Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

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

"Woman of the Year" is a 1940's style "battle-of-the-sexes" story where it's both parties who want to be the one who's wearing the pants in this rocky relationship.When it comes to the realm of romance - Spencer Tracy (as sportswriter, Sam Craig) and Katherine Hepburn (as international columnist, Tess Harding) are the "least-likely-to succeed" couple.Matching wits and wisecracks against each other - Tracy and Hepburn verbally duke it out on screen for the obvious enjoyment of the audience.Filmed in b&w - "Woman of the Year" was directed by George Stevens. This would be the first of 8 films that paired Tracy and Hepburn together.

Wartime world war II was the struggle for the free world to keep their freedoms and aide nations whose freedoms were at risk or nations taken over to regain them. The roles of women in society had been changing slowly over the past few decades before that, so career women who dared to step up to what was normally the men's plate began to encourage other women to do the same. For popular columnist Tess Harding (Katharine Hepburn), her independence is all she knows, so so what if she can't make a pot of coffee or fry an egg? But a feud with a sports columnist is fixed with a risky solution: the best way to conquer an enemy is to marry them. Having ridiculed each other on the sly, Hepburn and Sam Craig (Spencer Tracy) begin to see each other socially, and impulsively, they get married. It's soon obvious that he is a traditionalist while she's a feminist, and obviously, neither of them want to change or compromise, and his frustration is quickly expanded. Their arguments become more aggressive after the initial amusement over their differences, and when she goes against her own ethics to try and become the traditional wife she thinks he wants, it has an even greater affect on her morale than it does on his digestion.You cannot compare gender issues of 1942 to post war year gender issues, let alone today's. Why a man would feel forced to change his ways in this era to appease his wife yet loose himself is as unacceptable now as it was then. The only difference now is that both sexes seem to be remaining single longer, while the war era created marriages on the spur of the moment that were regretted once the war was over. But Sam and Tess are career people at home together, who can discuss issues, and there's a lot of that. A ton of it, actually, and often, the intended comedy becomes intrusive drama that makes the two incompatible. Tess makes a fool out if herself in various ways, unable to make coffee or understand baseball, while Sam gets arrogant over her desire to keep her career as is. In a sense, it's very truthful, but it makes it difficult to root for either one without feeling sexist. Tracy and Hepburn are excellent in their first teaming together, and the writing often is brilliant. But you can't go into this with the idea that it's going to be a riotous comedy, because at times, it seems like it's written to create more battles between the sexes rather than try to create any type of understanding, let alone compromise.

Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn are at it again, but this time they are print journalist at the same newspaper. He is Sam Craig, and he has a sports column. He engages in a feud with political activist Tess Harding (Katherine Hepburn) who is outspoken and has an opinion on everything. She can speak in many different tongues because she know everybody except Hitler. Strangely enough, the down-to-earth Craig is attracted to the highly unconventional Tess who behaves like a buoy in stormy seas. She is much sought after for her views and presence. One day Sam Craig proposes to her and he discovers that she lives in a kind of Grant Central Station. People flock into and out of her life and her personal secretary Gerald Howe (Dan Tobin) is constantly consulting with her. Sam realizes that he has an obstacle course to negotiate. Tess may be married but she doesn't see Sam as the most important person in her life. More often than not she is off gallivanting around at conventions, meetings, etc., to have any time to spend with poor Sam. The straw that breaks the camel's back comes in the form of a little boy that Tess adopts without Sam's consent. Tess has an important meeting to attend and insists that Sam accompany her. Sam is in no mood to accompany Tess much less leave the little boy, Chris (George Kezas), home alone to fend for himself. Sam wants to have a child with Tess, but Tess is too busy. Finally, Sam takes little Chris back to the relief agency where Tess found him and used him as publicity stunt. The problem is that Tess isn't behaving like a mature adult. After Sam returns Chris (and Chris is overjoyed to be reunited with his pals), Sam leaves Tess. As it turns out, Tess' estranged parents, Ellen (Fay Bainter) and William (Minor Watson), are having another wedding. Sam is off at a boxing championship and refuses to budge to see Tess' parents. While she is listening to the wedding ceremony, Tess realizes how insensitive that she has been and goes back to Sam. You can guess what happens in this predictable but entertaining romantic comedy set against the backdrop of World War II. Tracy and Hepburn are perfectly suited for one another.

From their first moment on screen together the rapport between Katherine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy couldn't be more obvious, but it's too bad their chemistry wasn't better served by more dynamic direction. The formula romantic comedy plot moves like clockwork, with Hepburn and Tracy very much in character playing a globetrotting political journalist and an old-style sports reporter; the two meet, marry, and only then realize how little (besides love) they have in common. A half-century ago the scenario might have been fresh, but don't be too sure. It was produced in 1942, but under the deliberate (heavy-handed, to be less polite) direction of George Stevens the film looks like it was made a decade earlier. The best reason to see it today is to simply enjoy the ease with which its two stars play off each other.