Philip Barry's play about a scientist/inventor who rooms with a widow during the war might've fallen flat with a less-experienced cast; it is middling material, weighted with palaver, not even offering anything in the way of surprises. However, Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn are well-attuned to these characters (and to each other) and make the most of it. Tracy is talked into a platonic marriage with Kate, but eventually feels the pangs of real romance. The play's stagy action is opened-up expertly for the screen, with talky scenes nicely balanced by lively set-pieces (such as the train-sequence, the best moment in the film). The colorful supporting cast, including Gloria Grahame (in a bit part) and Keenan Wynn, perform with aplomb, plowing right through the contrivances. As Kate's girlfriend, Lucille Ball gives one of her best performances, and she has a classic retort to Spencer Tracy who commands his dog to lie down (Ball to Tracy: "Who, me?"). Not a perfect showcase for the leads, but very pleasant nonetheless. *** from ****
33 Reviews
Lovely Film
Incalculacable19 April 2006
Without Love, one of the Tracy/Hepburn movies, is one little-known films from that series. It is a sweet story of a developing love between two people. There is a lot of comedy as well, which is fantastic and it is truly funny at times. Katie and Spence, are, as usual, sizzling up the screen and acting to perfection. Although it may not have the charm of Woman of the Year or the biting dialog of Adam's Rib, it is a charming story. Katharine Hepburn plays a widow, Spencer Tracy plays a man who doesn't want to love again. This movie is not for everyone, I especially recommend it to Tracy/Hepburn fans as they will appreciate the real romance behind this picture and enjoy watching them sizzle. Beautiful film.
How long do you imagine this 'without love' thing lasts...?
gaityr21 August 2002
Spencer Tracy is Patrick Jamieson, a hard-headed scientist whose heart gave up on love a long time ago and which now takes refuge in facts and only facts. Katharine Hepburn is Jamie Rowan, a young widow who, having had her perfect first love and husband die in a riding accident, has closed herself off to love and life, believing she should--and could--never love again. So, from this common ground and the respect they share for the sciences, Pat and Jamie decide to get married: how perfect, how *convenient* a marriage without love can be! No jealousy, no bickering, just companionship.
Well, that's the *idea* anyway... the viewer knows with pretty much any Hepburn/Tracy vehicle that the two leads are going to wind up together, and very happily so, in the end. The thrill in coming to a film of theirs fresh is seeing how their characters get there. It's a pretty fun ride in WITHOUT LOVE: Hepburn is pitch-perfect as a widow set on becoming a spinster, and Tracy has his slightly bemused, man-(sorta)-above-the-fray character down to a T. The love story is given a lot of care in this film, so that you really can believe that eventually, love--or more importantly, the *lack* of love--can get in the way of a marriage. You watch Pat getting used to Jamie, beginning to find her indispensable; you see Jamie opening up, smiling, even longing for love again. Jamie's loneliness within their self-declared 'loveless' marriage is especially well-handled, because it is *her* heartache, at the loss of a perfect husband and true love, that seems so insurmountable and must be overcome first. Of course, it can't hurt to have the main characters played by Hepburn and Tracy--already there's a built-in audience waiting and expecting these two to get together! But the script also had quite a part to play in that, by the end of the film, I was definitely willing Pat and Jamie to discover their love for each other, and to voice it out loud instead of pretending that their marriage 'without love' hadn't already turned into one full of love. The final scene between Pat and Jamie is startlingly sweet: the roundabout way in which Pat admits his love for Jamie is both heartfelt and true to the relationship between the characters.
All this having been said, WITHOUT LOVE, along with the two melodramas KEEPER OF THE FLAME and THE SEA OF GRASS (and perhaps also Frank Capra's THE STATE OF THE UNION), still remains one of the forgotten--or at the very least, much lesser-known--movies of the nine collaborations between those immortal screen (and real-life) lovers. There probably is a reason for this--the film is entertaining (witness the scene where Pat quite literally sleepwalks into Jamie's bed!), with a clever script ("Are you trying to be vulgar?"/"It takes no effort.") and a great cast (Hepburn and Tracy, of course, but Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn also shine and charm in their small roles to great effect). However, WITHOUT LOVE (also based on a Philip Barry play) is quite simply *not* THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. The script just doesn't have the same zing or exuberance (though you can tell Barry has tried his hardest), and the actors don't share and feed off that same electric current that charged Hepburn's acting against Cary Grant and James Stewart. It can't have been too difficult to figure out, given the greatly contrasting Broadway runs the two plays (both starring Hepburn in the role she originated on stage) had--one smooth and receiving tumultuous welcome wherever it went, the other... well, not *quite* so joyously received.
Still, how often *does* a film like THE PHILADELPHIA STORY come along? Surely while waiting between classics, it couldn't hurt to watch a few solid, sweet and thoroughly engaging films like WITHOUT LOVE. And this film has bonuses as well--Pat and Jamie are more truly equals than any of the characters I've seen Hepburn and Tracy play so far... no 'slapping down' of the Hepburn character by the big gruff bear-paw of the Tracy character. Hepburn fans also get to see her sing (in French!) and totter around in the most alarming feathery get-up (that ending scene is really a hoot!). Keenan Wynn plays a delightful Philip Barry drunk--which means that he's wittier and more lucid than the rest of us, even when we're sober on a good day!--and Lucille Ball is luminous in her small role as Kitty Trimble.
So why not give WITHOUT LOVE a chance to put a smile on your face? With any luck, it'll do that and much, much more...!
