Only Angels Have Wings

The flying scenes are action packed, the setting is exotic, and the characters are interesting. In my opinion, the romance element didn't make much sense, but it was still good.

Any movie with Rita Hayworth in it is likely to get my approval, but it's actually Cary Grant and Jean Arthur (and the strong script that supplies them with sharp, rapid-fire dialogue) who make this particular picture a delight.

This movie probably started as a list of piloting dilemmas and then a story was worked in around them. The story that was chosen appears to be how women find abusive men irresistible.

Since it comes right inbetween Bringing Up Baby and His Girl Friday in Hawks/Grant-collabs you'd be forgiven to think it's a screwball comedy. It's not though. It's actually a drama with quite an unusually dark view of humanity that processes it's themes with fascinating clarity even though it uses some clichés to get there. If it was made these days I'd wish it was a miniseries so we could get to explore the characters fully.

Will the planes make it or not? These situations were surprisingly suspenseful (although people raised on current Hollywood fare, may not agree). I sort of wished the filmmakers developed the relationship between Jeff and Bonnie a little more (she's absent for a little too long). Also, the film almost never had a musical score, and while that worked well in the suspense scenes, it may have hurt the non-suspense ones.

Unlike his other famous 30s films this was Hawks’ own idea, so you can see what he’s about: proto-noir visual moments, competent mise-en-scène, and machos sincerely promoting awful values (https://newleftreview.org/issues/i24/articles/lee-russell-howard-hawks). At its best manages a tough-guy aesthetic similar to Hemingway in his flatter moments; not telling much of a story is a strength. The high point is a plane landing scene early on whose emotionless tension evokes Kubrick without the irony.

Elusive, but good. A story mostly about Geoff Carter and tangentially about Connie Lee. Lots of attention on the flying here—like the actual act of flying—maybe a bit too much. Carter's stoicism, brought to screen by Cary Grant, proves the drive of the film, yet I wasn't always certain what the movie was trying to tell me, if anything. Still, those final moments, as the tears are finally allowed above the surface and the double-headed quarter shows up again, are quite powerful.

Who is Joe?

Not one of my favourites from Hawks but a really fun cast of characters that is very romantic and surprisingly vibesy at times. Still not totally sure why Grant poured all that water over Hayworth’s head though

Hard to define genre-wise, not quite action-adventure, not quite melodramatic romance, the balance between the two held together by some terrific character work. Possibly the best performances of both Grant and Arthur's careers, and some great miniature work with the airplane models. Compared to say, Casablanca, OAHW plays out more as a series of vignettes than an overall cohesive narrative, which is detriment, but otherwise another solid entry from Hawks.

Another one of those Golden Age dramas where I'm supposed to sympathise for some prick, and Grant doing that really turns me off. Almost felt pain for Arthur who conveys the sickness part of love-sickness effectively. I'm mainly gunning for the writer here, because a lot of the drama feels clunky and unnecessary, while otherwise it's a finely made film.

This is a massively entertaining adventure film with a fairly indifferent romantic subplot. I'm more that willing to look past that since it throws Jean Arthur into the mix. The magnificent cast also includes Sig Ruman as Grant's business partner and Noah Beery Jr. as an extremely ill-fated pilot. The effects work in this film is some of the best of the 1930's.

Very solid classic Hollywood, but overrated. I don't get why it's held up as an all-timer. Most of the cast are pretty good, though I found Arthur a bit underwhelming and Grant a bit unlikable, which is pretty shocking from him. No real complaints, and the screenplay and effects are really good, but I just don't see anything all that special.

What a great movie. Wonderfully unconcerned with plot, in favour of characters that feel like real people.

As clunky and imperfect as it is, there’s enough charm, atmosphere, suspense, and eventual emotional payoff to make it transcend the sum of its parts. There’s a palpable love of adventure and the profession on display. And, like love’s most honest expressions, it confesses it in all its trauma and bittersweetness.

Endless purgatory, with nothing to do but wait for the next tragedy and then go back to waiting.

A love story -- though not really the one with Geoff and Bonnie, but instead one dedicated to the Hemingway-esque daredevils who loved adventure and the camaraderie of sharing in a dangerous mission. Certainly, it fits well with the rest of Hawks' works with the focus on hypermasculinity; here we're also shown that it's a mask covering up other insecurities. Some great shots of early aviation and a tremendous supporting cast make this yet another great film from 1939.

The flying scenes might have been impressive for its time, but the movie is painfully bland and tedious.

Classic Golden Age stuff, by turns melodramatic, adventurous, and romantic, all with a sense of humor. A few things elevate it. The evocation of its exotic locale: tropical, nocturnal, foggy, wet, and dangerous. A preoccupation with the strange cult of masculine rituals and codes - and the tiny gestures where these hardened facades tenderize. The aerial photography is exciting, and the miniature effects have aged relatively well and convincing. It's all a lot of fun.

