I'd never even remotely heard of this one when I came upon it. This one seems similar to My Man Godfrey. The big difference being the comedy part that this one doesn't have.A poor and hungry Loretta Young sits next to a poor but content Spencer Tracy on a park bench. He finds out she's starving and takes her in and shows her the ropes around his home in a shanty town. Even though life is tough in the depression he makes it easy on her and always seems to put her mind at ease when food and money are low. He's always taking one odd job after another. Eventually he falls in love with her but he's not a guy who likes to hold on to things or to be tied down. He's always ready to move on. Problem is though, he never does. The trials and tribulations of a poor couple during the midst of the depression is the basic premise for the rest of the film. How to get money and living around a few characters in the same situation they live in. Trying to make the right moral decisions and doing the right thing.This one is worth a watch because Spencer Tracy makes any film he does very watchable. He's basically the same in all films but he, like Clark Gable, could play every different role the same and you still wanna watch it. Loretta Young is as beautiful as she always was and plays the poor little starving but thankful girl just right. Grab this one and watch a tiny glimpse of what the depression was like at the time this was made. After this, try Meet John Doe and see a better film on a similar topic.

The film begins with a woman (the beautiful Loretta Young) who is starving because this is at the height of the Great Depression. She meets up with a man who looks rich (Spencer Tracy), in a park. He takes her to an expensive restaurant for dinner. But, it turns out he is just as poor as she is. After bilking the restaurant out of dinner, they return to his shack down along the river, and she stays the night (this is pre-code), falls deeply in love with him, but does so with a great deal of stress because she realizes that while he loves her, he is also a man who has a strong bent toward being free. And that is the crux of the film, and the first reason I give this film bonus points -- I know the feeling. I have been in two relationships where my partner wanted to be free almost as much as he wanted to be in a relationship. And, it was a constant struggle for both of us. So, in that sense, this is a really "real" dilemma for both characters.The other reason this film earns some bonus points is that it is at least a bit unique. Stop and think of what group of people are usually portrayed in Depression-era films -- it's usually gangsters or high society people. In contrast, in this film the people depicted are primarily honest people living in the slums of the Depression.Now, the film loses a few points, too. For one thing, some of the transitions between shots from different angles are very sloppy. But, this was only 1932, so I can let that slide...a bit.Spencer Tracy's acting here (he's one of my two favorite actors) is very good, considering this is early on in his career. You begin to see elements of the Tracy we came to know throughout his film career. Loretta Young is not only beautiful, but perfect in this role. I have mixed feelings about Marjorie Rambeau's portrayal of an alcoholic, though her part is central to the plot. Walter Connolly is very good here, though I noted his poor teeth, and found that distracting. This role is a bit different for him, so it's nice to see him in something this is not a comedy.And one of the joys of this film is that it's pre-code, but not in your face about it. As Tracy says early in the film, "No female has to starve in a town like this." And then there's the nude swimming scene...although, trust me, you won't see anything. And the fact that Young becomes pregnant later in the film. And of course, all this was filmed at a point when the real Tracy and the real Young were having a torrid affair.Although I won't put this film up to an "8", it is darned good and well-worth watching. You're likely to learn something about the Great Depression, to boot.

SPENCER TRACY plays a rough and tumble character in a role that was tailor made for Clark Gable. Somehow, his chemistry with LORETTA YOUNG is not quite what it should be. She, however, gives a very sensitive performance as the lovely girl attracted to him despite his arrogant behavior. This is the weakness of the story. If played by a charmer like Clark Gable, Loretta's yen for Tracy would be more understandable. As it is, he plays a real scoundrel without any attempt to soften his character for the sake of romance. He's sometimes so despicable that he alienates the viewer from sympathizing with him.But it's Loretta Young who holds the film together, even though her character often seems naive and foolish to stay with Tracy. MARJORIE RAMBEAU is effective in a good supporting role as a woman with backbone who helps Tracy and Young when he has to flee the authorities. WALTER CONNOLLY, as a man Tracy attempts to rob, is also fine.The film looks as though it was bathed in soft focus, perhaps to make the tone of the love story less gritty than it would have looked if filmed realistically. Whatever, Loretta Young has never looked more beautiful. Her costuming belies the fact that she's a Depression era heroine. Another unrealistic touch by director Frank Borzage, who has chosen to tell the story as if it were a fairy tale Depression story.

I have seen this film recently during a retrospective of Borzage´s filmography. It´s a film situated in that strange period of time before "Hays code" when american movies could tell stories who break (explicitly) the conservative rules of the "classic Hollywood moral". Like in other films of Borzage (The seventh heaven, bad girl...) love faces poverty and survives because of his almost "magic" nature. But what makes this film more remarkable than others from Borzage is the complexity of Spencer Tracy´s role. He is full of passion for life but also fears "everybody´s life". When he meets Loretta Young has to face a new situation than creates an earthquake of contradictions. I was very surprised with this role and it explains why this movie had so many problems in his time. In the end, a very nice surprise