Well, that's the *idea* anyway... the viewer knows with pretty much any Hepburn/Tracy vehicle that the two leads are going to wind up together, and very happily so, in the end. The thrill in coming to a film of theirs fresh is seeing how their characters get there. It's a pretty fun ride in WITHOUT LOVE: Hepburn is pitch-perfect as a widow set on becoming a spinster, and Tracy has his slightly bemused, man-(sorta)-above-the-fray character down to a T. The love story is given a lot of care in this film, so that you really can believe that eventually, love--or more importantly, the *lack* of love--can get in the way of a marriage. You watch Pat getting used to Jamie, beginning to find her indispensable; you see Jamie opening up, smiling, even longing for love again. Jamie's loneliness within their self-declared 'loveless' marriage is especially well-handled, because it is *her* heartache, at the loss of a perfect husband and true love, that seems so insurmountable and must be overcome first. Of course, it can't hurt to have the main characters played by Hepburn and Tracy--already there's a built-in audience waiting and expecting these two to get together! But the script also had quite a part to play in that, by the end of the film, I was definitely willing Pat and Jamie to discover their love for each other, and to voice it out loud instead of pretending that their marriage 'without love' hadn't already turned into one full of love. The final scene between Pat and Jamie is startlingly sweet: the roundabout way in which Pat admits his love for Jamie is both heartfelt and true to the relationship between the characters.
All this having been said, WITHOUT LOVE, along with the two melodramas KEEPER OF THE FLAME and THE SEA OF GRASS (and perhaps also Frank Capra's THE STATE OF THE UNION), still remains one of the forgotten--or at the very least, much lesser-known--movies of the nine collaborations between those immortal screen (and real-life) lovers. There probably is a reason for this--the film is entertaining (witness the scene where Pat quite literally sleepwalks into Jamie's bed!), with a clever script ("Are you trying to be vulgar?"/"It takes no effort.") and a great cast (Hepburn and Tracy, of course, but Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn also shine and charm in their small roles to great effect). However, WITHOUT LOVE (also based on a Philip Barry play) is quite simply *not* THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. The script just doesn't have the same zing or exuberance (though you can tell Barry has tried his hardest), and the actors don't share and feed off that same electric current that charged Hepburn's acting against Cary Grant and James Stewart. It can't have been too difficult to figure out, given the greatly contrasting Broadway runs the two plays (both starring Hepburn in the role she originated on stage) had--one smooth and receiving tumultuous welcome wherever it went, the other... well, not *quite* so joyously received.
Still, how often *does* a film like THE PHILADELPHIA STORY come along? Surely while waiting between classics, it couldn't hurt to watch a few solid, sweet and thoroughly engaging films like WITHOUT LOVE. And this film has bonuses as well--Pat and Jamie are more truly equals than any of the characters I've seen Hepburn and Tracy play so far... no 'slapping down' of the Hepburn character by the big gruff bear-paw of the Tracy character. Hepburn fans also get to see her sing (in French!) and totter around in the most alarming feathery get-up (that ending scene is really a hoot!). Keenan Wynn plays a delightful Philip Barry drunk--which means that he's wittier and more lucid than the rest of us, even when we're sober on a good day!--and Lucille Ball is luminous in her small role as Kitty Trimble.
So why not give WITHOUT LOVE a chance to put a smile on your face? With any luck, it'll do that and much, much more...!
no one is without love for long
didi-511 June 2003
If it wasn't for "Adam's Rib", this film would be my favourite of the Tracy/Hepburn movies. I like the characters they both play, and there's a plus of another plot going on in the background between Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn. Of course you know what's going to happen by the end but the movie is entertaining and the obviousness doesn't matter. I heard that Tracy wouldn't play in this on stage which seems a shame as he's so good on the screen as the cranky scientist taking up residence in Hepburn's cellar. Hepburn is fabulous as ever and the brittle widow is a perfect part for her. Of course no one who marries in the movies 'without love' stays that way. If they did we wouldn't have had these kind of movies in the golden age of Hollywood!
Nice film
blanche-216 July 2010
Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn are "Without Love" in this 1945 romantic comedy, also starring Keenan Wynn, Patricia Morison, and Lucille Ball. Based on a play by Philip Barry, Tracy plays Pat Jamieson, a scientist looking for a place to live in Washington, D.C. in wartime; he signs on as a caretaker for the home of Jamie Rowan (Hepburn), a widow. Jamieson has had his heart broken by a French woman, Lily Vine, and Jamie feels that she can never again recapture what she had with her late husband. The two decide to marry but keep it platonic.
This light comedy is obviously predictable, elevated by the excellent cast. Tracy and Hepburn are both delightful with their usual great chemistry. Keenan Wynn and Lucille Ball are on hand as an on-again, off-again couple; the Wynn character is engaged to Patricia Morison, a bossy woman, but he keeps flirting and kissing Ball. Ball's delivery is priceless.
Hollywood didn't know what to with Morison for most of her films, either B movies or small parts in A movies; in fact, her fabulous role in "Kiss of Death" was cut by the censors. Instead, she became a tremendous musical stage star on Broadway and in London, her best role being Kate in "Kiss Me, Kate." At this writing, she's 96 and still with us.
An entertaining film, good watch.
This light comedy is obviously predictable, elevated by the excellent cast. Tracy and Hepburn are both delightful with their usual great chemistry. Keenan Wynn and Lucille Ball are on hand as an on-again, off-again couple; the Wynn character is engaged to Patricia Morison, a bossy woman, but he keeps flirting and kissing Ball. Ball's delivery is priceless.
Hollywood didn't know what to with Morison for most of her films, either B movies or small parts in A movies; in fact, her fabulous role in "Kiss of Death" was cut by the censors. Instead, she became a tremendous musical stage star on Broadway and in London, her best role being Kate in "Kiss Me, Kate." At this writing, she's 96 and still with us.
An entertaining film, good watch.
Kate's had the best of it, Spence had the worst of it
bkoganbing26 October 2005
Without Love is the third Philip Barry play that Katharine Hepburn was in on Broadway and then brought to the screen. It certainly is less well known than Holiday and The Philadelphia Story, but it's not as good.
The story concerns a government scientist who arrives in town without a place to stay. The housing shortage in Washington, DC during the World War II years was the whole premise behind The More the Merrier. Here it's a vehicle that gets Tracy to meet Hepburn. She's a Washington socialite with a big house that she's trying to sell. Perfect for Tracy and his experiments trying to invent an oxygen mask for high altitudes.
They develop feelings for each other, but both have been married before. Tracy's gone through a bad divorce and Hepburn is a widow. They agree to marry, but without emotional involvement.
How that all works out is the reason you ought to see the film. For me it's the weakest of all their films together. It doesn't have the sparkle of either Woman of the Year or Adam's Rib.
