User Reviews

In Connecticut, the former WWII officer Tom Rath (Gregory Peck) and his wife Betsy (Jennifer Jones) are happily married middle class couple with three children. However, they have financial difficulties and Tom commutes every day to Manhattan to work in a charitable organization receiving a low salary.

Tom is tormented by the traumatic experience in war, where he killed seventeen persons including a young German soldier and he occasionally recalls his love affair with the Italian Maria (Marisa Pavan) in 1945.

When Tom inherits his grandmother's house, her former servant claims the real state but using forged document. Meanwhile Tom is hired to work as public relation of a television network and is assigned to write a speech to the owner, Ralph Hopkins (Frederic March). Soon he needs to decide whether he will be a dedicated executive or 9 to 5 fellows. Further, he learns that he has a son with Maria and she is very needy and he needs to choose between telling the truth to Betsy or keep the secret.

"The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit" is a realistic and humanistic drama about choices of an insecure man with a war trauma that frequently haunts him. Tom Rath sometimes is reluctant, thinking in the safety of his family first, but always takes the right decision supported by his beloved wife Betsy. The story has many subplots and one memorable character, Judge Bernstein, performed by Lee J. Cobb. The story is long but never boring. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Homem do Terno Cinzento" ("Man in the Gray Suit")

A man, feeling pressure from his wife for a better lifestyle, takes a new job with increased pay but added stress. To make matters worse, he becomes embroiled in legal actions concerning an inheritance from his grandmother. On top of all this, he learns that some of his actions in Italy during World War 2 have come to haunt him. This is a well told story with many sides to it, and I feel the use of flashback went a long way in making it even better. Well worth seeing.

I was pleased to get a chance to see this movie -- at least half of it -- during a bout of insomnia. The title was a catchphrase for corporate America for many, many years, a kind of symbol for overachieving, aggressive, ambitious businessmen without principles -- in other words, the "suits."

Though I am generally wary of Gregory Peck's (and Jennifer Jones') tendency to niceness, I was impressed by their work here. Their relationship was both substantial and subtle. Jennifer Jones had much much more humanity and integrity than the average housewife portrayed in other films of the 50s and 60s. Peck's character respected her opinions and values.

But I was knocked out by Fredric March. His type A, workaholic executive was touching on many levels. His utter tiredness, alcoholic puffiness, and innate sadness was plastered over with a Willy Loman-like veneer of gung-ho, jolly-good-fellow false heartiness. How familiar that character was and is -- in real life. His ambition, greed and drive had become a habit, and like any junky, he was simply unable to quit. Despite the human losses. I will never forget the scene in his office, when his wife calls him up, and he slowly hangs up the phone.

A very fine film, with many truths about our national character and obsessions....

I was really surprised on this film as it was not at all what I expected. The title suggested to me something about life in corporate America, but that was just a background to what was really going on.

The movie was really about men.

I certainly would not excuse the taking of the opportunity to have an illicit affair during wartime, but I can understand the longing for warmth and affection when you are so far away from home and feel that you life is about to end.

I was really taken with the character's (Gregory Peck) cautious approach to life. I can empathize with him as he puts security and safety for his family about the wife's (Jennifer Jones) wanting someone to make a difference. He was never really comfortable stepping out into a world where he did not know the rules.

I can certainly empathize with him in the decision to be a 9-5 man instead of someone who builds. You don't always know the effect that can have on a family when forced to make that decision.

Peck played an honorable man, who tried to do the right thing for his boss and his family. It was a fascinating movie, and I believe that every man cans see some of himself in Peck's character.

A lot of big stars from the era: Fredric March, Lee J. Cobb, and Keenan Wynn made the movie well worth watching.

Ten years after Gregory Peck and Jennifer Jones lit up the screen with their torrid love-hate relationship in "Duel in the Sun," they were reunited in this engrossing business-domestic drama.

The two were surrounded by a great cast, headed by Fredric March and Lee J. Cobb, to offer a sincere portrait of a junior Madison Avenue exec who must choose between being a "big CEO" or a "second-tier nine-to-fiver".

