Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Sammy-Jo Cervantes There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

bkoganbing When John Drew Barrymore was making films in the 50s he opted for a more modern style than his father John Barrymore ever tried. The elder Barrymore's classical style of acting was quite passé and would never have been accepted. Sad to say that young Barrymore tried and failed to be a James Dean type rebel. For Never Love A Stranger that's especially interesting because supporting Barrymore was an actor who would become the ideal image of cool.With elements taken from Manhattan Melodrama and Little Caesar, Never Love A Stranger is an old fashioned type film that probably was an anachronism in the 50s let alone now. Young Barrymore plays a slum kid who suffers an identity crisis when he discovers his Jewish roots after having been raised in a Catholic orphanage. He goes away but comes back one mean and tough punk who becomes kingpin of the rackets, taking over from Robert Bray who gave him his start. And as it turns out his childhood friend, Steve McQueen becomes the special prosecutor with the mission of bringing Barrymore down.Steve McQueen might have made this film slightly better had he been cast in the lead. But frankly this film was a turgid mess and I doubt that would have helped.

secondtake Never Love a Stranger (1958)You might be most impressed by the early appearance of Steve McQueen, who shows a spark and intensity that makes him rise above the rest of the cast, who are really rather good in all. It says something about star power, which isn't all smoke and mirrors. You might also get a kick that the leading male (McQueen is secondary) is played by John Drew Barrymore, son of the famous John and father of the famous Drew. Sadly, this man of the generation in the middle was troubled and had a mixture of leading roles, never achieving greatness or fame.If the plot is a familiar one about two slum kids in New York growing up into opposite roles, one a thug, the other the area's district attorney (there are several of these films), there is another theme that makes the movie singular. That is the issue of being Jewish, and at times downright anti-Semitism, though handled with kid gloves. The fighting between Catholic boys and the one Jewish kid (McQueen) is standard clan rivalry, with a religious twist. But when the other character, raised in a Catholic orphanage, discovers he is actually Jewish, his first reaction is rebellion. And the movie carries this theme throughout, adding a good if forced second level to work with.I'm not sure it matters, but it's interesting, at least, that McQueen and Barrymore are both not Jewish as far as I know (McQueen in particular doesn't fit the stereotypes, but that's probably okay by itself), nor was the director, Robert Stevens the American (as opposed to the more famous Robert Stevens the Brit). Even more interesting, the book the movie draws from was written by Harold Robbins, whose parents were Jewish immigrants, but when he was a child he claimed (falsely) to have been raised in a Roman Catholic orphanage. For whatever reason, then, the theme is handled with a kind of detachment that makes it odd, and not nearly as affecting as, say, some of the European films that really attack the issue of "passing" for Goy when the Nazi rampage was on (Louis Malle's "Au revoir les enfants" possibly the best). The Barrymore character never does quite accept of address his heritage.Now to be clear, the movie lacks a directorial touch to keep it alive and pertinent. It's a decent if uninspired effort, but the exceptions will make it worth a close look for some.

Robin Moss "Never Love A Stranger" is a badly directed movie with very poor dialogue, and an off-screen narrator pompously intoning meaningless platitudes.. The basic story is borrowed from several better films, and consequently has few surprises for the audience. However the film is of interest for other reasons.The first major turning point in the story is based on an extraordinarily racist idea. A mother had died giving birth to a baby who is brought up in a Catholic orphanage. When the child is in his teens, it is discovered that his mother was Jewish. Although the boy has been raised from birth as a Christian, it is decided that he should be removed from the orphanage because it is felt that his parentage prevents him from being a Christian! Can any student of the Catholic Church in America confirm or deny that this kind of racist nonsense ever occurred? Steve McQueen gives an early career performance, and already it is strikingly obvious that he has a rapport with the movie camera. Interestingly, so too has John Drew Barrymore, which raises the question of why did his movie career not prosper. Lita Milan has a strong and interesting face that is not conventionally beautiful. Thanks to Lee Garmes' lighting and to her heavy eye shadow, she seems better looking than she really is. R. G. Armstong comes in late in the movie, playing a hired assassin. Wearing glasses and city clothes, he is almost unrecognisable from the westerners he played in Sam Peckinpah's movies. Only his eyes remind the audience that they have seen him somewhere before.The IMDb states incorrectly that Dorothy Collins is not given a screen credit, Yes she is, and so too is lyricist Lawrence Elow.It is regrettable that "Never Love A Stranger" is such a weak movie. Buried beneath the shoddy dialogue and implausible characterisation is a workable story, struggling to emerge.

Michael-110 This film is painfully inept and should be avoided by all except lovers of camp. It's the oft-told story of the boyhood friends--where one goes straight and the other becomes a crook. For a vastly better version of the story, watch "Manhattan Melodrama." In "Never Love a Stranger," the dialogue is incredibly wooden and the plot contrivances both silly and obvious. Really, I don't know why I watched to the end except that I was hoping for a good courtroom scene, but none ever materialized.