Possibly because on stage, Tracy's part was played by Elliott Nugent. I'm sure that the part had to have been built up for someone of Tracy's stature to even consider it even if it was Hepburn as the leading lady.
Lucille Ball, Keenan Wynn, and Patricia Morison all have good supporting parts here.
The fans of Tracy and Hepburn, individually and collectively, should appreciate this. That's a group that takes in a whole lot of territory.
The story concerns a government scientist who arrives in town without a place to stay. The housing shortage in Washington, DC during the World War II years was the whole premise behind The More the Merrier. Here it's a vehicle that gets Tracy to meet Hepburn. She's a Washington socialite with a big house that she's trying to sell. Perfect for Tracy and his experiments trying to invent an oxygen mask for high altitudes.
They develop feelings for each other, but both have been married before. Tracy's gone through a bad divorce and Hepburn is a widow. They agree to marry, but without emotional involvement.
How that all works out is the reason you ought to see the film. For me it's the weakest of all their films together. It doesn't have the sparkle of either Woman of the Year or Adam's Rib.
Possibly because on stage, Tracy's part was played by Elliott Nugent. I'm sure that the part had to have been built up for someone of Tracy's stature to even consider it even if it was Hepburn as the leading lady.
Lucille Ball, Keenan Wynn, and Patricia Morison all have good supporting parts here.
The fans of Tracy and Hepburn, individually and collectively, should appreciate this. That's a group that takes in a whole lot of territory.
Love struggles
TheLittleSongbird8 January 2019
Both Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy gave performances throughout their year that are deservedly highly regarded, not just together but also in other films individually. Their pairing, which can be seen in nine films over a 25 year period (from 1942 with 'Woman of the Year' to 1967 with 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner') is considered one of cinema's most legendary and one can see why when seeing all their films together.
'Without Love' does very little to waste this iconic pairing and serves both Tracy and especially Hepburn, as well as the rest of the cast, well. It is not one of their best films together (one of the lesser ones for me), my personal favourite is 'Adam's Rib' with my least favourite perhaps being the still pretty decent 'Keeper of the Flame'. But that 'Without Love' is not one of their best and still be quite good, while uneven too, indicates how great their best films together were ('Adam's Rib' being a classic).
Maybe the pace could have done with more momentum in spots when the direction had moments where it lacked spark and became stagy. Some of the film, or at least on occasions, is silly and too reliant on coincidence, and the wit of the best Tracy-Hepburn films is not quite as strong here.
Also found the ending rather saccharine and with not enough build up getting there, which made what happened somewhat random and compared to what we'd seen in the rest of the film not entirely plausible.
However, both Tracy and especially Hepburn are on top form. Again Tracy giving the more subtle performance and the ever radiant Hepburn sinking her teeth into her role. Their chemistry is charming and also sizzles in wit and intensity and they succeed in giving their material and characters substance. They also have a good supporting cast, with Keenan Wynn providing plenty of zest and Lucille Ball having a whale of a time. Gloria Grahame has a nice short appearance and it is hard not to endear to Dizzy.
Further advantages are a script that still does have enough wit and sophistication (just not as strongly as some of their other films) and just about avoids being too talky, a very entertaining train-sequence and the chemistry between Tracy and Hepburn makes the romantic element believable. The production values are pleasing and the story has a good deal of charm and is easy to like.
In conclusion, nice film if not a Tracy-Hepburn essential. 7/10 Bethany Cox
'Without Love' does very little to waste this iconic pairing and serves both Tracy and especially Hepburn, as well as the rest of the cast, well. It is not one of their best films together (one of the lesser ones for me), my personal favourite is 'Adam's Rib' with my least favourite perhaps being the still pretty decent 'Keeper of the Flame'. But that 'Without Love' is not one of their best and still be quite good, while uneven too, indicates how great their best films together were ('Adam's Rib' being a classic).
Maybe the pace could have done with more momentum in spots when the direction had moments where it lacked spark and became stagy. Some of the film, or at least on occasions, is silly and too reliant on coincidence, and the wit of the best Tracy-Hepburn films is not quite as strong here.
Also found the ending rather saccharine and with not enough build up getting there, which made what happened somewhat random and compared to what we'd seen in the rest of the film not entirely plausible.
However, both Tracy and especially Hepburn are on top form. Again Tracy giving the more subtle performance and the ever radiant Hepburn sinking her teeth into her role. Their chemistry is charming and also sizzles in wit and intensity and they succeed in giving their material and characters substance. They also have a good supporting cast, with Keenan Wynn providing plenty of zest and Lucille Ball having a whale of a time. Gloria Grahame has a nice short appearance and it is hard not to endear to Dizzy.
Further advantages are a script that still does have enough wit and sophistication (just not as strongly as some of their other films) and just about avoids being too talky, a very entertaining train-sequence and the chemistry between Tracy and Hepburn makes the romantic element believable. The production values are pleasing and the story has a good deal of charm and is easy to like.
In conclusion, nice film if not a Tracy-Hepburn essential. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Cutest marriage proposal!
HotToastyRag7 November 2017
One of my favorite film proposals is from Without Love. Based on Philip Barry's play, Katharine Hepburn, who starred in the show on Broadway, recruited her off-screen sweetheart Spencer Tracy to act in the film adaptation. They play intellectual patriots-he's a government scientist and she's his assistant-who get along quite nicely as friends but aren't interested in romance. Because of logistics during wartime, Kate gets the bright idea that it would be easier if they married so he can continue his important experiments, and she gives a hilarious nervous monologue proposing a marriage "without love".
The Hays Code didn't allow an unmarried couple to lay down next to one another; one person's feet had to be always on the ground. Without Love was pretty daring for its time, since it stretched the boundaries and filmed some pretty risqué bedroom scenes using the excuse that Spencer Tracy's character was a chronic sleepwalker. To modern audiences, those scenes might seem a little silly, but try and imagine how it felt seeing them in 1945!
While this isn't my favorite Tracy-Hepburn pairing-that award goes to Adam's Rib and Guess Who's Coming to Dinner-it's definitely worth watching. They're awfully cute together in this one, and the romance doesn't include constant bickering like some of their other films. It's nice to see them actually get along, plus Felix Bressart, Kennan Wynn, Gloria Grahame, and Lucille Ball round out the supporting cast nicely.
