Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

mark.waltz Claustrophobic and dull, this film version of a forgotten Broadway play is nearly a disaster for all concerned: leads Doris Day and Richard Widmark have absolutely no chemistry, and director Gene Kelly adds no oomph to an absurd premise. As a married couple trying to have a baby, Widmark and Day are endlessly cheerful, often frantic, and excessively cutsie pie. They decide after failed attempts in her getting pregnant (she does everything but order him to make love to her) to try adoption, and in comes the sultry adoption agent Gia Scala who detests Widmark and his neighbor pal Gig Young from their first meeting, yet shows up nowhere out of the blue to announce that she's attracted to Widmark. I've always been of the belief that just because the written word in on the page as dialog doesn't mean that it's true. The film is presented as light and fluffy, but other than a few incidental lines is completely unfunny. Besides the forgettable title song (which has the same beat as the same year's theme from "The Blob"), there's the headache inducing "Run Away, Skidaddle, Skidoo", which had me cringing from the moment that Day began singing it while dancing with Widmark at an extremely boring cocktail party. For a film to be truly enjoyable, you have to be interested in the characters you're watching, and the only emotion I had from watching them was the desire to reach through a screen and put muzzles on all of them. This film makes the sound of nails on chalkboards preferable. Unlike other bad movies, this isn't even campy, just cringing.

TheLittleSongbird Seeing 'The Tunnel of Love' as part of my Doris Day completest quest, there was a good film somewhere. Having Gene Kelly on board as director, an interesting and at the time under-addressed subject matter and a great cast promised a lot.Unfortunately, 'The Tunnel of Love' was one of those promise more than deliver films. Certainly not a calamity, it just could have been so much more (especially when you have Day, Richard Widmark and Gig Young in the cast and considering that it bases itself around a subject matter that has a lot of interest and there is some truth behind some of the points the film says) and could have done a lot more with its subject. It is one of those mixed feelings/difficult to rate films rather than either extreme of love and hate.Day is typically effervescent and charming, giving her all and attacking what she has with gusto, though there is the sense at times that she knows that the script is weak and the character tends to be strangely written.There are other bright spots in the cast, especially Gig Young, who has the film's best line and brings some fun to a real sleazebag of a character, and Elizabeth Fraser who is lovely and fun to watch. Elizabeth Wilson also makes much of relatively little.Another bright spot is the beautifully sung and pleasant title song. 'The Tunnel of Love' is nicely shot, not bad for such a rushed production. There are times where the script should be praised for its frankness and candour, there are instances where characters say something truthful that not everybody dares to say, there are parts that are amusing. The subject is a difficult and under-addressed one and there are moments where one can totally see where it's coming from.However, despite being the first time Kelly directed without him being in it, it did seem like he was ill-suited to the material and didn't know what to do with it or the cast. While Widmark deserves some credit for expanding his range and doing something different from his usual villain, tough guy and anti-hero roles, he does try too hard in a role that he plays too heavily instead of having the necessary lighter touch and seems out of his depth.He and Day lack chemistry too, and some of the characters are strangely written and don't make much sense. The script has moments but mostly it's weak, it's never hilarious (some of it is repetitive and wears well thin long before the film is over) and it's not particularly sophisticated, some of it is actually uncomfortably sleazy.Story similarly is problematic. Again there are moments but a lot of the pacing is dull, what is really interesting could have been explored with more detail, some of it is very stagy (initially it was based on a play, but not all based-on-play films have this problem, far from it) and many of the plot strands are contrived and take ridiculousness and lack of sense to a whole new level.Overall, watchable with things that do work well but for Doris Day completests 'The Tunnel of Love' is a lesser effort. 5/10 Bethany Cox

MartinHafer It's hard to imagine what anyone was thinking when they made "The Tunnel of Love". After all, the film is supposed to be a comedy but it's rarely even remotely funny. It's also amazingly sleazy...but must have rubbed audiences wrong back in 1958...especially with America's sweetheart, Doris Day, in the lead! According to biographies, Day's husband at the time frankly pushed her into a lot of terrible projects and all he cared about was her money....and after his death she learned he'd pretty much spent her vast fortune. Isolde (Doris Day...Isolde?!) and Augie (Richard Widmark) have been married for a few years but are childless. She wants to adopt a child and he, somewhat reluctantly, agrees. But they seem like an ill- suited couple for adoption, as he seems to have a drinking problem and his best friend is a pig who seems willing to sleep with anyone other than his wife. When the worker from an adoption agency comes to their house to talk with Augie, he's a bit drunk and behaves in a very boorish manner. He spends the interview in his boxers, drinking and making suggestive comments to her. Not surprisingly, she stomps off...as any sane woman would have done that. Oddly, however, she soon comes back and then she goes with Augie out to drink some more. He wakes up in a hotel room later and thinks they slept together. Then, when the agency offers them a child about 9 months later, he thinks maybe it's HIS baby he fathered with this nutty social worker! Hilarity is meant to ensue...but doesn't. And, oddly, by the end, Isolde is apologizing to Augie and all is forgiven.There is nothing funny about this nor is there anything romantic. Adultery is really NOT comedy gold nor is bad parenting...and you honestly wonder how the writing could have been worse! The actors try their best (Widmark tries a bit TOO hard) but it's all a mess of a film...something no one should have agreed to make in the first place.

talliecat41 Maybe I'm a bit protective of my favorite actress, but I have seen one too many movies where Doris Day is intentionally deceived by the man she loves. Usually Miss Day is dooped in light-hearted fun, but I almost felt as victimized as she in "Tunnel of Love." I did not enjoy this movie one bit.