Director/screenwriter Nunnaly Johnson guided the actors in uniformly well-modulated performances, all deeply felt and cleanly expressed. Keenan Wynn offered a surprisingly subtle and touching performance as well, in a film produced by Darryl F. Zanuck, with a Bernard Herrmann score.

What a treat it is to watch these fine thespians breathe life into most intriguing characters from Sloan Wilson's thoughtful novel.

This film is based upon an original screenplay by Nunnally Johnson, famous for his scintillating screenplays for THE MUDLARK (1950), MY COUSIN RACHEL (1952), and THE THREE FACES OF EVE (1957). The story must have had a great deal of personal importance for him, because he chose to direct it (it was one of 8 films which he directed between 1954 and 1960). However, Johnson was not a great director, he was somewhat uninspired in that department and had few dynamic camera angles or sense of how to heighten drama visually, and in my opinion, he became too close to this story and material, so that he lost perspective to a certain extent. The film made a big hit when it came out, largely because Gregory Peck was the star. But the film addressed a number of pressing social and moral themes in a direct and sometimes brutal manner, which was unusual for the fifties. And some of them are timeless, such as Peck's despairing comment about his wartime exploits as a Captain of a Parachute division: 'I killed seventeen men. Not people in the distance, but men I could look at and see, including a young soldier whom I stabbed to death so that I could take his coat.' By addressing the issue of the traumas of the returned soldiers, haunting them still ten years after the end of the War, this film was very topical, and touched on the very themes which lay at the bottom of all the American film noir of the late forties and the fifties. Another reason for the interest in the film at the time was because of the unusual treatment of Peck being employed in the newly created television industry, a job you went to in Manhattan in a suit which was, often, grey flannel (hence the title). Jennifer Jones plays Peck's wife. Her role is surprisingly small, but most of it consists of her doing hysteria with tormented and streaming eyes, in the way she always did so well. Her husband Daryll Zanuck produced the film. There are good supporting roles for Lee J. Cobb, Keenan Wynn. Arthur O'Connell, Henry Daniell, and Gigi Perreau. (James Mason's daughter Portland Mason appears as Peck's daughter, but has little to do.) The Italian actress Marisa Pavan is excellent during a flashback section of the film as the sweet Italian girl with whom Peck has a love affair in Rome in 1945. She was the twin sister of the actress known as Pier Angeli (their real surname being Pierangeli). They both specialized in being the innocent Italian girl with the big trusting eyes who was capable of a great love, and there are some Italian girls who really look like that and really are like that, though less now than formerly. There is a third sister as well, Patrizia Pierangeli, 15 years younger than the twins, who appeared in eight films between 1972 and 1985. The other major role in the film is played with his usual dignity and thoughtfulness by Frederic March, as the rich head of a broadcasting corporation who hires Peck and whose arid and troubled private life is a major part of the story as well. (The major theme there is his sacrifice of a personal and family life in order to become a business moghul.) This film sprawls both in time and in space. Numerous major plot issues are walked away from at the end of the film and left entirely without any resolution. It is as if Johnson really needed a TV mini-series to get his complex stories told properly, and just had to cut it short. As it is, the film is a mammoth 2 hours and 33 minutes long. I would say that this was a well-meaning and deeply-felt project which partially failed, but its partial success is worthwhile. After all, films with a message are never that common at the best of times, and this was in the fifties era when so many issues were dodged by the social hypocrisies of the time. Congratulations, therefore, to Nunnally Johnson's ghost, for having tried very hard indeed to get serious about matters which were just not faced back then.