The Hays Code didn't allow an unmarried couple to lay down next to one another; one person's feet had to be always on the ground. Without Love was pretty daring for its time, since it stretched the boundaries and filmed some pretty risqué bedroom scenes using the excuse that Spencer Tracy's character was a chronic sleepwalker. To modern audiences, those scenes might seem a little silly, but try and imagine how it felt seeing them in 1945!
While this isn't my favorite Tracy-Hepburn pairing-that award goes to Adam's Rib and Guess Who's Coming to Dinner-it's definitely worth watching. They're awfully cute together in this one, and the romance doesn't include constant bickering like some of their other films. It's nice to see them actually get along, plus Felix Bressart, Kennan Wynn, Gloria Grahame, and Lucille Ball round out the supporting cast nicely.
Excellent Tracy-Hepburn vehicle...but Lucille Ball's best film performance
barrymn19 November 2006
This is an excellent vehicle for Tracy-Hepburn, not their best but darn close to it. Cleverly made comedy.
The whole cast is just fine, but I think this is Lucille Ball's all-time best feature film performance. She didn't have much opportunity for high-brow sophisticated parts, and as Kitty, the real estate agent and love interest for Keynan Wynn, Ball is just wonderful. What a shame she didn't get parts like this very often.
Direction and set design is typical of MGM's best of the 1940's.
Nifty film.....now if Warner Home Video would get around to releasing it on DVD, I'd be a happy camper.
The whole cast is just fine, but I think this is Lucille Ball's all-time best feature film performance. She didn't have much opportunity for high-brow sophisticated parts, and as Kitty, the real estate agent and love interest for Keynan Wynn, Ball is just wonderful. What a shame she didn't get parts like this very often.
Direction and set design is typical of MGM's best of the 1940's.
Nifty film.....now if Warner Home Video would get around to releasing it on DVD, I'd be a happy camper.
Stellar Cast in Lesser Tracy-Hepburn Outing
dglink5 September 2020
An amusing romantic-comedy based on a Philip Barry play, "Without Love" is most noteworthy as the third pairing of Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn. Set during the World War II housing shortage in Washington, D.C., which was better utilized in George Stevens's "The More the Merrier," the film is low on credibility and high on star wattage. Arriving in D.C. without lodging, but accompanied by a small dog, scientist Pat Jamieson foists himself on a well-dressed drunk, Quentin Ladd, who has shared a taxi with him, and he invites himself to spend the night at Ladd's home. However, the enormous house belongs to Ladd's female cousin, who is looking to rent or sell the place and needs a caretaker in the interim. The owner arrives from Virginia the following morning, and Jamieson maneuvers himself into the caretaker job. After the preposterous opening, the scientist settles into the cellar to develop a high-altitude oxygen mask, and he eventually partners with the widowed owner, who wants to return to a useful life.
With Spencer Tracy as Jamieson and Katharine Hepburn as Jamie, the widowed owner of the house, the flimsy concept takes a back seat to the developing platonic relationship between the two characters, who improbably have a past connection. The two stars spar like pros, but they are not the only lights in the cast. A young Keenan Wynn is engaging as Quentin, who is harried by his girlfriend Edwina, while pursuing a flirtatious redhead, Kitty. Who better than Lucille Ball could play the man-eating Kitty, and her delightful performance displays the comedic talent that would blossom six years later, when "I Love Lucy" debuted on TV. In a small role as a nightclub flower seller, Gloria Grahame delivers a memorable sneeze.
Hepburn thinks Tracy is still in love with a French piano-playing flame, while Tracy thinks Hepburn is falling for a handsome playboy; Tracy sleepwalks, Hepburn imitates a flamboyant chanteuse, and a cute terrier named Dizzy steals a few scenes. While the housing shortage set-up is dated, the development of an oxygen mask in a cellar is absurd, and the scientific equipment recalls early sci-fi films. However, all flaws aside, "Without Love" is easy-going fun that plays to a predictable conclusion. Even though a lesser Tracy-Hepburn teaming, the film benefits from a stellar cast, and all Tracy-Hepburn films are worth seeing.
With Spencer Tracy as Jamieson and Katharine Hepburn as Jamie, the widowed owner of the house, the flimsy concept takes a back seat to the developing platonic relationship between the two characters, who improbably have a past connection. The two stars spar like pros, but they are not the only lights in the cast. A young Keenan Wynn is engaging as Quentin, who is harried by his girlfriend Edwina, while pursuing a flirtatious redhead, Kitty. Who better than Lucille Ball could play the man-eating Kitty, and her delightful performance displays the comedic talent that would blossom six years later, when "I Love Lucy" debuted on TV. In a small role as a nightclub flower seller, Gloria Grahame delivers a memorable sneeze.
Hepburn thinks Tracy is still in love with a French piano-playing flame, while Tracy thinks Hepburn is falling for a handsome playboy; Tracy sleepwalks, Hepburn imitates a flamboyant chanteuse, and a cute terrier named Dizzy steals a few scenes. While the housing shortage set-up is dated, the development of an oxygen mask in a cellar is absurd, and the scientific equipment recalls early sci-fi films. However, all flaws aside, "Without Love" is easy-going fun that plays to a predictable conclusion. Even though a lesser Tracy-Hepburn teaming, the film benefits from a stellar cast, and all Tracy-Hepburn films are worth seeing.
A good idea and good actors, that could have been used much better
Catharina_Sweden1 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was quite slow and drawn-out, silly and dated, and not very funny either. The main idea about a couple who marry for convenience, and intend not to share a bedroom, but then develop feelings for each other after all, is quite good though - although not original. So much more could have been made by it. What one wants to see in a story with that theme, is the sexual tension slowly growing between the man and woman, and some innuendo... that is the whole point. Instead there were too many other, uninteresting, people involved here, and there was too much running in and out through doors like in a drawing room comedy on the theater stage.
The whole movie is carried by the two leads: Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn. I like it that Hollywood already in the 1940:s could make a love story with leads who were no longer young (especially that the woman is no longer young), and who did not have the traditional perfect handsome/pretty looks but instead more individual looks. The couple makes the movie worth watching once, in spite of all its shortcomings.
