Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

jacobs-greenwood Directed by Busby Berkeley, it features Priscilla Lane as a secretary in an ad agency that wants to become a successful working woman. Unfortunately, the film gets pretty bogged down in some very dated stereotypes of women in the workplace and, especially, men's attitudes towards it. Linda Lawrence (Lane) shares an apartment with Nancy (Penny Singleton), who - for contrast - plays the more typical secretary who is only working until she can find a husband that will marry her and allow her to stay at home (which of course she does).In any case, Linda is so attractive that every man in the firm is trying to date (but not necessarily marry) her. As secretary to Mr. Bates, played by Hugh Harvey (with a very annoying "whoo hoo" throughout), a rather bumbling "first line manager his entire career" type, Linda quickly advances to a position as his assistant. A career woman named Beatrice Harris, played fairly convincingly by Mona Barrie, is initially reluctant to share her "queen bee" status with Linda. However, once she recognizes the same ambition in Linda as her own, Beatrice instead begins to mentor her, somewhat.Wayne Morris plays an ex-football jock from Princeton named Jimmy Hall; he is also very ambitious, especially in his rather obnoxious pursuit of Linda. In fact, it is his whole attitude and actions towards Ms. Lane's character throughout the film that will be most offensive to anyone (especially female viewers) watching the film these days. He exhibits a very physical "won't take no for an answer" approach to getting Linda to marry him, which she does. This is followed by him insisting she give up her very promising (more so than his?) career to be there for him when he gets home from work, especially after (with Beatrice's assistance) Linda starts working with the "top dog", Harry Galleon played by Humphrey Bogart. Harry, like every other man in the agency, can't resist Linda's looks and starts to intentionally sabotage her 3 month marriage to Jimmy, which precipitates his ultimatum.After six months of staying at home, and dealing with a daily routine which includes picking up her husband at the train station and carpooling home with Bill Dalton (Gene Lockhart plays another very annoying character), Linda decides to work a behind-the-scenes deal to further her husband's career. When he declines the offer, never knowing of her involvement, she walks out, accusing him of being not ambitious enough for her. This leaves room for Harry to get back into the picture. But, of course, everything works out in time (in this less than 70 minute film!) for a happy ending.A most unusual film for Bogart. The title comes from the last line spoken in the film, by Priscilla Lane's character incidentally.

utgard14 Disturbing romantic drama about a woman climbing the corporate ladder while being involved with a clod. The woman is played by Priscilla Lane, an actress I like but certainly not in this role. On the surface a career woman in a 1938 movie actually sounds good. Unfortunately whatever good you can find from a historical perspective is undone by Lane's unhealthy relationship with a gross pig called Jimmy, played by Wayne Morris.Wayne Morris was an actor with an amiable screen presence but here he's playing a pushy, obnoxious, chauvinist stalker with a severe bad temper and violent tendencies. He parks the car he & Priscilla are in on railroad tracks with a train bearing down so she will say yes to his marriage proposal. This guy actually endangers her life just to get her to say yes! Someone thought that was romantic?!? Some usually solid supporting stars don't help much. Penny Singleton is likable but sadly wasted in a small part. Hugh Herbert is an annoying cartoon of a character, always fidgeting and making stupid noises. If the two lead roles were written better, Herbert's character would be the film's biggest deficit. But as it stands his irritating character is nothing to worry about next to the dysfunctional couple. Then we come to the main reason I even checked this film out: Humphrey Bogart. I've seen almost all of Bogie's films so whenever I get the chance to check out one of the few I haven't, I jump at the chance. Well this one was a wasted role for Bogie, playing Lane's infatuated boss who gets socked out by Morris.This is a terrible film. The characters are so wholly unlikeable that I can't believe Warner Bros made this mess. This may be the lowest rating I've ever given a film from this period. I'm a huge fan of classic films and I can often forgive their faults even more than modern films. But this is one case where I can't. Avoid this unless you're a fan of Bogart's or Lane's and just have to see every movie they're in.

Bolesroor "Men Are Such Fools" is a Busby Berkeley comedy that made me so angry I almost drove knitting needles into my eyes just to end the pain. I am a HUGE fan of old movies, I've seen more films from the 30's than most people have seen in their entire lives, and I can safely say this is an absolute disaster. Where do I start?First, every actor in the movie shouts every line as fast as possible. No, they BARK every line at one another with their Energy levels set to 10 and not an ounce of thought or meaning behind a single delivery. The actors perform so quickly, so intensely, that no scene lasts longer than 45 seconds and the entire movie is over in 69 minutes. Was there cocaine being served on set?Secondly the absurd plot involves the brutish Wayne Morris trying to convince the adorable Priscilla Lane to marry him by physically abusing and threatening her. He bellows at her endlessly, parking their car in front of an oncoming train and holding her underwater until she almost drowns. According to the up-tempo soundtrack and hyper-speed direction this is all supposed to be hilarious! Personally I don't find spousal abuse to be a toe-tapping, gut-busting chuckle-fest, but that's just me.The story makes no logical sense, as our buxom and bangable Priscilla adjusts to married life until she one day- for reasons still unclear to me- walks out on her husband just so they can be reunited in the third act. Yuck! Avoid this terrible mess... the soundtrack alone will drive up your blood pressure and give you a headache. All involved have done much better... so will you.GRADE: F

