Ensofter Overrated and overhyped

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

loganalaxanian I enjoyed this movie for a few reasons. I think Barbara Stanwyck played her character perfectly and I like how pre code this movie was considering how it was before the Hays code. I also liked how you really get to see how life was as a women in the 30s compared to today.

skylarmoffat Before reading any reviews on this movie I was shocked to see what it turned out to be. A modern day R rated film. A young girl being pimped out by her father, one day turns the tables to become an powerful woman sleeping her way to the top, getting jewels, and not taking the easy way out along the way.

DaxBeach2.0 First off, I loved learning that this was originally a Vitaphione film, while those were still (barely) used by 1933. As we learned on the early technologies of film sound/audio, it was fun to realize this was one of those rare films that implemented the Vitaphone technology. So, if you have a bit of a crush on Barbara Stanwyck, you might get your guts ripped out from this film, because she is areal floozy, and quite the bedroom-cash-register -- all just to get her way with men. Her character of Lily, is a real rotten soul - but it's a fun movie to get through, to see how it progresses. She basically sleeps her way to success and wealth, from the lowliest bars/speakeasies, and all the way up to the top management of a bank. Sadly, Stanwyck's younger years as kid and teen weren't too far off from this portrayal, sans the prostitution. She grew-up rough, so I'm certain she was comfortable and at least knowledgeable enough to take on this role.

classicsoncall You so often hear of actors and actresses refraining from certain roles for fear of being typecast, so I was a little surprised to see Barbara Stanwyck here as a young woman who starts out as an unwilling prostitute for her father (Robert Barrat), and then taking on the role full time in order to break out of poverty and assert herself in the world. Of course she might not have considered herself a prostitute, but a rose by any other name? Though Lily Powers (Stanwyck) sleeps her way to the upper echelon of the Gotham Trust Company, as the viewer I think one needs to keep a certain suspension of disbelief in mind. Her first victim Stevens (Donald Cook) was engaged to the President's daughter, and the heel worked to cover it up! Then, when Carter (Henry Kolker) moves in on Lily himself, he winds up dead at the hand of Stevens in a murder/suicide! Not saying it couldn't have happened that way, but it's a bit of a stretch to my thinking.What I thought was pretty clever was Courtland Trenholm (George Brent) pulling a fast one on his Board and Lily both by banishing her to Paris instead of paying an outright bribe to get rid of her. Of course that simply set up another round of career climbing for Lily that Trenholm needn't have got caught up in, but as the saying goes, love is blind.I'm pretty much in agreement with the viewers on this board who felt the film makers copped out a bit with the resolution of the story. Lily's change of heart was too abrupt to suddenly 'see the light' concerning her past indiscretions. But even more so I question the whole business of the Gotham Trust going under. For what reason - a scandal? And Trenholm indicted - for what? None of that was made clear at all and added to my confusion over the ending. I could see Trenholm attempting suicide given the circumstances, but what created the circumstances (at least those of a financial nature)? As far as losing Lily, OK, but there's that love is blind angle again. And if he really wanted to kill himself, he could have aimed a little higher.Even with those disclaimers though, I think this is a film one should see to get past the idea that themes like the ones shown aren't merely the product of more modern times. Movies made today might be more gritty in the presentation, but sometimes what's not shown on screen can be more visceral when left to the imagination, and this story leaves a lot to the imagination.