I can't remember the last time I saw such a wonderful, talented cast in such a forgettable movie. Take a look at that cast: Red Skelton, Howard Keel, Marge and Gower Champion, Ann Miller, even Zsa Zsa Gabor (and yes, I'm leaving out Grayson intentionally; she was not that talented). But the script is God-awful, and nothing works. What was the point of redoing a very exceptional previous movie, the 1930s Roberta with Irene Dunne, Fred Astaire, and Ginger Rodgers - and yes, Randolph Scott - if you weren't going to do something at least as good? Grayson can't hold a candle to Dunne when it comes to singing the big numbers in the show - Yesterdays, Smoke Gets in Your Eyes; they don't trust her with You're Lovely to Look At, and give it to the chorus instead - and she certainly was not in Dunne's league as an actress. The Champions do a beautiful dance number with Smoke Gets in Your Eyes, which is probably the highlight of the movie, but they don't have any charisma as actors. Keel is a great singer and has real charisma as an actor, but he's largely wasted here, as is Skelton, who has an embarrassing comedy number.
If you know the 1930s Roberta, this will make you cringe. If you don't, it still won't hold your interest.
Why they bothered with this, I don't know. Everyone in it did much better elsewhere.
--------------------------------
I watched it again last night on TCM, and saw better why this movie, even when not compared to its predecessor, just doesn't work for me: it's the script.
I don't care that it is different from the Broadway original, to which the 1930s version adheres more closely (though not altogether). Hollywood had always been in the habit of changing the plots of operettas. Here, since they changed the title from Roberta to Lovely to Look At, they really gave themselves the freedom to do just that.
Rather, the problem, as I saw it last night, was that they created several unlikeable characters for a show that really didn't need any. Howard Keel's role is the most disagreeable. What was the point of making him obnoxious???? Red Skelton's character (more or less the one Fred Astaire played in the 1930s version) comes off as too weak to be really interesting. Again, a real loss. Kathryn Grayson always came off as cold, to me at least, but here the script goes out of its way to make her unromantic. I found NO chemistry between her character and Keel's, which really guts an important part of the plot.
Keel sings well. Grayson sings as she always did, which I find grating, though I know it appealed to others. (To me, she makes Jeannette MacDonald sound like Helen Traubel.) As I said in my original review, above, everyone here did better elsewhere. With the exception of the Champions' dancing, which I really enjoy, I don't see any reason for sitting through this - unless you really can't sleep and there's nothing else on, which was my case last night.
If you know the 1930s Roberta, this will make you cringe. If you don't, it still won't hold your interest.
Why they bothered with this, I don't know. Everyone in it did much better elsewhere.
--------------------------------
I watched it again last night on TCM, and saw better why this movie, even when not compared to its predecessor, just doesn't work for me: it's the script.
I don't care that it is different from the Broadway original, to which the 1930s version adheres more closely (though not altogether). Hollywood had always been in the habit of changing the plots of operettas. Here, since they changed the title from Roberta to Lovely to Look At, they really gave themselves the freedom to do just that.
Rather, the problem, as I saw it last night, was that they created several unlikeable characters for a show that really didn't need any. Howard Keel's role is the most disagreeable. What was the point of making him obnoxious???? Red Skelton's character (more or less the one Fred Astaire played in the 1930s version) comes off as too weak to be really interesting. Again, a real loss. Kathryn Grayson always came off as cold, to me at least, but here the script goes out of its way to make her unromantic. I found NO chemistry between her character and Keel's, which really guts an important part of the plot.
Keel sings well. Grayson sings as she always did, which I find grating, though I know it appealed to others. (To me, she makes Jeannette MacDonald sound like Helen Traubel.) As I said in my original review, above, everyone here did better elsewhere. With the exception of the Champions' dancing, which I really enjoy, I don't see any reason for sitting through this - unless you really can't sleep and there's nothing else on, which was my case last night.