAN started out as an interesting drama of a young woman and man in a steel town in love but with different ideas and different levels of intellect but startlingly turned midpoint into the most sexist film of the 1930's, with a jaw-dropping climax matched only by an equally outrageous finale.

Irene Dunne is a lovely sensitive young woman in a steel town in love with the somewhat likable but coarse Charles Bickford. Irene dreams of escaping this dead end life but Bickford has no dreams other than being a big shot at the plant. Irene finds a soul mate in the somewhat younger Eric Linden, who studies and experiments with formulas on the side which Bickford ridicules. Dunne and Bickford marry but Irene hasn't quite given up on her dreams, taking in boarders and penny-pinching for the day they can move away. When Linden tells her of his discovery of a permanent dye she is thrilled that this may be their chance and wants to invest in it. Unfortunately, Bickford has had an apparent bad day at the plant and comes home in an angry mood and they have a big fight (apparently their first) and Bickford storms out to get good and drunk.

Repentful the next day, he listens again to Irene's idea and becomes enthusiastic when he sees Eric's formula first hand and they start a business that brings them all fortune within a few years. Eventually the couple have a son but Bickford's business ventures keeps him away from home more often than not. While in New York, he falls into the lure of predatory Gwili Andre and they have a long-running affair which climaxes in Andre eventually demanding they end it or he leave Irene to marry her. After initial resistance, Bickford agrees but Irene, even after being publicly ridiculed (everyone knows about the affair it seems) refuses to grant him a divorce because she "loves" him to much to let him go.

Things really start to get nasty when Bickford then sues her for divorce, alleging adultery on HER part and dragging her through the mud with paid-off "witnesses" who claim knowledge about Irene's "affair". Masochistic Irene however refuses to bring out HER knowledge about his affair into the proceedings since she is fighting the divorce. Bickford's lawyer paints her as a grasping, money-loving woman and even her earlier savings are used against her as "proof" of her love of money (quite oblivious to the fact that this money was the means to build Bickford's fortune.) When Bickford's lawyer announces Bickford is seeking full custody of their son and startled Irene erratically "admits" to the affair and then in hysteria proclaims their son is not Bickford's, no doubt in a desperate attempt to keep the child. Bickford finally is broken by his own selfishness and announces to the judge his story has all been a lie. Bickford is sentenced to a year in jail and their business collapses into bankruptcy over the scandal. Once released, Bickford goes back to work as a steel miller and is startled to find an all-forgiving Irene waiting to take him back as are his old friends, including Linden whom he has obviously also driven into bankruptcy.

This is the ugliest "love story" I have ever seen in a film! Based on a 1916 play, this jaw-dropping tale of a woman who loves no matter what is just pathetic and it's horrible to see the lovely Irene Dunne in such a degrading role. This movie is ridiculous beyond belief. How is Irene able to save over $6,000 in a few years from her lower-working class husband's salary in the 1920's even with taking in boarders? How is the crude, unambitious, and unschooled Bickford able to have the brains to get a major corporation off the ground? Bickford gets only a year for such blatant premeditated perjury? And frankly given his selfish core, I couldn't help but think his ultimate confession was not caused by shame over what he had done to his wife but the possibility that his son would not be recognized as his own.

The only good things I can think of saying about this film is the atmosphere in the early scenes is excellent, fully capturing the hot, steamy ambiance in a steel town, and Irene looks a vision in the glamorous fashions during the "rich" years. Seeing this beautiful, intelligent woman degraded with this story was too much for me but frankly I was just as disgusted with her character's all-forgiving attitude. Bickford gives a tired, rather over the top performance and it's no surprise he wasn't used very often as a leading man. Watching this unpleasant travesty would make even the most devoted film archivist wish this one were among the lost films.


A group of people lives near the steel mills in a run-down neighborhood. Anna (Irene Dunne) and Jim (Charles Bickford) are in love with each other, but Anna longs for something better from life and Jim is content with the way things are. However, Anna is determined to change things, so she enlists Joe's (Eric Linden) help. Joe is an inventor with an excellent discovery; he makes Jim his manager and the two make a fortune. Unfortunately, Jim is out of town very often, and he gets lonely, so he becomes unfaithful with an exotic blonde (Gwili Andre). Soon Anna wonders if helping Jim was worth it after all.

This film is rather short, and I suspect that some of it is missing, but the story has continuity. It is a rather entertaining pre-code with a bitter courtroom battle at the end of the film. All of the actors are outstanding in their roles.


And I've seen a lot of them. There is more stock footage in this thing than any movie I know except "Jungle Hell" (1956). The only difference is that "Jungle Hell" was all elephants. This one's all sea lions. On and on and on about the stupid sea lions while the stupid crew in their stupid boat looks for stupid Juan Francisco.

Much of the stock footage that isn't sea lions is native women of the South Pacific. I don't know if the editors were blind or what, but whoever was in charge of splicing the stock footage together didn't seem to mind that the women were mongoloid one minute, negroid the next, and caucasoid the next. They change races with surprising speed.

There is another prominent stock footage scene. An octopus in an aquarium (you can see him stick to the glass, and you can see the reflection of lights on the glass) battles a moray eel. The eel is defending all his little fish buddies from the mean old octopus. I'm not making this up. This is presented as if it were happening in the ocean for crying out loud. Who wins? Watch and find out!

Lots of stock footage of men fishing provides for some humor as the overdubbed voices say things like, "Watch out for my face." But it gets tiring after several minutes of the same stupid footage of the same stupid men catching the same stupid fish.

Alas, there is one more big stock footage scene. This one's of the devil monster. It's not a devil, and it's not really a monster. What is it? Let's just say it's not the kind of monster you were hoping for. Juan, who they did find at the end of all those sea lions, battles the "monster". Again, you'll have to watch to find out what happens.

What really surprises me is that the IMDB says this was edited down from a longer, older movie. That tells me that (1) someone thought the original was worth redoing, (2) someone thought this version was better, and (3) the original must've been worse. I can't imagine.