list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Hello, Dolly! on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Hello_Dolly/15152/default.aspx Title: Hello, Dolly!
Year: 1969
Director: Gene Kelly
Plot: Twenty-seven-year-old Barbra Streisand seemed an inappropriate choice for middle-aged, match-making widow Dolly Levi, but her energy carries her right through the role and dominates the lackluster movie around her. The plot, drawn from Thornton Wilder's The Matchmaker (itself based on a 19th-century British farce), is set in motion when Yonkers feed store clerk Cornelius Hackl (Michael Crawford) celebrates his promotion by taking his pal Barnaby Tucker (Danny Lockin) to New York City for a "corking good time." But Cornelius and Barnaby can't avoid crossing paths with their boss Horace Vandergelder (Walter Matthau), who'd give them Holy Ned if he saw them in a fancy restaurant with two fancy girls instead of tending the store. Mr. Vandergelder himself is the object of Dolly's affections, though she pretends to have only a professional interest in the widowed merchant, going through the motions of finding him a new wife when in fact she'd like to be the lucky bride herself. The film's musical set pieces include a show-stopping rendition of the title number, with Louis Armstrong more or less playing himself. The biggest number is "Before the Parade Passes By," in which thousands of costumed marchers and atmosphere extras cavort before a huge replica of a New York City thoroughfare in the 1890s (actually the main entrance of the 20th Century-Fox studio, with period facades adorning the office buildings). An artifact of an era in which Broadway musicals were a significant part of popular culture, Hello Dolly seemed bizarrely irrelevant in the social turmoil of the late 1960s, and it became one of the late-1960s big-budget failures that led Hollywood studios toward a different kind of filmmaking in the 1970s. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 26
Number of Lists: 10
Number of blog posts: 4
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sun, 15 Feb 2009 15:11:04 GMTHello, Dolly!1969Gene KellyTwenty-seven-year-old <a href="/players/P___112652/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Barbra Streisand</a> seemed an inappropriate choice for middle-aged, match-making widow Dolly Levi, but her energy carries her right through the role and dominates the lackluster movie around her. The plot, drawn from Thornton Wilder's <a href=/films/114621/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>The Matchmaker</a> (itself based on a 19th-century British farce), is set in motion when Yonkers feed store clerk Cornelius Hackl (<a href="/players/P____15687/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Michael Crawford</a>) celebrates his promotion by taking his pal Barnaby Tucker (Danny Lockin) to New York City for a "corking good time." But Cornelius and Barnaby can't avoid crossing paths with their boss Horace Vandergelder (<a href="/players/P____46456/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Walter Matthau</a>), who'd give them Holy Ned if he saw them in a fancy restaurant with two fancy girls instead of tending the store. Mr. Vandergelder himself is the object of Dolly's affections, though she pretends to have only a professional interest in the widowed merchant, going through the motions of finding him a new wife when in fact she'd like to be the lucky bride herself. The film's musical set pieces include a show-stopping rendition of the title number, with <a href="/players/P_____2289/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Louis Armstrong</a> more or less playing himself. The biggest number is "Before the Parade Passes By," in which thousands of costumed marchers and atmosphere extras cavort before a huge replica of a New York City thoroughfare in the 1890s (actually the main entrance of the 20th Century-Fox studio, with period facades adorning the office buildings). An artifact of an era in which Broadway musicals were a significant part of popular culture, Hello Dolly seemed bizarrely irrelevant in the social turmoil of the late 1960s, and it became one of the late-1960s big-budget failures that led Hollywood studios toward a different kind of filmmaking in the 1970s. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide26Tag Target (>10)10413http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t34128dflpq.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Hello_Dolly/15152/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_November_3_The_Movies_in_the/625/36904/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 11/3/2008 1:35:14 PM
Body: This is one of those things that's really hard to recall, yet I know I know an insane amount of them. WALL-E - > Hello, Dolly! Donnie Darko - > Evil Dead The Dreamers - > Freaks, Bande à Part, etc. Full of references. Interview With The Vampire - > Tequila Sunrise, Superman, Gone With The WInd Natural Born Killers - > Loaded with references to countless films and television. Home Alone - > Angels With Dirty Faces That's it for now . . .
