Alicia
I love this movie so much
Konterr
Brilliant and touching
Gary
The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.
JohnHowardReid
Producer: Jerry Wald. Copyright 25 March 1950 by Warner Brothers Pictures, Inc. (sic). New York opening at the Strand: 10 March 1950. U.S. release: 25 March 1950. U.K. release: 31 July 1950. Australian release (shortened to 78 minutes): 8 November 1951. 7,919 feet. 88 minutes.U.K. and Australian release title: TOO DANGEROUS TO LOVE.NOTES: Ladies and Gentlemen opened on Broadway at the Martin Beck on 17 October 1939 and ran 105 performances. Helen Hayes and Philip Merivale starred, whilst Robert Keith, Evelyn Varden and Connie Gilchrist figured in the support cast. Gilbert Miller produced, Charles MacArthur and Lewis Allen directed.The film's semi-documentary opening was cut from the Australian release version and is often omitted by TV broadcasters.COMMENT: Perfect Strangers has a good idea back of it but unfortunately fails to live up to expectations. It commences promisingly in semi-documentary fashion showing the fascinating process by which jurors are selected and all goes interestingly enough (with good use of real locations) until the jury is locked up and we discover that they are not as appealingly well-rounded or cleverly diverse a crowd as we would wish. In fact, to a man (and a woman) they are caricatures - and rather dull caricatures at that. Admittedly the players do their best, but there is a sense of strain and artificiality about their endeavors. Fortunately, Windust keeps the film moving briskly enough (except for the wearisomely long tete-a-tete right at the conclusion) and it is so superbly photographed it is always a pleasure to look at, even when most tiring to listen to. Miss Rogers is good to look at too, even when she wears her hair in an unbecoming upswept style. It's a pity she wasn't given a more personable co-star than Mr Morgan, though aside from his unconvincing speeches at the conclusion, he is adequate. The support players try hard (perhaps too hard) to make an impression, with Margalo Gillmore taking the honors in a line-up that we feel the casting director could have improved if he'd tried a little harder. The film editor too could have improved the movie with just five or ten minutes of judicious trimming. It's a pity that Windust didn't put the same attention into his script and his players as he does into attractive framing and pacey camera movements (still a fluid camera is one way to keep a story moving). In all, certainly disappointing, but by no means a write-off. All the same, odd to see Hecht and MacArthur's name associated with such a bland offering, which completely lacks the sharp, bitingly caustic, frantically witty dialogue, the mordantly observed characters and fast, satiric plot of The Front Page.OTHER VIEWS: A long review in The Monthly Film Bulletin commends the script's presentation of intellectual arguments on both the trial and the social issues of divorce, as well as its realistic depiction of court proceedings. Technically, however, the critic feels the film is a photographed stage play, with Morgan and Rogers dominating the screen.
vincentlynch-moonoi
The first third of the film is about the worst movie making I've ever seen. The director managed to create the sappiest stereotypical jurors one could possibly devise. Not believable characters at all.The remainder of the film is a bit better. Half the script is about the murder case being tried, but the other half of the script is about the relationships among the jurors...particularly the relationship that develops between Ginger Rogers and Dennis Morgan. Will he leave his wife for Ginger? Will she let him? The story is weak, but watchable. The sets are unbelievably cheap. But some of the acting is decent. Ginger Rogers has a few very good scenes, but I would have to say that the script held her back. Dennis Morgan could be a pretty decent actor back in the 1940s (see, for example, "In This Our Lives"), but here he is just okay. His career was fading toward television at this point.I've always enjoyed Thelma Ritter, but she always played the same character...but at least she was entertaining. Margalo Gillmore, a character actress you may recognize, has a decent role here as one of the jurors. Perhaps Anthony Ross worked better on the stage, but I wasn't impressed with him here. He seemed to try too hard. Howard Freeman, another character actor you may recognize, has a decent speaking part here. You may like to look for Alan Reed, who looked a bit like Fred Flintstone...and indeed was the original voice of Flintstone; not that this role is a particular good one. Paul Ford has a nothing role as judge; he was much better in later films where he excelled at playing a comic buffoon. Harry Bellaver is comfortable as the bailiff.This is no "12 Angry Men". But, it's watchable, and interesting in that the first third is so bad, and for seeing some of the actors. You're not likely to see many Dennis Morgan films that are later in his career.
LeonLouisRicci
A not very interesting Movie that attempts to give some clue as to the behind the scenes interactions among a Sequestered Jury. Like a Civics Lesson this is as dry as a Depositiion and only of interest to Ginger Roger's completest. The Murder Trial is hardly on Screen limiting the depth needed to give some urgency to the Jurors Private Arguments as they contemplate a Verdict. The typical Romance that blossoms and the Pitter-Patter and Petty Conflicts among The Twelve have about as much appeal as a Boxed Lunch.This could not be called Awful because it isn't, but it barely maintains interest and is a rather Lame Movie that is an Unremarkable Misfire that never comes to Life and remains in a Coma for most of the Running Time, its Duty unfulfilled.
edwagreen
Interesting film, but I must say that you really begin to wonder about the jury system when you have jurors serving who really don't understand the legal procedures and use feminine and male instincts to decide the fate of a person accused of murder.10 years after Dennis Morgan teamed with Ginger Rogers in her Oscar winning performance in "Kitty Foyle," the two were again in this film. Wisecracking Thelma Ritter is interesting as the common lady on the jury, but her ignorance becomes a little too annoying.The case takes a back seat to the relationship that develops between a divorced Rogers and a married Morgan.The film has an appropriate ending after the jury reaches a verdict. The film is interesting in the sense that the Rogers-Morgan love affair is used in a way to parallel the man accused of murder.
