Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

HotToastyRag If you've seen the hilarious clip of Spencer Tracy massaging Katharine Hepburn and suddenly giving her a hard spank on her bum, you've seen part of Adam's Rib. In the rest of that scene, Kate cries until Spence is sorry for hurting her feelings—and her derriere. He's willing to make amends but the only thing that makes her happy is when she immediately quits her crying and kicks him in the shin. If you laugh at that scene, you'll love the rest of the movie.Besides Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, because that film's totally different than the usual films they made together, Adam's Rib is my favorite of the Tracy-Hepburn movies. It's a hilarious battle of the sexes, with the offscreen duo playing an on screen married couple who are both lawyers and in constant competition with each other. When they take opposing sides in a trial, the courtroom erupts with tension!While Katharine Hepburn was famous for being an early feminist icon, in real life, she took everything Spencer Tracy dished out, even when it wasn't pretty. So, if you like seeing her give as good as she gets from Spence, you'll love the ninety-minute sparring match. The screenplay is funny and smart, as true to life today as it was in 1949. Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin's script will make you think about the roles in a marriage and what society will accept from a man versus a woman. When Spence claims men can use tears to get what they want just as effectively as women, or when Kate continually fights for gender equality at home and at work, you'll find yourself torn between the arguing pair—which shows it's well-written, since the script never blatantly takes sides! Watch the hilarious preview to see if you'll like it, and then rent the perfectly titled Adam's Rib for a fun afternoon with your sweetie-pie. It'll make for some very interesting conversations!

Tss5078 When I'm in the mood for a classic film, I usually look for something with Spencer Tracy in it. In an era where so many things were over the top and hard to follow, Tracy was a breath of fresh air, so very far ahead of his time. Adam's Rib is one of nine films he made with Katharine Hepburn, and is considered to be the best of the lot, I completely disagree. The film is ahead of it's time in that it's focused on woman's rights and asserts an affirmative defense for a violent crime, but the fact that it was a comedy, making light of a very serious charge, made the film lose credibility, and as a result, the message it was trying to portray does not come across very well at all. Doris Attinger (Judy Holliday) has caught her husband cheating and responded by shooting him. It seems an open and shut case for prosecuting attorney, Adam Bonner (Spencer Tracy), until his beautiful wife, Amanda (Katharine Hepburn) agrees to defend Mrs. Attinger. Her defense is an affirmative one, claiming that Doris Attinger should be acquitted, because a man arrested under similar circumstance would be. The claim is absolutely ridiculous even for 1949, because if anything, the justice system would have been harder on a man who shot his wife as opposed to her lover. Mrs. Bonner turns the trial into an absolute circus, embarrassing her husband, leading to an internal conflict in their marriage. This should have been where the comedy really came in, these fights between the two should have been hilarious, but they weren't. The couples fights were more serious, intense, and depressing than the trial itself. Everything about this film just seemed to be backwards and ridiculous, in particular Katharine Hepburn, who was so over the top in the courtroom, that it completely nullifies her argument. Here is a woman trying to stand up for woman's rights, by pulling ridiculous stunts and being unprofessional in the courtroom, how is that supposed to show that a woman can be just as good at her job as a man? The bottom line is that this film had a very serious message to spread, but everything was so backwards and misplaced, that it just loses any credibility it had, along with my interest about half way through. If Adam's Rib wasn't about a court case, and I wasn't waiting for the verdict, I probably wouldn't have sat through the whole thing.

cb2369 I admit, I am only 59 minutes in, but I can't watch another second of this. Both Hepburn and Tracy's characters are too annoyingly stupid.(Possible spoilers??, this explains only the set up and the beginning of the film)The film centers around a case that is way too clear: A woman buys a gun, follows her husband until she finds him cheating on her, and then shoots all 6 bullets in their direction, hitting the husband in the chest and wounding him. The film decides to choose this case as a backdrop for a discussion on sexism, and while that was clearly a problem in the 50s, it is of no importance to this case. The lawyers spend their time bickering over whether or not the man was having an affair, but neither seem to realize that adultery is no grounds for murder, nor is it even a crime in America. Any good writer would have realized that the details of this case weren't ambiguous enough for a discussion on sexism, and would have changed certain details, but alas, they did not and we spend our time watching Hepburn make a mountain out of a molehill and Tracy make Mount Everest out of Hepburn's mountain.I give this film a 4 because there is some good dialogue in between the badly-done plot and it is a decently tight script. I read the rest of the story on wikipedia and it doesn't seem to get much better. I don't suggest watching this unless getting back at men is such a fantasy of yours that you are willing to forgive the unbelievable aspects of this story.

Alex da Silva Lawyers Spencer Tracy (Adam) and Katharine Hepburn (Amanda) spend the film on opposite sides during the trial of Judy Holliday (Mrs Attinger) who is up on a charge of attempted murder after she shoots her husband Tom Ewell (Mr Attinger). Given that the film is a comedy, it can only really end one way for Judy Holliday.Tracy and Hepburn undoubtedly work well together but the film has occasions where these two characters talk across each other and it just seems too shouty. It may be realistic but it certainly is not entertaining. Hepburn tends to over-exaggerate and lay on the dramatics when she acts and Spencer Tracy is clearly the better actor of the two. Actually, the best character is that played by Tom Ewell. He steals the film in all his scenes because he is genuinely funny. Judy Holliday is good if you can get past her terrible voice but musician neighbour David Wayne (Kip) is awful – not in the fact that he is meant to be an annoying character, but in the fact that he doesn't know how to convincingly portray a realistic person. He plays it gay one minute, then straight another minute, he's rubbish at acting. Nothing about his character rings true.At the heart of the film is Hepburn's ridiculous notion about women's lib and some sort of feminist ideals – you know, the sort of thing that makes women annoying. Face the facts Hepburn, Judy Holliday had just tried to kill someone for goodness sake – it's got nothing to do with gender! It's certainly a watchable film with some amusing parts (mainly with Tom Ewell), and some annoying parts (Katharine Hepburn and every appearance of David Wayne), and overall, it's more annoying than funny. Certainly not a classic as people seem to believe because they are told that it is. Everyone has done better.