User Reviews (7)

Add a Review

  • This is a prime example of 50s excess, as it seems the notion of how gambling is detrimental to a new marriage is lost in a jumble. I suspect Graham Greene wanted to do a screwball comedy but it winds up an excuse to set two winsome but entirely mismatched stars loose in a romantic, foreign locale, filmed in Color and Cinemascope. Glynnis Johns had been getting really good roles in England and had just come out of Around the World in 80 Days. She'd played plenty of roles but here, she's inexplicably floating thru the movie like an excited child. Rozanno Brazzi was barely the bigger star, already a sensation in Italy from the early 40s and having made Three Coins in the Fountain, Summertime and the professor in the June Alyson version of Little Women. He plays a man good with numbers, but by all appearances is too old for his wife - she wears him out just by talking and he seems frustrated by his inability to keep up when she's on the fly. There are some cute, albeit brief glimpses of why this couple are together, but at heart, I didn't buy Brazzi, a master brooder, as an accountant in love with a numbers system that gets them wads of cash. They don't seem to be able to connect as a team most of the time and hence, we don't really care if they get out of their gambling troubles or not. There's a little screwball suspense around an imagined gambling debt and how they'll get out of their expensive hotel bill, and Robert Morley wanders in and out, barely blinking. Altho Glynis's wardrobe may have been eye catching and the casinos were put to good use for publicity, what we bankroll is a whitewashed Monte Carlo, complete with the two stars whisking by on a moped. Must've been charming in 1956, but today it's a test of endurance. I give this one and a half stars out of five. - MDMPHD (PS - You'll notice it's never mentioned as one of the great romantic comedies, much less as a film of note in any article or text. You'd do better with Brazzi in SUMMERTIME and Johns in NO HIGHWAY IN THE SKY to get these talented actors in their prime.)
  • jromanbaker3 November 2019
    Predictability is one of the sins of reviewers. and because they are so opposite Glynis Johns and Rossano Brazzi have an unpredictable chemistry and some reviewers have been snooty about this. They have fun together in this film, and audiences of the time would have surely enjoyed seeing them together. It is not a great film, but it is entertaining, charming at times and has actors like Robert Morley and Joyce Carey to keep an audience happy. And it has colour and Cinemascope which was well used and has just a whiff of naughtiness about it to make audiences think they were seeing a slightly daring film. It is an audience pleaser and I see nothing wrong in that if it does please, and it pleased me to see this cast put together and allowed to exude fun and pleasure in their roles. Glynis Johns shines as always, and Rossano Brazzi follows her lead. And who can complain about hearing her wonderful voice, or for that matter Brazzi delightfully battling with his English ? They were high in popularity at the time of this film and I like to think the audience of the 50's enjoyed seeing them as much as I did. So please reviewers be a little kinder towards a film that never pretended to be a Cary Grant and Grace Kelly vehicle. It is a warmer film than Hitchcock's ' To Catch a Thief ' and that makes it in some ways all the better for it.
  • Loser Takes All is a rather mild British comedy that stars Rossano Brazzi and Glynis Johns as an accountant and his fianc√© who work for the firm that Robert Morley and Felix Aylmer run in London.

    Morley is one of those sticklers for detail and for Rossano Brazzi successfully finding a seven pound and change discrepancy in his books and reconciling it, he and Johns get a holiday in Monte Carlo. Morley is penny wise and pound foolish.

    Still Brazzi and Johns are on a dream holiday and I've no doubt that this film was made to follow up the success of Paramount's To Catch A Thief. But Cary Grant and Grace Kelly were more interesting and Alfred Hitchcock made a more interesting film in general.

    Brazzi now thinking he's a mathematical genius has devised a 'system' as so many do. In the process though he's become unbearable to his new bride.

    Monte Carlo looks just as beautiful as it did in To Catch A Thief. But Hitchcock's classic never lost my interest as this one did.
  • Extremely mild "comedy" concerning suave accountant (Brazzi) whose secret numbers system compels him to test his arithmetic prowess against the house, becoming a problem gambler that threatens his marriage to the bright and feisty Glynis Johns.

    Robert Morley plays the typical pompous tycoon who eventually employs Brazzi after a series of financial losses, Tony Britton is Brazzi's laconic brother-in-law and while she's listed in the credits, I didn't happen to notice a young Shirley Ann Field ("Saturday Night & Sunday Morning") in an early film appearance though it would have been a highlight in this dull, alleged comedy.

    Glynis Johns has the best character, pert and precocious in her inimitable way and by far eclipses another Brazzi trademark emasculation; I enjoyed many Rossano Brazzi films, but he never looked convincing turning on the waterworks, and he gives the damp-eyes acting technique another attempt here with limited sympathy. Devotees of Brazzi, Johns or Morley might want to pay attention, but unlikely to appeal elsewhere.
  • Graham Greene was pleased to have written 'a light-hearted story with a happy ending' something of a first for him and was keen to write a film treatment, modelling the generous but forgetful tycoon Dreuther on Alexander Korda, with whom he had a friendly relationship. He later concurred with the general opinion that the film was a failure, but if he wanted a reason why he only had to look in the mirror. The plot is thin, including reliance on that old chestnut a workable scheme to triumph in a casino. Rossano Brazzi had his critics but is hard to see how Greene's preference Alec Guinness or anyone else could have got much more out of the role. There are compensations in the attractive photography of Monte Carlo and the agreeable performances from Glynis Johns, Robert Morley and not forgetting Joyce Carey in more extrovert mode than usual.
  • Graham Greene the film critic would have made short work of this glossy yet drab trivia which serves as yet another stern warning to postwar audiences against the lure of easy money for audiences left back in London in the rain, and which provides the vicarious satisfaction of seeing our young newlyweds' escape to Monte Carlo with its looser morals in widescreen & colour strictly on the understanding that in reality Money Doesn't Bring You Happiness and it was all an unsustainable fantasy. One can somehow discern Greene's sardonic fatalism (and the vague talk of adultery) lurking in the background of all this; and how his original story became such an awful film was probably far more interesting than anything that actually ended up on the screen.

    This seems to be intended as least partially as a comedy, but the only really comical aspect of it is the unbelievable miscasting of Rossano Brazzi as a naive working stiff with a head for figures, who finds himself being given the eye by a feline young Shirley Anne Field as the Attractive Girl in Casino (as she is identified in the cast list at the end).
  • Well I suppose every great writer will have a ghastly mistake like this.Whats worse it even tries,very badly,to make gambling look glamorous.Furthermore if ever a couple were mismatched it is Johns and Brazzi.