Diana vuole la libertà

I totally agree with the first post! I never could understand why people didn't think she was a great actress as an adult too. She was terrific and I appreciate her enough to make up for all the fools who don't. She is my favorite actress ever. I'm so sorry she quit acting at such a young age. What we've missed because of it! I wish Shirley would get back into show business now even after all these years! After all she has accomplished in her life she deserves take it easy at this age but sorry, as a great fan, I want more Shirley even now! I hope she doesn't stay away because of feeling unappreciated, it would make me cry if she did. I can't help but make a comment on Shirley the child... It would have been enough just to look at her pretty face, beautiful hair, sweet giggly voice, infectious smile and dimples, but it's amazing that on top of all that, she was so smart, had more poise than most adults, could dance fantastic, sing, act, remember lines and lyrics (all simultaneously) It is still totally amazing to me. And watching her movies when I was a child, I couldn't appreciate how easy she made it all look. Now that I'm an adult who has raised my own child, I fully realize how extraordinary Shirley really was. I don't know HOW she did it. I know this sounds like a small thing, but even if you watch her hands ... how expressive they were. I love how she use to put on her mad face and stamp her little foot! Best of all the little Shirley makes me smile just watching her put on a big smile and she can also bring me to tears. How many other people can do that?

Mild sitcom, from a story by Christopher Isherwood of all people, about a pastor's rebellious daughter in the stuffy upper-middle-class Baltimore of 1905. Though it's handsomely photographed, there's no Baltimore atmosphere here; it could as easily be Milwaukee or St. Louis, and in fact, the strong-family-ties theme, aggressive nostalgia, boy-next-door puppy love, and sleeve-tugging sentimentality play like a less well-written "Meet Me in St. Louis." Robert Young, top-billed and with a mustache and silly hair, does a tolerable warmup for "Father Knows Best"; he furrows his brow a lot and makes pronouncements. (But the height of the plot arc, in which he delivers a give-'em-hell sermon to his hypocritical congregation, is unaccountably omitted from the script.) The only real surprise of the movie is how amazingly uninteresting a 21-year-old Shirley Temple is. She simpers, she searches for her key light to be never anything but as attractive as possible, she tries to convey adolescent feistiness, but her line readings are monotonously alike, and she has no inner life. Nor is it wise to pair her with then-husband John Agar, in what's essentially the Tom Drake role; he's as dull as Tom Drake. The script puts the two through some very contrived roadblocks on the road to love, including a hard-to-believe episode of her unintentionally instigating a riot, a harder-to-believe one of him reading a speech of hers out loud and forgetting to change the pronouns, and an unpalatable one of her lying to him about painting his portrait. I wouldn't even root for such a selfish young miss. RKO must have figured, well, she's Shirley Temple, the audience will be on her side no matter what. I wasn't, and while the denouement is rushed to the point of incoherence, I wasn't sorry to see this one end.

Back in 1905, atypical teenager Shirley Temple (as Dinah "Di" Sheldon) is expelled from school after telling her teacher she wants to study human anatomy by painting nude models. Called "immoral," the budding art student also advocates a woman's right to vote. Plus, she wears two petticoats instead of the standard five. Sent home to North Baltimore, Ms. Temple receives moral support from understanding minister father Robert Young (as Andrew Sheldon). As a youth, he dabbled in ballroom dancing. Temple is attracted to tall, dark and handsome John Agar (as Thomas "Tom" Wade), but he prefers a traditionally feminine woman...

Back home, Temple gets into more political trouble when she paints Mr. Agar in his bathing suit. But, we do not see this on camera. Agar appears fully clothed while posing for Temple, but is bare-chested in the finished product. First of all, we are left to wonder when Temple became an expert in his male anatomy. Of course, in real life, they were married. After an interesting start, this becomes a silly film. However, the star (now being billed below Robert Young) shows her natural appeal. This is especially evident in the opening minutes. With cast and crew possibly helping set the mood, Temple appears to be comfortable and competent.

***** Adventure in Baltimore (4/19/49) Richard Wallace ~ Shirley Temple, John Agar, Robert Young, Josephine Hutchinson

I saw this movie about ten years ago and absolutely loved it! It made me laugh and cry. I have always been amazed when I hear of Shirley Temples "struggle" to have successful movies as an adult. I think she was delightful and had a real gift for comedy. I am sorry her career ended so soon and can't help but wonder what we're now missing out on because of it. I am also frustrated that her later movies are not made available on DVD...at least hardly any. I think people could now begin to appreciate her...to rediscover the adult Shirley, because they'd be able to see her in a fresh way...something they had trouble with years ago. Adventure in Baltimore is a movie that makes you long for the innocence of the day and at the same time cheer for new youthful freedoms. I found myself really involved in her situations and couldn't wait to see what would come next. If you want a great and entertaining afternoon, just hope some channel is playing this movie and enjoy!

Plot-- A reverend's 1905 family must find a way to adjust to the eldest daughter's instincts for equality at a time when women were denied many opportunities. Meanwhile, Dad may lose his chance to become a bishop because of town gossip over his daughter.

Looks like the misleading title and Shirley's rebellious upstart were meant to provide some edge to her squeaky-clean image. However, the results are what could be expected of the Temple brand—a wholesome little family drama, on the order of Father Knows Best. As daughter Dinah, Shirley manages to keep her feminist instincts within appealing bounds; at the same time, she defies confining norms placed on 1905 women. The rebellious context is carefully calibrated so as to be acceptable to 1949 audiences without offending the values of that later time. Note how in the movie Dinah's desire for women's suffrage is endorsed, but not her inclination for a career as a painter. That accords with norms of the late-40's when women still weren't expected to have careers. Careers would come later in the 1960's.

As Pastor Sheldon, Young is likably bland in the type role soon to define him. More importantly, as the voice of reason and church authority, he gives official approval to his daughter's actions. So the audience knows she's more than just rebellious— she's on the right track. On the other hand, too bad the studio didn't hire a more appealing swain than the dull- as-cement John Agar. But then he's certainly no competition for his then real life wife.

On the whole, the movie tells us more about Temple's career and the social norms of two historical periods than anything else. However, I'm still wondering how this revealing slice of fluff escaped from RKO's dream factory that was then turning out noirs by the dozen.