The whole movie is carried by the two leads: Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn. I like it that Hollywood already in the 1940:s could make a love story with leads who were no longer young (especially that the woman is no longer young), and who did not have the traditional perfect handsome/pretty looks but instead more individual looks. The couple makes the movie worth watching once, in spite of all its shortcomings.
Fun Film
scw121716 June 2010
I liked this film despite not really caring for Katharine Hepburn as an actress. I do, however, like Spencer Tracy. Having not seen (or even aware of) the Broadway play, I have nothing to compare it to. I think that made the film better for me. The plot line moved along well, predictably perhaps. For supporting cast, I was really surprised to see Lucille Ball. She was much better to me playing a more serious character without the slapstick comedy. The ending was pleasing, good to see things all work out between them. My favorite part of the film I would say was the repartee between Hepburn and Tracy's characters, nothing is said directly to each other and yet each knows what the other meant. Fun film, which I enjoyed.
An "A" feature with "B" production values
JohnHowardReid30 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Wow! A movie with Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn! But don't too excited! Who directed? Harold S. Bucquet, no less. Bucquet started off as an assistant director way back in 1922, then graduated to shorts in 1935 and finally to features with Young Dr. Kildare in 1938. He died on February 13, 1946, so Without Love was his last fling. At its best, Without Love is moderately entertaining, but, alas, it's at its least interesting when Tracy and Hepburn are on screen – thanks partly to Bucquet's rigorously dull direction with its long, static takes. And partly to a rather odd screenplay by Donald Ogden Stewart which delivers all its brightest and most lively lines to the support cast, particularly Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn! Admittedly, Tracy does deliver a few bright comebacks. But that's about all we can say on the plus side. Production values are rigorously "B"-grade and it's hard to believe that Karl Freund was in charge of photography. To sum up: Without Love is an "A" feature with "B" production values.
Without Love is Without Good Sense **
edwagreen18 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Without doubt, one of the weakest of the Tracy-Hepburn films, still somewhat better than "Desk Set" in 1957.
Keenan Wynn really does some really good ham acting earlier in the film when he appears drunk. Lucille Ball, of all people, nearly plays it quite straight as a Realtor on the make for Wynn. These 2 potentially comical people really aren't that funny here. In fact, later in the film, it seems that Hepburn borrows some of the Ball antics later used on television's "I Love Lucy."
Even with the title, we know how this is going to turn out: There has to be love, even for a couple joined together as he rejects love due to a bad experience, and she is rejecting it after her ideal marriage ends with the tragic death of her husband. This is supposed to be a marriage of convenience in war-time Washington.
The science sequences are ridiculous at best.
Little use is made of Patricia Morison, who gives quite a bitchy performance as a nasty, wealthy woman. She is the epitome of bitterness here.
While the science sequences are inane, the picture's oxygen is literally sucked out.
Keenan Wynn really does some really good ham acting earlier in the film when he appears drunk. Lucille Ball, of all people, nearly plays it quite straight as a Realtor on the make for Wynn. These 2 potentially comical people really aren't that funny here. In fact, later in the film, it seems that Hepburn borrows some of the Ball antics later used on television's "I Love Lucy."
Even with the title, we know how this is going to turn out: There has to be love, even for a couple joined together as he rejects love due to a bad experience, and she is rejecting it after her ideal marriage ends with the tragic death of her husband. This is supposed to be a marriage of convenience in war-time Washington.
The science sequences are ridiculous at best.
Little use is made of Patricia Morison, who gives quite a bitchy performance as a nasty, wealthy woman. She is the epitome of bitterness here.
While the science sequences are inane, the picture's oxygen is literally sucked out.
Lesser known Tracy-Hepburn vehicle by Philip Barry...
Doylenf7 August 2004
WITHOUT LOVE is such an uneven film--some of it is quite inspired--but it's safe to say that there are a few scenes that make it worth watching even if it is a bit overlong in getting to its inevitable conclusion. Hepburn and Tracy are at their most polished as romantic partners. The subplot is handled with skill by Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn (who does a great drunken bit) and fans of Tracy and Hepburn won't be disappointed in their handling of rather unusual roles.
Hepburn has never been one of my particular favorites--I find her mannerisms are a turn-off by the time any film starring her has gone beyond fifteen minutes--but here she is actually showing a warmth, tenderness and vulnerability that she seldom really showed in any of her more well-known comedy roles. And Tracy is so natural, you forget he is just acting.
The plot has two unlikely people who have given up love for opposite reasons actually finding out that they truly do love each other--but not until the last reel. All of their scenes are enhanced by the added device of having a dog who looks just like Toto (from the 'Wizard of Oz') steal many a scene. For added measure, Lucille Ball pops up in a brief but delightful supporting role opposite Keenan Wynn.
Hepburn is more appealing here than she was as the stuck-up heroine of THE PHILADELPHIA STORY and the story, although predictable, has some very unusual touches that make it well worth watching, especially if you're fans of Hepburn or Tracy.
Patricia Morison has a thankless supporting role and Gloria Grahame has a brief bit as a flower girl allergic to flowers in a nightclub scene.
Hepburn has never been one of my particular favorites--I find her mannerisms are a turn-off by the time any film starring her has gone beyond fifteen minutes--but here she is actually showing a warmth, tenderness and vulnerability that she seldom really showed in any of her more well-known comedy roles. And Tracy is so natural, you forget he is just acting.
The plot has two unlikely people who have given up love for opposite reasons actually finding out that they truly do love each other--but not until the last reel. All of their scenes are enhanced by the added device of having a dog who looks just like Toto (from the 'Wizard of Oz') steal many a scene. For added measure, Lucille Ball pops up in a brief but delightful supporting role opposite Keenan Wynn.
Hepburn is more appealing here than she was as the stuck-up heroine of THE PHILADELPHIA STORY and the story, although predictable, has some very unusual touches that make it well worth watching, especially if you're fans of Hepburn or Tracy.
Patricia Morison has a thankless supporting role and Gloria Grahame has a brief bit as a flower girl allergic to flowers in a nightclub scene.
