User reviews

My main disappointment with this film is the choice of leading man. Indeed Preston Foster was primarily a straight actor and unaccustomed to romantic comedy. I simply do not see why Carole Lombard's character, Kay Colby would have the slightest temptation to fall in love with Foster's character, Scott Miller, a pushy, egotistical, wiseacre. Perhaps the moral of the tale is that if a man, no matter how obnoxious, pursues a woman long enough, she will give in. The film seems to start out in the middle of the story. No background is given to explain Kay Colby's relationship with either men. And then before you know it one of them is exiled to Japan and disappears from the middle third of the picture.

Now the film does pick up as it goes along and entertains sufficiently with snappy dialog and boisterous incidents. The "storm at sea" scene is particularly satisfying. Perhaps due to the fact that Carole did all her own stunts, taking all the punishment herself and sparing her stand-in. However, the ending is much too abrupt. All the conflict is resolved in the last few seconds of the movie. The characters are not allowed to play out their feelings for us on screen. Perhaps it has all gone on inside their heads, but alas we have missed it. Overall this film is worth seeing once for Lombard fans, but it does not endear and fades quickly from memory.

The popularity of "Love Before Breakfast" was helped at the time from the success of Carole's previous film which was still in theaters, "Hands Across the Table". This film would signal her rise to fame and was a precursor to five straight hits in a row over the next two years.

The best thing one can say about LOVE BEFORE BREAKFAST is that it looks wonderful with sparkling cinematography by Ted Tetzlaff, lovely gowns for Lombard by Travis Banton, and stunning art direction by Albert S. D'Agostino, making one forget this film was from Universal, then not one of the major studios and only occasionally producing "A" movies such as this. The movie wonderfully captures the privileged life of the rich with ocean liners, elegant New York nightclubs, weekends yachting with friends or private horseback riding trails. There's no Depression on this planet with executives buying $2,000 worth of charity raffle tickets without batting an eye which surely appealed to the considerably less comfortable general public of the era. Add to the mix a beautiful, appealing heroine in the form of Carole Lombard and what more could you want. Well maybe a better script, better leading men, and more appealing characters.

Lombard stars as a socialite engaged to rising businessman Cesar Romero somewhat unaware of the obsession another acquaintance, ultra rich Preston Foster, has for her. Foster buys out the oil company Romero works for so he can give him a promotion and get him out the way - a two-year stint as a vice president in the Japan offices!! The brash, unctuous but supposedly (according to the screenwriter) agreeable Foster can't help but brag about his machinations to Lombard moments after Romero is on his way to Japan, to which Lombard is quite naturally repelled. Considerable time is then devoted to further control-freak methods by Foster to win Lombard who comes to despise the man she (accurately) calls a "little Napoleon". Eventually, he wears her down and she agrees to marry him if blatantly admitting she is not in love with him. Having won his prize, Foster is happy enough with this but soon decides he would rather win her completely so he brings Romero back to New York, but he still has a few tricks up his sleeve.

The Preston Foster character is so charmless and controlling it's good to see Lombard fighting him every step of the way but it's difficult to see any supposed "good points" the man is supposed to have. Most curious is Lombard's mother Janet Beecher favoritism for Foster of her daughter's two suitors, is it simply because he is the far richer beau? At one point late in the film Foster is actually quite indifferent to Lombard's safety which appalls Beecher if only for a moment. Couldn't she then see the real man whom her daughter was well familiar with? Lombard is terrific in this movie, raising it to the level of a fairly entertaining movie, one can imagine what a total misfire it would be without her. Some reviewers have commented she gets rather abrasive herself into the film but given her non-stop harassment in the guise of love (or more accurately, obsession) from Foster, I'd say her hostility and attitude are more than justified. Foster is quite unappealing but it's not his fault as much as the screenwriter's take on the character, although his lack of appeal is undercut by the blandness and shallowness of Lombard's other suitor, Cesar Romero. Joyce Compton has a cute bit as a visiting southern débutante whom Lombard briefly entangles in one of her payback stunts against Foster.

