gamay9 Hollywood is doing many remakes because they don't have any creative screen writers, like myself, who can't get his foot in the door because of nepotism and the fact that I know no one out there.Some remakes are good, such as 2005's 'King Kong' (special effects?) but most pale in comparison to the original, especially the comedies. This film would be a box office smash today, with Naomi Watts playing the 'Gilda' role and Matthew McConaghy taking the Cooper role and how about Robert Downey Jr. as Frederich March? Instead of 'bums' moving to Paris and becoming successful, let's have them all stay poor, making the film more realistic. Back in the 30's and 40's films seemed to gravitate toward 'rags to riches' themes. We all know that such success is not the norm. Miriam Hopkins would be a star today....without the girdle Hollywood made her wear. And, let's face it, even in the 30's, people involved in the arts did not only have platonic relationships.

evanston_dad An extremely racy pre-Code entry that stars Fredric March, Gary Cooper and Miriam Hopkins as one attractive menage-a-trois.The three play Americans living in France. Hopkins falls in love with both men and can't decide which one she wants more, so she has them both at turns, switching allegiances to whichever man she happens to be with in the moment. The film is very frankly sexual -- the gist is that all three characters are horny as hell and their passions are driven far more by lust than by any real love. The novelty of such an old film being so obviously naughty masks the fact that neither the story nor characters are very fleshed out, and the dramatic conflict, which can be reduced to a woman trying to decide whether or not she likes either man enough to be faithful to him, isn't overly compelling. It is refreshing for a change to see a woman in the driver's seat when it comes to her sexual dalliances, and a film that allows a female character to embrace her own sexual needs without shame or the obligation to give her a comeuppance. But this isn't a Lubitsch classic on the order of another Hopkins vehicle ("Trouble in Paradise") let alone the masterpieces "Ninotchka" and "The Shop Around the Corner."Grade: B

jmurf1111 The other Reviews gave more than enough technical, background, and actors/actress information regarding this movie. I will just address the classification Comedy. I found the script and the performers amusing here and there. My patience was tried throughout the entire film, though, as I watched and listened in anxious anticipation for the "FUNNY" to kick in. Let me tally the count: Belly laughs= ZERO... Out loud laughter=ZERO... Out loud chuckles=ZERO... Snickers and hmm hmmps=UNDER FIVE... Smiles - Yeah, I smiled (cheeks sure did Not get sore maintaining one, though)AND, the movie ended. If the Pre-Code factor of this film and other info as furnished in other Reviews is enough for you, then watch it.I CANNOT recommend seeing this film if you, like me, have the prerequisite requirement that a movie classified Comedy MUST have at least ONE (1) laugh-out-loud moment in it. Barring that, I can't even say I felt the enjoyment of having spent the time it took to watch the movie, as I felt too much disappointment for what it lacked.By the way -- Of Course I appreciate Gary Cooper, Fredric March, Edward Everett Horton, and (lesser known to me, yet enjoyable enough) Miriam Hopkins. I've seen films they're in that were ---my definition --- Funny. Just not here.

wes-connors On a train to Paris, playwright Fredric March (as Thomas "Tom" B. Chambers) and his painter friend Gary Cooper (as George Curtis) are interrupted while snoozing by attractive blonde Miriam Hopkins (as Gilda Farrell). A commercial artist, Ms. Hopkins banters with her fellow Americans about art, then goes to work for her virtuous boss, Edward Everett Horton (as Max Plunkett). Mr. Horton doesn't approve when Hopkins begins dating both Mr. March and Mr. Cooper. Horton has known Hopkins five years, and hasn't made it "to first base," but her new friends get Hopkins there quickly.Roommates eleven years, March and Cooper both fall in love with Hopkins. "Curious to have a little bit of feminine fluff breaking up our friendship," March tells Copper. The bed in the men's apartment seems to have collected a lot of dust (watch as Hopkins throws herself on it). Hopkins says she loves both men. Since they all like each other, the three decide to live together, to "concentrate on work" and make "a gentlemen's agreement" to "forget sex." But, when March or Cooper leaves Hopkins alone with the other, abstinence becomes difficult. Moreover, Hopkins reminds the men, "I am no gentleman." This Noel Coward play was dramatically altered, by writer Ben Hecht, for director Ernst Lubitsch and Paramount. Great credentials, but something was lost in the translation. "Design for Living" intends to be a modern, sexy comedy. Looking back on it, you can appreciate what they were attempting with Hopkins' character. But, despite Mr. Lubitsch's clever opening, there isn't much "chemistry" between Hopkins and her leading men. And, despite Mr. Hecht's clever writing about their laundry, long-time roommates March and Cooper have no screen rapport. Though good, the film doesn't add up.***** Design for Living (12/29/33) Ernst Lubitsch ~ Fredric March, Gary Cooper, Miriam Hopkins, Edward Everett Horton