]]>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:35:14 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme11/3/2008 1:35:14 PMThis is one of those things that's really hard to recall, yet I know I know an insane amount of them. WALL-E - &gt; Hello, Dolly! Donnie Darko - &gt; Evil Dead The Dreamers - &gt; Freaks, Bande &agrave; Part, etc. Full of references. Interview With The Vampire - &gt; Tequila Sunrise, Superman, Gone With The WInd Natural Born Killers - &gt; Loaded with references to countless films and television. Home Alone - &gt; Angels With Dirty Faces That's it for now . . . http://www.spout.com/blogs/aidanbrack/archive/2008/8/23/34294.aspx Post By: aidanbrack
Post To: The Bigger Picture
Post Date: 8/23/2008 6:10:35 AM
Body: From one of America's most creative and inventive studios comes a picture that is packed with intimacy and surprisingly adult themes. Wall-E is a small, trash-compacting robot who has the task of clearing up a world covered in junk. Now on his own, he only has a cockroach for company and has become obsessed with a copy of the film Hello, Dolly! that he has found on a Betamax tape. The first thirty minutes Wall-E is on his own, going about his job and picking up ‘treasures’ that he takes back to his home. This part of the film features lots of slapstick comedy but also really touches the heart as we see that Wall-E has developed a very strong personality and longs to be loved. Into the flick comes a real force of nature, another robot EVE. Appearing from nowhere, this robot is sleek and heavily armed and our shy hero instantly becomes smitten. When this robot disappears Wall-E is devastated and tries to track it down. On his adventure, Wall-E’s infectious personality encourages those he meets to break out of their conformist shells and actually explore and experience the world around them. This is a truly remarkable film that says enormous amounts about what it means to be human and chastises its human characters for not caring enough, either about the planet or about experiencing life. It handles its themes well, never going too far by preaching at its audience. Instead the film focuses on its story, a romance between the robotic odd couple. Wall-E’s courtship is endearingly awkward as he tries to tell EVE how he feels – no easy task given that neither character can really speak. It is one of the most pleasing film romances in years, perfectly capturing those feelings you had the first time you find yourself liking a girl. Wall-E’s shyness and childlike innocence makes him a truly appealing lead character, Pixar’s most interesting to date, and I was rooting for him right to the end. Less successful are some of the incidental robot characters he encounters in a defective robots centre. They serve little purpose other than to be wacky, colourful and possible merchandising tie-ins. Animation fans may be disappointed at the lack of visual wonder in this picture compared to previous Pixar pictures. Certainly I was never amazed by the way the film looks in the way I was by the gorgeous Finding Nemo, yet the more subdued visuals allow the story and its themes to really shine. There were long stretches of this film where it is possible to forget that this film is animated. Sequences look like they were shot with a camera and the result is a film that is more easily compared with its sci-fi or romance film influences than its animated stable mates. Those influences can be seen in frame after frame in this film from Soylent Green to Blade Runner, from Star Wars to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Fans of the science fiction genre will find that this film pays homage to many of the classics. For those who are not sci-fi aficionados there is still plenty to enjoy here, from its silent movie influences to the touching love story at the heart of this film. Wall-E and EVE work as a couple because they are robots who long to be something more than they were designed for. The film’s central message is that love is transformative and can bring out the best in us, making us want to be more than we are programmed to be. This film is a joyous celebration of love, humanity and individualism. It is an original, interesting story that strikes a change of tone from Pixar and shows that despite producing nine pictures in thirteen years the studio is more creative than ever.
]]>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:10:35 GMTaidanbrackThe Bigger Picture8/23/2008 6:10:35 AMFrom one of America's most creative and inventive studios comes a picture that is packed with intimacy and surprisingly adult themes. Wall-E is a small, trash-compacting robot who has the task of clearing up a world covered in junk. Now on his own, he only has a cockroach for company and has become obsessed with a copy of the film Hello, Dolly! that he has found on a Betamax tape. The first thirty minutes Wall-E is on his own, going about his job and picking up &lsquo;treasures&rsquo; that he takes back to his home. This part of the film features lots of slapstick comedy but also really touches the heart as we see that Wall-E has developed a very strong personality and longs to be loved. Into the flick comes a real force of nature, another robot EVE. Appearing from nowhere, this robot is sleek and heavily armed and our shy hero instantly becomes smitten. When