MovieChat Forums > Adam's Rib (1949) Discussion > An exceptionally irksome film

An exceptionally irksome film

posted 16 years ago by donofthedial
49 replies | jump to latest

I just saw AR last night for thew first time in my life. I have always liked Spencer Tracy very much. I enjoy some of Hepburn's films and Judy Holliday is a under appreciated national treasure.

That said, I found Adam's Rib to be an exceptionally irksome and annoying film. I have no concept of how it could ever be considered one of the 'best' comedies of all time for, for me, the laughs were few and far between.

The David Wayne character just is not funny. The song he sings is very annoying as is his 'personality'.

Tracy can be very overbearing in some of his films and when he begins to preach, he can be toxic. Listening to him spout off on his concepts of righteousness was a bit too much.

Judy Holliday saved this film for me. Without her in the film (and some great character actors and actresses)I would have turned it off quite quickly. Her scene in the jailhouse with KH was marvelous and she had some good dialog. As Hepburn asks her what happened after she shot the gun and Holliday answers, "bang?" with a quizzical expression on her face, you have to laugh. And she deserved a close-up reaction shot in the courtroom scene in which Hope Emerson lifts Spencer Tracy into the air. She gets a long shot, but it was her I wanted to see react.

Tom Ewell and David Wayne in the same film? One is a virtual clone of the other.

Jean Hagen was fine in a Judy Holliday type role.

The film was just a bit too stuffy for me; preachy, too. All pointing the way to the worst ST & KH film of all time - "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?"

I'd try Adam's Rib one more time, but its not a dish I think I would order or savor anytime soon.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] davegering 16 years ago

Just finished watching it, and I'll have to agree with you.

I enjoyed some of the early banter between Tracy and Hepburn, but the characters went over the top at about midpoint and the film never recovered. Also, the legal antics were so farcical (and so irrelevant to the case) that I found myself cringing everytime the venue went back to the courtroom.

As far as I'm concerned, it can be taken off the menu completely.

[–] Lysandra_Yaxley 16 years ago

When you first posted this message I figured I'd get it deleted because you are a troll. But then it's such a really stupid post that I concluded it should be left up as a testament to your complete lack of artistic taste. So here it is.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mladenilic 16 years ago

well, for me , this movie was hilarious and very entertaining but one thing annoyed me a bit.

Amanda ( Hepburn ) character was pretty cruel and wanted to win more than anything , even humiliating her husband at the court of law and in the end getting away with it, like nothing happened.

The verdict was also ridiculous.
How can anyone get away with shooting 5+ bullets at people???

[–] misspaddylee 16 years ago

I don't find "Adam's Rib" irksome in the least. It's a movie I love. I might even say it's my favourite "talkie". The script and performances are a continual source of joy for this viewer.

"It's as red as The Daily Worker and just as sore."

[–] denchophile-1 16 years ago

Adam's Rib is brilliant. Great script. Great performances and way ahead of its time in terms of Hepburn's character - a working married woman equal to her husband in intellect and income. Also the idea that marriage can be an equal partnership and men don't need to be threatened by their wives' intellect. So good on so many levels...

[–] ssweet6 16 years ago

While it can come across as preachy -- her character is a female attorney in the 40's defending a murder case....this alone brings in the feminist discussion between she and her husband.....

She is also defending a woman accused of trying to kill her slimy husband for an affair.....this again brings in the feminist discussion and male vs. female issues....

Also....they are lawyers.....they preach, they argue -- that is what lawyers do.

It is brilliant and the writing is simply the best.....and this is my side opinion, I think Spencer Tracy is just yummy...

[–] eric-1501 16 years ago

I'm only irked at the courtroom scene where Hepburn humiliates Tracy in such a
blatant way. Otherwise, I enjoy this film almost as much as Woman of the Year.

[–] mmitsos-1 13 years ago

I completely agree with you, denchophile-1. Yes, perhaps Tracy is a bit preachy...he's playing (and I think was one) a conservative, and most conservatives, particularly today, ARE preachy and self-righteous, and behind the times, and just plain WRONG on every social issue.

I loved this film, largely for Hepburn's unabashed anger at her husband for how he is so wrong in believing Judy's character was completely indefensible. Was she wrong in shooting him? Probably...but she didn't kill him! And, as Hepburn angled the case, she was in a "dream" state, and therefore, not of completely sound mind when she pulled the trigger. No premeditation whatsoever. Her husband was an UGLY pig, who also BEAT HER, OFTEN, and it's too bad she didn't kill him.