The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit is one of my top ten films of all time. Yes, it's that good. You may have to watch it twice to see everything going on in the film. The secret to watching this film is to put yourself back into the same date and time. Remind yourself of what 1950's America was like ten years after the war. How Men that had served in the War were supposed to act, behave and get on with their life. How Women whom had been so important during the war, has then had to go back to being housewives again. All of the above will help 'prepare' you to get the most out of this film. It is true of some films made so long ago that they become dated. Nothing could be further from the truth with this film. The struggle between reality, expectation, duty, honour and honesty all play their part. The chemistry between the characters is nothing short of perfect. Gregory Peck gives (in my opinion) his best performance of any film that I've seen him in. Jennifer Jones portrays the 50's housewife just brilliantly. Fredric March is one of the best character actors ever and he nails this part as well. The cinematography, use of light and colour is also first rate. Gregory Peck's character's use of dialogue is top notch and there are a lot of excellent scenes. As this film was made in 1957, there are a lot of things you have to work out for yourself and which could not be said (due to censorship rules) - but that makes the film all the more intriguing. There actually is not ONE bad actor in this film. Helen Hopkins is outstanding as the fragile wife of a powerful executive. Even the couple's children play their roles very well and right down to the housekeeper/Nanny who will make you laugh. I hope this recommendation helps your decision in viewing this film - as you'll be in for a very special treat. I guarantee you'll still be thinking/talking about it the next day !

The novel by Sloan Wilson, in which this film is based, offered an innovative view of the life in a small "bedroom community" in the Connecticut of the 50s. Nunnally Johnson, the director, and adapter, tried to bring the essence of the book to a film that would make sense of the text. At times, Mr. Johnson succeeds, but the film he gave us is a bit dated when one looks at it today.

Granted, some things never change, but the conflicts that made the basis for this melodrama, have been dealt with, more effectively in other, more distinguished films.

If you haven't seen the film, perhaps you should stop here.

In the center of the story we are presented with the epitome of decency: Gregory Peck. This great man was an excellent actor, his honesty exudes from every pore of his body. As Tom Rath, the former Captain of WWII, he has kept a secret that comes to haunt him at a crucial point of his life. Tom is ambitious, but he will not play the game until the kind president of the corporation has a heart to heart talk with him, recognizing Tom is a rare commodity in the business world.

The film offers a view of the complexity that is the corporation, as we knew it then. Greed had not taken over business yet. But what comes across clearly is the ambition of the people in the game of climbing the ladder of success.

Tom is happily married to Betsy, who shows signs that maybe she'll become either an alcoholic, or a Stepford wife. Her life goes into a tail spin because of the reality she must face in accepting what Tom has kept hidden inside. Betsy is not an endearing character; she doesn't elicit our sympathy until the end of the film, in which she comes to accept her lot in life. Jennifer Jones' interpretation of Betsy is not as effective in this film, perhaps because of the direction given by Mr. Johnson.

The cast if first rate. Fredric March and Lee J. Cobb, two of the best all time actors of the American stage and screen give life to both of the characters they play. Seen in the pivotal role of Maria, Marisa Pavan, the gorgeous Italian actress makes an impression on us. Keenan Wynn, also, has a small, but important part in the film.

View this movie as a curiosity piece, as it has lost some of the appeal it might have caused when it first came out.

This film reaches far beyond its time. In every way, shape and form; from the troubles to the triumphs of the protaganist, to the intensity and sincerity of its ethos, this cinematic work is an under exposed classic. It is my hope that this film be rediscovered and in doing so help those lost in a sea of moral relativity to detect delineation. The story cleary exposes the moral and emotional importance of honesty and its consequences. Additionally, the issue of war-time trauma is touched upon and its long-term impact on personal and professional relationships.

The performances by all are outstanding and will resonate with the viewer dramatically. As a gen x'r, I found this film to be a breath of fresh air. I am not alone. I pray that this story will be recirculated - for its impact is profound.

It is hard to not want to see a film with this good a cast. Gregory Peck, Jennifer Jones, Fredric March and Lee J Cobb are reasons enough to see any film individually, seeing them together in the same film makes one further exciting. The story also sounded very interesting as did the themes. The mostly positive reviews promised a lot too, despite seeing some slightly worrying criticisms at the same time. So 'The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit' was seen in high anticipation.

