AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

allisonbazanos This film was very different than the other films being made during the 30s. It was all about sex and a woman who was used to using her body to work her way to the top. The adventures of this woman trying to find a way in life by using questionable methods makes this movie worth watching, highly recommended.

Antonius Block There are several things that make this salacious pre-Code film worth watching, starting with Barbara Stanwyck, of course, who with her eyes and sexy come-on's seduces man after man to get ahead, literally f'ing her way to the top. There are some fantastic scenes from the beginning, where she fends off the advances of one man at her father's bar by pouring coffee on his hand, and explodes with anger at her father for essentially pimping her out since the age of 14. It's when he perishes in a fire that she has to fend for herself in the world. I'm not a big fan of John Wayne, but for those who are, you'll see him in an early role as one of her men along the way, and it was great to see Theresa Harris, who plays her maid. Lastly, I liked the elements of Nietzschean philosophy that at least form a basis for, and perhaps attempt to justify, Stanwyck using sex to get what she needs and wants out of men.On the other hand, the film is quite cynical and pretty linear in its plot. Stanwyck simply screws man after man – starting with a railroad worker who catches her hitching a ride to New York, and ending with an executive in a skyscraper. The film is brazen about this, and at one point she has sex in the ladies room, so if you're looking for elements of romance, this is not your film. How interesting is it that these "gold digger" themes are so common in films of this period, with men "victimized", when the far more prevalent situation in offices is sexual harassment, the inverse. While Stanwyck is one of my favorite actresses of the period, and it was exciting to see her in this steamy role, with those "take me" eyes and slow lead-ins to kisses, it's really rather hard to like any of the characters. The ending was a lame effort to patch some of that up, and didn't work for me. There are several Barbara Stanwyck pre-code films I would recommend over this one, including Night Nurse (1931), Ladies They Talk About (1933), and The Purchase Price (1932). If you're looking for high-wattage pre-Code shock value, though, this one is hard to top.

gort-8 Don't be deceived by the cute title. This nasty piece of business is a wild pre-code tale full of sin, immorality and lust. Its main character, played flawlessly by Barbara Stanwyck, is an openly amoral woman without a shred of decency or regret. We discover that Stanwyck's father has been pimping her at his speakeasy since she was fourteen. At his death, marrying a little Nietzschean philosophy into her need to climb social and financial ladders, she seduces one man after another with no regrets. The sex and immorality are left out of camera range, leaving questionable situations to the imagination of the viewer.In "Baby Face," Warner Bros. breaks every rule in the book with wild abandon that had to have driven the religious conservatives of the day into nuts. In the spring of 1933 it was submitted to the New York State Board of Censors, who rejected it, demanding a number of cuts and changes. Warner Brothers made these changes prior to the film's release in July 1933. In 2004, a "dupe negative" copy of the film as it existed prior to being censored was located at the Library of Congress. This uncensored version received its public premiere at the London Film Festival in November 2004, more than 70 years after it was made.Come see what all the excitement was about. It's actually a really fun, and racy, movie.

classicsoncall You so often hear of actors and actresses refraining from certain roles for fear of being typecast, so I was a little surprised to see Barbara Stanwyck here as a young woman who starts out as an unwilling prostitute for her father (Robert Barrat), and then taking on the role full time in order to break out of poverty and assert herself in the world. Of course she might not have considered herself a prostitute, but a rose by any other name? Though Lily Powers (Stanwyck) sleeps her way to the upper echelon of the Gotham Trust Company, as the viewer I think one needs to keep a certain suspension of disbelief in mind. Her first victim Stevens (Donald Cook) was engaged to the President's daughter, and the heel worked to cover it up! Then, when Carter (Henry Kolker) moves in on Lily himself, he winds up dead at the hand of Stevens in a murder/suicide! Not saying it couldn't have happened that way, but it's a bit of a stretch to my thinking.What I thought was pretty clever was Courtland Trenholm (George Brent) pulling a fast one on his Board and Lily both by banishing her to Paris instead of paying an outright bribe to get rid of her. Of course that simply set up another round of career climbing for Lily that Trenholm needn't have got caught up in, but as the saying goes, love is blind.I'm pretty much in agreement with the viewers on this board who felt the film makers copped out a bit with the resolution of the story. Lily's change of heart was too abrupt to suddenly 'see the light' concerning her past indiscretions. But even more so I question the whole business of the Gotham Trust going under. For what reason - a scandal? And Trenholm indicted - for what? None of that was made clear at all and added to my confusion over the ending. I could see Trenholm attempting suicide given the circumstances, but what created the circumstances (at least those of a financial nature)? As far as losing Lily, OK, but there's that love is blind angle again. And if he really wanted to kill himself, he could have aimed a little higher.Even with those disclaimers though, I think this is a film one should see to get past the idea that themes like the ones shown aren't merely the product of more modern times. Movies made today might be more gritty in the presentation, but sometimes what's not shown on screen can be more visceral when left to the imagination, and this story leaves a lot to the imagination.