Not a good one


I was disappointed by this movie. Katherine Hepburn is absolutely awful in it, she's downright irritating. And Mitchum only has a small role. Waste of time.

reply

That's funny, because I've always thought Katharine Hepburn was irritating UNTIL I saw this movie! I thought she was subtle, sweet, and very gentle in this movie.

Usually, Kate Hepburn is somebody who – if you're not a fan – comes across like nails on a chalkboard. Her voice hardly ever changes, she is very mannered, etc. But when watching this, I was struck by how attractive she suddenly seemed to me in this film.

She's somebody who I've never thought of as attractive. But, this film really showed a softer side to her. She played it with a touch of finesse. I saw her sensuality, her vulnerability, things I never associated with her before.

Maybe you ought to give it another try…

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!

reply

Hepburn had a way of having this irritating, well, undercurrent in just about each of her roles, but nevertheless she was a fine actress and did ultimately a decent enough job in this one as well, despite being cast against type. And while any picture could use more of Mitchum... even though not necessarily 'this' kind of Mitchum, somewhat miscast as he was here... as far as melodramas go, Undercurrent is a pretty strong one, with fine cinematography and competently realized characters (I particularly like how Taylor wasn't the one-dimensional evil dude he could've so easily been).



"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

reply

i agree. it was lacking.

reply