Skubishack333 Clicking through an endless guide that contained the typical TV offerings I was drawn to this by the description for such an older movie. I was interested to see what would be the content of such an older film with it's steamy description. To my surprised it was extremely entertaining and lighthearted... or am I just hardened by the times that we live in. Anyway... I enjoyed the situational comedy which in some ways reminded me of an Elvis Presley movie called "Live a Little, Love a Little" in the way that it changes pace but keeps the main characters interesting as they carry out the story. I also enjoyed seeing the way that a playboys life in the early 50's was perceived and I also enjoyed going back in time and seeing the behavior of the characters as they related to the story and it's topics. Had the industry not been so hard with its rating for this film... I think it could have been turned into a wonderful sit-com for TV in the 1950's... but that's just my opinion. Overall it was an enjoyable, light hearted comedy about sex (or lack of) that made me happy that I found it so late at night with all the other offerings that could have detoured my attention. This was only a few years before my days began but I could easily see these kinds of characters living out the story in real life as it was back in those days. The writers did a fantastic job with their use of language especially because had this been remade today most young people probably would be at a tremendous lost for words to make this type of film work as well as it did. There is much to learn about using language properly to tell a story... one that would have worked just as well if it were only on radio. Todays film values are all too visual and sorely lacks verbal entertainment which this film provides in great quantity and quality. I am glad to have found this gem in the rough.

dougdoepke A slightly kooky young woman tantalizes two bachelors with her innocence.Considering several drawbacks, the movie remains rather charming, thanks mainly to Audrey Hepburn look-alike McNamara. Still, the staging is 99-minutes of talk, with maybe two or three sets, only three players, and absolutely no action. Add an obsolete attraction of taboo words like "virgin' and "seduce"-- words now found across the TV dial— and the stage-bound film dates itself. Nonetheless, the three principals play off one another well, along with some fairly sprightly dialog. Then too, director Preminger gets to indulge his penchant for extra-long uninterrupted scenes. I count one scene at about ten minutes without a break. However, catch how adeptly the actors maintain their act during these extended takes. Actually, Preminger occupies an important place in the evolution of mature movies—especially with this film and its challenge to public watchdogs of the time, who apparently came out in force to protest the suggestive dialog. (Also key to the evolution—drug addiction in Man With The Golden Arm {1957} and sexual explicitness in Anatomy of a Murder {1959}, both Preminger projects.)Reading about McNamara's brief life is rather sad. Her performance here as the slightly kooky Patty is eye-catching, in my book, at least. Yet her career appears to have sputtered not long after. Perhaps it was the decade's preference for voluptuous leading ladies, which she definitely was not. Nonetheless, the movie manages some entertaining virtues, aside from remaining an historical curiosity, and can be viewed at either level.

ivan-22 I was a kid when I first saw it, and despite difficulty in following the plot, I knew this was a very likable movie. When I saw it decades later, all my early perceptions were amply confirmed. Of course, the writer deserves most of the plaudit. It's my favorite Maggie McNamara movie. Her death has not even registered on Hollywood's tragedy-recycling radars. Nor have many others. (Kevin Coughlin, Brandon de Wilde, Bobby Driscoll, Scotty Beckett). With disbelief I read that in her last years Maggie had to type for a living. She was a true, dedicated thespian without any vanity, a lady.

Ralph Michael Stein Long before Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks discovered they loved each other atop the Empire State Building, William Holden and Maggie McNamara met on the observation tower of the venerable skyscraper in the film version of the hit Broadway play, "The Moon is Blue." One of the best and most sprightly comedies of the early fifties, Otto Preminger had a fight on his hands when the film went before an aghast Production Code board.The movie makes rather light of a young woman's commitment to chastity, suggests that seduction is an amusing and acceptable pastime for a single male and uses words like "pregnant" and "virgin" offhandedly. The lovely, talkative, self-assured Patty even demands to know the meaning of the charge, by her new boyfriend's barely ex-girlfriend, that she's a "professional virgin." Shocking stuff and approval was denied. Perhaps equally stunning to the Hollywood censors was Preminger's decision to release the film without approval, something he had the clout to do.As it turned out, audiences were able to deal with this explosive material. :) And almost fifty years later, when virtually nothing remains to be said or done on the silver screen, this film retains its charm, humor and attractiveness because a superb trio of actors - William Holden, Maggie McNamara and an irrepressible David Niven, who steals some of the scenes - gives a timeless quality to their sterling performances.The script hews pretty much to the original play with minimal set changes. The dialogue is witty and fast. Preminger knew he had created a gem of a romantic comedy and it's good entertainment today in a world where the values expressed by the characters seem as remote as the social customs of the Neandertals. I hadn't seen the film in decades - I rented it and I'm going to buy a copy. This is a true and timeless classic.By the way, don't skip the trailer that precedes the film. It's very funny.