this robot disappears Wall-E is devastated and tries to track it down. On his adventure, Wall-E&rsquo;s infectious personality encourages those he meets to break out of their conformist shells and actually explore and experience the world around them. This is a truly remarkable film that says enormous amounts about what it means to be human and chastises its human characters for not caring enough, either about the planet or about experiencing life. It handles its themes well, never going too far by preaching at its audience. Instead the film focuses on its story, a romance between the robotic odd couple. Wall-E&rsquo;s courtship is endearingly awkward as he tries to tell EVE how he feels &ndash; no easy task given that neither character can really speak. It is one of the most pleasing film romances in years, perfectly capturing those feelings you had the first time you find yourself liking a girl. Wall-E&rsquo;s shyness and childlike innocence makes him a truly appealing lead character, Pixar&rsquo;s most interesting to date, and I was rooting for him right to the end. Less successful are some of the incidental robot characters he encounters in a defective robots centre. They serve little purpose other than to be wacky, colourful and possible merchandising tie-ins. Animation fans may be disappointed at the lack of visual wonder in this picture compared to previous Pixar pictures. Certainly I was never amazed by the way the film looks in the way I was by the gorgeous Finding Nemo, yet the more subdued visuals allow the story and its themes to really shine. There were long stretches of this film where it is possible to forget that this film is animated. Sequences look like they were shot with a camera and the result is a film that is more easily compared with its sci-fi or romance film influences than its animated stable mates. Those influences can be seen in frame after frame in this film from Soylent Green to Blade Runner, from Star Wars to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Fans of the science fiction genre will find that this film pays homage to many of the classics. For those who are not sci-fi aficionados there is still plenty to enjoy here, from its silent movie influences to the touching love story at the heart of this film. Wall-E and EVE work as a couple because they are robots who long to be something more than they were designed for. The film&rsquo;s central message is that love is transformative and can bring out the best in us, making us want to be more than we are programmed to be. This film is a joyous celebration of love, humanity and individualism. It is an original, interesting story that strikes a change of tone from Pixar and shows that despite producing nine pictures in thirteen years the studio is more creative than ever. http://www.spout.com/blogs/minerwerks/archive/2008/6/29/31878.aspx Post By: minerwerks
Post To: minerwerks Blog
Post Date: 6/29/2008 10:52:15 PM
Body: Last year's Super Bowl featured a car ad with a depressed assembly-line robot who jumps off a bridge. The car company faced some controvery over the suicide angle, and this just goes to prove exactly what I took away from the spot - they successfully managed to give a personality to a machine. Why else would people get so worked up over a hunk of metal toppling into the river? It's hard not to think of this watching Pixar's 'WALL-E,' which also hangs on the ability of the storytellers to make us care about a machine. WALL-E is the last of a fleet of waste management robots designed to scurry around Earth's surface and pile our trash into towers. This particular robot, however, has become fascinated with the remnants of our world - a video tape of 'Hello, Dolly!,' christmas lights, Zippo lighters, bubble wrap are among the items brought back to WALL-E's makeshift home. One day a sleek probe named EVE is left on Earth and WALL-E is smitten. He watches sheepishly from afar as EVE momentarily abandons her programming and flies gracefully over the barren landscape. As WALL-E courts EVE, her purpose is revealed - to collect evidence of living vegetation and return home. A ship soon arrives to collect EVE, and WALL-E becomes a stowaway to follow her. WALL-E is never deterred from his desire to find EVE, but we as the audience are next thrust into a kinetic, colorful and bizarre vision of the future of humankind represented by a giant ship called Axiom. As the fate of the humans becomes intertwined with EVE's mission and WALL-E's persistence, we are treated to a fun, exciting and thematically rich tale that explores the conflicts between our programming and our passions. It's almost a given at this point that Pixar's storytelling gurus can string together compelling character moments and exciting setpieces with ease. I can't ever see having the same reaction as I did watching 'Toy Story' all those years ago, but I am always pleased that there are filmmakers who care about giving the audience great characters and exciting moments based on goodwill between the viewer and the story. As with last year's 'Ratatouille," Pixar takes a risk in placing so much faith in a protagonist that must overcome preconceived notions - how much can we care about something that we are used to understanding as inhuman? I'm not sure they have managed to solve all the believability issues in giving programmed machines personalities, but old-fashioned charm goes a long way. The subtle themes of free will become more evident as the robots become intertwined in a drama with the humans, but a second viewing seems necessary to best take in the full meaning. And that's got to be one of the best ways to spend a summer afternoon this year.
