Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Armand for discover the entire force of film , it is not a bad idea to see it twice. first time for its adorable cast and extraordinary humor. than, for the message. it is more than an old film and it is more than a comedy. it has a splendid charm but the fight between a young widow, the role of media for case, the great corporation against the simple people are more great challenges for 2015 than for 1959. another aspect - Doris Day's acting who could be, after too many easy roles, a surprise. Jack Lemmon is himself and the dose of romanticism is perfect for admire a film who use all its potential. a remarkable comedy. and one of the splendid roles by Doris Day.

Amy Adler Jane (Doris Day) is a widow with two young children, living in Maine. She is a lobster trapper and her kids help her with the business. But one unlucky day, her shipment of lobsters, headed toward restaurants and businesses down the east coast, are not picked up by the scheduled train. Consequently, the lobsters die. Jane fumes, not only because this shipments' loss hurts, but her disappointed customers cancel future shipments, too. Turning to her lawyer friend, George (Jack Lemmon) for help, the two decide to petition the railroad for her losses. However, the head of the train company, Harry (Ernie Kovacs) is one tough nut and he offers her a paltry $750, take it or leave it. Nothing doing! Now, Jane sues. Harry, naturally, fights back, rerouting his train, among other things, to the dismay of the locals. Will Jane and George win the battle? And, since Jane has met a handsome, Manhattan journalist in the course of the resulting publicity, will George finally "wake up" and realize he loves Jane, too? I hate what I am about to write but it is so...this film is far from Day's best work and is NOT the lighthearted movie depicted on the cover. It is much more serious and has very few comedic situations. Also, it is quite contrived, from Day's leading her son's boy scout troop in a rousing (?) song of goody-two-shoes merits to the "we-are-the-last-to-know-we're-in-love" coupling of Jane and George. Lemon, to his credit, gets more out of his role but is still not given much of a chance to show off his comedic talents. On the plus side, the scenery is beautiful and the David/Goliath storyline has some good aspects. Therefore, perhaps, you the viewer should judge for yourself and give the flick a chance. As for me, I was totally let-down, for I thought there was no way that a Day-Lemon pairing could falter. I was wrong.

dougdoepke Entertaining A-budget production, but too plot-heavy to really succeed as a comedy, despite the heavyweight talents of Lemmon, Kovacs, Day, and director Quine. In short, the comedic moments have to compete with too many plot developments in a screenplay more seriously complex than most comedy set-ups. Strong-willed Day is determined not to be bested by railroad tyrant Kovacs in getting her lobster business going. Throw in a romantic triangle and Lemmon's political ambition and you've got a crowded storyline. Nonetheless, all the principals are in fine form—Day's all sunny spunk, Lemmon's a slightly pixilated attorney, while Kovacs does his usual moustache-twirling villain.As entertaining as these characters are, the movie really succeeds as a slice of idealized Americana. Whoever decided to film in an actual New England small town and use the residents for the many crowd scenes deserves a medal. The resulting visuals are a permanent record of small town America at mid-century and wonderfully colorful to look at. There's a bit of Norman Rockwell nostalgia in some of the set-ups that could have come off a Saturday Evening Post cover, especially those around the train station. And what could be more popularly American than the little guy (gal) besting the big guy at his own game. I just wish the script had eliminated the unnecessary and non-comedic Day/Forrest subplot, and instead mixed in more interaction between Kovacs and Lemmon whose chemistry is superb as shown in the under-rated Operation Mad Ball (1957). Nonetheless, there are enough compensations to make this a very watchable 90 minute diversion.

mrsastor This has to be the most underrated and overlooked of the comedies from Doris Day's later career. I'm surprised at the relatively low score it has received here on IMDb, as it's a really fun and entertaining movie (particularly following the unfortunate Tunnel of Love she appeared in the prior year).Rather than the lush, opulent interiors and wardrobe we usually look forward to in a Day comedy, this one is stunning for its exteriors. Filmed in New England in the summer of 1958, the film exudes idyllic small town splendor. Day plays Jane Osgood, a widowed entrepreneur (all "independent" women in 1950's TV or movies are either widows, as in Lucille Ball's later television work, or impossible-to-marry shrews like Joan Crawford in The Best of Everything). Osgood operates a budding lobster business, and when an expensive shipment is ruined by the laxity of the railroad, she takes on railroad magnet Harry Foster Malone in a highly publicized David & Goliath lawsuit. Ernie Kovacs is particularly memorable in his portrayal of Harry Foster Malone, an obvious and amusing allusion to Orson Welles' Charles Foster Kane, which was of course an allusion to William Randolph Hurst. In her legal battle, Osgood enlists the aid of local attorney and old friend George Denham, the man she's "supposed" to be with and just doesn't realize it, played well by a young Jack Lemmon. Throughout the course of the story, the film seems to at regular intervals inject some rather insightful observations on a multitude of thought-provoking topics, including the place and nature of democracy in a capitalist society, the overwhelming power wielded by big business, even the (at the time) ever expanding place of television in our lives and its ability to influence and inform. And all of this in a comedy! The only negative I can think of is the inclusion of perhaps the worst musical number ever put on film. Jane Osgood is the den mother of the local boy-scout troop (naturally) and at the camp out in her back yard she leads them in a sing-a-long of the single most stupid, dreadful and endless song you ever heard in your life. "Be Prepared"…well they warned you! It starts out as amusingly bad, but then seems to last about fifteen or twenty minutes until you think you'd rather take your own life than hear one more note. Any self-respecting boy scout over the age of five would kick you right in the nuts if you asked him to sing this wretched torturous piece of nonsense.This aside (it is unfortunately not that uncommon in films of this era), this film benefits well from a strong, well written script and an excellent cast. It is actually much more intelligent and heart-warming than any of the Doris Day-Rock Hudson pairings, and while it is a very different kind of film, it can hold its own against any of those. Highly recommended, but be prepared to hit the "mute" button when those boy-scouts start singing!