SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

slothropgr This movie is like that old breath mint commercial--you get two (clap) two (clap) TWO flicks in one! The first stars Ingrid Bergman in a tale of revenge in the Big Easy, the second Coop in a railroad adventure taking place 2000 miles away. "Trunk" in this case having nothing to do with luggage, but with a railroad's trunk line. So the title has nothing ay-tall to do with the first half of the movie. In fact except for Coop, Bergman and her bizarre servants neither half has anything to do with the other period. While the novel probably tied these two widely disparate stories together, the movie doesn't bother. You know they're going to end up together, the only question (seeing that they have as little in common as their stories) is how. They're Ingrid and Coop, that's how. NOT one of those romances that make you wonder how they'll get along after the marriage. That said, I enjoyed it. Coop plays Coop, 'nuff said. Ingrid's character is unapologetically out for blood and makes almost no attempt at being sympathetic. It's the perfect antidote for those tired of her hapless helpless milquetoasts in "Casablanca" and "Gaslight." She's gorgeous and in your face. Saved both flicks for me. Great train collision at the end, too--real ones, or so they tell me.

bobt145 I'll leave it to one of the ladies to give us judgment on Gary Cooper's charm.For me, this is Ingrid Bergman at her absolute best. Shot just after Casablanca, the screenplay and Sam Wood's common sense choose to focus on Ingrid in every scene but the brief, although well done, train wreck and brawl.She is radiant, sly, coquettish, warm, reactive, piercing, soft, hard. Most of all, she is desirable. A woman for all time, for all women.And she is strong. Melting for a brief second, gathering her resolve and forging ahead with her plans and schemes.The Edna Ferber novel has enough truth to provide a reasonable story line for Ingrid to carry along single handedly. Cooper and Jerry Austin as Cupidon are excellent. Florence Bates gets too little time, too late as a matron with claws.And French, yes, bless them, they allowed Ingrid to speak French, which she did so beautifully.The current 6.2 Yahoo rating is laughable. "Saratoga Trunk" may not be a "Casablanca" or "Notorious" but it is far better than this lowly rating. See for yourself.

MartinHafer The film begins with Ingrid Bergman and her two freaky servants arriving in New Orleans from Paris. Apparently years earlier, her mother was involved in a scandal and Ingrid returned in an effort to irritate kin who would have sooner forgotten she or her mother existed. That's because she reasons if they are shocked enough, they'll pay her off to get rid of her. Then, with this money, she will leave New Orleans and seek out a millionaire somewhere else, as she poses as a Countess. Along the way, Gary Cooper shows up and looks totally out of place as a love interest.It's amazing that this film wasn't the reason that Ingrid Bergman's film career plummeted--her performance and character were THAT bad! Instead of the classy and demure female she usually played in films, she is probably one of the most annoying characters in film. Her fake Contessa was shallow, demanding, unpredictable and stupefyingly dumb. How she was able to vamp ANY man seemed a mystery, as she seemed less vampish than just plain nuts!! I am not exaggerating to say that she behaved, at times, like someone with a combination of a severe mental illness and a personality disorder, and all these together make me think "who in the world would fall in love with this mess?!". Frankly, I couldn't stand watching her histrionics and narcissistic behavior and she looked more like a guest on "The Jerry Springer Show" than a leading lady! Confusing, awful and overacted are words that come to mind when I think about her role.The rest of the cast is, frankly, overwhelmed by Bergman's ranting and hysterics. While Gary Cooper is generally an excellent leading man, he is dominated by her and just looks lost. And, oddly, they cast two total weirdos as her entourage--Flora Robson and Jerry Austin. Ms. Robson is best known for her portrayals of Queen Elizabeth I, but here, for some odd reason, they coated her in makeup and the end result looked much like the love child of a cigar store Indian and Aunt Jemima! Her face was very wooden, she sported odd eyebrows and she dressed like a slave. As for Mr. Austin, he was a dwarf and while this shouldn't be held against him, his role was written like he was a court jester--a very, very thankless role for someone who is "vertically challenged"! Overall, the rotten acting, writing and limp direction make this one of the big stinkers of the age--nearly as pointless and dull as such famous turkeys as PARNELL and SWING YOUR LADY.

CrystalSparkles4 I gave this movie a 10 simply out of my sick obsession with Ingrid Bergman:) lol. I really think she was the best actress to ever grace this earth with her talent and all of her movies are absolutely wonderful (even when they are awful) because SHE is in them. If it hadn't been her and Vivien Leigh (as it had originally been desired I hear) I would have given it a 9.0 Simply because I love Viv but probably not as much as I love Ingrid. And any other actress would have made it maybe a 6. It's a good story, two wild people falling in love in a society where it bad to be bad. Reminds me a little of GWTW except laced with a more highbrow attitude. Gary Cooper is very handsome as usual and of course his voice never changes the entire film, but hey Ingrid makes him seem so amazing and dashing and 20 times hotter than he probably should be.