Nurse Isabel Crane (Jane Fonda) rushes to marry her patient, Korean War veteran George Haverstick (Jim Hutton). She's not happy that he had recently purchased a black hearse and they're driving away from their wedding in it. He quitted his job without telling her. His hands still shake from unknown afflictions. It's Christmas time. They're on their way to their Miami honeymoon but he's stopping in Tennessee to visit his war buddy Ralph Bates (Anthony Franciosa). Meanwhile, Ralph also his own problem within his marriage.

I don't know how this is a comedy. The music cues and the directions keep trying to drive it into the comedic arena. I don't see how this can be a comedy. Non of these people are appealing. There is too much anger for that. Their problems are serious. Their dysfunctions are terribly unfunny unless getting your young son burnt is hilarious to you. Getting yourself burnt can be lots of hilarity but this is not that. This seems to be a lot closer to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf. I would be interested in treating this Tennessee Williams play as a much darker drama.

I am amused that this film based on Tennessee William's work got nominated as a comedy for two different cinema awarding bodies. If this is a comedy, so would Albee's "Who is afraid of Virginia Woolf" be termed a comedy. Can this work be called a black comedy? Even this is doubtful--you could call "MASH" a black comedy but not "Period of Adjustment."

The play made me sit up, not laugh. The play may not be of the same caliber as William's other work like "The Night of Iguana" or "The Streetcar named Desire" but it forces the audience to look inwards. Unfortunately, director George Roy Hill in his first regular film effort as a director does not display the capability that he showed in directing his later films ("Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid," "The Sting," "A Little Romance," etc.). He fumbles with his editing: the shift of scene from the Baitz' to the Haversticks on stage would have been aided by a curtain or the lights going off, but in this film the switch from Fonda/Hutton to Franciosa/Nettleton is too abrupt and confusing. Yet Roy Hill shows his capability of eliciting fine performances from his cast, especially Jane Fonda (as he did later with Redford, Newman and Lord Laurence Olivier), and the dog!

Viewing this film 40 years after it was made, one cannot but appreciate the values of Tennessee Williams (and George Roy Hill) and the subject under discussion. How many contemporary directors would venture to make a film of the play today?

The film is fine entertainment value for those who like a good play on film (you need cinema to show visual shock of viewing the hearse for the first time, the stage can never provide the same effect).