6.3/10
Senior Film Conservator

A definitive 6.3/10 rating for a film that redefined the boundaries of cult cinema. Yours for the Asking remains a cornerstone of transgressive art.
Alright, so Yours for the Asking? It’s a definite watch if you’re into those slightly off-kilter, forgotten flicks from the 1930s. If you enjoy a movie that feels like a pleasant afternoon at your grandma's house – a little dusty, but full of stories – then this is for you. But if you need sharp, modern pacing or storylines that perfectly tie up, you might find yourself checking the clock. 🕰️
George Raft plays Johnny Lamb, a casino owner with a surprising soft spot. He sees Lucille Sutton (Ida Lupino), who’s lost pretty much everything, and decides to give her a job. It’s a sweet gesture, but also, you know, good for business. He figures her class will draw in a better crowd. Smart thinking, actually.
His pals, though, they get all bent out of shape. They’re these vaguely shady types who thrive on Johnny being a certain kind of guy. The idea of him turning “good” because of Lucille? It scares them. Like, genuinely scares them for their bottom line. It’s pretty funny how worried they get over something so simple.
So, what do they do? They hire two professional schemers, Gert Malloy and Dictionary McKinney, played by Lynne Overman and James Gleason. This is where the movie really picks up. These two are just… a delight. They’re meant to pull Johnny back to his wild side, but they’re not exactly subtle about it.
Overman’s Gert is all bluster and quick remarks. Gleason’s Dictionary is the slightly more grounded one, often looking exasperated. Their banter is the film's secret weapon. There’s a scene where they’re trying to set up a fake poker game, and it just keeps going wrong. They try to get Johnny to bet on races, but he just won't bite.
I kept wondering if Johnny was really that dense, or just playing along. He often seems one step behind, but then sometimes he gives this knowing look. It makes you guess a bit. Or maybe I’m overthinking it. 🤔
Ida Lupino as Lucille is the calm eye in the storm. She carries herself with a quiet dignity, even when her situation is pretty dire. You root for her to find some stability. Her reaction shots, when she’s watching the chaos unfold, are often just a subtle raise of an eyebrow. Very effective.
The whole plot is a bit convoluted. It’s like a Rube Goldberg machine for trying to make someone “bad” again. You have to kinda just go with it. The film doesn't waste much time on deep explanations. Things just happen, and everyone reacts.
The pacing is… well, it's 1930s pacing. Some scenes stretch out a little. Like a long phone call that could have been chopped. But then you get a rapid-fire exchange between Gert and Dictionary that makes up for it. It's an uneven rhythm, but it works for the kind of story they're telling. It keeps you on your toes, in a way.
It’s a movie that feels very much of its time, but still has a certain charm. The stakes never feel truly high, which is fine. It’s more about the absurdity of these characters trying to manipulate each other for what feels like fairly low-grade gangster reasons.
You probably won't remember every single plot point after it’s over. But you’ll likely remember Gert and Dictionary trying to pull off some half-baked scheme. Their performances really make the whole thing tick. They're the kind of characters you just want to spend more time with. They make the film feel a bit more alive than it might otherwise be.
So, yeah. Give it a shot if you’re in the mood for something light, a bit silly, and with some genuinely fun supporting players. Don't expect a masterpiece, but do expect a few good laughs and a smile. 😄

IMDb —
1916
Community
Log in to comment.