Takes itself way too seriously

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

Good acting and competent directing can't save the most ridiculous plot ever filmed. Not simply implausible, the premise of the third act is jaw-droppingly stupid and utterly unconvincing. Add to this a leading man of 60 playing a thirty year old, complete with a fifteen year old love interest, and you're in for some heavy-duty cringing. I wish I could give this no stars, but probably it does deserve one, since Coleman and Garson act quite well, despite the script. And Marvin Leroy is always a competent director, though the opening scenes are heavy handed and obvious. Miss this one unless you're a super old film buff.Believe me, the Carol Burnet spoof is 100% more entertaining than this flop!

I couldn't care less about the amnesiac man and his fate. Watching him trying to talk and the woman caring so much about a total stranger while soft music was playing over cardboard landscapes was too much for me.I couldn't watch the whole film out of boredom but I read it's* synopsis. I don't believe in selective memory loss and so I consider the plot nonsensical. First he looses* his memory then he gets what was lost before, but than* again he looses* other memories because of a convenient accident so the plot can go on to make a sappy love story.And lead actor is wrong for the part, he is way to* old to be a soldier. It would have been easy to find who he was after the shock. Just look for missing 3 star generals. It usually takes 30 years to be promoted to that rank and this guy looks about 50.And someone tell me why was a beautiful and kind woman like the lead actress conveniently single without any love interest in her past?*Intentional errors in accordance with Internet protocol.

In many ways "the" most outrageous amnesia story ever told yet, ironically (or should I say "iconically?") also one of the most successful. And memorable. True love. Passion. Everything you could ever want. And then, bang, he disappears. Patiently, she tracks him down. And tracks him. And tracks him. And finds him. And discovers that he lost his memory and is now a very successful businessman who, strangely, never married. The big meeting. He does not recognize her at all. (This was considered a 6-hankie movie by the way, and we just used up 4). So, aware he might never actually know who she is, she takes a job by his side. Because something is better than nothing. Many modern reviewers have criticized current TV dramas for "manipulating the viewer shamelessly." I am guilty of this myself. But the pattern, the template, for viewer manipulation was set here, decades ago. Yes, the acting was spectacular. I mean, OMG, Greer Garson! And Ronald ("a far far better thing I do") Coleman! You could watch these two sort laundry and it would still be a good film. But, fact is, the last 30 minutes or so of the film are spent with the audience always on the edge of its chair hoping that ANY MOMENT he will recognize her. And he does, sort of. Critics have said the ending under-performs the film. It does, but, think about it, with that kind of setup, ANY ENDING WOULD UNDERPERFORM. This is one of the must-sees.

I have a tendency to like LeRoy's thirties movie best ("I'm a fugitive from a chain gang" "they won't forget" "Waterloo bridge" ) but "random harvest " is a superb melodrama which does not forget the zeitgeist of the time:mysterious past ,lapses of memory,Freudian sides were present in many Hitchcock,Lang ,Siodmak and Tourneur of the time.Le Roy's is psychoanalytical melodrama (whereas theirs were thrillers) Greer Garson was Le Roy's favourite actress at the time :she had been Edna Gabley who devoted her life to orphans ("Blossoms in the dust") and the same year Wyler's "Mrs Minniver" followed by another Le Roy's work "Madame Curie" (to think that there are French critics who do not like that movie!)So it is surprising to see a cast against type Greer Garson portray a music hall dancer (she manages quite well though).She won't stay in the job for long anyway and the rest of the movie shows Greer Garson in her usual role :an actress who never overplays -which in melodramas can be dreadful- and plays with restraint and sensitivity.The structure of the movie is bizarre ,there are several parts with sometimes a lack of connection between them ;take Garson's reappearance after the greedy family episode .Few scenes in the pure melodrama genre leave the viewer ill at ease like this one.In its own way ,it predates the second part of "Vertigo" .The end of the movie is what we have got to call "catharsis" ,or how the hero finally comes to term with his past .Ronald Coleman may seem a bit too old in the first scenes but as the movie at least spans a decade or more ,it's not a big problem,except may be for the short romance with his distant niece .Melodrama buffs cannot ignore "random harvest" .