I thought Judy Holliday was wonderful, and the scene in which Amanda is taking the deposition from Judy is great. Her playing the comedic "straight woman" to Holliday's lines was sublime....the timing was impeccable by both actresses.

[–] Death_to_Pan_and_Scan 16 years ago

I also found it irksome. You look on the major films lists and will find this title absent (except from NY Times 1,00 films list) and I'd say there's good reason. It may be a gimmicky film with its 'battle of the sexes' theme, but it's not really all that good.

Tracy may be too preachy with his conservative views, but Hepburn's character acts like a first class idiot, not realizing that she has more than slightly upset him in court. She has turned the courtroom (and the law, which obviously means a lot to him) into a complete circus and humiliated him with the weightlifting scene. You'd think after all those years of marriage she'd know him well enough to come to the realization. That she doesn't see the intentions of the neighbor a mile away and realize the annoyance of his song to her husband makes her look even dumber for one who should be a smart career woman, unless the film wants to paint smart career women as totally oblivious.

Cukor made some great films and some truly obnoxious ones and this one falls in more with the latter. For a Tracy/Hepburn pairing I'd much rather watch "Woman of the Year" or "Pat and Mike", both which I found much more entertaining. For Judy Holliday, I'd suggest "Born Yesterday" instead, for Hagen there's her brilliant comedic performance in "Singing in the Rain".

This is one alleged 'classic' that I won't ever feel the need to see again, but it's still less annoying than her character in the overrated "Bringing Up Baby" (a film blown away by two other Grant/Hepburn screwball comedies that were funnier and more entertaining: "The Philadelphia Story" and "Holiday").

----------
"It's such a sadness that you think you've seen a film on your *beep* ing telephone. Get real."

[–] gbennett5 16 years ago

I guess the OP - and his/her followers - enjoy Adam Sandler-type comedy,
or worse - Jerry Lewis pictures. Unreal. This is a truly witty send
up of the sexes that plays as beautifully today as it did nearly 60
years ago. Cukor's direction, the actors' performances, the script - all
topnotch. It doesn't get any better than this.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheDuchessofM 15 years ago

I always love that argument whenever classic movies are discussed and one or more people dislike a movie held as a great.

[–] Celluloid_Junkie83 14 years ago

I really enjoyed the film but can also see that the points made by the OP (and his "followers") have merit. Although I really enjoyed the performances, the whole trial seemed like a farce. If anything, I felt that Amanda's performance (in more than one sense of the word) in the courtroom may have actually belittled the role of women in (then) modern society. The fact that she turned the whole trial into a circus and basically got a guilty woman off the hook showed that being a legitimate lawyer of integrity was not so important to her as proving that women are as good as men. Adam was prosecuting Doris because she broke the law, not because she was a woman - whereas Amanda was defending Doris because she was a woman and not because she believed her innocent. This was proven by her comment of "you have no right..." when she thought Adam might shoot her.

I was quite relieved when I saw the aforementioned seen in Kip's apartment because up until that point it seemed that Amanda's flawed perspective of the trial would remain the final image we would see on that particular subject. You may call me a misogynist but I didn't really see that Adam did much wrong throughout the film, with the exception of the slap on the backside during the massage scene (please correct me if I'm wrong on this). As with the majority of Romantic Comedies a wedge is usually driven between a couple before we ultimately see a happy ending and I definitely got the impression that in this case it was down to Amanda's behaviour.

Finally, to the people who've slated the OP and those who agreed with him - please get over yourselves. Yes this film is regarded as a classic but that doesn't mean that everyone has to like it and if for any reason they don't, is doesn't make their opinion any less valid. I found the comments considered and worthwhile (unlike comments we see that simply say "this was rubbish") and surely you people see that comments like "you must prefer Adam Sandler films" render you more likely to be considered the troll on this board.

"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men"

[–] donofthedial 13 years ago

Wow.

I have not revisited this thread since my OP. A little surprising to see some insulting comments over an opinion about a film for non-children.

I enjoyed both the pro and con posts.

It's been a couple of years since I have seen the film, so I have no passion to discuss it. I'll t6ry it again some day if I can figure out how to not hear that song.

This was obviously a sex comedy, but it didnlt work for me.

