Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Bryan Bjerke I'm a young male that decided to watch this movie at random. This seems to be geared towards older ladies. Now I typically enjoy older movies, but this film just did not seem to age very well. It did have a few memorable scenes so I don't regret watching it, but I wouldn't recommend this movie however.

JohnHowardReid Copyright 1957 by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening at the Roxy: 15 May 1957. U.S. release: May 1957. U.K. release: 12 August 1956. Australian release: 11 July 1957. Sydney opening at the Regent. 9,305 feet. 103 minutes. U.K. release title: HIS OTHER WOMAN.SYNOPSIS: Love and automation clash when an efficiency expert takes stock of a broadcasting company's research department.NOTES: The play opened on Broadway at the Broadhurst on 24 October 1955. Shirley Booth starred opposite Byron Sanders. Also in the cast: Elizabeth Wilson, Joyce Van Patten, Louis Gossett, Frank Moran, Mary Gildea. The director was Joseph Fields. The play closed after a very satisfactory 296 performances.Fox's 75th CinemaScope feature and the 8th teaming of Tracy and Hepburn. COMMENT: A very pleasant and even more pertinent comedy in 2017 than it appeared when originally released. Most contemporary critics liked the film, but nearly all complained how slight the story was and if it were not for the superlative acting teamwork of Tracy and Hepburn... While there is a certain amount of truth in these assessments — it's hard to imagine "Desk Set" succeeding so entertainingly well in the hands of any other players but the warmly likable yet sympathetically odd-people-out Spencer and Kate — there are quite a few other aspects of the movie to enjoy as well. Not least of these enjoyments is the excellent support cast. As the gossipy Smithers, Harry Ellerbe (in movies since at least 1932) has the best role of his entire career. Making their movie debuts are Dina Merrill (from the New York modeling world), and Sue Randall (from a television and Broadway stage background). Oddly, so far as I know, the lovely Miss Randall never made another picture, whereas the equally attractive but somewhat less personable Miss Merrill went on to enjoy a modest but reasonably successful career.I could single out other players for praise, but will content myself with a tip of the hat to Joan Blondell, a skilled comedienne who makes the most of her every entrance and exit.Ephron has realized this little gem on a fair-sized budget. It's untrue to say that "Desk Set" is simply a photographed stage play. It's correct that a lot of the action still takes place in the one set, but not only is this one set more extensive and elaborately furnished than the stage equivalent, there are actually quite a few changes of scene.Shamroy has photographed his players to their considerable advantage, whilst Lang has directed in an unobtrusive but thoroughly professional manner. Admittedly, he has made little use of CinemaScope until the 3rd Act when "Emmy" is cleverly made to fill those wide open interior spaces.If you can afford to laugh at the computer revolution, "Desk Set" will certainly tickle your funny bone.

dougandwin As I have always been a fan of Spencer Tracy, I thought it would be good to sit through one of his old works....big mistake! This movie has not met the test of time (as many have!), and if it were not for good old Joan Blondell, I may not have watched it all the way through. Unfortunately, as great an actress Katharine Hepburn was, this clearly was not her brightest hour. She seemed to be anxious to look after Spencer rather than act, and some of her prolonged rantings were too much. There were some good individual scenes, but they were far apart. Gig Young played his usual role of the other man competently, while it was good to see Dina Merrill in a fun mood. Not worth commenting on the story which has been done before and better.

michaeljhuman First off, I would have given this movie a better review if it's pace was a bit better. It felt a bit disjointed in some ways, with a series of what felt like separate scenes (I believe someone mentioned it felt like a play, and it did). Some worked well, some did not work as well. But that's a bit objective.As an example of something I did not buy into...the romance between her and the computer engineer. I never quite bought into it. He shows some interest, but she only shows flashes of interest - but I just couldn't connect the dots.I loved seeing a woman playing a smart competent role. Kudos to them. It's enjoyable seeing strong female roles in movies - it's becoming more common now, but did not seem to be that common back then.As a software engineer, I totally appreciate the subject matter. And I am not sure the man-machine debate is done. While computers have been an amazing innovation, improving our lives in ways hard to imagine now doing without, at the same time they still introduce problems. For example, people living their lives out on the computer rather than in person with real people...some people have struggled with addiction to games even, such as World of Warcraft.But moving along, Hepburn makes this movie. She is fascinating to watch when she's quoting poetry, especially at the ending scene. For her acting alone, I should give it 6 stars.The supporting cast of her fellow researchers was quite good. Especially the heavier set one (sorry, forgot her name.) I can recommend this movie, for sure. It could maybe have been better though?