JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Loui Blair It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

joe-pearce-1 Pretty much every character in this film is stereotypical, but since the film employs absolutely first rate actors in every role and has a decent and easy-to-take screenplay, they manage to pull the story of a somewhat gold-digging girl looking for The Better Life, aided and abetted by a classy down-at-the-heels member of Society, up to a near A-level effort, even if the budget remains strictly B-level. I've never understood why Irene Ware didn't 'make it' in Hollywood. She was extraordinarily pretty without being beautiful, had a delightful personality, and was a good actress - not unlike a B version of Marguerite Churchill (also a B personality, but in more perhaps B-plus films), Wendy Barrie or Virginia Bruce, all of whom shared those same attributes and did romantic comedy with the best practitioners of the art. Sidney Blackmer simply cannot be bad, and he is quite charming in his role here. Indeed, for all practical purposes he would appear to be the leading man, except that it doesn't quite turn out that way. (What is called "the kitchen scene" here, between Ware and Blackmer, and mentioned by other reviewers, is probably the highlight of the movie and might have achieved a kind of minor immortality if done in an A film by, say, William Powell and Carole Lombard.) Russell Hopton as the target Miss Ware really does go for manages to play it tough and classy at the same time and we are not surprised he turns out to be an ex-bootlegger. Hopton died a suicide a decade later, only 45, but in all his best tough-as-nails roles, he looks like the last person on earth who would commit suicide! (See G-MEN for vindication.) Betty Compson went from silent screen stardom to talking B-films to near-bit 1940s roles, but survived pretty well (see her in an atypical but rather memorable role in Lugosi's THE INVISIBLE GHOST) and is charming here. In fact, the whole cast is admirable, with the possible exception of Edward Gargan, who here, instead of playing his usual lovable-if-dumb cop or workman, plays a loudmouthed bully who is the only really objectionable character in the film (even if the others are somewhat mercenary, they are at least charmingly so). Of course, this is very early Gargan and he is only doing what the script and the director ask of him, so even he is admirable in his way, I guess. Anyway, this is a film that could easily have been made for an A studio with a top A cast - Carole Lombard/Jean Harlow and Ronald Colman/William Powell, then Clark Gable/Spencer Tracy and Norma Shearer/Myrna Loy would not have been the least bit out of place in the four leads, and one can imagine Nat Pendleton in the Gargan role. If it had been done by them, it would probably have had an even better script, certainly better production values, and most likely be better remembered today. But I doubt it would really have been substantially more enjoyable than this little and rather unjustly forgotten B effort.

Robert J. Maxwell It so strongly reminded me of other plots that at time I wasn't sure what I was watching. "Pygmalion", "My Fair Lady," "The Palm Beach Story," "The Lady Eve." Irene Ware, a former Miss United States in real life, is fired from her promising job as a waitress and runs into a drunken but avuncular Sidney Blackmer, a former rich man who is now in hock up to his neck. This was shot in 1934, mind you, and there was a depression.They concoct a scheme. Blackmer will sell shares in a phony product and with the money they will buy a new wardrobe for Ware, establish themselves at the posh Clifton Hotel, palm Ware off as a society girl only recently released from a convent school with time off for good behavior, marry her to one of the millionaires, and Ware and Blackmer will divide the proceeds.Now, a standard romantic comedy plot would have Blackmer and Ware falling for each other and getting married, hypothetical imperatives be damned. But this story introduces a young, more eligible husband for Ware, Russell Hopton. He has a little money too, but he's hardly society. He runs a trucking company and is a former bootlegger.In my humble view, it was a mistake to introduce Hopton. He sounds like a gangster and looks like a cartoon villain out the Dick Tracy comic strips. He seems to have little in the way of jaw or chin, so the whole of his head sits on his maxilla which, in its turn, sits directly on his shoulders. He can't act either.Oddly enough, Sidney Blackmer delivers a quiet performance full of a kind of fumbling wit. He gets some good lines. When he had the right role -- a seriocomic one, as in "Rosemary's Baby" -- he did much better than he did as a straight villain.Irene Ware is exceptional, especially for a former beauty queen, because she isn't staggeringly attractive. What she does have is a native but masked sensuality. Her features are plain and pure, a dish of vanilla ice cream, but the way she carries herself and the slender figure she displays in a bathing suit make it possible to grasp why she might win a beauty contest. Her performance may be the best in the movie.The woman that Blackmer finally marries, Betty Compson, is nearer Blackmer's age and has been in love with him for years. She has a heart of gold. If only her voice didn't sound like the crushing of a multitude of egg shells.It's worth a viewing. Not two viewings.

wes-connors Harassed at work by brutish boyfriend Edward Gargan (as Mike O'Reilly), pretty hash-slinging waitress Irene Ware (as Mary Beekman) is fired for causing the commotion. On the way home, Ms. Ware loses her last paycheck to an ill wind, and meets down-on-his luck millionaire Sydney Blackmer (as Kenneth Alden). Obviously imbibed, Mr. Blackmer sees Ware reach for her paycheck, and thinks she's going to jump off a bridge. Ware, conversely, believes the depressed drunk is planning his own suicidal jump...In addition to his cash flow problems, Blackmer is having trouble proposing to beautiful Betty Compson (as Clarissa Stanhope), due to an "aversion to marriage." Blackmer gives Ware a make-over, and introduces her to Ms. Compson and their "high society" crowd. They plan to get Ware married to a millionaire, with Blackmer getting a "commission" for his services. Soon, Ware falls in love with rich, rough-looking Russell Hopton (as Pat Brennan). Mr. Hopton has the money Ware desires, but harbors a swarthy secret… "False Pretenses" features a great cast and an interesting, albeit flawed, story. Ware and Blackmer have a romantic chemistry that doesn't appear anywhere in the script. Ware is a attractive leading lady and Blackmer, probably best-known for his devilish role in "Rosemary's Baby" (1968), is always charming. You're also left wondering what takes Blackmer so long in seeing the desirable Compson as a good match. And, as "second leads" Compson and Hopton, leave you wanting to see them as headliners.***** False Pretenses (10/22/35) Charles Lamont ~ Irene Ware, Sidney Blackmer, Betty Compson, Russell Hopton

dbborroughs A just fired girl chasing her paycheck meets a broke drunk millionaire on a bridge. He thinks shes going to jump, like he had been intending.She takes him home to his house where they get to talking. Its decided that he will get money together, teacher her to be a lady and then set her out to his rich friends to find a husband and then pay him finders fee. Odd ball romantic(?) comedy drama is decidedly not your run of the mill Hollywood movie. Rarely has a "comedy" been so cynical. Love, even when you find it still is no match for money. The cast is excellent and keeps you watching even when you can't believe how mercenary everyone on screen is. The script is very good with lots of witty lines and exchanges (the early cooking scene is excellent). the script also provides some really good characters that are not the usual assortment of people you find in films of this, or any other sort. If there is a down side its that perhaps the film is much too cynical. There is something about its tone that while amusing prevents you from completely connecting. Certainly its worth a look since odds are you'll not find a film with a similar attitude for 40 years. 6 or 7 out of 10 depending on your mood.