Just perfect...

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Adventure (1945)Surely the title is a huge pun, or a huge mistake. This is an adventure of a man who is no longer looking for the high seas and wartime survival, but the adventure of love with a woman who is not, at fist his type. It's not as bad as some of the reviews suggest, but there is something steady and normal and incipient about it all. While featuring Clark Gable in the lead, and with the same director as Gone with the Wind a few years earlier, there is something stiff about it all, even the humor and fun. Greer Garson is the "serious" woman, someone who has to force herself to have fun, and Joan Blondell is the racy one, out for fun above all else. And if Gable seems suited to the crazy woman, he's clearly also set to be tamed by the other.That's pretty much the adventure, after a few wild scenes from kicking down the door in Chile to getting torpedoed by the Japanese. Garson can be impressive in her cultured way, but here she is hot and cold, on and off. It's partly her speeches are more words than meaning. There's nothing more boring than people talking about being exciting. If in one scene you'll be laughing as Gable and Garson trap some chickens, in the next you'll be forced to think deep thoughts about true adventure and true meaning—when in fact the meaning was in the chicken scene.Blondell never quite gets her due in many of her movies because she plays against (or in contrast to) the leading female who is more grand, or more beautiful, or just more star powered than she is. Too bad. She's fun but she also has fabulous screen presence. That, to me, is what matters most (often) in this era.The movie is too long in parts, and the theme wears thin after while. In the end it's about a sailor's life or the landlubber's, the first filled with freedom, the second with a home and a family. It's 1945, the soldiers are coming home—guess which side wins?

In his first film after World War II service in the Army Air Corps, Clark Gable settled down to a familiar character and one of his most familiar directors. Adventure was the last of five films that Gable did with Victor Fleming which also includes Gone With The Wind. This one never quite measured up to Gone With The Wind though.Gable was literally met at the airport by Louis B. Mayer and rushed into this film. It was thought at the time that a film with current box office sensation Greer Garson was a can't miss item at the box office. Garson was coming off an Oscar she received in 1942 for Mrs. Miniver the year Gable went away to war. The results were underwhelming, but seen over 60 years after it was first out show Adventure to be not a bad story at all. Gable fits comfortably into the part of the tough boatswain who loves the rollicking life at sea he leads. No woman is going to be tying him down, not one like prim and proper librarian Greer Garson. He likes them like her roommate Joan Blondell, sassy and out for a good time.But Greer and her notions of settling down with home and family kind of get under his skin. It's what's led many a man to the altar.Gable and Garson never worked together again, probably by mutual consent. Neither were each other's types on the screen and in life, but no one has anything to be ashamed of in Adventure.Best performance in the cast is by Thomas Mitchell as Gable's friend and confidante. Mitchell plays the usual tragicomic alcoholic that he took a patent out on for the screen. Another in the cast and former vocalist with the Xavier Cugat Orchestra is Lina Romay who is the woman we first see Gable with as the film opens. She would shortly be joining the Bing Crosby show as the featured female singer. That 'dame' who gets $20.00 for some conversation is none other than Barbara Billingsley aka June Cleaver. Who'd have thunk that one?Though this one didn't set the world on fire, Gable's next two films, Homecoming and The Hucksters rank in my humble opinion as two of his very best. The King was ascending his throne again.

I like Gable and Garson. But not together. They just don't make a believable screen couple. Apparently the stars had such opposite personalities that they didn't get along well while making this movie. Y'know, that might explain their *very* convincing portrayal of hostility when their characters meet. In fact, there's nothing in the story to warrant such immediate, vehement animosity - so it must be real life bleeding through the actors' performances.Far less convincing is the falling in love part, which comes out of nowhere. Well, out of a contrived and ridiculous situation. So, she starts to like him after they steal chickens together and get shot at by a farmer? Um... okay. I guess it was a thrilling experience that made her suddenly want him because... it's exciting to be with a guy who almost got you killed? The scene is played lightheartedly, even as they're running away, dodging bullets. Bizarre.I never understood Greer Garson's character. I couldn't figure out how she really felt about things. For instance, when he plans to go back to sea and leave her, I can't tell if her reaction and speech was genuine, or if she was putting on some sort of front. Besides her behavior is inconsistent. I blame the script for being confusing, and peppered with strange, unrealistic dialogue. Maybe Greer didn't "get" her character either. All I know is, her acting seems rather...bad. To be fair, Joan Blondell overacts too - whether it's frenzied flirting, or wailing & crying in exaggerated "I Love Lucy" fashion - she comes across as cartoonish. I hate to say it 'cause I've always liked Joan before. Actually, Gable's acting is a bit over-the-top as well! It's gotta be the poor script or misguided director.There's one scene that really made me laugh. Greer's watching Clark eat - He's scarfing down his food, all uncouth. And she's gazing at him, with what I assume is meant to be ...lust? Making googley eyes, smiling, pouting, grimacing...all in quick succession. Her lips are out of control! "Oh Clark, you're so sexy when you gobble your dinner like a caveman! Wanna steal more chickens before bed?" Apart from the fatally mismatched leads, this movie is just...strange. The tone's all over the place - is it serious, is it comical? Usually it's comical when it's supposed to be serious. I guess the intended effect was "mystical" and "moving" when the drunken sidekick thinks he's lost his soul (literally saw it exit his chest!) and wants to repent of the sins he's committed. But I found it laughable. Not to mention that last scene when someone (keeping it vague here) WILLS someone else to live, and it's, like, supernatural or spiritual or some junk.This movie tries to be many things - deep, philosophical, preachy... a comedy, romance, melodrama... it's anything but an Adventure! But I guess a confounding title kinda fits a film that, itself, doesn't make much sense.

I'm 65 and I have appreciated Gable's contributions over his career. I did not see Adventure on the silver screen but only this afternoon on TV, and so I cannot think back to how it was received at the time. Our mindsets are different now, anyway, and so I'm now wondering whether anyone else today besides me becomes worn down by his dialog? I'm sorry, but his constant barking finally got to me and I had to turn this one off. What's he doing anyway, schtik? I can imagine his answering even "one lump or two?" in high dudgeon. That just gets tiresome after a while, until such affectation of anger, indignation, resentment or whatever degenerates almost into buffoonery. Not everything has to be expressed frankly, my dear.