Judy Holliday was great, though.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (11305375) 13 years ago

I have to agree here, I've been in the same situation where I have commented on a film on another message board like “Dawn of the Dead” saying how I think It's overrated and terrible and found the same kind of reaction and arguably more hostile. I personally don't mind other people respectfully and I'll repeat the word respectfully disagreeing with me me but more often is the case some most I find get abusive and call you an idiot. Now I have friends who may I say I love and I know they are pretty intelligent people and not the least bit stupid and who's taste in film in my personal opinion leaves something at times to be desired. My own parents enjoyed “The Postman”, yes would you believe it and yet I know that neither of them are not stupid. Questionable taste in film's maybe but not dumb.

I wonder if people are that sad or that insecure that they just can't help that not everyone likes their prized film, It's really kind of pathetic that some people get bent out of shape over a movie no matter how good or bad it may be when there are more important things in the world to be getting upset about. Murder, robbery, physical and sexual abuse on woman, children and yes men.

Let me say personally that I quite liked “Adam's Rib” although to be honest I fail to see what the big fuss over it was. It was reasonably entertaining for me and although I know some people found it irksome as the same was said for the character of Amanda I think that was kind of the point. I think she was meant to be although I have to confess to finding her rather annoying myself, particularly considering she was supposed to be a very intelligent woman who I would have credited with some integrity and common sense. She seemed more concerned as another poster noted with proving some feminist point to push her agenda rather than see that justice was done. As much as I feel sorry on some level for the defendant in this film I still think by rights she should have gone to prison. Because even if (and let's face it the guy was) the man was a rat it didn't give her the right to shoot him. I don't think her intention of course was to kill him but the fact of the matter was that she might very well have. Amanda should have the good sense to realise this, or either she did but just didn't care which is arguable even worse.

It would also be easy to take this film out of context and have Adam made to look like some sexist relic who deserves to be made a fool of but the fact of the matter is he wasn't or at least not very going by 1940's standards. He was essentially a decent man who I believe hated the thought of anyone, anyone...anyone taking the law in to their own hands. He said as much himself, it wasn't about the fact that she was a woman, the fact that the issue of her being a woman came up was because Amanda introduced it in to the courtroom.

What got me is the low-down, underhanded tactics Amanda used as well, this wasn't the behaviour of a mature, responsible woman more a spiteful, vindictive individual who wanted to get back at her spouse for not taking her side and she proceeded to make him look like an idiot. What person would want to do that to their other half? Ok, Adam might have been himself a bit overbearing in his opinions but morally I can't help but agree with him. If it was a man that had done the same thing to his wife I think Adam would have felt the same way, I know I would have. In the end it's a miracle that he even forgives Amanda or at the very least
chooses to stay with her because she has potentially tarnished his image and his reputation. He was after all the assistant DA. A man in a fairly high position who's reputation was significant importance. I wonder if Amanda would have been quite so willing to stay with him had he done the same to her.

I'm just glad she didn't fully get away with it and that Adam made her realise towards the end how much of a fool and how she was so wrong for exploiting that trial for her own cause.

[–] juzgame 12 years ago

Katherine Hepburn is an amazing actress. Yes the chemistry between Tracy and Hepburn was very tangible, (example making faces at each other under the table in the courtroom). She has excellent comic timing, which her male co-stars (Tracey in this movie and Cary Grant in "Bringing up baby") also share. The way Hepburn and Grant accidentally rip each others' clothing in the restaurant scene in "Bringing up baby" is so natural yet the timing has to be perfect. Acting-wise, it was sheer pleasure to watch them.

Script-wise though, I cringe to watch. I agree with the posters' views and Adam's stance that Doris Attinger should is not justified to shoot her husband (the fact that he is wounded not killed is secondary), and that Amanda (Hepburn) is idiotic and some of her actions (like humiliating her husband) is uncalled for.

Hepburn's character in "Bringing up baby" is worse. I made it through half-way because it is such a famed movie, but I just couldn't stomach watching the rest of it. I wouldn't say that Hepburn character is self-righteous or pompous to make her own law. However, she's either ignorant or oblivious to common-sense logic/law that it is impossible to reason with her. I might finish watching it someday (Cary Grant IS funny in the bathrobe, the acting IS excellent) when I can suspend my sense of what's right and logical enough to endure Hepburn's character.

