mark.waltz Claustrophobic and dull, this film version of a forgotten Broadway play is nearly a disaster for all concerned: leads Doris Day and Richard Widmark have absolutely no chemistry, and director Gene Kelly adds no oomph to an absurd premise. As a married couple trying to have a baby, Widmark and Day are endlessly cheerful, often frantic, and excessively cutsie pie. They decide after failed attempts in her getting pregnant (she does everything but order him to make love to her) to try adoption, and in comes the sultry adoption agent Gia Scala who detests Widmark and his neighbor pal Gig Young from their first meeting, yet shows up nowhere out of the blue to announce that she's attracted to Widmark. I've always been of the belief that just because the written word in on the page as dialog doesn't mean that it's true. The film is presented as light and fluffy, but other than a few incidental lines is completely unfunny. Besides the forgettable title song (which has the same beat as the same year's theme from "The Blob"), there's the headache inducing "Run Away, Skidaddle, Skidoo", which had me cringing from the moment that Day began singing it while dancing with Widmark at an extremely boring cocktail party. For a film to be truly enjoyable, you have to be interested in the characters you're watching, and the only emotion I had from watching them was the desire to reach through a screen and put muzzles on all of them. This film makes the sound of nails on chalkboards preferable. Unlike other bad movies, this isn't even campy, just cringing.

vincentlynch-moonoi For me there's only one real reason to watch this film: a chance to see Richard Widmark in a romantic comedy. I can't say he seems totally comfortable in the role, but it works, and it is nice to see him in this.The plot is fairly simple: A couple (Doris Day and Widmark) want to adopt a baby, and Widmark finds himself having a sort of affair with the investigator for the adoption agency. Of course, there are plenty of misunderstandings...sort of stock and trade for most Doris Day romantic comedies.Day is Day. Nothing new or different from her; the usually effervescence. Gia Scala plays the voluptuous investigator. Elisabeth Fraser plays the wife of Gig Young...the next door neighbors. And speaking of Gig Young, if you don't know the story of his death, read about it on Wikipedia, and then consider how shallow most of his screen appearances were in this era. Each film role seemed a mere carbon copy of the last one. And his major talent seemed to be pouring a drink. Too bad; he really was quite a good actor.So, what's wrong with the film? Nothing much except that it's sort of...well, I was going to say dumb, but that would be wrong/ Stereotypical might be a better word.I've often wondered what Richard Widmark was like in real life.While I'm not particularly impressed with this film, it's "okay" as such films go. A weak "7".

SimonJack One of Webster's definitions of humor describes it as being ludicrous or absurdly incongruous. So, people who decry this movie as such might themselves be without a sense of humor. As for claims of miscasting of Richard Widmark, I think that shows how we become so set in our views that we stereotype actors. I don't ever recall having seen this film in the theater when I was in high school, or on TV in later years. It is part of the Doris Day DVD collection I recently bought. And these 50 plus years later, I found this to be a very entertaining and well-acted movie. The script is a very good general portrayal of the times and how people felt about children, family, fidelity, etc. Gig Young's part might be a rare exception in real life, but his straying character is important for the movie where Widmark's character plays off of him. I think Widmark was exceptionally good in his role. Like most other reviewers, I probably had a notion of Widmark as a gangster, tough guy or bad guy, with an occasional Army or Navy hero thrown in. But here he gives a great performance – out of his usual character – of any man, and how he might have felt and thought and behaved like in such a situation in the 1950s. I think the consternation, anxiety and angst that Widmark shows at different times makes him so real. The stereotypical actors we might normally think of for this role would not have given it that real human touch. Theirs would have been the light treatment where everyone has a good laugh in the film. This was a masterful job, in my view, of humor with pathos. Only a very good actor could pull that off, and I think Widmark did it very well. To be fair with moviegoers, I must say that I think I probably would not have enjoyed this film as much when it was made. Again, mostly because of my idea of what Widmark should play. We also had different ideas back then of Doris Day and the roles she should play. And that's probably why this movie didn't do well at the box office. But today, I'm glad I can enjoy this film as a very good example of acting by the entire cast in a rather sophisticated comedy. The comedy comes mostly from innuendo and misunderstandings among the characters. As for the plot – I like to remember that Hollywood puts out fiction even with its most adept efforts for accuracy in biographical and historical films. But for comedy, some of the very best films of all time have been those with the most unlikely plots. About the only thing in this movie that doesn't make sense is its title with accompanying song. But then, that's in the congruity of Hollywood humor. Or did I miss something in that too?

moonspinner55 Painful farce, adapted from Peter De Vries' novel which then became the kind of play dinner-theaters specialized in. It features Richard Widmark in a humiliating 'comedic' role as a man whose wife can't get pregnant, leading him into a drunken excursion with a sexy adoption agent, whom he later believes he has knocked up. Widmark is not suited to this material, which should be played nimbly and without force. Director Gene Kelly, of all people, is likewise not suited to guide an intense actor like Widmark through the rigors of light comedy (which can be more precarious than a gangster drama). Doris Day is the put-upon wife, and I felt for her. Even with a feeble script and dim handling, Day manages a ray of sunshine or two. Gig Young, in the patented Gig Young/friendly neighbor role, helps out a little bit, but "The Tunnel Of Love" is a frigid affair. *1/2 from ****