Putting the Carriage before the Horse
JamesHitchcock4 September 2020
Most romantic comedies are based on the mathematical formula A+B-C=D, where A stands for "boy loves girl", B for "girl loves boy" and C for some obstacle to their love which has to be removed to achieve happy ending D. At the time this film was made, the happy ending almost always involved either a marriage or the reconciliation of estranged or divorced partners. Even today the film industry generally still believes that love and marriage go together like a horse and carriage. "Without Love" is based upon a variation in this formula; there is still a happy ending, but the carriage comes before the horse. Marriage comes first and love comes later.
The action takes place during World War II. Jamie Rowan is a young widow who decides to help the war effort by allowing Patrick Jamieson, a military research scientist, to set up his laboratory in the basement of her house. (I was surprised to learn that "Jamie" was used in America as a name for girls of Katharine Hepburn's generation; it did not come into use as a feminine name in Britain until much later). Jamie begins to assist Patrick with his scientific work, and the two become friends. There is, however, a psychological obstacle to love developing between them. Patrick has had a negative view of love ever since being treated badly by a former girlfriend. Jamie had a very happy marriage, but was left devastated when her husband died suddenly in a riding accident. As they put it, he has had all the worst of love and she all the best. Nevertheless, the two agree to marry "without love", believing that this will enable them to work together more effectively and that love is not an essential ingredient in a marriage. But, this being a rom-com, their relationship does not remain loveless for very long.
The leading roles are taken by Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn who were of course partners in real life, although they never married because Tracy was unable to get a divorce from his wife. This was one of a number of films they made together. Watching the movie I did in fact wonder whether the screenplay had been written with younger actors in mind. We learn that Jamie was born in 1917, making her a full decade younger than Hepburn herself. As for Patrick, his heartbreak over his lost love somehow seems more appropriate to a young man of twenty or thirty than to a middle-aged one of forty-five (Tracy's age at the time of filming). Yet both play their roles well enough to overcome this potential difficulty.
The dialogue is at times witty, but I felt that the main problem with the film is that it is too static, dominated by talk rather than action. It can be amusing while you are watching it, but there is not much of any substance. It is better than something like "Quality Street" but it does not really remain in the mind in the way which Hepburn's great romantic comedies like "Bringing up Baby" and "The Philadelphia Story" do. 6/10
The action takes place during World War II. Jamie Rowan is a young widow who decides to help the war effort by allowing Patrick Jamieson, a military research scientist, to set up his laboratory in the basement of her house. (I was surprised to learn that "Jamie" was used in America as a name for girls of Katharine Hepburn's generation; it did not come into use as a feminine name in Britain until much later). Jamie begins to assist Patrick with his scientific work, and the two become friends. There is, however, a psychological obstacle to love developing between them. Patrick has had a negative view of love ever since being treated badly by a former girlfriend. Jamie had a very happy marriage, but was left devastated when her husband died suddenly in a riding accident. As they put it, he has had all the worst of love and she all the best. Nevertheless, the two agree to marry "without love", believing that this will enable them to work together more effectively and that love is not an essential ingredient in a marriage. But, this being a rom-com, their relationship does not remain loveless for very long.
The leading roles are taken by Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn who were of course partners in real life, although they never married because Tracy was unable to get a divorce from his wife. This was one of a number of films they made together. Watching the movie I did in fact wonder whether the screenplay had been written with younger actors in mind. We learn that Jamie was born in 1917, making her a full decade younger than Hepburn herself. As for Patrick, his heartbreak over his lost love somehow seems more appropriate to a young man of twenty or thirty than to a middle-aged one of forty-five (Tracy's age at the time of filming). Yet both play their roles well enough to overcome this potential difficulty.
The dialogue is at times witty, but I felt that the main problem with the film is that it is too static, dominated by talk rather than action. It can be amusing while you are watching it, but there is not much of any substance. It is better than something like "Quality Street" but it does not really remain in the mind in the way which Hepburn's great romantic comedies like "Bringing up Baby" and "The Philadelphia Story" do. 6/10
Not their best pairing, but entertaining
vincentlynch-moonoi25 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
While not the best of the Spencer Tracy/Katherine Hepburn pairings, this is a decent film about a platonic marriage. While predominantly a comedy, there are some marvelous dramatic exchanges between the two (for example, the scene where each describes why they don't want love again).
Keenan Wynn lends levity with his alcoholic playboy role, and he is quite good at it. In fact, he is as likable in this film as I've ever seen him. Interesting also is a supporting role by a young Lucille Ball.
There are times the script is witty and engaging, and other times it really seems to drag a bit. It's worth watching at least once, but it may not find a spot in your DVD collection, while most of the other Tracy/Hepburn films probably will.
Keenan Wynn lends levity with his alcoholic playboy role, and he is quite good at it. In fact, he is as likable in this film as I've ever seen him. Interesting also is a supporting role by a young Lucille Ball.
There are times the script is witty and engaging, and other times it really seems to drag a bit. It's worth watching at least once, but it may not find a spot in your DVD collection, while most of the other Tracy/Hepburn films probably will.
Not a bad movie
richard-178713 March 2017
No, this is not at the level of the better known Tracy-Hepburn movies, like Desk Set or Woman of the Year. But it's pleasant enough viewing for the time it takes.
What I found interesting was that sometimes the two main characters really hurt each other, something we don't see in the later T-H comedies. These are not perfect people, and they are not always careful of each other's feelings.
As several others have noted, Lucille Ball gets good material here and does a fine job of it. Somewhat like Mary Astor in Philadephia Story.
For me, the weakest part is Keenan Wynn's relationship to Edwina. What could she possibly have to attract him, or any man?
So, a pleasant enough pastime, though I will probably have forgotten most of it by tomorrow.
What I found interesting was that sometimes the two main characters really hurt each other, something we don't see in the later T-H comedies. These are not perfect people, and they are not always careful of each other's feelings.
As several others have noted, Lucille Ball gets good material here and does a fine job of it. Somewhat like Mary Astor in Philadephia Story.
For me, the weakest part is Keenan Wynn's relationship to Edwina. What could she possibly have to attract him, or any man?