The movie quickly wraps things up with a quickie ending that would seem direct steal from Lombard's classic MY MAN GODFREY if not for the fact that this movie predated that legendary film by several months.

I enjoyed "Love Before Breakfast" very much and think with a slight re-write it could have earned a 9, as it was a nice little screwball comedy.

The film begins with a very rich industrialist (Preston Foster) buying an oil company just so he can transfer a guy overseas (Cesar Romero) in order to have a chance at the girl (Carole Lombard). Now Foster isn't a total jerk--the transfer is a promotion for Romero and he's thrilled to take it. The plan is for Romero to stay in Japan for two years and then return to marry Lombard. However, it's pretty obvious that this relationship has some problems--not the least of which is the conniving Foster. Now it could be easy to dislike Foster since he is manipulative and a bit of a stalker, however, the writers did a good job making his character likable. He's rich but a pretty swell guy. Heck, I might have married him if he'd asked! But, as for Lombard, she gives him a very hard time--after all, Foster IS responsible for the boyfriend going overseas. And, after a while, she does come to like Foster and is willing to marry him instead. However, Foster isn't happy with this--after all, if Romero was home, would she still be willing to do this? So, he brings Romero back and treats him with every kindness to allow Lombard a chance to choose. Who she chooses, how and why is something you'll just have to see for yourself.

I liked this story very much, but did have a complaint about one thing. I think that Lombard's character was made a bit too volatile and annoying. It got bad enough towards the end that I could not believe that Foster would still want such a nasty...um...'lady'. As for the rest of the cast, they are quite dandy. I liked Lombard's mother and the dog (an adorable little thing), but I especially liked the small part played by Richard Carle--he wasn't in the movie a lot, but was great in the scenes where he appeared.

Overall, an enjoyable little comedy only marred, very slightly, by a female character that is, at times, just a bit too annoying and snippy. Still, give it a look--it's a nice forgotten little film.

I like Carole Lombard. I think she's one of the most talented, funny actresses ever - and, although this one could not be considered one of her classic movies, it still is fun to watch. A lot of people complain about Preston Foster's role in this movie. It's true that the chemistry they're supposed to have doesn't always work, but I don't think it's the actor's fault - the script is just not that good. It seems to me like we land into the middle of a film. Carole's fiancé is going away to Japan because Preston wants her to himself - and, because he wants her to himself, he keeps finding selfish, annoying ways to get closer. To some up, no one gets why Carole is supposed to be in love with a self-centered, egotistic man. And yet I still like this movie. I pop it up whenever I can't find anything better to do. It's easy-going, if not perfect, and it's amusing. The scene where they're taken in and we discover that Preston's punched Carole is a treat. In conclusion, Carole has made a lot of better films and some of them can be easily found now a days thanks to that great invention that is the DVD (what would we old-movie lovers do if it wasn't for that?), but this one is still worth checking out. I guess anything with her is.

Last Night I watched A Good Old Fashioned Orgy (2011)a movie that supposedly represents a modern day romantic comedy, I didn't get one laugh and the bevy of actresses in that movie all combined couldn't compare to Carole Lombard.

I love Lombard's movies she's always entertaining as well as strikingly beautiful, this movie came out the same year as "My Man Godfrey" and while this movie can't compare to Godfrey I think Carole with her starring role in this film is more of a showcase for her. The plot is nothing special, spoiled rich girl and powerful businessman go head to head, but it's the performances especially the chemistry between Lombard and Preston that make this movie worth seeing.

The film's premise is straightforward: Lombard plays Kay Colby, a young socialite convinced she's in love with Bill Wadsworth (Cesar Romero), a fellow quickly identified as the douche who is all wrong for her. Her Mr. Right is Preston Foster's Scott Miller, who happens to own the oil company Wadsworth works for.

