Ensofter Overrated and overhyped

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Patience Watson One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

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

mmallon4 There's something about Gentleman Jim which makes the film uplifting, it has a real aura of celebration to it. There's nothing better than hearing Auld Lang Sang during the opening credits of a piece of classic Hollywood filmmaking. Compare this to the many bleak biopics which portray historical figures going through unprecedented amounts of suffering, Gentleman Jim really stands out with its combination of comedy and drama which never takes itself too seriously to create something unique; historical accuracy be dammed!Errol Flynn and Jack Carson make for a fun duo as a pair of part time con-men. Flynn's reaction at the film's beginning to the pickpocket currently in the act of robbing him, just a quick "get outta there" and a slap on the wrist as he continues himself to con other people, it's so brief you would almost miss it and if it doesn't show what a great actor he is then I don't know what will; such sly confidence.Gentleman Jim is a movie full of blink-and-you-miss-them moments of subtle comedy. One of my favourite of these is the moment in which a child asks his mother during a fight "why doesn't daddy look that like in his underwear" and her response of "shh, he did once". I love the child's reaction with his eye's rolling up as if he's saying"oh, I totally get it". The movie does also have its more overt moments of humour in the form of Corbett's entertaining family of screwballs led by a scenery chewing Alan Hale. Yet even Hale's chewing of the scenery is outdone by Ward Bond as the over the top, manly force of nature that is John L. Sullivan.Gentleman Jim differs from most boxing film partially due to its time period setting. The film acts as a piece of 1890's nostalgia when there would still have been people alive in 1942 to remember this period. It is easily apparent the filmmakers put great strides into recreating the time period with its lush sets and great attention to detail. However the other aspect which makes the movie stand out amongst boxing pictures is its presentation of boxing as a real gentleman's sport, making the movie really live up to its title. This isn't a story with Rocky Balboas nor does it take place in sweaty, gritty inner city gyms. I guess somewhere along the way the sport of boxing became less sophisticated and more middle to lower class.Classic Hollywood films are generally not known for their realistic boxing scenes with their use of sped up footage and not very convincing punches. Gentleman Jim does a better job than other boxing films of the era. Flynn learned to box for the role and no body doubles where used while the fights for the most part do come off as convincing. The meeting between Corbett and Sullivan after their fight is the film's real tearjerker moment: what true gentlemen. An acceptance that your time has come to an end and that it will happen to all of us eventually.

weezeralfalfa Beginning with "They Died with their Boots on" of the previous year, director Raoul Walsh began an association with Errol Flynn that lasted through the war years. "Gentleman Jim" was sandwiched between various WWII films for the duration of the war. After "They Died with their Boots on", Olivia de Havilland was never again Flynn's leading lady. Although a variety of leading ladies filled her shoes over the remainder of Flynn's career, Alexis Smith was the most frequent, costarring in 4 of Flynn's films from 1941-50. She looked especially striking in Technicolor, with her flaming hair and greenish eyes. Unfortunately, the present film was shot in B&W. To see Alexis in a Flynn Technicolor film, checkout the westerns "San Antonio" or "Montana".Although the present film is supposed to be a partial biopic of the pioneer progressive boxer "Gentleman" Jim Corbett, I'm sure Alexis's character is purely fictional. Corbett was married some years before the fight with heavyweight champion J.L. Sullivan. Alexis, as Victoria, keeps popping up in Corbett's life, and secretly puts up the $10,000. needed to stage the Corbett-Sullivan fight, mostly to hopefully see Corbett get beat by Sullivan. Of course, this backfires when Corbett wins. Victoria comes across as very confident of her place in Nob Hill society in San Francisco, but is very condescending toward Corbett, whom she sees as too ambitious and talented as a boxer and as too aggressive in seeking to be an accepted gentleman member of the Olympic Club. She alternatively encourages him toward a romantic relationship, then slaps him down when he oversteps her invisible bounds. Clearly, she's jealous of his overall talent and probably fears he would be too dominating in a relationship with her.Historically, Corbett's fame is based not just on his defeat of Sullivan, but in introducing a new style of boxing, largely imported from England, emphasizing fancy foot work and gloved hands, instead of bare knuckle slugging. Historically, Corbett also was a reasonably good actor, and after his boxing days were over, he made money in vaudeville.Ward Bond does a good job impersonating Sullivan, except that he overdoes the confusion in the ring due to Corbett's quickness and dancing. He is shown being gracious toward Corbett in his defeat. I don't know if this is historically correct. I viewed a 130 min. version of this film on You Tube. The standard version is 144 min. I didn't have the feeling that something important was missing.

JohnHowardReid One of Walsh's best films. It's directed with tremendous zest and gusto, yet with painstaking attention to detail. No doubles are used in the boxing scenes which all come across with edge-of-the-seat excitement. The witty script presents an array of flesh-and-blood characters instead of the usual Hollywood stereotypes. And it's not afraid to present even Corbett himself in an unflattering light. All the characters in fact are fully rounded. No attempt is made to gloss over their faults, although nearly everyone is pretty likable. The players do a sterling job in bringing these characters to life. Flynn delivers one of his best performances as the bumptious and boorishly over-confident but quick-thinking Corbett. Flynn makes us like Corbett by the sheer force of his personality (although, of course, Corbett doesn't do anything to antagonize us – if we accept his constant needling of John L. Sullivan). Production values are extraordinarily lavish with breath-taking sets, crowds of extras, gorgeous costumes – plus high camera angles to show them all off!

Edgar Allan Pooh . . . "In that case, I'm no lady," is the way Jim and Vicky exchange their vows in what has to be one of the better "feel good" film biographies of the 1900s. Since the entire story of GENTLEMAN JIM occurs in the late 1800s, these risqué-sounding disclosures are delivered fully-clothed, in a semi-public place. Errol Flynn portrays the title pugilist as a Devil-may-care risk-taker, like himself. Since the boxing rings of James J. Corbett's time were sized somewhere between Louisville's Churchill Downs and New York City's Central Park, Jim realizes that he has plenty of room to dance around his far heavier opponents for 15, 20, or 65 rounds, ducking 99% of their punches. Then, when the bigger brutes are too weak to box their own shadows, Jim lays them flatter that the Marquess of Queensbury. In a larger sense, GENTLEMAN JIM is carefully constructed to show that nearly all Rich People are lucky hypocrites, generally undeserving of their Wealth, and desperate to kick off anyone trying to follow them up the Ladder of Success. That makes this flick a "Two-Fer."