]]>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 02:52:15 GMTminerwerksminerwerks Blog6/29/2008 10:52:15 PMLast year's Super Bowl featured a car ad with a depressed assembly-line robot who jumps off a bridge. The car company faced some controvery over the suicide angle, and this just goes to prove exactly what I took away from the spot - they successfully managed to give a personality to a machine. Why else would people get so worked up over a hunk of metal toppling into the river? It's hard not to think of this watching Pixar's 'WALL-E,' which also hangs on the ability of the storytellers to make us care about a machine. WALL-E is the last of a fleet of waste management robots designed to scurry around Earth's surface and pile our trash into towers. This particular robot, however, has become fascinated with the remnants of our world - a video tape of 'Hello, Dolly!,' christmas lights, Zippo lighters, bubble wrap are among the items brought back to WALL-E's makeshift home. One day a sleek probe named EVE is left on Earth and WALL-E is smitten. He watches sheepishly from afar as EVE momentarily abandons her programming and flies gracefully over the barren landscape. As WALL-E courts EVE, her purpose is revealed - to collect evidence of living vegetation and return home. A ship soon arrives to collect EVE, and WALL-E becomes a stowaway to follow her. WALL-E is never deterred from his desire to find EVE, but we as the audience are next thrust into a kinetic, colorful and bizarre vision of the future of humankind represented by a giant ship called Axiom. As the fate of the humans becomes intertwined with EVE's mission and WALL-E's persistence, we are treated to a fun, exciting and thematically rich tale that explores the conflicts between our programming and our passions. It's almost a given at this point that Pixar's storytelling gurus can string together compelling character moments and exciting setpieces with ease. I can't ever see having the same reaction as I did watching 'Toy Story' all those years ago, but I am always pleased that there are filmmakers who care about giving the audience great characters and exciting moments based on goodwill between the viewer and the story. As with last year's 'Ratatouille," Pixar takes a risk in placing so much faith in a protagonist that must overcome preconceived notions - how much can we care about something that we are used to understanding as inhuman? I'm not sure they have managed to solve all the believability issues in giving programmed machines personalities, but old-fashioned charm goes a long way. The subtle themes of free will become more evident as the robots become intertwined in a drama with the humans, but a second viewing seems necessary to best take in the full meaning. And that's got to be one of the best ways to spend a summer afternoon this year. http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/6/29/31874.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 6/29/2008 8:19:02 PM
Body: Alright, Pixar. I've had it. I am past the point of being tired trying to find new and creative ways to use superlatives that are as endlessly creative and fresh as your films. Seriously, does everything you do have to be so superiorly textured and nuanced, inviting hours of “rewatchability?” (There, see? I now have to resort to making up words just to keep up. I hope you can sleep well at night in your money-lined pillows.) “WALL*E” is not a film to watch, it is one to consume. Layered with more craft and care than any film released so far this year. Readers of this paper's film column will no doubt attest to the fact that it is on rare occasion that I report to resoundingly glowing praise or hyperbole often (unless, of course, Adam Sandler is involved – kidding!). But time and time again, I find myself overwhelmed with Pixar's ability to take the most simple of concepts – the childhood love of toys (“Toy Story,” “Toy Story 2”) the bond between parent and child (“Finding Nemo” directed by WALL*E's Andrew Stanton, “The Incredibles”), the importance of teamwork (“Monsters Inc.,” “A Bug's Life,” “Ratatouille”) and here, the rudimentary necessity of tactile social interaction – and make it alternately fresh, nostalgic, exciting, comfortable and gloriously rendered both emotionally and graphically. WALL*E is short for Waste Allocation Lift Loader Earth-class, a cuddly little bundle of microchips that is alone in its Earth-bound duty of cleaning up the mountainous waste left behind by a fleeing human race centuries prior. It seems a big conglomerate (imagine Wal-Mart injected with anabolic steroids) made a mess of things after it took over running (and ruining) the globe and jettisoned its population for a little while as it attempted to clean up its mess. Seven hundred years