We quickly discover Miller is in love with Colby. He's also manipulative and sneaky, for as the film opens we find Miller is purposefully sending her rather self-centred beau away on assignment on a ship to Japan . And he manages to finagle it so that his own Ms. Wrong, a yappy countess with an entourage of similarly disposed dogs, is going on the same ship. Colby and Wadsworth bump into him (more accurately, they bump into his parked car and then him) at the dock.

So the stage is set for an epic 2nd act featuring the screwball comedy battle of wills, which will steadily escalate in madness and will only let up in the last minute.

The film is not as wicked as 'Mr. & Mrs. Smith', which has very similar sort of screwball formula (sneaky guy pursuing girl as opposed to sneaky girl pursuing guy ala 'Bringing up Baby'), but like that film, this one features Lombard doing what she does best: make you want to kiss and kill her at the same time. She's so good that it makes up for the inadequacies of the leading man, Preston Foster, who is not a good enough listener as an actor to create the sort of chemistry a William Powell or Cary Grant could form with an ugly lamp (see Powell's work in 'My Man Godfrey' opposite Lombard, whom he had not too long before filming divorced!). Foster's all right when we don't have to watch him react to Lombard, but his comic timing and general shtick is uneven. I suspect the director must have figured this out, as the camera is kind in allowing her to create the illusion of a relationship twixt the two a fair amount of the time.

Another interesting phenomenon is the visceral similarity in appearance of the two men (they look alike and both have dark hair with trimmed mustaches) vying for Lombard's Colby, which was aesthetically dissonant for me. I think at the very least one of the staches could have gone, just so douche-bag and good guy don't become perceptually associated in our minds.

The indulgence of quibbles aside, the film's moments of charm and Lombard's mastery of screwball comedy's delectable form of erotica make it well worth seeing if you're fond of the genre.

Having now watched Universal’s CAROLE LOMBARD: THE GLAMOUR COLLECTION in its entirety, I can say that of the 6 films included two are classics – HANDS ACROSS THE TABLE (1935) and TRUE CONFESSION (1937) – two more are lesser efforts but still delightful – WE’RE NOT DRESSING (1934) and THE PRINCESS COMES ACROSS (1936) – while the remaining two titles are essentially routine and wouldn’t have stood a chance had they been released on their own (the set being devoid of any substantial extras, they could then be considered as such).

That is not to say that this particular vehicle (which I wasn’t familiar with) isn’t a pleasant diversion per se – at 70 minutes, it’s certainly innocuous enough; still, comparing it to the comic gems on offer in this set, it definitely comes up lacking! To begin with, there’s nothing remotely original about either plot (Lombard is torn between two men – one is wealthy and conceited but genuinely in love, the other is ambitious and something of a playboy) or setting (high society); true, this type of romantic comedy was typical for Depression-era America – but it’s among the most trivial examples of escapist fare that I’ve watched!

Besides, Lombard is let down by her leading men – after all, Preston Foster and Cesar Romero are hardly Fred MacMurray and Ralph Bellamy (who played similar, but more rounded, characters in HANDS ACROSS THE TABLE)...and the same thing can be said of director Walter Lang (here demonstrating little of the style conveyed by Mitchell Leisen throughout HANDS, or even the inspired craziness of TRUE CONFESSION). Actually, the whole enterprise feels invincibly second-rate: however, one shouldn’t blame this on the change in studio from Paramount (which made all the other titles in this set) to Universal because, truth be told, Lombard’s next outing – MY MAN GODFREY (1936; also released by the latter) – proved to be one of her best films!

LOVE BEFORE BREAKFAST, then, features all the typical ingredients: love/hate relationship, misunderstanding, embarrassment, romantic threat, etc. Richard Carle appears as an elderly gentleman who, in spite of being a bachelor, offers Foster advice on his amorous situation; climaxing with an unconvincing storm at sea, this sequence is nonetheless capped by an amusing – and most unconventional – wedding ceremony presided over by familiar character actor E. E. Clive!

