Room for One More (1952)

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

This movie is watchable and engaging despite its flaws.its the sort of movie I wish I had seen as a child , I would have liked it a lot more then. The real life Mr. And Mrs. Cary Grant are the parents of three children plus two foster children. Both foster kids come to them as sullen, angry and disturbed , but in a short time, after being loved, mostly by the patient and kind Mother(Betsy Drake) , they transform into nice sitcom kids. Once Mom succeeds with Jane , there isn't much doubt or tension that orphan #2 will end up a conformist Eagle Scout. The good stuff-the child actors are all good. Norman Taurog elicits good performances out of children. We hope he didn't need to threaten to kill the dog, this time, in order to motivate the kids(famous story told many times by Jackie Cooper). The not so good stuff- WB and Max Steiners decision to telegraph every emotion with the heavy score. I know it's a feature of its time, but really do we need another tinkly version of Row your boat,after we heard Grant and the family sing it ad nauseum.Another possible negative-Cary Grant casting, in general..yes his performance is fine, but seeing him with his great tan ,great hair,Cary Grant voice playing a struggling municipal employee,just not real believable in this role. And this is not to say,Grant can't be great playing struggling, real people,just not in this movie..There is a running gag that I did enjoy,that Grant is constantly sexually frustrated,with all of the kiddie interruptions. And there is one eye popping sight gag, that will go over every kids head, I am sure . Mom and Poppy are about to get it on, he has planned a romantic night with a bottle of champagne .They are interrupted again by crises de child. Grant accepts it as the bottle of champagne explodes and foams all over the bed.Probably the best moment in the movie. Some other strange bits-why did orphan #2,jimmy John sport a real New York-ese Brooklyn accent, when no one else did?What about the extended scene of Grant in his white trunks and nothing else.? He looks trim and good for 50's standards,but why is he still clad in the trunks for the next ten minute scene? Over all, worth watching and engaging, but definitely dated and of its time.

Real-life marrieds Cary Grant and Betsy Drake as a loving couple who adopt needy children. Perhaps trying to erase the stigma--the negative curiosity--from adoption and foster families that was highly prevalent in the early-'50s, screenwriters Jack Rose and Melville Shavelson (working from Anna Perrot Rose's book) go a little nutty providing these particular children with a happy ending. Drake is appropriately warm and buttery, but Grant (uncomfortably referred to as "Poppy" Rose, as if he were in his 70s) has the stern look of concentration that unfortunately never slides into bemusement. His "Poppy" is supposed to be wary of his wife's desire to fill the house with kids, but Grant seems a bit anxious at finding an actual character to portray. He's just relying on externals here, and the slightest sneer of discontent shows through. Story transformed into a TV series some ten years later. ** from ****

Heartwarming tale which proves that environment is a great factor than heredity with regard to placement of children.Cary Grant and Betsy Drake are absolutely fabulous as the couple with 3 children and limited finances; despite this, they take in two difficult foster children.With patience and a firm hand, they are able to succeed beyond the expectation of what many would feel.They did a wonderful job raising their own three children as well. The three knew when to help out.The film excellently pointed out the problems of coping with a foster children; one who comes into your home with an array of problems looking for love and understanding.This is definitely a film that will tug at your heart. It is so nostalgic yet it represents the best of human kindness and dignity. You'll have a tear in your eye, but you will certainly come away with that good feeling of accomplishment.Bless those who take in foster children and are able to work with them.

There was a period when studios needed to play the game, the American game. They did it less because it sold tickets, instead the motivation was to protect their monopoly. Once they knew the topics, they simply figured out how to sell them in such a way that put butts in seats.During the war the topics were simple enough. Afterwards, they had to celebrate similar home-oriented values. So here we have this little movie made by Grant and his then wife. The story here is a simple flow: two orphans with serious problems get folded into a perfect family. The crippled boy overcomes adversity, becomes an eagle scout and rides a bicycle. The girl, well she proves herself at a dance and as a babysitter. Its actually pretty depressing, the whole thing, What is it about us that we need to be reassured in such reduced terms?Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.