A vastly overrated film. Late in life, Katherine Hepburn gave an interview in which she described this film. She said it was a disaster. Then she was told that it was now a "cult classic". She said "that's because audiences now are a disaster". Too true. Her own performance in this film is dreadful. Cary Grant (second billed) is in his elemwnt and does pretty well as a totally cynical Cockney crook. But the screenplay is bitty and wanders all over the place; the attempted humour is too broad to raise a laugh; and despite the mainly English cast (Grant, Edmund Gwenn, Brian Aherne) the England depicted is strictly Hollywood backlot. Compton MacKenzie's original novel is both much funnier and much darker . [In the same late-in-life interview, Hepburn described the original novel as "brilliant"] So why is it now a "cult classic"? Simply because of the perceived sex interest in Hepburn playing a transvestite role, and one or two [brief] scenes of sexual ambiguity, with a woman coming on to the "boy" [not that Hepburn looks anything other than a woman, despite the trousers] and a scene where Brian Aherne is very interested in the "boy" but later accepts her just as easily as a girl. And that's it, folks. A little titillation for people so sexually inclined. The film is a curiosity but otherwise crap.
@kennethstokes51024 жыл бұрын
I enjoyed it!
@nicholasreid18364 жыл бұрын
@@kennethstokes5102 Bully for you. In the same interview I quoted, after Hepburn said the film was a disaster, she was asked why it was now a cult movie. She replied "because audiences now are a disaster". I agree with her.
@kennethstokes51024 жыл бұрын
@@nicholasreid1836 So what? still enjoyed it.
@nicholasreid18364 жыл бұрын
@@kennethstokes5102 As I said, bully for you.
@kennethstokes51024 жыл бұрын
@@nicholasreid1836 Why, because I like a movie Katherine Hepburn doesn't like? Well escuuuuze me!