later, WALL*E is the remaining inhabitant, dutifully filling his days with trash duty, but developed enough to find other, more meaningful diversions. For example, he has adopted a pet cockroach (naturally), collects miscellaneous scraps and parts, and settles in from time to time with a Betamax version of “Hello Dolly”). Thematically, the first 40 minutes or so is very similar to last year's “I am Legend,” as a non-speaking WALL*E does just enough to occupy time, but is painfully lonely and just wants a hand (or synthetic replication thereof) to hold. Unlike “I am Legend,” “WALL*E” does not suck royally after that setup. He is visited by an Extraterrestrial Vegitation Evaluator (EVE), which is a sleek new robot model sent to the planet in search of burgeoning life. EVE is like a new iPod to WALL*E's cassette player, but regardless of format, the song remains the same – WALL*E is immediately smitten. After a coy courting period (with lasers), WALL*E tags along on EVE's spaceship, which is housed on a floating Earth, populated with gelatinous mounds of flesh that are the human race. No longer do people rely on such tired traditions as “walking,” they simply jet around their new home in personal Barc-o-loungers, communicate entirely through computer screens and happily subsist on whatever the Big Brother-like corporate owners of the ship (the same ones that spoiled the planet) tell them to. To reveal more would spoil the wonder of “WALL*E.” It's clear that the filmmakers in that coveted Pixar house have a passion for film as well as storytelling. From silent-era slapstick that would make Buster Keaton proud, to space journeys capable of bringing a tear to George Lucas's eye, to nods of golden-age movie musicals, “WALL*E” serves as a loving, guided tour through the coveted vaults of cinematic history. There are scenes within that will induce tears, but not because of maudlin plot contrivances that do everything but old an onion under your eyes. There are moments of ecstatic marvel and whimsy throughout that make this so much more than a just another celluloid babysitter for the kiddos. And you can dispute or politicize the film's dyspeptic world view all you want (though does anyone else see the irony of a film featuring a society of computer-enslaved blobs of humanity created by a computer animation studio that works for years on one project?), but in this increasingly heated political climate, there is a reason the word “change” is bandied about so often. As over-simplified as it may sound, “Wall*E” serves as an animated testament to our ability to do just that. But just as the morbidly obese captain of the human cargo ship in “WALL*E” proves, it is only accomplished by a innate willingness to do so. It may all sound trite, but as the best films in our short cinematic history, “WALL*E” makes you believe that anything is possible. P.S. Don't arrive late or you will miss a wonderful Looney Tunes-era short called “Presto,” featuring a rabbit that could out-wascal Bugs Bunny
]]>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:19:02 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog6/29/2008 8:19:02 PMAlright, Pixar. I've had it. I am past the point of being tired trying to find new and creative ways to use superlatives that are as endlessly creative and fresh as your films. Seriously, does everything you do have to be so superiorly textured and nuanced, inviting hours of &ldquo;rewatchability?&rdquo; (There, see? I now have to resort to making up words just to keep up. I hope you can sleep well at night in your money-lined pillows.) &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; is not a film to watch, it is one to consume. Layered with more craft and care than any film released so far this year. Readers of this paper's film column will no doubt attest to the fact that it is on rare occasion that I report to resoundingly glowing praise or hyperbole often (unless, of course, Adam Sandler is involved &ndash; kidding!). But time and time again, I find myself overwhelmed with Pixar's ability to take the most simple of concepts &ndash; the childhood love of toys (&ldquo;Toy Story,&rdquo; &ldquo;Toy Story 2&rdquo;) the bond between parent and child (&ldquo;Finding Nemo&rdquo; directed by WALL*E's Andrew Stanton, &ldquo;The Incredibles&rdquo;), the importance of teamwork (&ldquo;Monsters Inc.,&rdquo; &ldquo;A Bug's Life,&rdquo; &ldquo;Ratatouille&rdquo;) and here, the rudimentary necessity of tactile social interaction &ndash; and make it alternately fresh, nostalgic, exciting, comfortable and gloriously rendered both emotionally and graphically. WALL*E is short for Waste Allocation Lift Loader Earth-class, a cuddly little bundle of microchips that is alone in its Earth-bound duty of cleaning up the mountainous waste left behind by a fleeing human race centuries prior. It seems a big conglomerate (imagine Wal-Mart injected with anabolic steroids) made a mess of things after it took over running (and ruining) the globe and jettisoned its population for a little while as it attempted to clean up its mess. Seven hundred years later, WALL*E is the remaining inhabitant, dutifully filling his days with trash duty, but developed enough to find other, more meaningful