I love Lombard as much as the next person. What's not to love? But this movie is shocking. I liked Kay Colby for 30 or so minutes, but then, as she became more angry, shrill, and mean, I came to thoroughly dislike the brat. Yet, even drenched, sneezing, and bundled in a too-big bathrobe,running wild and out of control, she's gorgeous, which is apparently why Foster is besotted with her. Her escalating infantile behavior should have been a wake-up call to her suitor that he'd best run for the hills, but instead he rustles up a minister and marries her, while she protests in the marriage vows that she will not obey. I see a quickie Reno divorce hot on the heels of the honeymoon.

Preston Foster is much criticized for not being as charming as Cary Grant, or as attractively domineering as Clark Gable, but I thought his performance was fine. However, the character he played was not so fine. Back in the 30s women may have thought it was romantic to be so desired that a suitor would go to any lengths to win her, but today it looks like stalking. Still, I warmed up to him when he said he was breaking their engagement because he wanted her to be in love with him. This was an interesting plot turn but the scriptwriters fell down on the job by not developing this. Instead, they made Lombard's character unlikeable, and that's not a nice thing to do to any star, let alone Lombard.

I have to say I was more than happy after seeing this one. Noticing the few reviews, it would seem that this is one of Mrs. Lombard's minor comedies but it's is way better than that. Deserves more to say the least.

Preston Foster is just as good in this as Mrs. Lombard. He's a real firecracker in this. Trying to get the girl he wants in his corporate/take charge kinda way. He meets his match though. It's a fun one all the way through.

Look out for a few scenes with Cesar Romero. He does a great job. Not one of your typical 30's era acting where it looks sorta fake. He really is good in this. I'm surprised he didn't do more of these.

Give this one a go and be prepared for fun. I loved it.

This is a terrible film. It is not funny at all and is both boring and irritating. It is supposed to be a frothy romantic comedy, but it has about as much froth as a glass of beer that has been standing in a cupboard for two weeks. Carole Lombard was unable to save it on her own, despite her talents, and she flails around like a lost parakeet who cannot find her perch. The appalling leading man, Preston Foster, is simply offensive and revolting. If you are looking for a complete failure in this genre, this is it. A basic premise of this film is that it is OK for a pompous man to persecute a girl and try to force his attentions on her to satisfy his lusts and his male vanity. This is supposed to be amusing. The man's self regard is nauseating, and the very concept of this film is utterly loathsome.

Love Before Breakfast features an amusing love triangle between three shallow, selfish characters, played to perfection by Carole Lombard, Preston Foster, and Cesar Romero. Foster, a filthy rich oil baron, "pushes buttons" to have employee Romero, Carole's fiancé, sent to Japan, so he can move in on Carole. Carole is devastated the man she loves is leaving her for two years, but the unworthy object of said love has a hard time hiding his glee at the promotion the overseas job means. Even as his ship sails with poor Carole tearfully waving goodbye, true love Ceasar can be seen at the railing obviously enjoying the attentions of a sexy countess, played with carnivorous exuberance by buxom Betty Lawford. Foster's character is such an egomaniac he smugly brags to Carole about his fiancé-to-Japan manipulation. Thus begins the battle of wills between Carole and Foster that lasts for the rest of this entertaining, witty, little "white telephone movie". They take turns alternately courting and resisting each other with lots of dirty tricks along he way. Both principles have wicked senses of humor. Preston thinks it's hilarious when Carole gets her eye blacked in a night club brawl she engineered. Her get-even prank is to set him up at the local riding club with an evil tempered horse that is sure to throw him. The entire episode at the stable is the funniest in this very amusing picture, except perhaps for the riotous closing scene.

