Plantiana Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

gridoon There is a scene somewhere in the middle of "Double Dynamite" where Frank Sinatra and Jane Russel are lying on their beds in two rooms separated only by a thin wall and start singing to each other; the camera lingers on Jane's face and smile, and it's a delightful moment. The rest of the movie is not quite on that level, but the three stars make it worth watching anyway: Sinatra is likable, Russell is dazzling, and Groucho Marx has some laugh-out-loud zingers ("You're getting married? Where is the ceremony taking place, Alkatraz?"), and does some of his trademarked eyebrow-raising as well. In fact, I would say that this is a better showcase for him than the Marx Brothers' last film "Love Happy", in which he was essentially just a guest star. "Double Dynamite" is a minor film, but it passes the time very easily. (**1/2)

wes-connors The three stars - Frank Sinatra, Jane Russell, and Groucho Marx - make the film interesting and enjoyable (if you like them). Everything else is routine. At one point, when Mr. Marx is discovered smoking a cigar in Mr. Sinatra's bathtub, the movie threatens to become surreal. This scene could not have happened in this movie; it violates the structure of the film up to that point... but, if the film had stayed with that "possible-only-in-a-Marx-Brothers" situation, it might have become something other than routine. And, of course, I can't pass up a "Merry XMas, Groucho!" (...which I didn't catch Ms. Russell or Mr. Sinatra wishing!) Hey, it would have made me laugh. ***** Double Dynamite (12/25/51) Irving Cummings ~ Frank Sinatra, Jane Russell, Groucho Marx

theowinthrop The post - Marx Brothers films of Groucho are somewhat astounding because of their mediocrity or worse. Groucho appeared in the late 1940s in four films: COPACABANA, DOUBLE DYNAMITE, A GIRL IN EVERY PORT, MR. MUSIC. He would subsequently appear alone in WILL SUCCESS SPOIL ROCK HUNTER, and finally made SKIDOO. None of these have the values of the best Marx Brother films, and yet they had pretty good casts in most of them: Carmen Miranda, Frank Sinatra and Jane Russell, William Bendix, Bing Crosby, Tony Randall and Jayne Mansfield, Jackie Gleason and Carol Channing. Some of the directors were interesting: Frank Tashlin in ROCK HUNTER and Otto Preminger in SKIDOO (even Richard Haydn in MR. MUSIC). But the films rarely have much going for them. Not that the two Marx Brother films of this period (LOVE HAPPY and THE STORY OF MANKIND) were anything to write home about.I tend to think that Groucho, wealthy and middle aged, was no longer really interested in proving anything in movies. His energies concentrated wonderfully on the radio and then television quiz show YOU BET YOUR LIFE. And he was right - his stardom remained high as a result. For that matter neither Harpo or Chico really needed to prove anything about their talents either. LOVE HAPPY was shot because (like A NIGHT IN CASABLANCA) Chico had some money troubles tied to his gambling. But Harpo and Groucho forced Chico to curtail some of his spending habits. From the point of making movies to impress none of them needed it.So I suspect Groucho was less than really choosy in picking his films. He definitely lucked out in DOUBLE DYNAMITE by having a film with Frank Sinatra and Jane Russell. Both had followings (Sinatra's first following peaking in 1948; Russell being notorious for THE OUTLAW). But the story is a rather weak one. Sinatra is a clerk in a business owned by Howard Freeman. He manages to save Nestor Paiva's life, and the grateful bookie puts money down for Sinatra on a sure-thing horse that wins big. Now Sinatra has money to burn, but just then there is an audit of the books, and Freeman discovers a huge discrepancy. So Sinatra becomes his chief suspect for embezzlement. Sinatra's problems are that he can't prove Paiva has repaid like this, and even if he could Freeman tends not to believe him. His only allies are his girlfriend and fellow worker Russell, and his closest friend Groucho (as Emil J. Ketch, a philosophical waiter with some biting wit). In the plot of the film, Groucho tries to help Sinatra by trying to get information from Freeman that may lead to the actual embezzler. This leads to the best portions of the film.I have commented on Howard Freeman elsewhere on this board. A gifted character actor, he is unjustly forgotten today. He was capable of dramatic performances (he was a memorable Himmler in HITLER'S MADMAN, and he was the crooked landlord of the fleabag hotel that Alan Ladd used in THE BLUE DAHLIA), and he was equally good in comedy (he is the wealthy sausage manufacturer who is convinced by an intruding Stewart Grainger not to marry the devious Eleanor Parker in SCARAMOUCHE). He was also one of the few character actors who ever had a chance to reverse a dramatic performance into a comic gem, when he took his self-centered, fatuous Himmler and used it as a nice guy mistaken for a Himmler in a CAR 54 WHERE ARE YOU? episode. With his abilities he was a first rate foil for Groucho.Freeman's Mr. Pulsifer is not fully prepared to prosecute Sinatra, but he certainly makes Sinatra aware of his peril. So Emil decides that he has to get to know Pulsifer and pry out of him various information about other potential suspects (such as Pulsifer's son). How to do this? Well Pulsifer has not met Emil as a waiter, so Emil dresses up as a wealthy potential business investor. Sinatra is footing the bill for Emil's luxury rooms at a hotel, and his wining and dining Freeman. Of course, the fatuous Freeman does fall for it. Here's the type of man he wants to associate with: a real man of the world. While Groucho spins the most outlandish lies, Freeman readily, greedily swallows them. The scenes between them are quite good.Groucho does recite "Gather ye rosebuds" at one point, and he has a nice duet with Sinatra. So there are positive points in the film. Ms Russell does the best she can but her lines are not memorable (the title's double entendre is the limit of wit regarding her role). It is a pleasant film, at times almost rising with Groucho and Freeman, but it is not up to the best work Groucho ever did.

lzf0 Think about it. Sinatra, Groucho, and Jane Russell starring in a movie written by Harry Crane and with songs by Jule Styne and Sammy Cahn. Sound great. Well, it's not. Sinatra is a bank clerk who is wrongly accused of stealing money from his bank. His singing is great; it's probably never been better. However, instead of the flip Sinatra character of the 1950s, director Cummings asks Sinatra to play a timid young man, a role that never really suited him well. (Think about "The Kissing Bandit"! Compare that to "Meet Danny Wilson", Sinatra's next film where he gets to play that cocky guy!) Groucho is as funny as usual, but the script is contrived, there are too few sight gags, and the direction is slow. We are even cheated on the musical numbers. The two songs, "It's Only Money" (sung by Frank and Groucho) and "Kisses and Tears" (sung by Frank and Jane, accompanied by the jazzy Phil Moore Four) are good, but I wish there were more. Groucho did better with his brothers and Sinatra did better with Nelson Riddle!