'The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit' on the most part works very well, even if it did slightly disappoint. There are so many obvious good things, namely the performances, the emotional power and the approach to the themes addressed. Do have to agree however with the flaws that have been cited, mostly because of the overlength and pace. Can see why 'The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit' may not work for everybody, but do find the appeal quite a lot more understandable.

Will start with the good, as there is a lot more of that than bad. The set design is attractive enough without swamping the drama, even if there is a lack of authenticity in some of the past scenes. Bernard Hermann has always been one of my favourite film composers, his score for 'Vertigo' is one of my favourite scores of all time, and it is here haunting and adds to the emotional power (without being overwrought) even if it is not quite a character of its own in the same way some of his other scores. There is good sympathetic direction here, even if it is a bit sluggish in the legal subplot.

Script is intelligently written and thoughtful, as well as written with a lot of sincerity. The story is generally compelling, it was brave for 'The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit' to address such heavy topical themes in the day and deal with it so directly and honestly without being heavy-handed. So much so it does get emotional and at times painful to watch (not in a bad way), furthermore the subject and themes have such relevance and truth today so relating to what was being handled was easy. The war scenes are powerful and they and the aftermath do really well at showing how much damage the war did to so many without trivialising.

The characters also felt like real human beings, especially Peck's and March's. The performances are all round fabulous. Peck did sincere better than a lot of actors at the time and he shows that here in a performance that is towards his best and plays to his strengths. The other standout is March, as the most realistic and most complex character that he gives some poignant humanity too. Cobb breathes so much life to his character while also being reserved. Jones has a problematic character, the only one that was difficult to get behind, but gives it everything emotionally. Ann Harding and Marisa Pavan are touching in their roles.

On the other hand, 'The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit' does go on for much too long and one does feel the length with some sluggish pacing. What would have improved things were that if the war scenes were tightened up in the pace as they do run on for longer than needed and if the legal subplot, which was not very interesting and added next to nothing, was cut as others have said.

Although the sets are nice, the camera work sometimes does feel rather static and could really have afforded to have been opened up more to make it more cinematic. The ending felt anti-climactic.

Summing up on the whole, a lot of great but a few drawbacks making for a solid if flawed film. 7/10

Nunnally Johnson is a good writer - but maybe not such a good director. This film is so dull to look at that it almost dies. The Cinemascope frame makes it look all the duller, and the cheap, fake sets look very, well, cheap and fake!

But the central idea here is fascinating. The film takes a serious look at how difficult it was for men to return to ordinary everyday existences after the horror of the war. Gregory Peck is fine in the lead role, but Jennifer Jones is a little shrill as his wife.

The supporting cast is excellent. Fredric March gives one of his best performances as Peck's troubled boss - and Ann Harding is sensational as his unloved wife. And Henry Daniell as Peck's business rival almost steals the picture.

But the film is way over-long and the ending very trite. Still worth a look.

Gregory Peck and Jennifer Jones who ten years earlier lit up the screen in Duel from the Sun get together again for a film that's as far removed from that classic as George Washington to George Bush.

The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit just doesn't translate well for the screen. A whole lot of plot elements, some in themselves could be film subjects, don't quite mesh together to make a whole film.

Gregory Peck is Mr. Fifties typical suburbanite with the wife, three kids and a mortgage and looking to do better for himself and his family. One of his commuter friends, Gene Lockhart tells him of a job opening at a TV network and he applies for it. The head man, Fredric March likes him enough, but Peck arouses the jealousy of others in the place like Henry Daniell and Arthur O'Connell.

He's also got an inheritance problem when he gets a sprawling estate from his grandmother and then her caretaker, Joseph Sweeney, looks to contest the will. And he's got something dropped on his doorstep from his World War II service as a result of a wartime romance.

Some parts of The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit are nicely done. My favorite moment in it is when Lee J. Cobb playing a judge in an informal hearing in his chambers deals rather nicely with the issues Sweeney raises.

Fredric March as the communications tycoon is drawn from William S. Paley of CBS and does very well. I'm not sure why his family problems get put into the story. He's having problems with his rebellious teenage daughter Gigi Perreau. That could have been a film unto itself.

