Leila Porter comes to dislike her husband James, a glue king who is always eating onions and looking sloppy. But after she divorces him and marries two-timing playboy Schuyler Van Sutphen the now-reformed James looks pretty good.
On New Year's Eve 1946, Sheila Page kills her husband Barney. She wishes that she could relive 1946 and avoid the mistakes that she made throughout the year. Her wish comes true but cheating fate proves more difficult than she anticipated.
On their way to the train station with their wives for a vacation in Atlantic City, Stanley and Oliver get a phone call from a fellow lodge member who tells them a surprise stag party in ... See full summary »
James W. Horne,
One of over 700 Paramount Productions, filmed between 1929 and 1949, which were sold to MCA/Universal in 1958 for television distribution, and have been owned and controlled by Universal ever since. See more »
The year is 1942, and by that time, the movie making has matured, there had been quite outstanding mystery movies (eg Thin Man series), and in addition, the mystery literature of outstanding quality was already there for some time. So this poor attempt on a mystery-comedy-thriller can't be really swallowed without leaving a bit of bitter taste.
The movie per se, if I don't look at the inconsistencies, won't be really that bad, and one can afford to watch it, after putting the brain in some locker. But if the brain functions, one would start asking questions.
Why, Louise, supposed to be not only in love, but even secretly married, would flirt with all and sundry ? In fact whose daughter was Louise? It was mentioned that she wasn't the professor's real daughter, does it mean she was his step-daughter ? In that case she would have been complicit in the crime (which could explain her flirting), but that wasn't brought out. In fact, how could all the victim fail to recognize the murderer ? There can be no circumstances, under which one could say that they have not seen the person, at the scene of the original incident which prompted these crimes, and in their guilty conscience, that would have been permanently etched.
The thriller (attempt at) had been through forced creation of situations. Naturally considering the physique of the murderer and the murdered/ attempted, the strangling, even through a rope, would have been difficult and the poison, could have been sourced through Louise, I don't see how else.. The murderer wasn't a chemist, nor probably the other one, on which the fingers were pointed, probably was. Louise wasn't only a senior chemistry student, but had a free access to the lab.
Even in the end, just to put the audience on edge, the phone wasn't picked up. With the murders taking place, one after other, won't one ?
These are only some of the glaring inconsistencies. If I start listing all, it would take up all the space.
On the positive side, there are quite a few catchy songs, and the comedy sequences, some of them, are believable situational, and thankfully, without loud acting by either Eddie or June.
0 of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this