Sentimentalist rubbish

[deleted]

I agree with the OP. It is a dated, sickeningly cheesy, unrealistic and sappy look at politics, in a world which is in no way similar to the real world. Both James Stewart's character and performance were annoying, and the dialogue was forced and ridiculous. Terrible and unintentionally funny film.

Being a British wanker (unt, you have no business discussing American politics.

What is it with these stupid Brits thinking they're qualified to judge our movies and TV shows when they clearly have no clue about our culture? You don't see Americans going over to forums and Youtube videos and the like bashing YOUR shows and movies because we don't get the point/humor/references in them.

You guys are so freak'n obnoxious.

You're missing the point of Mr. Capra himself. Sure it may be sentimental, but it's not rubbish. Much like American television icon Michael Landon's work, it made you feel good about yourself and America. (Sarcasm) Your parents must not have given you all the love in the world that you needed as a kid. ;-)

I found it actually somewhat more tolerable i.e. less manipulative, schmaltzy and sort of dishonest than, for instance, Mr Deeds or (particularly) It`s a Wonderful Life. It`s more than just a little heavy handed and moralizing, of course, but here Capra`s vision appears to be darker and more realistic - it actually depicts `most` people, senators and otherwise, as either self servingly evil or callous and even Stewart`s "victory" in the end looks indeed like there should be quotation marks around it. Also, Stewart was surprisingly engaging here, investing his righteous everyman schmuck persona with some authentic desperation, confusion and pain, channeling his naive idealism in such a way that one`s almost tempted to buy into it as well. Jean Arthur`s pretty OK, too, but Claude Rains seemed a bit questionable - there are several moments when he`s borderline ashamed of his conduct, but then long scenes follow where he`s pounding away at poor Mr Smith with viscious, steely gusto. And what`s with the president character? He keeps sending Stewart covert smiles of approval at regular intervals and in the end this grinning almost seems to take on overtones of sexual attraction. It`s all very bizarre and hammy to a tee. Overall, it`s a rather decent film, especially by Capra`s lowly standards.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

I agree, saw this only once, and that was it, too soppy, I'm a James Stewart Fan though.

I saw some celerity talk the other day about why The Lone Ranger crashed and burned at the box office and she thought it was because of reviewers and how they like "modern" non-linear storytelling now. I have been thinking about that and about how someone like Capra, who is very similar to Spielberg for sentimentality would get panned by the critics if he was working now. The idea that a movie has to be high brow to be good, that it has to get rid of the schmaltz to work is beyond ridiculous. Sometimes a movie just has to make you feel good, sometimes you don't even know why a movie works, it just does even if it shouldn't. It doesn't have to be a document about how politics works, it can be about characters, like this movie is about.

If people don't like this movie, fine, no skin off my nose, but for people to pretend to be movie lovers and to not at least respect this movie and others like it just shows how truly ignorant they are.

Wag the dog sucked.

Limit of the Willing Suspension of Disbelief: directly proportional to its awesomeness.