So, a pleasant enough pastime, though I will probably have forgotten most of it by tomorrow.
Very, very good up until the very disappointing ending
planktonrules13 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The first 95% of this film was excellent. In particular, the dialog was first-rate--especially the very suggestive and smart-alecky lines given to supporting actress, Lucille Ball, though the rest of the cast all had some wonderful zingers scattered throughout the film. And the main idea of the plot--two people who marry out of convenience but come to love each other is marvelous. However, there is one small gripe and one big one about the film. The small one is that Katherine Hepburn's marriage proposal just seems to come out of thin air--with no indication WHY she would do this (other than the fact it was in the script, of course). But the biggest problem was that this film SHOULD have gotten a score of 8, but the ending was such a dud--a major letdown! Suddenly, the smart acting and hip dialog degenerated to a sickly sweet and annoying conclusion. It's a real shame, because with a smoother ending, this might have been among the best of the Tracy-Hepburn films.
A final note--I think it was probably an inside joke and done intentionally, but when Katherine Hepburn is making faces in the mirror at herself, the reflection isn't totally in sync--especially at the very end. Watch the scene carefully and you'll see what I mean.
A final note--I think it was probably an inside joke and done intentionally, but when Katherine Hepburn is making faces in the mirror at herself, the reflection isn't totally in sync--especially at the very end. Watch the scene carefully and you'll see what I mean.
Books never change, but females do.
mark.waltz30 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
He doesn't want love because he's had the best of it, while she doesn't want love because she's had the best of it. In their third pairing together, the team of Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn show why they remain one of the great screen teams of all time. Tracy is a renowned scientist in Washington and unable to find a hotel, crashes at the pad of Keenan Wynn's whom he helps get home while drunk. Wynn is engaged to nasty socialite Patricia Morison who exemplifies everything that Tracy hates about women. But he meets his match in Hepburn, who is as anti-female as Morison is female. Toss in feisty Lucille Ball as a self proclaimed bad girl whom Tracy hits it off with from the start, proving that men and women can be buddies.
This is a pre-women's liberation comedy that takes the battle of the sexes to another level after Tracy and Hepburn's conflicts of "Woman of the Year". All of the archetypes of the female species are there, from the nastiness of Morison's socialite to Ball's good old gal, up to Hepburn's sensible but fun loving earth mother. Even the crotchety housekeeper gets a certain archetype as well. Hepburn was delightfully independent in life, never intruding in on Tracy's real life marital situation but standing by him when he really needed her. In this, their friendship transfers over to their characters who decide to marry simply for partnership and common interests but find that they really can't live without love.
Returning to the world of Philip Barry after both "Holiday" and "The Philadelphia Story", Hepburn joins Tracy who played this role on Broadway. MGM hit gold a third time with a popular team after the box office intake of the Powell/Loy and Rooney/Garland teams. Only their third film together, it was very clear that the third time was just as charming as the other two.
This is a pre-women's liberation comedy that takes the battle of the sexes to another level after Tracy and Hepburn's conflicts of "Woman of the Year". All of the archetypes of the female species are there, from the nastiness of Morison's socialite to Ball's good old gal, up to Hepburn's sensible but fun loving earth mother. Even the crotchety housekeeper gets a certain archetype as well. Hepburn was delightfully independent in life, never intruding in on Tracy's real life marital situation but standing by him when he really needed her. In this, their friendship transfers over to their characters who decide to marry simply for partnership and common interests but find that they really can't live without love.
Returning to the world of Philip Barry after both "Holiday" and "The Philadelphia Story", Hepburn joins Tracy who played this role on Broadway. MGM hit gold a third time with a popular team after the box office intake of the Powell/Loy and Rooney/Garland teams. Only their third film together, it was very clear that the third time was just as charming as the other two.
Similar to but less romantic than The Mirror Has Two Faces
eddax16 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The problem I have with this movie as well as a few other Katharine Hepburn-Spencer Tracy pairings is how she knuckles under his chauvinism. Sure, it was the way it was back in the day but this is the pants- wearing feminist Katharine Hepburn. Her personality is as big as her talent and in such movies, the two just don't mesh. As such, try as I might to look past it, I can't appreciate some of her movies as much as I want to.
Without Love is otherwise a pleasant enough movie with a similar plot to The Mirror Has Two Faces, in which two people marry for convenience and wind up falling for each other (though of course the woman has secretly loved the man all along). But unlike the latter movie, the man doesn't come crawling back once he realizes he's lost the woman he loves. Tracy somewhat ambles back and it's a whole lot less satisfying than Jeff Bridges standing below Barbra Streisand's apartment building yelling how much he loves her.
Lucille Ball's in this movie too but she doesn't get too much screen time, naturally, though at least she gets to wisecrack a bit.
It's a little sad when I realize that Tracy's pet dog was the best thing in this movie. Asta the terrier from The Thin Man was cute too but in that movie he served as a foil to the ace pairing of William Powell and Myrna Loy.
Without Love is otherwise a pleasant enough movie with a similar plot to The Mirror Has Two Faces, in which two people marry for convenience and wind up falling for each other (though of course the woman has secretly loved the man all along). But unlike the latter movie, the man doesn't come crawling back once he realizes he's lost the woman he loves. Tracy somewhat ambles back and it's a whole lot less satisfying than Jeff Bridges standing below Barbra Streisand's apartment building yelling how much he loves her.
Lucille Ball's in this movie too but she doesn't get too much screen time, naturally, though at least she gets to wisecrack a bit.
It's a little sad when I realize that Tracy's pet dog was the best thing in this movie. Asta the terrier from The Thin Man was cute too but in that movie he served as a foil to the ace pairing of William Powell and Myrna Loy.
Could have been so much more
xan-the-crawford-fan14 September 2021
I was pleased by this film, but also disappointed. Tracy and Hepburn were palatable, more so than usual (especially Hepburn- I LIKED her in this flick). Lucille Ball gave quite a good little dramatic performance. Perhaps the weak link in the main cast was Keenan Wynn, but he wasn't //bad//, it was just that the rest of the cast was better.
