Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Cristi_Ciopron This musical _dramedy with Jane Powell as the poison ivy, Constance Moore as her sister, Bellamy as helpless but resigned, directed by Lubin (who was a director otherwise dependable for gentle humor, mostly gags like the ice-creams) and written by DeLeon but also a few others (which usually means slapdash), has its meager graciousness and classiness (but not as naughty), with a bit of awkwardness, and it was meant as extravagant, grand and piquant. Although perhaps not as much sleazy as sulfurous in spirit, it doesn't qualify as exploitation, it has a cool cast, mostly ineffective direction (mediocre, bland but knowledgeable) and likable sets; the fact that the players have styles so unlike enhances the meant extravagance and flurry. Bellamy's character is honest and chivalrous, but the casting _betted on the player's innate shrewdness and slyness.The story bubbles away. Save for the cast, the result is disappointing. Jane Powell and Constance Moore play two sisters, and they both give good performances; Bellamy's character is a consummate gentleman, after all he gets to marry a stripper whose tits and ass are famous, and the player seems resigned and somewhat amused.While the movie has a claim for being a fairy tale, it also comprehends the coarser facts, like the unnerving scene with the marines (the leading actress gives it its truth), and the numberless ironies, as when Ruth Tobey, the dependable and plump roommate, flatters Jo Williams for providing what to tell her children about.Being the tale of a rescuing, it's nonetheless character driven (by the players, not in any way by the script) and it has a feel of laziness, of torpor, contradicted by Jane Powell's force. It's certainly watchable, but mediocre at best, and quite lifeless or uninspired, bland. Precisely what could of been exploitative is awkwardly delivered; so that the naughtiness comes across as bland, the piquant gags as rough, and the gentleness as enjoyable, the storyline, mostly random footage, manages somehow to be good-natured. Yet, why did people like DeLeon and Lubin have to be involved with it? The general sentiment is of aimlessness.Constance Moore's tits and ass are complimented, which they presumably deserve.When the tall girl on the toes enters, she exclaims: 'They just came!'. Maybe they did.

rhoda-9 It's a treat to see the majestic, golden-haired, golden-voiced Constance Moore, but what a shame she is in something so cheap and lame. From the first shots we know this movie isn't going to bother with coherence. We see an orchestra leader conducting a symphony, then Jane Powell in her boarding-school bedroom. She falls asleep and we see her dream of joining the orchestra at Carnegie Hall and singing with them. Huh? Who is she? Why should we care about her? Why show us a character's DREAM before showing us anything about who they ARE? The whole thing is slipshod like that. Moore is supposed to be the love interest for Ralph Bellamy, but we never see them do anything but argue. Then, near the end, they are reconciled, but nothing more romantic happens. No love words, no kiss. Then, right at the end, Moore whispers to Powell that Bellamy has asked her to marry him and she will say yes! It's as if the movie makers suddenly woke up and realised, uh-oh, we forgot the love stuff! The movie also has its distasteful aspects--the 15-year-old character (Powell's real age at the time) puts her hair up, wears lots of makeup and a sexy dress to show that she can pass for eighteen and be in a Broadway show. As a result, dozens of soldiers and sailors flock to her eagerly, and she encourages them. It gives the viewer an uncomfortable feeling that she is being taken advantage of.There is also the weird elevation to star status of the mediocrity Morton Gould. He is the conductor at the beginning, playing Carnegie Hall, and throughout the film we are told, ooh, they are putting on an original Morton Gould show, ooh, that's Morton Gould!, ooh, Morton Gould wants me for his radio show! Gould himself, as we see from his appearance in the movie, is as dull as his unmemorable music.And the burlesque! The typical embarrassment of Hays-code burlesque theatre, with men roaring and stamping at girls who wear more clothes than real girls of the time did at the beach. The little sister burns with shame at seeing Moore display a leg (horrors!) to the audience, but in the Broadway show at the end, in which they both star, Moore is wearing a costume that shows BOTH her legs! Ridiculous.It is very nice to see such likable performers as Arthur Treacher and Louise Beavers (there is a sweet moment when he stops making ice-cream sundaes for Powell and instead makes one for himself and one for Beavers, and they dig in). But both have been much, much funnier with better material.

Snow Leopard This light musical is solid if nothing special, with a story, characters, and production that are all about average overall. The cast is probably the strongest part if it, with a young Jane Powell in the lead role.The story concerns two sisters and their dreams of a career in show business. As the younger of the two, Powell's character wants to be a singer, and Powell is given several opportunities to perform. As her sister, Constance Moore has a simpler role, but she fulfills it adequately. Ralph Bellamy probably gives the best performance, and he is well-cast as a well-meaning, slightly befuddled Broadway producer. Arthur Treacher also pitches in playing Bellamy's butler.Most of the rest of it is rather plain, although there are no real flaws. The story is purely lightweight, but it has enough to keep you watching, and the characters are just believable enough to make you care about them.

calvertfan An early outing for Jane Powell as Sherry, a student at a musical school who yearns for a career on the stage, like her elder sister Jo (Constance Moore). But the fat is in the fire when Sherry travels to New York to see her sister on the stage, and finds out that she's not a top Broadway actress, but "Bubbles Barton" the burlesque queen.Jane P does the annoying little sister thing as well as Shirley Temple did in "The Bachelor And The Bobby-Soxer", though at least this time she's not in love with the older man (phew!). "Delightfully Dangerous" starts off a bit slowly, but soon picks up, and is a treat to watch - except for the final musical number which drags on for what seems like hours. No one suddenly breaks out into song in this musical, all the numbers are the ones on the stage, so only one of them really seems to fit into the storyline at all. Constance Moore was brilliant as Bubbles, and the definite standout star of the movie has to be Arthur Treacher (one of my childhood favourites!) as Jeffers the butler. Remarkably witty as always, even he has seen the infamous Bubbles on stage and thinks she has "a wonderful pair of - eyes."