Horrendous casting and only just watchable--if you are a die-hard Pat O'Brien fan
In many ways this was a very dumb film--no doubt because of the casting of Pat O'Brien as a boxer!! While it never made much sense to give O'Brien the macho roles he was given throughout the 1930s, this one was significantly worse because they made the mistake of showing him shirtless. The paunchy and petite-muscled O'Brien was just ridiculous playing a boxer. Heck, leading lady Glenda Farrell probably might have been just as convincing as a pugilist! And then to make matters worse, O'Brien showed all the boxing skill and grace you'd expect of an out of shape, slightly balding, uncoordinated and under-muscled man. To try and make the public believe in his machismo, they paired him with boxers who appeared too clumsy to be believed--falling all over themselves as O'Brien danced around the ring. And while dancing doesn't require the same type of musculature as boxing, O'Brien even did a shabby job when it came to his footwork--requiring the studio to splice in a double's legs in close up shots (the double had hairier legs if you look carefully).
Now if you can ignore the ludicrousness of this casting, the film itself is pure 1930's Pat O'Brien with all the usual clichés and nothing good in particular to distinguish it. Once again, he's down and out and his pride won't let him tell his girl the truth but by the end of the film he's regained his old swagger and pride.
Considering how many excellent boxing pictures have been made, I only recommend this to fans of O'Brien--all others will probably be unable to finish this formulaic bit of tripe.
4 of 5 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?