The film mananges to (mostly) avoid grossly annoying clichés by not having Tracy and Hepburn fall in love too quickly. Of course they eventually do, but that's how the Tracy-Hepburn flicks work- you just count on your fingers for them to end up together and either do or don't pay attention to how they get there.
Liked that Tracy's character was an inventor, and liked how Hepburn helped him with his invention- it was adorable. Did feel that it was a bit odd that Hepburn's character would marry so quickly, but liked the convenience angle the the marriage initially took.
The main flaw in the plot was the undercooked secondary love story between Wynn and Ball. Their story wasn't explained nearly as much- can only guess that if they had expanded on the Ball-Wynn story, the film would have been about three hours, but I would rather have a three-hour-long film where the love stories get equal time versus what I got, which is the Tracy-Hepburn love story having a decent amount of time and the Ball-Wynn one not really being that well developed.
And thus leaving us unable to feel any sympathy towards the love between Ball and Wynn. Lucille Ball shows that she could do drama as well as comedy, although she was better in comedy, but she's not bad at drama, not at all.
Hepburn and Tracy are, as I mentioned above, more easy to watch than usual. She's not grating on my nerves, and is actually acting, and he's not being a smart-a douche who feels that Hepburn's character should "Stay home! Make babies! Man better!" like he was in some of their other films, and she isn't swayed as easily by his "charms" as she is in some of their other flicks.
Yes, there are clichés. Yes, the script stinks. But it's not //that// bad. It's just barely above mediocre, and not even the stars and their good performances can do much about that.
The film mananges to (mostly) avoid grossly annoying clichés by not having Tracy and Hepburn fall in love too quickly. Of course they eventually do, but that's how the Tracy-Hepburn flicks work- you just count on your fingers for them to end up together and either do or don't pay attention to how they get there.
Liked that Tracy's character was an inventor, and liked how Hepburn helped him with his invention- it was adorable. Did feel that it was a bit odd that Hepburn's character would marry so quickly, but liked the convenience angle the the marriage initially took.
The main flaw in the plot was the undercooked secondary love story between Wynn and Ball. Their story wasn't explained nearly as much- can only guess that if they had expanded on the Ball-Wynn story, the film would have been about three hours, but I would rather have a three-hour-long film where the love stories get equal time versus what I got, which is the Tracy-Hepburn love story having a decent amount of time and the Ball-Wynn one not really being that well developed.
And thus leaving us unable to feel any sympathy towards the love between Ball and Wynn. Lucille Ball shows that she could do drama as well as comedy, although she was better in comedy, but she's not bad at drama, not at all.
Hepburn and Tracy are, as I mentioned above, more easy to watch than usual. She's not grating on my nerves, and is actually acting, and he's not being a smart-a douche who feels that Hepburn's character should "Stay home! Make babies! Man better!" like he was in some of their other films, and she isn't swayed as easily by his "charms" as she is in some of their other flicks.
Yes, there are clichés. Yes, the script stinks. But it's not //that// bad. It's just barely above mediocre, and not even the stars and their good performances can do much about that.
Well acted, quirky romantic comedy
jhkp24 February 2016
During WWII there was a housing shortage in Washington, DC, and that's what sets the plot in motion in Without Love. Jamie Rowan (Hepburn), a fairly well-off widow, advertises for a caretaker for her Washington home (she also has a place in the country) and Pat Jamison (Tracy), a scientist working on an aviation invention for the government (but with no skill at taking care of the house) moves in. Both these people have been deeply hurt by love, she by the death of her husband, he by rejection from a woman he loved. They decide on a marriage "without love" because they want companionship without emotional entanglement. Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn play another couple, Carl Esmond is a man attempting to romance Kate; Patricia Morison plays an attractive bitch.
I guess the movie doesn't really reach any heights, but it's a lovely, thoughtful, intelligent, warm and yet surprisingly sharp comedy, with very good acting. The film creates a little world and invites you in. Harold S. Bucquet (who took over Kate's film, Dragon Seed, when Jack Conway fell ill) had been the director of the MGM Dr. Kildare films, which were pretty darn good programmers. He brings a nice quality to this love story.
I guess the movie doesn't really reach any heights, but it's a lovely, thoughtful, intelligent, warm and yet surprisingly sharp comedy, with very good acting. The film creates a little world and invites you in. Harold S. Bucquet (who took over Kate's film, Dragon Seed, when Jack Conway fell ill) had been the director of the MGM Dr. Kildare films, which were pretty darn good programmers. He brings a nice quality to this love story.
Jamie Rowan: Books are more important than pajamas.
bombersflyup31 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Without Love is a reasonable to good comedy/romance, though very light and not too memorable.
A top notch cast, though Spencer Tracy was not up to par with the rest. Dizzy came with, so that helped. The platonic marriage all very dated, Jamie's suddenness doesn't really work and Pat's actions don't make a whole lot of sense, the writing's quite weak. Katharine Hepburn's character Jamie's the heart of the film, but Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn also good in their parts. Could of done without the oxygen mask plot, uninteresting.
A top notch cast, though Spencer Tracy was not up to par with the rest. Dizzy came with, so that helped. The platonic marriage all very dated, Jamie's suddenness doesn't really work and Pat's actions don't make a whole lot of sense, the writing's quite weak. Katharine Hepburn's character Jamie's the heart of the film, but Lucille Ball and Keenan Wynn also good in their parts. Could of done without the oxygen mask plot, uninteresting.
Without Love = Full of love
folsominc230 June 2004
i was able to see this movie for the first time over the weekend & have to say that i immediately fell in love with it.
the tenderness of both characters & understanding of each other's problems showed how in love might grow to being in love so deeply.
the love of the characters was not based on sexual situations or any of the vulgar material that is produced today, although they were deeply attracted to each other, first mentally and then physically.
i truly wish that they would release this film so that i could get a copy of it. it is one of the best, sweetest romances i have seen in a long time.
the tenderness of both characters & understanding of each other's problems showed how in love might grow to being in love so deeply.
the love of the characters was not based on sexual situations or any of the vulgar material that is produced today, although they were deeply attracted to each other, first mentally and then physically.
i truly wish that they would release this film so that i could get a copy of it. it is one of the best, sweetest romances i have seen in a long time.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