One of the charms of this little comedy is very strong but subtle characterization, thanks to light comedy specialist Walter Lang's expert direction and a script which was surprisingly clever, considering that it seems to have been virtually committee written. Herbert Fields gets credit for the screenplay, but with input from no less than six other writers, including Preston Sturges! Of the Carole Lombard pictures yours truly has seen, this one gives her the best character. In some of her other movies she is just too much of a dizzy dame to be appealing. Especially in My Man Godfrey (1936), in which she's so foolish and childish, she seems almost retarded. In Love Before Breakfast Carole comes off more sophisticated, clever, and witty. Never mind she is spoiled, self-centered, wishy-washy, and lazy -- she lives in a swank apartment with her well-off mother (likeable Janet Beecher) and seems to have never even considered getting a job. And of course Carole is beautiful. Her beauty is well accented by Ted Tetzlaff's gloriously luminous black and white photography, a standout job here even in an era when terrific cinematography is practically taken for granted. The left side of Carole Lombard's gorgeous face was tragically scarred in a late 1920's automobile accident. Even the best of Hollywood makeup couldn't quite cover it, so that special care had to be taken with lighting and camera angles. Tetzlaff washes Carole's closeups in tenebristic shadowing which illuminates only the right side. A generous use of soft focus for her closeups seems to have set the tone for the overall look of the picture, and a very pleasing look it is.

Love Before Breakfast is a typical example of a type of picture called "white telephone movie" in the trade. Younger people, used to telephones of all sizes, shapes, and colors, may not remember, as sadly aged oldblackandwhite does, when nearly every one of them was an unglamorous, utilitarian, flat black. Only rich folks had the glossy white ones that you had to special order and pay extra for on your telephone bill. Hence white telephone movies are about rich guys and rich babes lounging in their ritzy apartments and palatial mansions, going out to glittering night clubs, sailing on their swell yachts, and gabbing on their white telephones. Standard cinema history wisdom portrays this type of movie as especially made for the depressed poor of the Great Depression, who wanted to escape into such fantasies, rather than watch any realistic social melodrama that would remind them of their own distressed lives. The Depression may have made white telephone movies more popular all right, but please note that the same type of picture was very popular in the 1920's, a period of previously unexampled prosperity, and continues to to be popular in various altered forms to this day.

Love Before Breakfast is a solid white telephone job. Charming cast, clever story, plush sets, sensuous cinematography, witty, amusing dialog, fast pacing, and funny gags. A lot of glossy, smooth Old Hollywood entertainment packed into and hour and ten minutes.

This is one of a string of romantic comedies Carole Lombard made in the 1930s. All were entertaining and successful. The Golden Age of Hollywood comedy had a number of leading ladies of humor. Lombard was among the best that included Claudette Colbert, Irene Dunne, Jean Arthur, Myrna Loy, Ginger Rogers, Rosalind Russell, Barbara Stanwyck and Loretta Young.

In "Love Before Breakfast," Lombard plays Kay Colby, a wealthy socialite who is pursued by two lovers. Cesar Romero is Bill Wadsworth and Preston Foster is Scott Miller. Foster has the male lead. The film has its humor with some warmth at times. The script is OK considering that the plot seems a little weak. Foster's role is probably as good as one could make the character as written. He is the brunt of most of the humorous situations - although not all.

One funny scene involves horseback riding and a fall by Miller, who then absconds with Colby's horse. Another is when Colby sets up Miller to dance with a Southern belle after telling them individually that the other was deaf and they would have to speak up when talking. The film has a number of these ups and downs between the two stars, and that's what makes it a good comedy. Yet, the two leads don't seem to have the chemistry that could put more pizazz into the movie. Some revisions in the script to add some sizzle could have lifted this film a lot.

This is a movie about pursuit and perseverance for love. It has some nice supporting roles, and overall it makes for an enjoyable evening at the movies.

