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

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

As most other reviewers have pointed out-this woman's picture of 1931 has some very odd morality and that's what makes it a very interesting relic. Norma Shearer is a liberated young woman who allows her lover to have sex with her whenever he wants without his offering any sort of commitment. He even announces after they have run off together that he has a wife in Paris. Then he dumps her in Mexico. But she accepts all this abuse because she still loves him and believes that marriage is not necessary for happiness. However she is still so hurt by him, she becomes a super slut and becomes well known among the elite Eurotrash for her available sexuality. Then the lover sends her a telegram saying he is divorcing his wife and will agree to marry her. Shearer is thrilled until the lover finds out about her checkered European adventures and dumps her. There is a "happy" ending when the lover comes to his senses a year later and agrees to marry her.Wow- talk about an abusive relationship, by todays standards. All the while, Robert Montgomery as her best friend half heartedly offers to marry her whenever she gets upset. His character drinks throughout the movie. Montgomery gives the best performance and is quite charming. Today, we can interpret his actions as either deeply closeted or just someone who loves his liquor more than actively pursuing the love of his life.Shearer has costume changes in nearly every scene. I am sure the female (and some male) audiences of the day loved it. As usual she is very chic. She has a tendency to pose, silent movie style occasionally- but I can fault the director . He should have reined her in. She didn't do that much when she worked with a stronger director like George Cukor. Shearer has loads of charisma that still come across today. The movie is worth checking out...

I find much to agree with in all of the comments made about this film. The hypocritical morals are obvious. The disparity between Norma Shearer's acting style, nurtured in silent films, and Robert Montgomery's style, which does anticipate a more modern approach, is also apparent. The costumes and sets are marvelous and capture the milieu with authenticity and panache. But not being a great fan of Miss Shearer, I did, indeed, grow weary of seeing her throw her head back in laughter. I wholeheartedly agree that Robert Montgomery steals the show.The content of this film makes it racy in any era. The montage of scenes depicting Shearer with man after man makes the point clearly enough without being as explicit as a contemporary film. In fact that method of story telling is one of the key distinctions between films from the Golden Age of Hollywood and contemporary cinema. This method either appeals to an individual's tastes today or doesn't (and it is that bias which often forms the basis of comments found in forums such as this). For the record, I appreciate a less explicit approach to cinema. The only point I would like to make more explicit is that I found it impossible to see what: 1) Miss Shearer's character saw in her caddish married lover or 2) what Mr. Montgomery's character saw in Miss Shearer's character. The only person who seemed the slightest bit attractive was Montgomery's character (despite his penchant for the bottle), who nobody found desirable. Filmed today, this movie would probably explore the rejected woman's past, searching for psychological explanations for her preference of an abusive mate over a warm, caring one. This film, therefore, might have been an interesting psychological study and made a little more sense. But filmed in 1930, cinema had a long way to go before really delving into such explorations. Even Bette Davis' landmark portrayal of Mildred in 1934's "Of Human Bondage" is not so much an exploration as a portrait.

This is a precode movie starring Norma Shearer, who looks gorgeous in all the gowns (and is that the way people dressed for a football game in the '30s?). Shearer plays a free spirit who doesn't believe in marriage and instead cavorts and travels with a reporter. Of course, she's kidding herself, and she wanted the wedding ring all along - when he announces he's been married the whole time and then breaks up with her, she takes up with every man she meets. This is never actually stated, which makes it kind of fun. Robert Montgomery says, "Boy, what I heard about you in Paris." Shearer: "You didn't believe it, did you?" Montgomery: "Not the first 6 or 700 times." Montgomery easily steals the movie as her funny, charming, ever-drunk good friend. It's the best role and holds up today. The other roles don't - the story is too melodramatic, acted in an old-fashioned, hand on the forehead style that dates it.Added to that, the reporter character of Alan, played by Neil Hamilton, is despicable, making the film a frustrating experience for the viewer.As an artifact and for the clothes and sets, you can't beat it, though.

Very of its time and very tailored to its star: A love triangle that mainly allows La Shearer to wear great clothes, hog all the close-ups, emote theatrically, and win all the audience sympathy. Or most of it, because one of the two swains bidding for her is Robert Montgomery, and in the charm department he easily outclasses the competition, Neil Hamilton. The latter mistreats our Norma horribly, doesn't reveal that he's a married man until he's had his way with her (it's a pretty racy movie for its day), neglects and insults her and doesn't give her a chance to explain why she's become a loose woman (it's because he rejected her, the varmint). But she just goes on loving the rat. For an assembly-line early talkie, it features unusually snappy dialogue (John Meehan is one of the unsung heroes of MGM), and of course the Art Deco ambience is luscious. But the plot doesn't go where you want it to (i.e., this Hamilton guy just doesn't deserve the leading lady), and the 70-odd years have revealed Shearer's much-vaunted star quality to be mostly a bag of actressy tricks.