One doesn't come to this type of picture with high expectations, but many such films rely on familiar story elements, star turns, colorful settings and lively music to deliver pleasant, unchallenging entertainment that will satisfy an audience. No studio did this better than MGM.
But something went wrong this time around. Maybe it was having four screenwriters contributing to a dull, contrived story. Maybe it was making a musical in which the leading lady is neither a singer nor a dancer, in which one of the male leads also neither sings nor dances, in which the other leading man dances but does not sing, and in which none of the foregoing trio has the slightest flair for comedy. What to do? Give Jimmy Durante a couple of night club scenes in which he can do some familiar turns (which he has done far better elsewhere), fill some time with Cugat's orchestra, have some "native" dancers cavort at a festival. You get the idea. Even Esther's wet scenes don't compare favorably with those in most of her other films. And Peter Lawford, a firmly-established would-be leading man without a shred of discernible talent? His character here, supposedly infatuated and preoccupied, becomes thoroughly distasteful, so much so that his romantic reconciliation with Esther becomes impossible to accept.
Any redeeming qualities in this picture? You bet. Cyd Charisse (whose role, like Durante's, has nothing to do with the plot) is featured in two dance routines with Ricardo Montalban. He is surprisingly good, and she is unsurprisingly great. Perhaps one of those four screenwriters suggested that since they were making a musical without any leading players who could sing, they had better use at least somebody who could claim to be a dancer. Good thinking, MGM. You made the right choice. As for the rest...the sooner forgotten, the better.
