Susan Lane is a gifted psychiatrist, grounded in self-control. Before returning by train to her practice in Chicago, she spends time back East with war veterans, building their self-esteem,... See full summary »
Susan Lane is a gifted psychiatrist, grounded in self-control. Before returning by train to her practice in Chicago, she spends time back East with war veterans, building their self-esteem, but frowning on the impulsive, as represented by a favorite comic strip called "The Nixie." She bumps into Michael Kent, an officer and the comic strip's author. He likes her instantly and she dislikes him. He's headed to the Pacific, sees her on the train, gets off in Chicago, and with her father's help, pursues her and hatches a plan to marry her. Meanwhile, she has her own plan to get rid of him with the help of a blond patient. Will the Nixie get into her psyche? Written by
This is an exceptional comedy in that each person of the cast of nearly two dozen adds something to the humor. Thus, the supporting cast does even more to help the main stars deliver a great hilarious movie. Yet, the few reviews to the time of this writing seemed to miss much of the humor because it was dated, out of tune with the present times, or not politically correct. Too bad for them.
Why do some people think comedy has to be written, lived and acted only in the present milieu? That would make everything from the past as terrible as most of what passes as humor in recent years. Why would some people put today's restrictions on a film to strangle and stifle the genuine humor that it contained when made? A reviewer will refer to films made before "the code," as though that was a hindrance in itself to films. Then that same reviewer will try to impose a modern "code" that would restrict a film even more. Instead, should we not look for the humor as it was expressed and felt in those times past?
Who says the one or two headline stars of a film have to stand out with the best lines all the time? Who says a supporting cast can't steal the scene with occasional bursts of comedic brilliance? Who says that scripts and writers can't spread the humor around as appropriate and for the best laughs? Who says that the customs and mores of a time past can't be funny in the present -- or understood and appreciated as they were originally? Who says that the social customs that guided filmmaking in the past can't still be sources of hilarity and laughter today?
Maybe it's a sign of the times that so many people today can't laugh at themselves and the world around them. Perhaps we need to look more closely at the past when in seriously tough and dour times people were able to laugh at their foibles and those of others. And the movie makers were able to give them great fodder for laughter, as in this film, "She Wouldn't Say Yes." I laughed long and hard in several spots in this film. If you didn't on first viewing, watch it again. Turn off the critic and just watch the people and listen to the exchanges.
Look for the funny in a deadpan expression. Look for the hilarity in a seemingly flat response. Look for the humor in all the usual places as well. And look and watch for the laughter that lay hidden and ready to pounce from so many sharp turns or quick changes in scene of a fast and screwy script. This movie is a great howl throughout.
5 of 6 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?