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

Steineded How sad is this?

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

mark.waltz A seeming marriage of convenience provides companionship for the lovely widow Kay Francis and foreign legion officer Ian Hunter, but when Hunter's dashing friend Errol Flynn comes along, it's only a matter of time before sparks fly. The threat of war seems to create constant danger, but Francis, always impeccably dressed, finds time for polite chit-chat with her husband and romance with the dashing Flynn. With a script of poetic mutterings by Flynn, how could she not? But for Flynn's sister, the noble Frieda Inescort, having been in love with Hunter for years, realizing what's going on is a crisis for her conscience, and for these four beautiful noble people, it must be as heart-wrenching for them as it is dull for much of the audience.With no key villain involved in this triangle (pretty much a sexless one), there's little sizzle between the leads and that causes this oh so nice romantic soap opera to suffer from slow pacing and unrealistic situations. The four stars are all fine, but outside of the intrigue concerning their mission, Hunter and Flynn are dull and lifeless. Flynn sounds silly with much of his lines, and when Hunter has to become commanding, he's unconvincing.That's not the case for the two ladies, putting glamour and feminine charm in what was essentially a man's film. The generic title just seems to lay there with no purpose. Herbert Mundin provides a bit of comedy and Ben Welden is amusing as a wealthy Russian letch who makes a play for Francis, prompting a great reply from her which indicates bluntly, "No dice". I had hoped for more heat between Kay and Errol, but that is lacking. The over nobility of the major characters leads to a ridiculously clichéd finale that even after multiple viewings had me rolling my eyes. As a huge Kay Francis fan, I would watch this over and over, but as a film historian, call it a second rate finale to her A list years at Warner Brothers. She scored the same year with "Confession", and to a lesser degree with "First Lady", but in spite the use of the title in the film's last scene, it's just average.

richard-1787 The cinematography in this movie, by Tony Gaudio, is stunning. The scenes shot in the desert, with the play of shadows on the sands and the wind blowing those sands, are magnificent. I'd love to see them on a really large screen.The play of light and shadow through the levered blinds in some of the indoor shots is good as well.The last scene, when we see Flynn and Frances in profile against a strangely lit sky, is also very good - though they are posed in a way so noble as to stretch credulity.Some really remarkable and very beautiful cinematography, in other words.The plot is another matter. It is a standard love triangle - two men love the same woman, who loves only one of them - but there isn't much erotic tension. The two men are so noble that you know they will do the right thing. Which, frankly, deprives the movie of suspense - contrast it with *Casablanca*, say - and makes it rather boring.Flynn is good in this picture, very natural, very relaxed.Kay Francis, on the other hand, over-dramatizes everything, which does not work against Flynn's detached and humorous manner. Olivia de Havilland would have been better in this role. Francis gets top billing - she was a BIG star then - but I honestly do not understand her appeal.This is an uneven movie, in sum. The cinematography is great, Flynn is OK, but Francis is way over the top, and the plot, such as it is, not particularly involving.

classicsoncall I had the greatest trouble with two quotes from the film, the first one in my summary line above, and the other - "The hopes we have for tomorrow die today". I can't make any sense out of the first, and the second is one of the most pessimistic and depressing statements I've ever heard. The latter was actually stated twice in the story, the second time when Julia Ashton summarized her feelings on what would have been an ill fated affair with Captain Roark (Errol Flynn). Instead, the ill fate befalls Julia's husband John Wister (Ian Hunter) in a self imposed suicide mission into a desert region of the Sahara. For his part, Colonel Wister comes across as a model of nobility in stepping aside for his second officer, but it's a safe bet you won't run across somebody like him in real life any time soon.Back to that first quote - I'm still thinking about it, but nothing's coming to me. I'm sure it was a way of making a connection with the title of the movie, but it comes across as awkward at best. Maybe I heard it incorrectly, so any help would be appreciated.You know, I had a thought about this film I never considered before for a black and white move - I think I would have preferred to see it in color for it's exotic locations, military dress and Miss Francis' fashionable gowns by Orry-Kelly. That might have done a better job of distracting me from the troublesome dialog.

oldlady7 I agree with comment #2. It is a story and film from another era and, as such, it was great to have on while I sewed and did wifely work! The people were gorgeous to look at, Kay Francis was excellent, and the idea that people could restrain their emotions and behave like "grown ups" was pleasant. There were a lot of things unsaid and that added to the overall story as the viewer could fill in from their own life experiences. It also means that a child watching it would not get all of the underlying meanings. And that's a good thing. Almost everyone in the cast is a familiar face if you watch old movies. Watch it when it is on and see what they meant when they said "it's a woman's picture."