This film does not deserve the negative criticism it received, apparently even from Miss Temple herself. Perhaps its depiction of amiable teenagers of that era is a Hollywood version. (Unlike today, when teens are shown as cynical, foul-mouthed, pot-smoking, alcoholics.) Shirley is always her delightful self. Dickie Moore is wonderful as a kind, thoughtful young man. It is great to see Shirley again with Guy Kibbee ("Captain January.") The performance from William Gargan, as a loser but well-meaning father, is remarkable. His scene where he invades a birthday party is so embarrassing it is hard to watch. There isn't any singing, but there are entertaining dance scenes. The only problem with the film for me is the predictable, unrealistic conclusion. It would have been better if the writers could have thought of a more creative way to have a happy ending. This is a fun, underrated, very likeable movie.

Poor Irish teen, living with her crusty grandpa and unemployed inventor-father, needs a party frock after a wealthy boy she likes asks her to his birthday bash. Naturally, along with a new dress, she'll need a matching wrap and evening sandals, too! Shirley Temple on the wane: she proves not to be a natural movie talent in her teenage years, nor does she seem to connect with this character or with the other kids in the cast (though one can hardly blame her for steering clear of Peggy Ryan's over-the-top Myrtle!). William Gargan, playing Shirl's father--a purveyor of a new technique which turns weeds into a rubbery substance--manages a nice sense of loving desperation, and Temple does break out her dancing shoes in the party sequence. But these teen-trials are completely unreal. This is the kind of penniless movie family with one foot on the street who still manage to live in a large apartment complete with telephone extension in the daughter's room! The film failed to get Temple's career on the right track, and her manner is blasé and indifferent throughout. ** from ****

It would be hard for me not to like any Shirley Temple movie.

It's too bad most people think of her as the cute little tyke, because, as she grew into an adult, she just got better as an actress, and in fact became a beautiful woman.

She was at the in-between stage in this movie, playing a young teenager, which was appropriate since she was 14.

As usual, she was adorable. Even as a fan, I will admit that sometimes she relied too much on pouty expressions left over from her very young years, but she also had the ability necessary to portray the pertinent emotions.

She liked dancing, as she wrote in her autobiography (which I highly recommend, to everyone),and she got to dance here, and was a lot of fun to watch.

Dickie Moore, of whom also I am a fan, was just not quite right as the rich boy. He didn't come across strongly enough, but his performance still does not detract enough to lessen one's enjoyment.

Roland du Pree, on the other hand, gave a very strong performance, strong enough, in fact, that I am dumbfounded he didn't have a major career.

He was a very good-looking young man, a good dancer, and a scene stealer, but apparently nothing is known about him, since even his birth date is not shown here at IMDb.

Look for a very young Noel Neill and a very young June Lockhart in the party scene.

The adults, by the way, rather varied in watchability, but, again, nothing can detract much from this very nice movie.