Console best movie i've ever seen.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

MartinHafer Despite rather mediocre reviews here on IMDb and in Leonard Maltin's guide, I really liked this movie. Unlike the few other American Revolution films Hollywood has made, this one was both interesting and did an excellent job in conveying WHY the Colonists were rebelling and didn't paint the British as total buffoons or Nazis (like in THE PATRIOT). Plus, the main character's father-in-law is a loyalist, so the real tensions that existed within families was given decent treatment. As an American History teacher, I must point out that despite coming from Hollywood in 1940, the realism in spirit is quite surprising and I could recommend this to kids, as they'd learn a lot.It was odd to see Cary Grant as a bit of a rag-tag outdoorsman, but he carried it off better than I'd expected. Plus, his British accent really wouldn't have been out of place in the Colonies at that time.Another big plus for the film was the relationship between Grant and his sons. Yes, it's a bit manipulative, but I really liked the way the writers dealt with this relationship in the movie. All in all, an excellent film.

spcummings We really found this an interesting movie, since we lived near Williamsburg, and are familiar with Virginia history, especially in the Albermarle County and Wiliamsburg/James River areas. It was interesting to see so much use of the Colonial Williamsburg settings. And the story was a good encapsulation of some early American social and political currents. Unfortunately, the script is weak, the acting uneven, and the moral lessons are not subtle. If you are looking for a sweeping drama, historical epic, or subtle story lines--skip this one. If you want a look through a simplistic lens, then it will be worth your 90 minutes investment.

John White The only reason I watched this film was to see my Grandfather. He is the guy who hands Cary the bottle of booze in the house, then is shown again when Martha Scott comes out of her room and sits at the table. He is standing just to the left of her (screen left). But back to the flick. Cary was too hyper in this film. Everything he did was at 100 miles per hour! And that hair was the worst! Oh well. All of Cary's other movies more than make-up for this one. By the way, my grandfather's name is Dan White (I) (imdb.com)

Calysta Such a thing as outright disastrous Cary Grant exists in the form of the emotionally unstirring catastrophic period piece which engages top talent for all the wrong reasons.The screenplay remains the biggest fault of the movie, due to mindless indulgence of the writer about Virginian high society and love that comes in the most rigid form of unconvincing passion. Frank Llyold's idiotic and alarmingly dated direction doesn't help ailing elements any further. Cary Grant would have been better off fronting his appearance under a different name. He looks ridiculous in a long haired wig, and with an unconvincing accent, seems an embarrassment amongst the most elegant folk in Virginia.After a succession of brilliant Cary Grant projects at Columbia, the dated ill fate and dull proceeding of this movie makes one wonder at the film's very existence.The best movie of *1927*. The pioneers of sound could have made more interesting short work of this as a cinematic experiment. Maybe it would have been more successful.Rating: 4/10