crispy_comments The opening credits of this movie really had me fooled. So many names that led me to expect delightful entertainment. OK, Wayne Morris is obnoxious with his immature, boisterous, steamroll-over-everyone-with-no-regard-for-their-feelings, routine. But this movie's also got: Priscilla Lane, who's always charming. Penny Singleton, very funny but sadly underused apart from the Blondie series. Hugh Herbert, that giggly goofball. Oh yeah, Humphrey Bogart's in it too. Plus, the script is based on a story by Faith Baldwin, and I've enjoyed other movies based on her work.So I was all set to enjoy this one, until I realized early on that it was gonna be one of those movies where the Ambitious Career Gal is taught to stop fighting her True Womanly Nature, which of course means she lets an aggressive doofus wear her down 'til she agrees to marry him, then sublimates and channels her ambitions through him, to help him get off his lazy butt and make something of himself. 'Cause women should stand by (and behind) their man and use their intelligence and talents to help *him* succeed. Be content in your supportive role and never seek glory or take credit. Also, be a mother to your infantile husband. Sounds fun, right? Nice moments of truth where she expresses her boredom with suburbia, the cozy/stifling home, and simple-minded neighbours inane converstions she must put up with. She's wasted there. Her brains and vitality require big-city opportunities and more stimulating company. After he squanders an opportunity she's arranged for him, she leaves him, supposedly to make him take *his* career more seriously and win her back. What then? He'll have more drive, and make her "proud", but she'll still be bored hanging around the house waiting for him to return from work. (And can't even help him openly because his ego must be preserved!) Wouldn't envy and frustration set in? Living vicariously through somebody else is never a good idea. I did like that she wasn't portrayed as a Greedy Wench, pursuing wealth. They were comfortable. Which was part of the problem because she didn't want to be comfortable or complacent. She was bursting with ideas, ambitious to DO something, to create, invent, give life purpose and meaning. And then - inexplicable, implausible "love".Probably the most disturbing thing about Men Are Such Fools, is the way Wayne Morris "woos" Priscilla Lane. Basically he's abusive but we're supposed to find his persistence cute. Pursuing the poor woman no matter how often she says no (girls never really mean "no", they just wanna be chased!) and acting like a petulant child whenever she pays attention to something other than him. But my favorite example of his touching devotion? Maybe the part where he risks her life driving like a maniac and ignores her pleas to slow down. She'll have to agree to marry him first! Tee-hee! Followed by the scare-tactic of stopping the car on the train tracks, just as a train's coming. But don't worry, he knows the train will stop before it hits them. (He didn't know another would come along from the opposite direction and almost kill them for really-real, but it's still funny right?) If the silly stubborn female would just know what's good for her and do as he says, he wouldn't have to go to these lengths! He finally wears her down in this hilarious, heartwarming scene: They're at a pool party and he dunks her *repeatedly* underwater until she agrees to marry him. Any possible humour you might find in this situation is undermined by the fact that he's yanking her roughly by the HAIR and barely giving her time to breathe between dunks. While the other partygoers stand around laughing. Nobody seems to think this might be a tad dangerous or, um, PSYCHOTIC. It's truly disturbing to witness. Trust me, the level of brutality in this scene goes WAY beyond "playful" pool hijinks.After literally making it impossible for her to breathe, he takes her breath away some more, by forcing a kiss. Naturally, she's starry-eyed and ready to set a wedding date! So we get a nice juxtaposition of sex & violence with that wonderful message that women are slaves to their hormones AND enjoy being roughed up - This is the best way to make a woman obey, er, I mean, show a woman you love her. Yes, women stay with abusive men and believe their possessiveness/controlling behaviour/violence = love. Gotta blame movies like this one, for helping to brainwash both men and women into thinking these kinds of relationships are, not only normal, but *ideal*. I just love being confronted with disturbing, depressing issues in romantic comedies!It's bizarre how this couple alternates between excessive "comic" violence/forced almost manic "joy", and other moments where they glare at each other with what seems to be intense hatred/resentment. I wonder if the author or actors were trying to sneak in subversive hints that this is indeed a scary, unhealthy relationship...under the surface veneer of obeying the Hays Code and enforcing gender role "norms" and the illusion of romantic comedy. I'd like to think so! I only recommend this movie to fans of the cast/crew, or students of film history. My goal is to watch every single (existing) movie from the silent era to 1959. Everyone needs an ambition in life, right?