alfvillanueva There is a lot of talent involved in this movie. They all perform as expected. the problem lies with the script, which was corny, dull and repetitive for the forties, and would have been also in the 30s, even in the 20s!! When released,it flopped, and no wonder.Ann Sheridan always said the reason was the lack of chemistry between her and Gary Cooper, but the real reason for me, a great fan of both of them is the script. It is monotonous and seems to go on forever.... The production values are all first rate: cast, sets and direction are first class A pity those responsible did not see what the result would be, in time. A pity for all concerned, including us, the audience .

utgard14 What a let-down this film was. I can see why it was such a big flop when it was released. Leo McCarey was a great director and his two films prior to this, Going My Way and Bells of St. Mary's, are bona fide classics. Not to mention his great comedies from the 1930s. So the movie is competently filmed as it should be, but it's still terrible. It has two amazing lead actors (only one of which delivers here). But the story is the pits.The plot is that Gary Cooper plays a family man who never says no to anyone. He will give the shirt off his back and let his family go hungry to help a complete stranger. Right off the bat we have a problem because there is no way possible I can see myself rooting for such a character with obviously skewed priorities. The writing is bad but the acting by Cooper isn't up to snuff either. We've all seen Cooper play down-to-earth good and decent guys before. His performances are usually grounded in a likable persona that makes him relatable. Here, he plays a character who cares more about helping strangers than his own family! His poor wife, wonderfully played by Ann Sheridan, put up with more than any reasonable person would. It was so infuriating watching Cooper's character be such a doormat. The only person he seemed able to say no to was his wife! The film tries to reconcile it all in the end with some of the people Cooper has helped out paying him back. This completely belies the entire fractured point of the film. It's clear the writers didn't even believe in their own premise. The problem with Sam is not that he helps people who don't pay him back. The problem is that he puts the welfare of others over his own loved ones. Whatever happened to "charity begins at home?" Ugh this is such a frustrating film to watch. I couldn't help but wonder at the end about Sheridan's character's future. She will have a life of perpetual debt and unhappiness because of this man and probably die of a stroke at 40. Sam, meanwhile, will become homeless and probably starve to death because every time he's got a crumb of food he'll give it away due to his obvious mental illness.When you get right down to it, this is a depressing movie. The romance is non-existent as there is no chemistry between the leads. This is partly due to Cooper's lackluster effort, I'm sure. Plus it's really hard to root for a couple when you are actually hoping the wife divorces the worthless husband. There is no comedy here, either. There wasn't one funny moment in the whole film. I'll give it a 4 because of the competent production values and because of the star power involved, which I'm sure will help some swallow this pill of a movie.

Terry I recently had the opportunity to see this film after about 30 years and I think I enjoyed it more this time! What a wonderful film! This should be on the list of 'must sees' for any Gary Copper fan. The talented Cooper was able to play anything from a western to the wonderful, good hearted Sam. This is a light hearted look at the consequences that can occur when you extend yourself once too often. I never laughed so much at the comical situations that good ol' Sam gets himself into. The dead pan Ann Sheridan was the perfect choice for Sam's wife. She was really an untapped source as an actress, very underrated! If you have the chance to see this delightful film, please do, you won't be sorry!

Varlaam Leslie Halliwell didn't like this film either. He called it Capraesque, and it seems quite obvious that that is the effect the filmmakers were going for.Frank Capra certainly had a special touch. It wasn't always infallible, mind you, but he could do wonders with some pretty soppy material. Maybe it's good to have an example of what happens when you go Capraesque without Capra.Gary Cooper is a Good Samaritan so generous that he consistently gets himself into dire straits. The idea isn't bad, but the execution... Cooper's character goes way past selflessness and on into suckerdom. (Suckerhood?) He's so virtuous, he's neither believable nor sympathetic. I've seen this film twice in the past couple of decades, and both times the impulse to reach out and throttle him was difficult to suppress. He's infuriating to watch. An actual person like this would be a menace to his family and friends. He simply begs to be walked all over.Ann Sheridan is Coop's wife. What a waste. The following year, 1949, she was paid back in spades for her generosity in suffering through this one by co-starring in the uproarious "I Was a Male War Bride" with Cary Grant. Capra fans will recognize Todd Karns immediately. He played Harry Bailey, Jimmy Stewart's younger brother, in "It's a Wonderful Life" (1946). It's because of films like that one that you can find a word like "Capraesque" in the dictionary.