Carole Lombard steals any film that she's in and this film is no exception. Yes, she played Kay Colby, a wealthy bored heiress. She is expected to marry Cesar Romero's character who takes off for months to Japan on a work assignment for his boss, Scott Miller (played by Preston Foster). Scott Miller and Kay Colby have a love and hate relationship during her fiancé's absence. I don't think that Scott Miller was that bad. The best scenes take place when Kay and her fiancé are on their small boat in the waters while Miller does his best to assist his employee and his fiancé during a storm. But Kay is stubborn to admit any feelings for Scott Miller. I thought the scene at the restaurant with her fiancé where the table get circling but annoying. The film is a slapstick comedy during the old studio system and when stars like Lombard made several films a year. Not all films were gems but this one is entertaining though after all.

In between her stunning hits with Fred MacMurray, Carole Lombard found time to get loaned out to Universal from Paramount for My Man Godfrey and Love Before Breakfast. The first of course is a comedy classic with nice social overtones. The second is an all right comedy, but not up to the standards she set with Fred MacMurray at Paramount.

It's the usual romantic triangle with Carole caught between Cesar Romero who has her and Preston Foster who wants her. Both of them are in the oil business and Foster has just bought out Cesar's company and now he works for Foster. To clear the field he sends Cesar off to Japan to their new branch office, but Carole thinks that's not playing fair. So Preston's going to have to put on a big campaign to win her.

Of course that's helped along when Carole sees a photograph of Romero in Tokyo looking like he's living it up. But the rather arrogant Foster overplays his hand a bit. It's a close race right up to the finish to see who will get Carole, but I think it's rather obvious.

Some criticism was made of Foster and while he didn't exactly do much in the way of comedy, I think he handled it well in this film. Romero was his charming best and two performances in the cast also deserve to be singled out. One is Janet Beecher as Lombard's wise mother and the other is Joyce Compton as an empty headed southern belle who Lombard almost foists on Foster.

Love Before Breakfast is a bit of a dip in the career of Carole Lombard, but not anything her fans would notice, either back in 1936 or now.

My main reason for seeing 'Love Before Breakfast' was Carole Lombard, an actress who was reason enough to see anything. She was a beautiful woman and immensely gifted in particularly romantic comedy, her tragic death at too young an age was a great loss. Also love when done well comedy mixed with romance and, as said many times, the kind that has wit and sophistication. While Walter Lang has done films that have been good.

'Love Before Breakfast' could have been quite a lot better, and considering what it had going for it it should have been better. Not an awful film or a complete potential waste, also not a great film. It generally left me mixed and is really not one of the best representations of romantic comedy from this period, it is only just above middle-of-the-road. It is not one of Lombard's best, though she is a long way from disgraced here and is one of its main redeeming qualities, like it is with all her work. Lang has also done much better, my personal favourite film of his being 'The King and I'.

There are two reasons for seeing the film. One is the production values. 'Love Before Breakfast' is a really gorgeous looking film, the fashions are a sight to behold and the camera clearly loves Lombard. Even more so is Lombard, who has more than assured comic timing and elegant charm, she also is a dream to look at thanks to the photography and fashions.

Caesar Romero is also charming and suave and makes the most of a role that from personal opinion was underwritten. Janet Beecher is amusing, while there are enough moments of witty comedy (the storm at sea and horse-riding sequences are the highlight) and sophistication. The romantic elements are not sentimental or sappy, and although not sizzling as much as it should in spots it charms enough.

However, Preston Foster came over as uneven. He does make a real effort to bring likeability and appeal to his character who is anything but, and does do so when he grows into the role, and is amusing at times, but he is not always at ease with the comedy and his chemistry with Lombard doesn't always sizzle enough. Lang's direction is generally uninspired and the material doesn't really play to his strengths.

Sharper wit and a more consistent romantic chemistry would have helped, as the script is also uneven, some of it is sparkling and other parts fall flat. The story doesn't really come to life enough on the whole, apart from some great moments in the second act. It takes too long to get going, while calling it flimsy would be an understatement (not much of one at all) and there is just nothing to it. It all feels on the bland side, while the characters are hard to get behind, with some truly off-putting behaviour and over-played situations, and the ending agreed is too abrupt with resolutions being far too rushed.

