Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

canuckteach I bought the Turner-Classic 4-movie set of Harlow, and she is excellent in all 4. 'Dinner at 8' I had not seen in a long time, but I did recall some juicy conflict between Beery and Harlow. The camera loved Harlow (as it did Monroe, 20 years later). The sets, lighting and her ensemble truly highlighted her beauty and sensuality. Her ability to feign 'culture' - and then talk like a carnaval barker the next minute is delightful to regard.Being a 'pre-code' film, we also get some frankness that would have been excised only a few years later: Harlow is having an affair with a handsome family doctor, who, according to his faithful wife, is a frequent philanderer; Marie Dressler confesses that she has acquired expensive jewelry from men in her previous relationships that were not matrimonial; pretty Madge Evans--engaged to a very suitable partner--falls in love with a charming, but over-the-hill, alcoholic actor (John Barrymore). These indiscretions are presented openly (without skin), in the spirit of pre-code films, which presented imperfect characters who seemed lifelike, and sometimes suffered for their sins - but sometimes didn't.Contrast this to 'China Seas' made only a few years later with Harlow and Clark Gable: Gable says he will stick with his pretty former-consort Harlow--even marry her--but first she must face the justice system for her role in an attempted theft. I doubt the original story ended that way, but the Code demanded that villains NOT prosper from their nefarious deeds - so, Harlow will face prison for 3 to 5, I guess. If made in 1932, that film would have ended with Gable suppressing the role Harlow played, and marrying her the same day, in a local church! In Dinner at 8, at least 2 leading female characters are guilty of unfaithfulness, but neither really 'face the music'. My point is: at least in pre-code films, the guilty didn't have to suffer harsh consequences -- hence, the writers had more freedom to wrap up the story as they saw fit.This is a fine ensemble cast, featuring Harlow at her prettiest and maybe most feisty (she & Beery disliked one another - so, maybe art was imitating life!?). Recommended.

richard-1787 There is a lot of melodrama in this movie, and the first part, especially when Marie Dressler is not on the screen, can be slow going. Once we get to the night of the dinner, however, it gets much better.Billie Burke's scenes, both at the news that the aspic has been dropped and when she berates her husband and daughter for coming to her with their problems when she has a dinner to give, are both funny and very sad at the same time, sad that any person could be so caught up in the superficial to get that upset over it.The scene where Lee Tracy tells off Larry Renault is also very well done. (The scene after that, John Barrymore's last, descends into real melodrama and becomes, for me, hard to watch.) After that, the scene between Jean Harlow and Wallace Berry is brilliant. It is rather like *All About Eve* in that it shows just how low human beings can descend in a desire to destroy each other.And then there is the dinner party itself. Harlow has several great moments, and looks like a million dollars, but the ugliest person on the set by far, Marie Dressler, gets the prize for her delivery of the last lines, as she walks with Harlow into Dinner at Eight.

atlasmb I think it would be a mistake to reveal much about the story of this film, so I will deal only with it merits.David O. Selznick set out to create another of his quality productions with "Dinner at Eight", starring an all-star cast.Billie Burke, with her lilting voice, plays Millicent, the wife of a shipping business owner. She is self-consumed and intent on creating a perfect dinner party.Lionel Barrymore plays Oliver Jordan, her husband and a man with several problems on his hands. Madge Evans plays Paula, their daughter who is engaged to a young, attractive man who is cut from very regular cloth. She is involved with another man--one who offers a more exotic and challenging relationship.Wallace Beery plays Dan Packard, a coarse and aggressive businessman who is invited to the dinner at Oliver's request. His wife Kitty is played by Jean Harlow. She's a platinum-plated gold digger whose relationship with Dan is similar to that between Billie and Harry in "Born Yesterday".Edmund Lowe plays Dr. Talbot, a "masher" who treats several characters.Marie Dressler plays Carlotta Vance, a retired actress who flaunts a lifestyle she cannot sustain. Ms. Dressler often plays the matronly socialite for laughs; here she is a fully-developed character who is allowed to show her real acting talent.John Barrymore plays Larry Renault, an actor who is on the down-side of a career onstage and in film. His is one of the bravest portrayals I have ever seen, as his character's personality and situation are written so close to his own.The main strength of this film is the story, which allows each character to be developed, giving emotional depth to the story. It is well worth seeing.

Dunham16 The classic 1933 setup could not be grander. George S. Kaufman and Edna Ferber wrote a Broadway depression drama, here translated into a black and white film centering on the lives of the people invited to a formal dinner which the wife isn't capable of pulling off, and for which the husband doesn't exactly have enthusiasm. The one liners about the old rich losing everything in the depression, to believe all is over, are magnificent. The film is a milestone in the number of high paying stars the producer was willing to hire in the early days of the talkies -John and Lionel Barrymore, Wallace Beery, Jean Harlow, Billie Burke and Marie Dressler. While everything clicked gloriously during the premiere year, 1933, the millennium finds both the photography and the editing VERY dated and more the sense of the major characters developing their backstories and depression dilemmas as sequential short plays, one after the other having nothing to do with each other, than a storyline per se. It seems more like watching a series of fabulous old clips featuring this or that famous star in this or that realistic loss of self and wealth situation, but not anything which the modern audience might suggest approaches "a play with a story".