86.00

Seamless pacing and an expressive, patient camera make this just about impossible to take your eyes off of. The first half hour is a masterclass in showing (not telling) a (growing) sense of community and emotional investment--even for the outsider. I love the way Hawks uses Jean Arthur as something of a proxy for the audience in those early scenes. And the film never lets up from there--Mitchell is great, as usual, and the conclusion's weaving of threads together is sublime.

When people say "They don't make 'em like they used to" this is the kind of thing I think of. A hangout movie about pilots delivering mail in the jungle, with astonishing effects to boot. So specific. A heart-warming an occasionally thrilling film. All the action in the air blew me away too. For a while I was unsure how invested I was. I was enjoying myself but felt a little distanced. Then when it reaches its excellent ending it all came together wonderfully.-a113er, https://redd.it/4h9

Only Angels Have Wings (1939) is Howard Hawks take on John Ford's Air Mail (1932). Only a few modifications creating a wider and more atmospheric areal landscape to the dramas of fading pilots fading away in a crappy flying job. We all know Cary Grant is one of the most likable guys on camera, and that part of him does the role justice. Most of all respect to Thomas Mitchell, being the real joy spreader in the middle of nowhere! A very likable performance in a terrific year for him!

Howard Hawks #2

Like another Hawks masterpiece, Rio Bravo, this is a prime example of great hangout movie. It helps of course that the cast is in top form, specifically Cary Grant, Thomas Mitchell and Rita Hayworth (who easily outshines Jean Arthur). (2nd viewing, 1st: 85)

Cary Grant is the man. Otherwise, everything that Hawks does here he does better in To Have and Have Not, so I can't get too excited about this one.

88.500

The setting for the film creates an interesting atmosphere and there's a fair amount of decent dialogue.

This quite underrated film is actually one of the greatest chronicles about death in the history of fiction. While Hawks' usual speech gathers people that hate each other -- Mac Pherson, Kid, Geoff -- and unite them in a common quest -- to fly across the sky --, Only Angels Have Wings also deals with future in the most honest way: its characters don't think about it, they just do things -- drink, talk, curse, hate, and, as Geoff uses to say, doesn't ask anyone to do anything. There is no fate.

Great early adventure that makes the most of its sets and has a damn good ending.

Not a bad film and it is entertaining, but the two lead characters were awful. Cary Grant was terribly miscast and made the character completely unlikable and uninteresting. He had no chemistry with Jean Arthur, whose character is the typical weak, pathetic female character that always get inserted into films of this era. The story was interesting, but it seemed like they couldn't decide what story they wanted to tell and it got a bit jumbled up just before Hayworth arrives.

grant is good, arthur was horrible and hayworth was in here somewhere even though i can't remember her. so the gist of it is that if you cut out the love story entirely, you've got a pretty good movie.

awesome flying sequences...and screw Gilda, Hayworth's r e a l l y sexy in THIS. :D

I have no complaints but I can't see what the big deal is. Only the top-notch script puts it above average.

#221

watched: 2011, 2015, 2021

Thomas Mitchell and Jean Arthur knock it out of the park. One of the better adventure films in existence. Meandering and strikingly purgatorial, like the first half of Casablanca.

"A bizarre and gorgeous film to say the least, this masterwork (based on a story fragment written by Hawks in 1938 titled Plane from Barranca) embodies a fantastic range of opposite states of mind and being." - Zach Campbell

"Three great scenes and no bad ones"

Enjoyable black and white, afternoon viewing.

Classic Hawks flyboy drama. Great acting and directing, plus a little magic somewhere that makes it even better. Thomas Mitchell's death scene--and the aftermath--is a real standout.

226

Probably the perfect role for Cary Grant, and certainly my favorite Howard Hawks film, as I think it perfectly illustrates his stoic, macho but heartfelt ethos. It is a film I find myself thinking back on fondly more often than most. And Hayworth and Arthur are of course a welcome presence.

Early mix of adventure/drama/comedy that pulls it off exceedingly well with pitch-perfect casting and technique. A classic in the best sense of the word.

Another strong work from Hawks: strong men, adamant women and outstanding dialogs. It even has airoplanes in it - what else one could wish for? A film without faults.

218

I couldn't stop thinking how much better it would be with Bogart. Don't get me wrong, I love Cary Grant, this kind of tough-as-nails role isn't suited for him. When Hawks made To Have and Have Not a few years later, it's a very similar movie but with the proper casting of Bogart. However, Jean Arthur is spot on for her part. The plot seems cobbled together from pre-determined scenes, but it's a satisfying adventure story about man's men and their ideals, with a few terrific flying sequences.

A pretty enjoyable film, with some good performances all around. The drama doesn't always work right but the film is strong enough that it still gets its point across.

One of Hawks' most endearing and accomplished films, with a fervent heart underneath its beautiful skin.

# 245

Hawks' macho-but-not-really paradigm gets the ultimate workout from the equally three-dimensional Cary Grant. If it lacks the political intrigue of Casablanca, it more than surpasses that film in warmth, adventure, plausibility (especially regarding the central romance) and character. A sadly underappreciated classic.