A film that has qualities, but that has also been overvalued over the decades.
This was certainly one of the most interesting films of 1940, a time when the world was more attentive to the development of the war in Europe than to what was done by the actors. Based on a play that had great success on Broadway, George Cukor offers us an elegant and practical film, with material that allows the actors to show some talent, but which is still too theatrical at several moments, like a recorded play.
Despite being considered a classic at times, I think it is a minor work for everyone: Cukor will always be best remembered for “My Fair Lady”; Cary Grant shined much brighter in “North By Northwest” and “Charade”; Hepburn will always be remembered for “Lion in Winter” and Stewart, one of Hitchcock’s favorites, ensured eternity in “Vertigo” and “Rear Window”. However, it is undeniable that they are great actors and Cukor was one of the great directors of the time, which allows us to guess the importance the studio gave to this production then. The director's work is elegant, clear and well executed; Grant is good at playing the funny cynic and Hepburn follows him without a problem. It's worth seeing these two great actors in the same scene. Stuart, however, seems strange, does not develop properly and the result of his efforts is frankly poor, considering his capabilities.
Where the film makes the most mistakes is in the script, a conventional play with a contained and discreet humor, based on word puns that are lost every time we have to watch subtitled versions in our language (that's my case, as a native speaker of Portuguese), and which never goes beyond the average. The characters wander around the house, talking sarcastically, and the action is slow and predictable. I can't understand how the film won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, nor the Oscar for Best Actor, for Stewart. Especially if we consider that it had a pair of superior films alongside it, namely “Rebecca” and “Grapes of Wrath”. It's bizarre.