utgard14 What a let-down this film was. I can see why it was such a big flop when it was released. Leo McCarey was a great director and his two films prior to this, Going My Way and Bells of St. Mary's, are bona fide classics. Not to mention his great comedies from the 1930s. So the movie is competently filmed as it should be, but it's still terrible. It has two amazing lead actors (only one of which delivers here). But the story is the pits.The plot is that Gary Cooper plays a family man who never says no to anyone. He will give the shirt off his back and let his family go hungry to help a complete stranger. Right off the bat we have a problem because there is no way possible I can see myself rooting for such a character with obviously skewed priorities. The writing is bad but the acting by Cooper isn't up to snuff either. We've all seen Cooper play down-to-earth good and decent guys before. His performances are usually grounded in a likable persona that makes him relatable. Here, he plays a character who cares more about helping strangers than his own family! His poor wife, wonderfully played by Ann Sheridan, put up with more than any reasonable person would. It was so infuriating watching Cooper's character be such a doormat. The only person he seemed able to say no to was his wife! The film tries to reconcile it all in the end with some of the people Cooper has helped out paying him back. This completely belies the entire fractured point of the film. It's clear the writers didn't even believe in their own premise. The problem with Sam is not that he helps people who don't pay him back. The problem is that he puts the welfare of others over his own loved ones. Whatever happened to "charity begins at home?" Ugh this is such a frustrating film to watch. I couldn't help but wonder at the end about Sheridan's character's future. She will have a life of perpetual debt and unhappiness because of this man and probably die of a stroke at 40. Sam, meanwhile, will become homeless and probably starve to death because every time he's got a crumb of food he'll give it away due to his obvious mental illness.When you get right down to it, this is a depressing movie. The romance is non-existent as there is no chemistry between the leads. This is partly due to Cooper's lackluster effort, I'm sure. Plus it's really hard to root for a couple when you are actually hoping the wife divorces the worthless husband. There is no comedy here, either. There wasn't one funny moment in the whole film. I'll give it a 4 because of the competent production values and because of the star power involved, which I'm sure will help some swallow this pill of a movie.

John T. Ryan IN WHAT MUST be regraded as an in-betweener (that being a story that is half way between being a farce and a sort of serious story), we see Gary Cooper in this curious comedy from Leo McCarey. We can't say that it doesn't have a great deal to offer; yet it never really realizes its full potential.BEING A PRODUCT OF the great Director McCarey, it has a great lineage from which it inherited many of the traits that had been become common ingredients of a feature comedy by that time. "That time", in this case, would be the late 1940's.MANY OF THOSE very traits were developed during those "golden" years of the silent movie era; being the mid to late 1920's. Two of the mainstays of technique were developed in the Hal Roach Studios. These were the slowing down of the comic action to allow for the building of a gag to a climax and effect; instead of rapid fire barrages of punches, kicks, custard pies and pratfalls.THE SECOND PRINCIPAL, which is a sort of methodical outgrowth of this deliberate style, has been named, "Reciprocal Destruction". This sort of extended gag witnesses the back and forth, ever escalating loosing of mayhem and malicious mischief on the property of others; with each side, all the while, never doing anything to prevent the other side from destroying ones own property. Got It? THE MAIN EXPONENT of such comic principles are those silent film shorts starring Laurel & Hardy. Mr. Leo McCarey is said to have been the main architect of these methods.IN THE FILM of which we are speaking, GOOD SAM, we have Mr. McCarey attempting to recapture some of the zaniness from by gone days by using generous portions of these now "old" reliables. Perhaps Leo was seen as having hit the zenith of his career in the Bing Crosby vehicles, GOING MY WAY and THE BELLS OF ST. MARY'S.THE RESULTNIG MOVIE comes out with what we must call mixed results in the final product. McCarey places a very contemporary, though highly idealized American family (Gary Cooper, Anne Sheridan, etc.) into a sort of latter day Laurel & Hardy comedy.AT THE VERY heart of the story is a spoof of what would happen if someone, e.g., the head of a typical, church going, God fearing, Judeo-Chrisyian household takes the Golden Rule to an extreme. It is in this that, we believe, is the crux of the problem.AND, JUST AS a word of caution, please do not confuse this picture with the Jack Lemmon starring comedy vehicle, GOOD NEIGHBOR SAM (); which we feel does a much better job of hitting the old bull's eye! WE HAVE TO believe that, while the feature is somewhat enjoyable, it is doomed to failure from the start. After all, how can you make the loving and good treatment of your neighbors into a fault and expect anything else?

edwagreen This film was a box office flop when it debuted in 1948 and part of the reason was that the chemistry between Ann Sheridan and Gary Cooper was just not there.This picture was the typical holiday feel good movie in the attempt of "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town," (1936) or "Miracle on 34th Street." (1947). The theme of the film is the basic good qualities of people and how you have to take a chance on them. Of course, the Gary Cooper character goes overboard as the do-good person; he sacrifices almost everything for good quality people at the expense of his own family.Ann Sheridan is impressive here going between her laughter at her do-good husband and anger when things don't go their way. The end of the film reminded me somewhat of the classic- "It's A Wonderful Life," (1946) where everyone rallies around our protagonist at a time when things couldn't appear to be bleaker. This film is basically the fulfillment of the American dream by doing good to your neighbor. It fails to reach its height because after a while you get tired of Cooper's constant good deeds and his drunken scene near the end gives us a necessary break from all this and shows the human frailty.

Terry I recently had the opportunity to see this film after about 30 years and I think I enjoyed it more this time! What a wonderful film! This should be on the list of 'must sees' for any Gary Copper fan. The talented Cooper was able to play anything from a western to the wonderful, good hearted Sam. This is a light hearted look at the consequences that can occur when you extend yourself once too often. I never laughed so much at the comical situations that good ol' Sam gets himself into. The dead pan Ann Sheridan was the perfect choice for Sam's wife. She was really an untapped source as an actress, very underrated! If you have the chance to see this delightful film, please do, you won't be sorry!