I like to think of this film as Cary Grant forgetting the Cary Grant he was turning himself into...and just acting. Beginning with "Topper", he was developing the Cary Grant persona, and it showed up in 8 films before this one. But here, he doesn't play himself at all. He plays the character Matt Howard.
I'm surprised when I see what a low rating this film gets by IMDb reviewers. I think the reason, perhaps, is that if you are expecting the suave and sophisticated Cary Grant, well, you're going to be disappointed. Instead, Grant portrays a rather "backwoods" oaf, who does mature as time passes.
My main gripe about the film is that it takes place in Virginia (where I lived for over two decades), but many of the exterior shots were clearly photographed in the American west (where I now live) -- Santa Cruz, to be specific. Sort of like in the movie I watched last week that included all those mountains...in Florida. A minor point, perhaps, but nevertheless annoying as heck.
On the other hand, a number of segments were filmed in Williamsburg, not long after it had been restored. Bravo for the film company!
This is a powerful film, and overall it does a pretty good job of telling its story within accurate history of the American Revolution.
Grant does somewhat overplay his role...but I assume that to be the fault of the director, Frank Lloyd. On the other hand, Martha Scott is magnificent as the wife. It was not until this evening that I realized she also played the mother in "Ben-Hur", a performance I have always admired. Sir Cedric Hardwicke is also excellent as the embittered pro-British father of Martha Scott. Other roles are also played well, though none of the supporting actors stands out, except for Richard Carlson, who does a nice turn as Thomas Jefferson.
I, too, prefer the suave sophisticated Cary Grant, so this film will not make it to my DVD shelf. But, I've watched it several times on TCM, and probably will again. It's that good.
I'm surprised when I see what a low rating this film gets by IMDb reviewers. I think the reason, perhaps, is that if you are expecting the suave and sophisticated Cary Grant, well, you're going to be disappointed. Instead, Grant portrays a rather "backwoods" oaf, who does mature as time passes.
My main gripe about the film is that it takes place in Virginia (where I lived for over two decades), but many of the exterior shots were clearly photographed in the American west (where I now live) -- Santa Cruz, to be specific. Sort of like in the movie I watched last week that included all those mountains...in Florida. A minor point, perhaps, but nevertheless annoying as heck.
On the other hand, a number of segments were filmed in Williamsburg, not long after it had been restored. Bravo for the film company!
This is a powerful film, and overall it does a pretty good job of telling its story within accurate history of the American Revolution.
Grant does somewhat overplay his role...but I assume that to be the fault of the director, Frank Lloyd. On the other hand, Martha Scott is magnificent as the wife. It was not until this evening that I realized she also played the mother in "Ben-Hur", a performance I have always admired. Sir Cedric Hardwicke is also excellent as the embittered pro-British father of Martha Scott. Other roles are also played well, though none of the supporting actors stands out, except for Richard Carlson, who does a nice turn as Thomas Jefferson.
I, too, prefer the suave sophisticated Cary Grant, so this film will not make it to my DVD shelf. But, I've watched it several times on TCM, and probably will again. It's that good.