Even the wartime flashbacks could have been a film plot easily. Keenan Wynn as Captain Peck's sergeant and Marisa Pavan as his wartime inamorata do very well in their roles. I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't inspired by Dwight Eisenhower and Kay Summersby.

Jones and Peck still have a lot of good chemistry left over. I wish they had been given a more coherent story to act in.

I had trouble finding this film in the local video store but finally saw it on television. It's well worth watching. It's a wonderful commentary on the American suburban corporate culture emerging in the years following the second World War. Peck plays the stereotypical businessman living in Connecticut and taking the New Haven Railroad into New York City each day. He is faced with a number of seemingly mundane dilemmas, such as settling a deceased relative's estate, how to deal with a dissatisfied wife more ambitious than he, whether to switch jobs for better pay, and whether he should tell his new boss what he *needs* rather than *wants* to hear. Hanging over him are the ever-present memories of his wartime combat experience, which intrude on him occasionally – especially during those otherwise empty hours spent commuting on the train.

I disagree with the reviewer who found the film boring apart from the war scenes. One of the reasons why this film works so well is that it regularly jolts the viewer, nearly lulled into complacency by the apparent ordinariness of suburban life, with those sudden flashbacks of the horrors of war. The juxtaposition of these quite different scenes was quite deliberate and speaks volumes in itself. How is it possible for someone who has spent four years both killing and avoiding death to settle into a normal life of family and work? Obviously it's not easy.

Furthermore, death continues to haunt the family in various, almost light-hearted ways, particularly by way of the children who were born after the carnage had ended and for whom death is no more real than the gunfights in those television westerns to which they are so conspicuously addicted. A scene near the beginning has one of the girls suffering from chicken pox, a fairly minor malady, as everyone knows. But she tells her father she has "small pox" and her sister keeps teasing her with the morbid suggestion that she is going to die. The father tells her to stop, but she keeps it up. He knows what death is all about; his children do not.

The term "workaholic" had not yet been coined in 1956, but the contrast between the man who chooses a fuller, less driven life – including time for family – and the man married to his career could not have been more starkly portrayed. The viewers find themselves applauding the choice Peck eventually makes and pitying March for not having done so himself.

I am a great fan of the score's composer, Bernard Herrmann, whose music is uniquely capable of evoking a range of strong emotions in the listener. The music here is typically Herrmann, although it is not as central a "character" in this film as are his scores in, say, "Vertigo" and "Psycho." It is impossible to imagine the latter two films without the music, while this film seems less obviously dependent on its score.

Although I quite liked this film, it is overly long and could have been better edited. The several subplots needed to be better integrated into the whole. What, for example, was the purpose of the challenge to Peck's inheritance, other than to show the persistent salvific role Cobb played in his life? This subplot could easily have been cut and the film would have suffered nothing in terms of its overall impact. In fact, it might have been better for being more tightly constructed.

Now I now why everyone had to move to the suburbs in the 1950's. Everyone was looking for Lee J. Cobb, who plays the benificent judge who keeps hauling Gregory Peck's derriere out of the fire. Peck is just your average war hero now slogging through corporate trenches who runs into a problem or two but the suburb-based judge is there to bail him out.

Fredric March is the business tycoon who's sacrificed his family for the company, a TV network, wouldn't you know? Spend a lot of time with your family, March advises Peck. I would but they keep watching TV, our star suggests. Then smash that TV, March declares, undoubtedly echoing the view of movie studios of that period who could see the handwriting on the wall.

But a more telling vision of what was to come is shown when Peck sends the children to bed but lingers to watch the cowboy movie that entranced the kids. Instead of leaving, Peck sits down in front of the set as the scene fades.

As any kind of insight into corporate light, this film moves far too stiffly to be critical but there's a soap opera feel to the goings-on that is somewhat captivating.