diversions. For example, he has adopted a pet cockroach (naturally), collects miscellaneous scraps and parts, and settles in from time to time with a Betamax version of &ldquo;Hello Dolly&rdquo;). Thematically, the first 40 minutes or so is very similar to last year's &ldquo;I am Legend,&rdquo; as a non-speaking WALL*E does just enough to occupy time, but is painfully lonely and just wants a hand (or synthetic replication thereof) to hold. Unlike &ldquo;I am Legend,&rdquo; &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; does not suck royally after that setup. He is visited by an Extraterrestrial Vegitation Evaluator (EVE), which is a sleek new robot model sent to the planet in search of burgeoning life. EVE is like a new iPod to WALL*E's cassette player, but regardless of format, the song remains the same &ndash; WALL*E is immediately smitten. After a coy courting period (with lasers), WALL*E tags along on EVE's spaceship, which is housed on a floating Earth, populated with gelatinous mounds of flesh that are the human race. No longer do people rely on such tired traditions as &ldquo;walking,&rdquo; they simply jet around their new home in personal Barc-o-loungers, communicate entirely through computer screens and happily subsist on whatever the Big Brother-like corporate owners of the ship (the same ones that spoiled the planet) tell them to. To reveal more would spoil the wonder of &ldquo;WALL*E.&rdquo; It's clear that the filmmakers in that coveted Pixar house have a passion for film as well as storytelling. From silent-era slapstick that would make Buster Keaton proud, to space journeys capable of bringing a tear to George Lucas's eye, to nods of golden-age movie musicals, &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; serves as a loving, guided tour through the coveted vaults of cinematic history. There are scenes within that will induce tears, but not because of maudlin plot contrivances that do everything but old an onion under your eyes. There are moments of ecstatic marvel and whimsy throughout that make this so much more than a just another celluloid babysitter for the kiddos. And you can dispute or politicize the film's dyspeptic world view all you want (though does anyone else see the irony of a film featuring a society of computer-enslaved blobs of humanity created by a computer animation studio that works for years on one project?), but in this increasingly heated political climate, there is a reason the word &ldquo;change&rdquo; is bandied about so often. As over-simplified as it may sound, &ldquo;Wall*E&rdquo; serves as an animated testament to our ability to do just that. But just as the morbidly obese captain of the human cargo ship in &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; proves, it is only accomplished by a innate willingness to do so. It may all sound trite, but as the best films in our short cinematic history, &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; makes you believe that anything is possible. P.S. Don't arrive late or you will miss a wonderful Looney Tunes-era short called &ldquo;Presto,&rdquo; featuring a rabbit that could out-wascal Bugs Bunny http://www.spout.com/blogs/jjgittes/archive/2008/6/9/31010.aspx Post By: jjgittes
Post To: jjgittes Blog
Post Date: 6/9/2008 4:34:44 PM
Body: I had the dubious honor of being a part of my high school's production of HELLO DOLLY a zillion years ago, so there was a time when I was intimately familiar with both the play and the film. It's been a long time and truthfully, I had my reservations about the show even then. Watching the film again this past Saturday on Reel 13, I was reminded how lame the show really is and the film version, as directed by Gene Kelly, is even worse.I suspect the popularity of Jerry Herman's original production during the 60's had more to do with the Carol Channing persona than the story. If that's true, then the film was handicapped before it even began by bypassing Channing in favor of a very young Barbra Streisand, playing a character fifteen or twenty years older than she actually was. This is not to say that Streisand is bad in the role. Her strongest assets – her voice and her comic timing – are on prime display here and she imbues the character with an engaging energy and vitality. She puts forth extraordinary effort, but one has a hard time believing that a) she is a widowed matchmaker and has been out of the public scene for a decade and b) she would be a good match for Walter Matthau's Horace Vandergelder character. This is the primary plot of the film and the film suffers because it never once seems plausible. Gosh – Streisand seems even younger than the ingénue Irene Malloy character (Marianne McAndrew).Unfortunately, the rest of the cast, who were at least age-appropriate, were horribly off-the-mark in their performances. On the whole, I blame Kelly, who seems to have directed all of them (except maybe Streisand and Matthau) to be ridiculously over-the-top. This includes a baby-faced Michael Crawford as Cornelius Hackl and a I-don't-believe-he's-straight-for-a-second Tommy Tune, both of which went on to have wonderful stage careers. On film, they come off as silly and cartoonish. What's interesting to me is that as an actor, Kelly was always so smooth, sincere and understated. I'm bewildered as to why he wasn't able to bring that style to the table when he's behind the camera. It could have done wonders for the plot. It's hard enough to believe that all these people fall in love (there are four couples in the film) within a twenty-four hour period. The wide-eyed, loud and juvenile performance styles make it impossible, but I wonder what it would have been like if the characters had the opportunity to establish real connections with each other – make us care and root for them to get together. It could have made for an entirely different experience.
