Antonius Block The main theme of this movie is one that has played out so many times in movies and books (and life): a man (James Mason) cheats on his wife (Barbara Stanwyck) with a woman (Ava Gardner) who gives him the thrills she cannot. The affair was over, but now she's back. He resists, but she points out that fireworks are not something to be taken lightly: "Maybe it wasn't love, maybe it was only chemistry, or the right combination, or a miracle. But most people drag through their whole lives without finding it. We both know that, don't we Bran?" And when he tells her he doesn't want to see her again, she purrs the sexy double entendre "I'll do exactly what you want Bran, exactly what you want."Gardner is just brilliant, oozing raw desire and channeling Jean Harlow in "The Red-Headed Woman" when she later gets slapped by Mason. Instead of being hurt, she eggs him on, knowing his passion is rising, and knows "that's what you're missing at home", and "you want to be rotten like me." Stanwyck plays the virtuous wife with quiet grace, though I thought she was too reserved in a showdown scene with the outlandishly mean Gardner. It's always great to see her movies though, and she does play 'hurt' and 'conflicted' well. There is a lot of star power here, with Cyd Charisse and Van Heflin also in the cast, and even an appearance from Nancy Davis, who of course would later be Nancy Reagan. As Stanwyck is betrayed by Mason, she turns to Heflin, and it's quite clear they're mutually attracted. Heflin is so smooth and likable, and there is dignity in his acknowledgment of his love for her without resorting to adultery, in direct contrast to Gardner and Mason. Mason and Stanwyck may have gotten top billing, but I think they were upstaged by Heflin and Gardner. As the pressure ratchets up, both Mason and Stanwyck find themselves needing to make choices, though Mason's is disrupted by an event I won't spoil. There are some events that might be too convenient as it plays out, but there is reality and passion here, and I enjoyed this film.

prs51 Barbara Stanwyck was a great actress over a long and distinguished career and this is an enjoyable drama about the lives and loves of upper income New Yorkers in the late forties. But as much as she delivers her usual sterling performance, I couldn't help but feel sorry for her as she is upstaged in the glamour stakes by both Cyd Charisse and Ava Gardner who are both at the apex of their beauty. A secondary niggle relating to the casting has both Babs and Cyd fighting for the affections of Van Heflin. Van Heflin!! On the other hand James Mason is well-cast as the weak-willed sleazy husband. Overall an impressive entry into the "woman's picture" of the forties genre.

MartinHafer The film begins with James Mason at a nightclub trying to make time with a young lady (Cyd Charisse). Charisse isn't and realizes he's a married man. Oddly, despite this, Mason is NOT interested in a fast woman who also enters the scene. It seems that Ava Gardner had, in the past, had an affair with Mason--and he wanted nothing to do with her again--as she was clingy.You then find out that Mason's sad wife is Barbara Stanwyck and she knows about this previous fling with Gardner. She is desperately hoping to get on with their lives--and is scared when Gardner approaches her to announce she's going to steal Mason! Stanwyck acts brave--but it's obvious she's shaken.A short time after this showdown, Stanwyck learns that Gardner is dead and the viewer is uncertain who did it. Stanwyck, you know, didn't do it. But, Mason might have. Or, perhaps some third party did the deed. The only thing you know for sure is that Gardner's character had it coming!! Fortunately, Heflin just so happens to be a retired cop. And so, while he's VERY interested in Stanwyck, he also has a chance to help out by figuring out who committed the crime.This film has a terrific cast--Barbara Stanwyck, Van Helfin, James Mason and Ava Gardner. And, with the material they were given, the actors did a fine job--particularly Miss Gardner who played a wonderfully evil part. The problem, however, is that the film rarely seems believable and the writing, as another reviewer stated, was rather 'pedestrian'. Surely with so much acting talent you'd think they'd be able to come up with THIS! One of the worst problems with the film is the character played by Stanwyck. It was a very thankless role--a woman whose husband has cheated on her yet cannot let the rat go. Viewers are inclined to be a bit annoyed by her needy character--especially when, otherwise, she is supposed to be strong and intelligent. Another problem is the relationship between Heflin and Stanwyck. While you could see them fall in love and this makes for a very interesting twist (the injured wife finding love herself with another man), it all happened way too fast. They just met and then there was an instant attraction--something that rarely happens in real life and which cannot be understood by the viewer based on their meeting. It was simply too rushed and as a result, difficult to believe. All in all, it should have been a lot better and the film is a stylish but not especially inspired soaper.If you do watch this, there is only one standout scene in the film. Watch Heflin in the car with the blonde. The scene is great...and really brutal---and very reminiscent of film noir. I just wish the rest of the film had been that tough and unflinching. Also, keep an eye out for William Conrad as a cop. He looks a lot like his days as 'Cannon' but with a bit more hair--and that same wonderful voice!

crombina I just saw this movie the other day on TCM. The acting was exceptional all around. The story was interesting and kept my attention the entire time.I especially enjoyed the scenes between Stanwyck and Heflin. It was fun to see their characters interact in a friendly manner. It's quite a contrast from their roles in "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers." My favorite parts of the movie were when they ate mushrooms & eggs and when they were hanging out in the NY neighborhood.My only quip was how the murder plot resolved so quickly. The movie would've been more suspenseful if it had been a little longer. And it easily could've been 10 or 15 minutes longer; it's not like the movie dragged at any point.