This movie from the 1950's goes beyond the conflict in balancing home and work commitments because it also deals with the loss of idealism by young people who become caught up with the need to provide and the competition to succeed. Life seems to have gotten worse in the 60 years since this movie was made. In fact, some people, both men and women, have given up on the idea of family life in favour of success in the business world. One can only guess at the level of social dysfunction from our addictive and artificial work environments. In this movie, a cast of exceptional acting talent provides great entertainment as well as an insight into the shallow lives that many people began to lead in the 1950's. Jennifer Jones signals her dissatisfaction with her husband's work ethic. This at first struck me as a yearning for a lost youth, wanting her husband Gregory Peck to provide for his family while keeping his knight in shining armour image. But Jones is no status seeker; she senses the boring conventional work world that her husband inhabits is not healthy for him or the family. Fredric March, that icon of American integrity, is the company Chairman. On the surface, he pays lip service to family values but struggles with his own estrangement from his wife and a daughter's elopement. Peck learns from March as a mentor but also in his failings as a man. Lee J. Cobb has a supporting role as judge and family friend. Towards the end of the movie, after some setbacks, Peck and Jones take a courageous step together that shows their own integrity and their maturity as a couple. The movie is a another landmark for the World War II generation who came back to civilian life and encountered a new world. It is one worth watching!

The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit (1956)

Such a considered movie. And such great scenes deflated by overambition or by just enough implausibility to undermine the sincerity needed to work. It's not uninteresting. It's not even bad in any way.

First, what works? A stylizing not from Douglas Sirk, with a slightly exaggerated truthfulness to deeply personal affairs. It's a beautiful film, well paced, well seen. It has some wonderful acting. Not only is Gregory Peck his usual steady, if slow, persuasive self, a paradigm of admirable poise, but the surrounding cast is underplayed (mostly) and sharp. The way the acting (and set design--such moderne furniture!) make up that world is convincing even as it is arch. It really makes Mad Men a bit lame in the long view.

But there are flaws. One is a pace that is slow in order to seem measured, or as I say, considered. Everything is quite important even when it is small. We are to feel the misunderstanding between father and daughter, we are to really sense to empty and rather meaningless corporate world that is the main backdrop. And we do. If you get absorbed, all is well. Only the war flashbacks seem false. It's not a war film, I know, but if that's the case, we are at a loss how to look at the war sequences (which are important and long) with any seriousness.

Which brings up a more subtle and pervasive problem: the overall timing of the issues if off. The key crisis within Peck's character is a resolving of his war time experiences, good and bad (mostly bad, I guess, but he had a beautiful love affair and child, too, which can be seen as good). He struggles with this and the issue gets forced into the family of his wife and children. But the war was over ten years earlier. He even says this at one point, that it's so long ago, why are people so concerned? And yet it affects him in the same way fictional characters in late 1940s movies are affected. I think the flashbacks can be real a decade or two later, but the social adjustments seem delayed to me.

Jennifer Jones is quirky in her role here, and I came to see, especially after she blows up at Peck in one scene, that she's quite perfect and brilliant as a 1950s mom and wife. Frederic March is really brilliant as a wise but troubled aging executive (a reminder why he was once such a convincing leading man). And Lee Jay Cobb gets a turn as a lawyer, giving it some life. Everyone is quite good, in fact, except the two servants--the odd older nanny for Peck's kids and the troublemaking old servant threatening a lawsuit. There are a few odd turns that are attempts at humor, and they don't work. The good humor is enough to keep the movie from unrelenting somberness. An interesting transition into the culture of the later 1950s.

A wonderful film about a returning WW II vet having trouble fitting back into society, and feeling like a cog in some giant wheel. He also has to deal with flashbacks, and his indiscretion, which wind up affecting his marriage. A classic film. Should be on all Top 100 lists.

This was the original "Mad Men". The sets are mid-century modern, the entire visual experience is fascinating. The script was well-written and both Peck and March were terrific. I found some of the flashback scenes somewhat long, but they are important to the story. Toward the end Jennifer Jones (Peck's wife) gets overly dramatic, and the background music is way over the top, but typical for movies of this era. In the end, this movie is about the work/life balance and the expectations that come from that. And that is why it is still relevant today.