In conclusion, worth a look if mainly for the production values and Lombard. 6/10

Depression-era audiences evidently relished the foibles and follies of the idle rich as an escape from cold reality in the 1930's. However, the nonsense on display in "Love Before Breakfast" may have made a poor, but rational, daily existence preferable. Wacky Carole Lombard is engaged to Cesar Romero, but Romero's boss, Preston Foster, is after Lombard, while Foster's lady friend, a countess played by Betty Lawford, pursues Romero. Foster has unlimited funds and power to pursue his romantic interest, and he gets Romero out of the way by transferring him to Japan aboard a ship with the countess.

If viewers can overlook her character's behavior, Carole Lombard as Kay Colby is a delight to watch; her delivery is always spot on, and she manages to rise above the wreckage with her reputation intact. The rest of the cast, however, sink into silliness. Preston Foster as Scott Miller, the manipulative business tycoon, is passably handsome and passably competent in a role that begs for the self-confident swagger of a Clark Gable. A young Cesar Romero is wasted in a nothing role as Bill Wadsworth, Colby's supposed fiancé, whose name seems to mask an obvious Latin heritage. A passel of scene-stealing Pekinese dogs, an embarrassing stereotyped Japanese maid, and dated cringe-worthy lines like "I'm free, white, and twenty-one" pull the film further under. Richard Carle as Brinkerhoff, a geriatric bachelor who claims to know women, and Janet Beecher as Colby's mother, who claims with a straight face that she's "free, white, and in her early 40's," pile dated gender comments on the already antique premise that women are to be ruthlessly pursued by domineering men. At least seven writers labored to adapt the short story, Spinster Dinner, by Faith Baldwin, and the result provides a clear example of too many typewriters spoil the screenplay. Despite a writing assist by Preston Sturges, Lombard is the sole reason to seek out this silly screwball-comedy wannabe,"Love Before Breakfast."

A rich man pursues a young woman although her boyfriend works for him. This breezy film is an apt vehicle for the comedic talents of the incomparable Lombard, who plays the woman in a love triangle involving Foster and Romero. The role of the rich fellow seems tailor-made for Clark Gable, but Foster, who was better known for playing tough guys, does pretty well as a poor man's Gable. Beecher is a delight as Lombard's wise-cracking mother. Although only one is credited, apparently a number of writers were involved, including Preston Sturges. However, the film does not suffer from too many cooks in the kitchen, as the pacing is rapid and the dialog is witty. Lang provides the smooth direction.

