Matrixston Wow! Such a good movie.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

Catherina If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

bkoganbing The Golden Arrow casts Bette Davis and George Brent as a typical 30s heiress who abounded in so many films and the reporter who married her. Heiresses and reporters, ever since It Happened One Night they were together in movies like ham and eggs.But there's an interesting twist on it here. Davis is a pseudo-heiress hired by Henry O'Neill to play his daughter and live the good life as a walking breathing advertisement for his cosmetics. Of course reporters are to be avoided as they tend to get curious and ask embarrassing questions. But Davis falls for Brent and they marry.After which like Tyrone Power in Love Is News and That Wonderful Urge he becomes the object of press scrutiny. Now George knows how the boyfriends of Madonna and Paris Hilton feel.This screwball comedy is not the best of material for Davis and Brent who certainly did some classics later on. But it's passably amusing and Bette's fans will like it.

trimmerb1234 I knew nothing of this movie before starting to watch it however within minutes it became quickly apparent that she is surrounded by a cast below her league and I began to wonder if this was Bette Davis's last Warner Bros picture which indeed it was.Prickly, fastidious Bette Davis knew her own worth and while other stars - see Rosalind Russel in "The Women" - could clown as well as be serious, Davis's haughtiness and seriousness about her craft made this an absolute no no. Here amiable George Brent was no "A List" star and some of the support is decidedly mediocre. In the movie she has longish exchanges with, and must submit to being I think playfully slapped on the back by, an actor some leagues below her. She was an actress who could and did frequently signal boredom and distaste when the plot has her in substandard company. In terms of fellow cast it is clear that she is here but the script demands that she doesn't indicate or feel that. As a viewer I thought the movie was more than she could - or deserved to - take. That Warners did not see that is curious. Perhaps their sense hitherto of owning, contractually, their stars who had to do what they were told. Perhaps it is hindsight - what the world came to know later of her character and talent. "Now Voyager" has her cast as a drab - she was not vain about her appearance, but in that, cast with the superbly charming, intelligent talented Claude Raines she had a part and co-star equally worthy of her talent. She was surely right to demand that the parts and co-stars matched her own high standards. Classic movies fully worthy of her talent were the result.

whpratt1 In the opening scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I could see. However, Bette Davis(Daisey Appleby),"The Whales of August",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her best roles in a long career in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her yacht with George Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral Staircase",'46. Daisey even proposed marriage to Johnny in a Ferris Wheel upside down and even got a black eye. Davis and Brent made a great couple, one suppose to be very rich and the other a very poor reporter. Off stage, Davis and Brent were having a real torrid love affair, which is good reason why there was sparks when these two appeared in this film. If you liked Bette Davis and George Brent, this is the film for you!

fwrichter This is an EXCELLENT example of early Bette Davis talent. The production is above average for 1936 timeframe. I cannot understand why the owners of the rights to this film have not put it on DVD. Owners, PLEASE PLEASE release it. I would buy it immediately. I have not seen it in more than thirty years, on television, but remember it well.