Lots of commentators here have been referring to Capra. This is enlightening: this comedy, this story of an honest little woman against the riches and corrupt guys who run a corporation, lacks a great director. And Capra sure would have been the best choice to make this movie more than just marginally good.
Look, the storyline is good because it was rehearsed and played so many times on stage and so are the actors since they were already in the play or had a chance to see it. But the mise en scene is lame. So many important if not climactic scenes are shot on the same level as the rest... it's a pity. The movie's breath is that of a dozing director. No rush, no hush, and certainly no plush nor blush.
Bottom line: a very good play with very good actors unfortunately shot at stage level, not movie level.
Personal: in my opinion: Paul Douglas was a bit too old or too common to be a love interest. If I can daydream of Capra helming this one why not attach Jimmy Stewart?
Look, the storyline is good because it was rehearsed and played so many times on stage and so are the actors since they were already in the play or had a chance to see it. But the mise en scene is lame. So many important if not climactic scenes are shot on the same level as the rest... it's a pity. The movie's breath is that of a dozing director. No rush, no hush, and certainly no plush nor blush.
Bottom line: a very good play with very good actors unfortunately shot at stage level, not movie level.
Personal: in my opinion: Paul Douglas was a bit too old or too common to be a love interest. If I can daydream of Capra helming this one why not attach Jimmy Stewart?