Many other comments are severe about this film. Mine is certainly not. I would tend to argue on the contrary that, despite its seemingly light plot line, it could be numbered among the minor classics of the 30s screwball comedy - certainly in any case a significantly better one than some other similar Lombard pictures of the same period, such as the much thinner The Princess Comes Across. To sum it up, the main criticism targets four supposed weaknesses : a simplistic plot; a male hero who is too much of an egocentric and a bully to be loved - and/or a female heroin who is too spoiled and shrill a brat to be lovable; and last, Preston Foster, considered to lack charm for his part. Let us start with the last one. Yes, the film would certainly have been at least one notch higher with the ever charming Cary Grant rather than Foster. However maybe Grant would have been precisely that - a little too charming for the part. Many viewers do not seem to appreciate that the film is actually very ironic, if not critical, towards Scott Miller, a successful oil tycoon who is accustomed to everything always going the way he wants it - as funnily illustrated by the brief but telling boardroom scene, when he tells other administrators that he is not going to oblige them to accept his viewpoint, however he is ready to stay there a whole week until he convinces them to adopt it, as it is the best one... (actually two minutes later he leaves abruptly the meeting room when he is told that Lombard is visiting him - which belies the idea that he does not really care for her.) The story shows very clearly that what Miller lacks is the interest and the capacity to understand what makes others tick - in particular the woman he believes he loves. So if Preston Foster appears at times a bit charmless and self-centered, with blinkers on - it is because Miller his character is, and should therefore be thus depicted. At other times Miller forgets about his conquering instincts, and Foster can then become quite charming. That is also a reply to the second criticism. Yes indeed, Miller is something of an egoist, and a very heavy-handed one in his pursuit of Kay, the film does nothing to conceal or idealize his behaviour. But before using end-of-20th-century terms of harassment or even stalking, let us remember that it is a film of the 30s, moreover a comedy. Is Scott Miller heavy-handed in his courtship and sometimes very annoying? Yes indeed, Kay Colby makes the point quite eloquently and wittily. Does she therefore automatically become a victim because "he does not take no for an answer"? First, besides being very insistent, always in public places and in a fairly humoristic manner, he never applies direct pressure on her, nor does he get incensed or discouraged by her repeated rebukes. Second, yes, he keeps on insisting despite being rejected - but it so happens he is actually right to believe that her feelings towards him are by far not as negative as she pretends. And third, he actually does at a point take no for an answer - and the film wittily suggests that if this a new tactic he should have tried it earlier, as she then discovers that she misses her assiduous suitor. So he is certainly not a perfect character, but not a bad guy either. Which actually can equally be said of Kay Colby. Miller has everything - the power, the top job, the wealth, the male prerogatives. Apart from wealth, Kay has none of that. However, character-wise, they are very similar - strong-willed, independent-minded, self-centered, unyielding, everything but victims. At one stage, when she agrees to a wedding with him, she throws to him that he should not expect it to finish as the Taming of the shrew. Actually the film plays quite brightly around this theme. Miller has indeed every intention of taming her while marrying her. The only problem is that Kay is adamantly set against that : she knows that old story very well, and has no intention whatsoever to follow its pattern. Actually in every part of the film - there are several - there is a strong element of theater / comedy between them. In the first part, which on her side might be seen as some kind of probing him, the dialogue they play repeatedly is I-love-you / But-I-do-not-love-you-and-you-bore-me. If his assiduity had been really insufferable for her, she would certainly have found means to cut it short, as she says to her mother "I am free, white and 21". Truth is that, then and later on, when he feigns not to love her any more and when she resists his obvious attempts to unmask her as actually loving him, they just play a game of hide-and-seek, each of them trying not to be found out first. This point is also an answer to the last criticism, that the plot is unoriginal "because it is just the usual love triangle". Actually it is not in the least a love triangle - and it is fairly original. It reminds of 18th century French theatre, focussed on maneuvering and counter-maneuvering between two main characters in a love battle - Bill as well as the Contessina are just side props which the main characters use without really caring about them, in order to gain an advantage in their battle. That might not be very nice, but there is not much reason to feel sorry for them - first because they are at least as self-centered as Miller and Kay, second because they are not people who deeply love or suffer, third because it is shown that they will quite easily find solace in each other's arms. The ending of the film may appear extremely rushed and far-fetched. It might be so, if one is keen on verisimilitude - which is absolutely not the point, nor that of the film as a whole. Far from having to be taken seriously, it is meant as a hilarious spoof mocking usual happy ends. The captain is doing his best to marry them - but instead of listening a word of what he says, which makes them bound forever, they keep on shouting at each other which covers his voice. He asserts that he will indeed tame her, and fairly soon; she assures him he will most certainly not succeed in doing anything of the sort. From previous skirmishes between them, one would definitely believe her rather than him. While not a shrew, she certainly is his equal as to pigheadedness, for better and for worse. Will the newlyweds be happy ever after, after this most inauspicious start? Doubts may arise - they are too much alike for their own good, on the other side they are made for one another. Sparks might fly often between them in their married life - that would not be very different from the relations they have entertained during the courting period - there's no accounting for taste... Preston Sturges had some finger in the writing of the film. One strongly suspects that last scene is part of his input.