CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

JohnHowardReid Producer: Jerry Wald. Copyright 25 March 1950 by Warner Brothers Pictures, Inc. (sic). New York opening at the Strand: 10 March 1950. U.S. release: 25 March 1950. U.K. release: 31 July 1950. Australian release (shortened to 78 minutes): 8 November 1951. 7,919 feet. 88 minutes.U.K. and Australian release title: TOO DANGEROUS TO LOVE.NOTES: Ladies and Gentlemen opened on Broadway at the Martin Beck on 17 October 1939 and ran 105 performances. Helen Hayes and Philip Merivale starred, whilst Robert Keith, Evelyn Varden and Connie Gilchrist figured in the support cast. Gilbert Miller produced, Charles MacArthur and Lewis Allen directed.The film's semi-documentary opening was cut from the Australian release version and is often omitted by TV broadcasters.COMMENT: Perfect Strangers has a good idea back of it but unfortunately fails to live up to expectations. It commences promisingly in semi-documentary fashion showing the fascinating process by which jurors are selected and all goes interestingly enough (with good use of real locations) until the jury is locked up and we discover that they are not as appealingly well-rounded or cleverly diverse a crowd as we would wish. In fact, to a man (and a woman) they are caricatures - and rather dull caricatures at that. Admittedly the players do their best, but there is a sense of strain and artificiality about their endeavors. Fortunately, Windust keeps the film moving briskly enough (except for the wearisomely long tete-a-tete right at the conclusion) and it is so superbly photographed it is always a pleasure to look at, even when most tiring to listen to. Miss Rogers is good to look at too, even when she wears her hair in an unbecoming upswept style. It's a pity she wasn't given a more personable co-star than Mr Morgan, though aside from his unconvincing speeches at the conclusion, he is adequate. The support players try hard (perhaps too hard) to make an impression, with Margalo Gillmore taking the honors in a line-up that we feel the casting director could have improved if he'd tried a little harder. The film editor too could have improved the movie with just five or ten minutes of judicious trimming. It's a pity that Windust didn't put the same attention into his script and his players as he does into attractive framing and pacey camera movements (still a fluid camera is one way to keep a story moving). In all, certainly disappointing, but by no means a write-off. All the same, odd to see Hecht and MacArthur's name associated with such a bland offering, which completely lacks the sharp, bitingly caustic, frantically witty dialogue, the mordantly observed characters and fast, satiric plot of The Front Page.OTHER VIEWS: A long review in The Monthly Film Bulletin commends the script's presentation of intellectual arguments on both the trial and the social issues of divorce, as well as its realistic depiction of court proceedings. Technically, however, the critic feels the film is a photographed stage play, with Morgan and Rogers dominating the screen.

vincentlynch-moonoi The first third of the film is about the worst movie making I've ever seen. The director managed to create the sappiest stereotypical jurors one could possibly devise. Not believable characters at all.The remainder of the film is a bit better. Half the script is about the murder case being tried, but the other half of the script is about the relationships among the jurors...particularly the relationship that develops between Ginger Rogers and Dennis Morgan. Will he leave his wife for Ginger? Will she let him? The story is weak, but watchable. The sets are unbelievably cheap. But some of the acting is decent. Ginger Rogers has a few very good scenes, but I would have to say that the script held her back. Dennis Morgan could be a pretty decent actor back in the 1940s (see, for example, "In This Our Lives"), but here he is just okay. His career was fading toward television at this point.I've always enjoyed Thelma Ritter, but she always played the same character...but at least she was entertaining. Margalo Gillmore, a character actress you may recognize, has a decent role here as one of the jurors. Perhaps Anthony Ross worked better on the stage, but I wasn't impressed with him here. He seemed to try too hard. Howard Freeman, another character actor you may recognize, has a decent speaking part here. You may like to look for Alan Reed, who looked a bit like Fred Flintstone...and indeed was the original voice of Flintstone; not that this role is a particular good one. Paul Ford has a nothing role as judge; he was much better in later films where he excelled at playing a comic buffoon. Harry Bellaver is comfortable as the bailiff.This is no "12 Angry Men". But, it's watchable, and interesting in that the first third is so bad, and for seeing some of the actors. You're not likely to see many Dennis Morgan films that are later in his career.

DKosty123 This effort is solid even though Ginger Rogers never dances one step. Even though she and Mr Morgan are the stars, this movies focus is more on the jury. You could call it 12 Angry Men light.It breaks all the rules for a jury. Don't talk about the case among yourselves becomes wait until the guards are all out of the room and discuss it endlessly. While the script is not as powerful as the Fonda classic, this one has it's points.It goes into more personal stuff about each person than you'd expect. I feel sorry for the guard in charge of communicating with the outside folks when the jury is sequestered. They ask him to do a lot of things for sure.Still, the busy body type of script makes the movie more interesting. Ginger Rogers does a good job in this one, being clever yet ordinary. The movie does make a lot of hints at what was viewed in 1950 as to how marriages are supposed to be. Divorce gets mentioned a lot too.While a period piece, the film has some character actors who you will know including one from Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea though his role as DA is really small.

Neil Doyle Ginger Rogers didn't have too much luck in her choice of material by the time the late '40s rolled around--except for a reunion with Fred Astaire in 'The Barkleys of Broadway' most of her dramatic films were a disappointment--but 'Perfect Strangers' has a well-written script from a play by Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur. The two stars play jurors who find themselves on a jury panel for a murder trial. Sequestered, they fall in love despite the fact that Dennis Morgan is married, unhappily. The suspense comes from wondering what will happen to their relationship when the trial ends.Ginger had wanted to work with Dennis Morgan since their last teaming in 'Kitty Foyle'. Under Bretaigne Windust's sensitive direction, the two stars give interesting performances. Among the supporting roles, Thelma Ritter delivers her usual competent work. Well worth viewing, but not yet released to video. You'll have to catch it on one of the cable stations.