Gregory Peck's character Tom Rath is dishonest on several levels and his wife Betsey (Jennifer Jones) knows it!

At the films beginning, she says "You've changed!"

Through several flashbacks, we see some Tom Rath's rough war life. And Jennifer Jones pushes him to achieve, and go for the better job, but maybe it's because she KNOWS she doesn't have his whole heart, as she once did. And he's losing his moral backbone too!

Work---Will he be a "yes" man or will he tell his boss the truth? Home---Will he tell his wife the truth about his war past? And how will they deal with the consequences??? Family vs. Work--Will he be a "9 to 5" man? Or will he climb up the corporate ladder with a boss who admires him???

Great supporting role by Frederic March, as his boss... ----- DVD has great commentary by James Monaco, who was in his youth in the 50's, and a man unknown to me but a media and film expert (per the website he gives out at the end). He mixes standard film commentary with relevant "life in the 1950's" details.

One of many films I'd heard of or about but never seen, even though the cast is first rate. Every scene is good, some are great, even the few that Peck isn't in. I'm still not sure what to make of this picture as a whole, though, as it takes some pretty major plot detours that necessarily take time to finally get tied up. So many ideas churn through the script over the course of the first half, only to be subsumed into the general "be yourself, tell the truth" message, it feels as if the script were rewritten halfway through out of fear that the themes of mental health, materialism and broken marriage were either too depressing or too highbrow for a mid-50s audience.

They needn't have worried, because these themes have only gotten more relevant today. And the film is astonishingly evenhanded (even the German soldiers are just guys), and often quite subtle, in the way such themes are presented. I guess you could say that mental health -- principally Tom Rath's -- really IS the main subject of the film.

Gregory Peck, Jennifer Jones and Frederic March are terrific in their roles, all of which require great emotional range and intensity, not easy to do in a movie this long and not often demanded in post-WWII films. Lee J. Cobb's character may be the most enigmatic of all, and he plays it with studied, reserved aplomb. Even Keenan Wynn turns in a serious and even earnest performance.

I'm a sucker for surprises, and this movie is full of them. For one, you never know when a scene is over, because just when one conversation ends and you expect a segue to the next scene, we stay on this character, possibly for quite a bit, as the plot dashes off in a new direction. As the complications pile up, for both the Peck and March characters, a multitude of possibilities open up, and the script sometimes seems intent on exploring every last one. But while stimulating, this technique can lead to a fragmented plot and scenes that seem to go on forever. I have no doubt that a good editor could shave at least 20 minutes with no ill effects and some salutary ones.

With a different (read lesser) cast, this movie might have been unwatchable. But Peck inhabits the Rath character so completely and convincingly that he makes even frankly melodramatic sequences (and there are some) believable. The rest of the cast is almost as good. The war flashback material is extraordinary, if a bit overlong.

What were they thinking of? You see some films and you think "went on a bit long" but nothing with the chutzpah of this film, which overstays its welcome by at least an hour. And the viewer is fishing around a lot to find much of a point to many of the scenes. Yet the vagueness, slowness and pointless detail of this film gives it a certain realism. I have rarely had such a sense of living in the 1950s (actually I did live through the 50s but you know what I mean). I definitely buy the plausibility of returned soldiers having troubling memories of the war, but Gregory Peck for all his agreeable presence doesn't deliver this theme with much conviction, as he is cool, calm and confident. Even less conviction is conveyed by grandma's white elephant house, which is clearly a multi-millionaire's mansion. Despite my concerns about authenticity I sat through the film with good humour, partly because I had no real idea where it was heading. I can't in all honesty award it more than 6 out of 10 though. The script needed slashing, the scenarios needed more genuine drama, and the messages needed more conviction. A piece of cinematic overindulgence which traded on star actors for acceptability, both then and now.

Interesting story, enlightening, a good reflection of vets life after the horror of war. . However, about 45 minutes too long. Agreed, the wife was awfully shrewish. I'd have probably smacked her, and I'm a woman. If Peck's character had chosen to live in his office I don't think I'd have faulted him overmuch.