[–] ang-son 11 years ago

Do finish "Bringing up baby"! It's one of my favorites. Just be sure to be in the right mode, have a few drinks (or whatever) and enjoy the total wackiness of 40's comedy.

[–] butaneggbert 9 years ago

That's an excellent recommendation. There's a lot wrong with BUB - primarily with the casting of Hepburn in the first place, when so other actresses intuitively grasped the "ditz" character so far out of Hepburn's range.

But if you can accept or overlook the flaws, so many gems lie there. The elements of it KH did get right are gloriously funny. The secondary parts are played excellently. Overall, it's completely worth it - even for multiple viewings.

And yep - with a few drinks or "whatever" - to get first-time viewers over the rough spots, the fun would come through!

(BTW, as to Hepburn's range - big fallout once upon a time between writer Garson Kanin and Tracy, when Kanin casually referred to Hepburn's "limited range" as though it were a given. The two very close friends hit a serious rough spot over that, as Kanin realized they sure weren't on the same page on that!)

[–] gbromberg 14 years ago

It isn't a terrifically memorable movie, but I love the chemistry between Tracy and Hepburn. Tracy's facial expressions are brilliant. Acting isn't just verbal, it's non-verbal too, and Tracy is fantastic.

The two, together, are gold.

[–] jackboot 14 years ago

I concur! The chemistry between Tracy and Hepburn is palpable throughout. I don't think that you can manufacture that kind of stuff the way they had it, not even the greatest virtuoso actors.

[–] carmen-allison 13 years ago

I don't remember seeing this film (I was just looking through your list of films because of something you had said somewhere else - I think the "Things you didn't get for Christmas" thread).

Anyway, that said, if you want to see an "exceptionally irksome film" then check out the old movie "The Good Sam" with Ann Sheridan and Gary Cooper. If you look it up type in just Good Sam as I couldn't find it with the The in the title and had to check Ann Sheridan's film list for it (I couldn't remember the male lead at first - just knew he was more famous than she was).

The way I remember this movie was that the Gary Cooper character was supposed to be this selfless man (possibly a preacher?) to the point of being an idiotic doormat that everyone used and abused yet I seem to recall a scene where AS's character mocks another character and she is made out to seem like a bitch when anyone in her position would be thoroughly justified in losing it by that point.

I am curious now to see Adam's Rib to see if a movie could be worse than this one or a likewise annoying film with Loretta Young and David Niven and Cary Grant called "The Bishop's Wife". At least I think it was The Bishop's Wife. I couldn't remember whether or not Cary Grant or David Niven was the husband/bishop but apparently it was Niven (Grant and Niven apparently did change parts though from the original casting).

The thing that I found so nauseating and that made my blood boil was that after all the sacrifices the wife had to make throughout the film, when she finally "blackmailed" her husband the bishop into naming their baby after him (which he did not want to do oddly enough but she very much did) he tricked her and, as usual got his own way. Then, to make it up to her in the very end he BOUGHT HER (and the family) ICE-CREAM (something that I'm sure would have appealed to their young kids at least as much as to her, if not more, and could further be seen as not only a chinzy apology but a annoyingly indirect one as well as a one that used the kids to get to her. All in all, this last part really disgusted me.

I must say, from reading the board (because in this case I wasn't sure of the name of the movie and had to look all through her list for a likely movie though I thought it likely might be this - I didn't remember the main points listed in the synopsis) this may be a different movie but I don't think so.

Reading the comments on both movies boards I wouldn't mind seeing them again to see if these small scenes that infuriated me would still overshadow the whole picture which in both cases were supposed to be heart-warming I would imagine.

Anyway, I would encourage you to check them out and tell me what you think and as I said I will try to watch Adam's Rib in the near future (a much easier movie to find I'm sure than (The) Good Sam. The Bishop's Wife would likely be easier to find just like Adam's Rib considering the full cast and the theme.

[–] mikekrit62 12 years ago

I'm quite sure you're not talking about the Bishop's Wife, at least the one with David Niven. There is nothing in that movie about naming a baby, or blackmail, or taking the family out for ice cream. The Bishop (Niven) IS the husband, Cary Grant is the angel. It's actually quite a nice Christmas story, hardly annoying, so you obviously are mistaken.

More importantly, why would you enter a thread about Adam's Rib, admit you never saw it, then proceed to rip other movies?