Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

atlasmb The action in this film takes place within the rarefied air of art deco penthouses with thirty-foot ceilings. There, the central characters--Anne (Barbara Stanwyck) and Dick (James Rennie)--fall in love and make decisions about their relationship.Dick is somewhat amused--and a little intrigued--by Anne's "theories" about marriage. She see it as a hindrance to love and a guarantee that romance will die. Basically, she is a proponent of free love.Different conceptions of free love have been expressed by many notables in the fields of science and the arts over the centuries. The actual Free Love movement is a more recent development with its beginnings in the 1800s. Although its proponents espoused many various views on culture, politics and the nature of man, there were common threads--primarily a condemnation of state-sponsored marriage and the view that the institution of marriage runs contrary to the nature of man and that it impinges on the freedoms of both partners and amounts to little more than enslavement, particularly of the woman.One can see where Anne is coming from, but it is not surprising that certain aspects of traditional marriage hold a romantic interest for Anne. Dick is so in love with her that he might agree to anything she wants. But they are constantly judged by others who reflect the mores of society. Eventually, the couple agrees to live apart and love from a distance.You can probably guess where the story is going, despite the fact that this is a pre-Code production. The staging feels, rightfully, like a play. Its tone is light-hearted for the most part, centering on characters whose lives seem to revolve around emptying cocktail glasses and witty repartee. But it's a stylish production and the acting is suitable for carefree banter sprinkled with Anne's "theories". Fortunately, her free love notions do not include the social engineering leanings of others who theorized in this realm.

mark.waltz By 1931, Barbara Stanwyck was moving quickly to the forefront of Hollywood stardom, and critics (as well as the public) were taking notice. An association with Frank Capra at Columbia and a non-exclusive contract with Warner Brothers made the movie audiences of the pre-code depression era aware of her massive talents, particularly as a serious dramatic actress who could handle comedy as well. Her movies were often hit and miss, going between mediocre melodramas like "Ten Cents a Dance" and such classics as "The Miracle Woman", as well as fascinatingly fun exposes on sin with "Night Nurse" and later on "Ladies They Talk About" and "Baby Face". If anybody could sin on screen with a gleam in their eye, it was Barbara Stanwyck."Illicit" certainly doesn't lack on sinful glamour with its lavish Park Avenue settings, a pre-code forbidden plot involving single lovers (Stanwyck and James Rennie) obviously involved in a sexual relationship, droll comedy by Charles Butterworth (as a fun-loving lush who constantly "borrows" Rennie's stash of liquor), and perky Joan Blondell. Unfortunately, playing opposite the talented Stanwyck, James Rennie seems to be a total bore in the male lead, while there are definite sparks between Stanwyck and Ricardo Cortez, playing her old flame who just won't give her up and would be more willing than to adhere to her desire for a serious relationship without the benefit (or in her opinion, curse) of marriage. The imperious looking Natalie Moorehead is the other woman who comes between Stanwyck and Rennie, discovering boredom after their freedom comes to an end thanks to his pressure on her to tie the knot. While their characters are interesting, they are too one-note to add much more to the plot where you pretty much already know what is going to happen.Unfortunately, as excellent as Stanwyck is, her character really doesn't have any motivation for avoiding marriage other than memories of her own parent's ill-fated union. Claude Gillingwater offers brief wisdom as Rennie's understanding father who would like nothing more than to see Stanwyck become his daughter-in-law, but after his one scene, totally disappears from the film, taking away the only sensible character in the film. Two years later with more character development and ten less minutes, the same story was better served as "Ex-Lady" where the rising Bette Davis got a better leading man as well as a career for her character than Stanwyck, who obviously enjoyed being a party girl even when her marriage was on the rocks. Stanwyck does get a great exit though, but by that time, it's almost too little, too late.

LeonLouisRicci The Theory, Should Lovers Marry or Not is Endlessly Talked and Talked in this Pre-Coder that Benefits from the First Starring Role for Barbara Stanwyck and She is Up to the Task of Looking Spunky and Frustrated, Randy and Depressed with Alternating Scenes as the Movie Bounces off the Walls with Theories and More Theories Batted Around..."What do Theories have to do with love?" Stanwyck Asks. Exactly.Most of the Pre-Code Fun is in the First Act as the Movie Uncomfortably Moves All Over the Place with Dry Discussions, Wordy Arguments, and Not Much Else. In All of this Soap Opera Seriousness it is Charles Butterworth as a Witty Drunk Steals Every Scene. Ricardo Cortez is a One Note Bore, but Joan Blondell and Natalie Moorehead do Add Some Spice to the Dreariness and Moorehead's Margie Confronting Stanwyck about "Dick" is a Highlight.Overall, Pre-Code Watchers are Likely to be Disappointed After the First Few Scenes. Lovers of Staged Dialog and Glittery Costumes Might Find it More Appealing. Yes, the Virtues of Marriage as the Preferred Lifestyle Managing to Squeeze the Sex Dry is an Edgy Subject and would Vanish in a Few Years from the Screen, but this is a Slog of a Story that Could Have been Summed Up in a One Act Play.

dougdoepke The best part of this rather boring gabfest is getting to see ladies high-fashion outfits, circa 1930. Some of them are real doozies. Stanwyck gets more than her share of slinky finery as a rich guy's paramour. Actually, the movie's premise is a significant one—does marriage somehow kill love? Anne (Stanwyck) seems to think so and sometimes acts on the premise. The trouble is that the premise gets drowned out by all the talk from one scene to the next, without let-up. Then too, director Mayo adds nothing to what turns out to be a filmed stage play. To be charitable, his options may have been cramped by the newness of movie sound equipment.Pre-Code liberties are evident in the first few scenes where Anne, in a clinging negligee, and Dick (Rennie) discuss whether to marry or to continue living in sin. After that, the screenplay settles into more conventional marital mix-ups. But at least Stanwyck shines, showing why she was slated for bigger and better things. In fact, she's almost girlish, a really long way from the femme fatale of Double Indemnity (1944). Too bad she doesn't have more scenes with that other Warner's personality girl, Joan Blondell (Duckie). Anyway, I found the movie considerably less than I expected.