I love this movie so much

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

An early example of the pantechnicon entry this has dated badly but I accept that had I seen it in a movie theatre closer to the time it was released (32' 33'?) as many writing here seem to have done I may be more sympathetic. I have probably been frightened by other superior examples of the genre, Julien Duvivier's Un Carnet de bal especially, this was only four years after Million but in style and quality it is light years ahead. In the next decade England weighed in with Dead Of Night and two adaptations - Quartet/Trio - of short stories by Willie Maugham (a third, Encore, arrived in 1950), plus Easy Money and Train Of Events. Alas, there isn't much one can say about If I Had A Million but I'm glad I finally got round to seeing it.

This poor excuse for a film is truly dreadful. It doesn't even deserve 1 out 10. It should get a zero because there is nothing in it that merits it being called a movie. I don't know what it is, but it's not a movie.Charles Laughton appears 52 minutes into the film, but his presence adds nothing to the project. It has multiple writers and directors, but it is a waste of talent and expertise. Clearly, filmmaking in the 1930s was primitive because 'Tales of Manhattan' did it better in 1942 which also featured Laughton. Although Edward G. Robinson stole the show in that ensemble piece, Laughton's performance in that film was far superior to this poorly made effort.Not worth the money on DVD and I can see why it has not stood the test of time.

simple story. a lot of characters. a piece of paper as axis of fundamental change in life of few people. and old flavor of classic film. it is part of a large chain of movies. nothing is new at first sigh. but the art to give force to each small story is its great virtue. that is all. nothing complicated but expression of perfect precision.few well-know actors and slices of existences and admirable science of detail. memorable scenes - the cars scenes remains extraordinary-, wise picture of society and the cinnamon of emotions.a film about crisis period in a delicate manner. and, sure, about people. and one of experiments who remains, for many, important dream.

The Charles Laughton section was the first I saw of this film when it was run at The National film Theatre in London in the 60s.It seems there were two versions of this part made. For the US all Laughton does is blow a large raspberry (Bronx Cheer for those in the US). In a version that was, presumably, made for the British audiences he also does a perfect V sign (palm back) which is the equivalent of 'the finger' in the US.Was this because the Americans did not understand the meaning of the V sign or was it to avoid offending their sensibilities. We will probably never know. Either way it a marvellous part of the film.