Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

wes-connors Playboy lawyer Preston Foster (as Jimmy Hughes) is reluctantly recruited to run against an incumbent mayor, while romancing his daughter, pretty blonde Joan Fontaine (as Trudy Olson). The campaign leads to the uncovering of a gang of racketeering gamblers in the city, with both mayoral candidates, and the city police chief, becoming suspects. "You Can't Beat Love" is a competent, but routine little piece of fluff, which looks to have benefited few of those involved. There are a few likable moments. Thankfully, it was as forgettable as it was routine.*** You Can't Beat Love (1937) Christy Cabanne ~ Preston Foster, Joan Fontaine, Herbert Mundin

MartinHafer The film begins with a knuckle-head playboy (Preston Foster) working on a road crew dressed in a tux in order to win a bet. Apparently, this guy will take on any bet or act on a whim. This becomes very apparent when he disrupts a food giveaway hosted by the mayor's daughter and as a result of this, he announces he's running for mayor--though he seems very much apolitical and has no interest in the job. Later, when he once again meets up with the mayor's daughter (Joan Fontaine) they supposedly fall in love--although there seemed to be little chemistry between them and it made very little sense for Fontaine to suddenly love a guy she so quickly hated at the beginning of the film. Plus, she really had plenty of reason to dislike the guy.Regardless of the reasoning for announcing he was running for mayor, eventually Foster takes the role seriously and jumps in to the fray--only to see first-hand just how corrupt the police chief is. Foster's job from then on is to expose this crook, though new girlfriend Fontaine doesn't understand and takes it all very personally.Aside from the appearance by Joan Fontaine in one of her earliest films, there's not a lot to distinguish this film--though it is occasionally fun and is a decent time-passer. You could do worse, but you could also do a lot better.FYI--Early in her career, Joan's accent changed A LOT--seeming to indicate she was working with coaches to create an accent acceptable to movie-goers (eventually resulting in a refined British accent as in films such as REBECCA and her later Americanized accent in films of the late 40s and 50s). Through the mid-to late 30s, this was still quite in flux. It is interesting here that her voice and style of speaking is almost identical to her sister's (Olivia De Havilland), though this style was only a transition and was mostly gone by 1940. An odd observation, I know, but something that's obvious if you watch several of her early films at once (like I have over the last few days).

jotix100 The only reason for watching this film was the allure of watching Joan Fontaine in her third picture. RKO obviously had no clue what to do with this budding young talent. Pairing her with the dashing Preston Foster didn't get the intended results.In fact, the film, as directed by Christy Cabanne doesn't hold the viewer's attention. The plot doesn't make too much sense, as it appears to have been done as a B movie to fill a double bill, so popular at the time.The best thing in the movie are some of the supporting cast members. Herbert Mundin makes the best impression as the faithful valet. Alan Bruce, William Brisbane, and Paul Guilfoyle are seen in minor roles.As far as Joan Fontaine, one wouldn't have guessed how far she would go judging for her participation in the film.Watch it as a curiosity.

malcolmgsw Preston Foster is a good action man but put him in a suit with Joan Fontaine as his romantic lead and he is rather out of his depth.Unfortunately it is the case with films of this nature that firstly you need a good script and secondly you need some chemistry between the lead actors.Alas this film falls flat on both counts.It is a sad waste of the talents of all concerned.I am not saying this is boring but it really is not all that entertaining.I had looked at the films page before viewing and saw that it had a mark of 6.5.Having seen this film all i can say is that maybe i am missing something.Compare this for example with "Bringing Up Baby" made at RKO,the same studio that made this,just one year later.It is a bit like comparing "Hercules Unchained" with "Ben Hur".