Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Excellent, a Must See

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

The plot to "Half Angel" is insane and impossible to believe. But should that stop you from watching it? Maybe not. After all, some of the best old rom-coms of the classic era of Hollywood had completely ridiculous plots...such as in "Bringing Up Baby" and "My Favorite Wife" as well as "The Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer".Nora (Loretta Young) is an extremely conventional and a bit straight-laced lady. She's going to be married soon, so you'd think she was very happy...and she is on the surface. However, subconsciously she is NOT happy and longs to be wild, carefree and in love. But she is not aware of this and this side of her only starts appearing when she goes to sleep at night. She begins sleepwalking as this other personality and soon completely captivates John (Joseph Cotten). However, John knows little about this mystery woman....she was in his life and then just disappeared! So he frantically looks all over town for her. Eventually, he finds Nora...and she has zero recollection of him. In fact, she even presses charges when she thinks he's taking liberties with her, a stranger! What's next? See this odd film.This movie works because of the actors...period. The plot is ridiculous but Joseph Cotten and Loretta Young were such wonderful professionals that they were able to bring it across and make it fun as well. Overall, fun and enjoyable...and silly.

The plot of the movie was imaginative- Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde in reverse, gender as well as personality (Loretta is almost Mr Hyde while awake and Dr Jekyll in subconscious). Unlike what has been mentioned several times, (even by her screen father), it isn't sleep walking but schizophrenia and hence the plot is believable, including her failure to remember what her subconscious personality did, in detail. But she did remember, and tried to hint on screen, that she had been doing some thing naughty. The movie would have been excellent had a few gaps had been filled up and ironed out. She did knew her childhood sweetheart (John Raymond), but her reason of dislike isn't clear (which could have been clarified just in a few short dialogues, say with her colleague nurses). Quite a few other fillers would have made it into excellent movie. I give it above average in Plot, Loretta and Cotten - roles as well as execution, but that had been highly negated by the execution and also realization of both the doctor- who should have (and as it comes out did) guess but didn't take sufficient measures and more by her father, who obviously knew Raymond (he was the gardener of their family), as well as that the kids shared something sweet. He could have been a more pragmatic person say as the uncle in Katie Did It.

I just saw this movie on one of the cable channels, and it is adorable. Loretta Young is as beautiful as ever, and Joseph Cotton is his usual handsome self! The supporting players are also wonderful and you will recognize each one-The story line is a little silly, but you must take into consideration that the film is from 1951- As a film buff, I am aware that this era was a time for musicals and light comedies, and this film is light- You won't have to figure out plot twists or hidden meanings, the film is straight forward fun-If you are looking for a film that is entertaining and fine for the whole family than try this one-Stay with it,and I am sure you will enjoy it. A fun film!

"This is very odd," says Nora at one point, and she could have been talking about the whole film. The Technicolor is loud and garish, the plot is unconvincing and the characters lack substance in this ill-thought-out 'chick flick'.Nora Gilpin is a nurse who knows, but doesn't like, John Raymond - the handsome (and single) attorney. Nora has a tendency to sleepwalk, and her subconscious self heads straight for John, because although she won't admit it, she is secretly in love with him. A doctor advises John that he should marry her - then her two selves will merge happily.Loretta Young plays Nora. Already a screen veteran at the time (she had been making pictures continually since appearing in Valentino's "The Sheikh"), she is very beautiful and gets to wear some nice New Look outfits. It has to be said that Loretta is no acting genius. It is probably just as well, because the shallow script makes no demands upon her whatsoever. All she has to do is play with a few frocks in front of the mirror, keep her make-up pristine and utter one or two deeply un-witty quips. "I can't believe I'm capable of that moronic talk," she says. It's a shame she didn't say it to the scriptwriter.The part of John Raymond is taken by a miscast Joseph Cotten. If Young was getting a little old for ingenue parts at age 38, Cotten at 46 was stretching the point. The man who, ten years earlier, played Jedediah in "Citizen Kane" so assuredly seems tentative and ill at ease in this bit of froth.Nora shows up at John's place in the middle of the night and flirts with him in his bedroom. This makes no kind of sense, given that this is 1951 and Nora is engaged to somebody else. It simply doesn't ring true.The legal case which occupies the middle segment is just plain dreadful. Nora finds herself subpoena'd to appear as a witness at nine o'clock the next morning, even though no trial could possibly have been arranged so quickly. She is the complainant - so why on earth would she need to be subpoena'd? And who would do it? The papers are drawn up as if this were a civil case and she were the plaintiff, though she has suffered no civil wrong and it is clearly a criminal trial. John Raymond appears as an attorney, even though he is the defendant (this is a major no-no). He concedes the case against him, then the magistrate allows him to cross-examine Nora on a point of no relevance whatsoever. She is cross-examined without having given evidence in chief. Raymond mixes private chat with his questions, volunteers evidence himself and waves exhibits around without formally adducing them. The identification evidence is plain ridiculous, as is the conclusion of the trial.The spurious psychoanalysis is annoying, as is Nora's failure to recognise the fragment from her own petticoat. The back-projection of the roller-coaster is feeble."Half Angel" is half-baked.