dstanwyck
फ़र॰ 2005 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हमारे अपडेट अभी भी डेवलप हो रहे हैं. हालांकि प्रोफ़ाइलका पिछला संस्करण अब उपलब्ध नहीं है, हम सक्रिय रूप से सुधारों पर काम कर रहे हैं, और कुछ अनुपलब्ध सुविधाएं जल्द ही वापस आ जाएंगी! उनकी वापसी के लिए हमारे साथ बने रहें। इस बीच, रेटिंग विश्लेषण अभी भी हमारे iOS और Android ऐप्स पर उपलब्ध है, जो प्रोफ़ाइल पेज पर पाया जाता है. वर्ष और शैली के अनुसार अपने रेटिंग वितरण (ओं) को देखने के लिए, कृपया हमारा नया हेल्प गाइड देखें.
बैज3
बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
समीक्षाएं62
dstanwyckकी रेटिंग
Puhleeze! What in hell are they doing? When she's wrong, she's so wrong, she's worse. Of course, when she's great, she's very good. I. mean, she is an interesting character, on and off screen. But, let's face it, in too many films, she's involved as as a solo act. Mitchum, in the beginning of his career, and throughout, is always fascinating in his laconic, unusual way. (Brilliant in the Night of the Hunter.). Shirley MacLaine said he was the most poetic, intelligent actor she'd ever worked with. No doubt. Robert Taylor is invariable in his performances. Bland (as is his expressionless face) and a one-note Charlie. What the great Stanwyck saw in him, is beyond me. What the public saw in him, ditto. Minnelli should have stayed with his wonderful musicals, his dramas are searching for air. Turgidity is descriptive. Maybe The Bad and the Beautiful. Save Lana Turner. False back lot shootings of their house and property. Marjorie Main couldn't quite get going. Too brief and really no place for her style to go anywhere. Jayne Meadows was usually interesting in her all too few performances - tall, icy, remote being. (Steve Allen, the great, used her well.) Long story short: A stink-a-roo.
An utter injustice to the great Bronte girls, Charlotte and Emily. What WERE the Warner boys thinking? Their stuff is either great, or its complete opposite. This was the opposite. The swell of all too typical background music, Korngold in this case, haunts the background as well as the foreground. The scenery is blatantly false. The direction, Bernhardt's, whom I like nicely, at times, was taking naps while all the non-action of the action was going on. (Arthur Kennedy, a non-winning AA nominee 5 times, not for this film, although he was good. Should of won one of them.) No further comment. A sad mess of everything.
If you're tired and need to rest for awhile, put this ragmop movie on and have a sweet snooze. What about it this film has any appeal to anyone at anytime, 1946 or any year before or after? I can't imagine. Has there ever been a movie with such poor acting - even the wonderful Peter Lorre - lousy writing (Curt Siodmak, no less!) and equally poor (Robert Florey, no less!) All the actors were sleep-walking through it. Andrea King, especially, to the point of being annoying. Costume pieces are not her style. Started off with a hint of something, maybe. But the hint wilted into nothing. All in all, if you're tired, take a look at this claptrap. You'll sleep like a baby.
हाल ही में लिए गए पोल
223 कुल पोल लिए गए