]]>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:34:44 GMTjjgittesjjgittes Blog6/9/2008 4:34:44 PMI had the dubious honor of being a part of my high school's production of HELLO DOLLY a zillion years ago, so there was a time when I was intimately familiar with both the play and the film. It's been a long time and truthfully, I had my reservations about the show even then. Watching the film again this past Saturday on Reel 13, I was reminded how lame the show really is and the film version, as directed by Gene Kelly, is even worse.I suspect the popularity of Jerry Herman's original production during the 60's had more to do with the Carol Channing persona than the story. If that's true, then the film was handicapped before it even began by bypassing Channing in favor of a very young Barbra Streisand, playing a character fifteen or twenty years older than she actually was. This is not to say that Streisand is bad in the role. Her strongest assets &ndash; her voice and her comic timing &ndash; are on prime display here and she imbues the character with an engaging energy and vitality. She puts forth extraordinary effort, but one has a hard time believing that a) she is a widowed matchmaker and has been out of the public scene for a decade and b) she would be a good match for Walter Matthau's Horace Vandergelder character. This is the primary plot of the film and the film suffers because it never once seems plausible. Gosh &ndash; Streisand seems even younger than the ing&eacute;nue Irene Malloy character (Marianne McAndrew).Unfortunately, the rest of the cast, who were at least age-appropriate, were horribly off-the-mark in their performances. On the whole, I blame Kelly, who seems to have directed all of them (except maybe Streisand and Matthau) to be ridiculously over-the-top. This includes a baby-faced Michael Crawford as Cornelius Hackl and a I-don't-believe-he's-straight-for-a-second Tommy Tune, both of which went on to have wonderful stage careers. On film, they come off as silly and cartoonish. What's interesting to me is that as an actor, Kelly was always so smooth, sincere and understated. I'm bewildered as to why he wasn't able to bring that style to the table when he's behind the camera. It could have done wonders for the plot. It's hard enough to believe that all these people fall in love (there are four couples in the film) within a twenty-four hour period. The wide-eyed, loud and juvenile performance styles make it impossible, but I wonder what it would have been like if the characters had the opportunity to establish real connections with each other &ndash; make us care and root for them to get together. It could have made for an entirely different experience. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxClassic
Number of films tagged: 816

Number of people who tagged: 312

Number of times used: 1453

]]>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:54:36 GMT8163121453Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomedy
Number of films tagged: 1087

Number of people who tagged: 253

Number of times used: 1342

]]>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:30 GMT10872531342Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romance/MemberTagFilms.aspxromance
Number of films tagged: 7161

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1003

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT71611691003Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 980

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:20 GMT6791154980Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/musical/MemberTagFilms.aspxmusical
Number of films tagged: 174

Number of people who tagged: 109

Number of times used: 356

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:03:25 GMT174109356Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/childhood/MemberTagFilms.aspxchildhood
Number of films tagged: 499

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 93

]]>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 09:42:53 GMT4993893Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/city/MemberTagFilms.aspxcity
Number of films tagged: 891

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 38

]]>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:19:09 GMT8911938Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/crush/MemberTagFilms.aspxcrush
Number of films tagged: 199

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 32

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT1991932Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/matchmaker/MemberTagFilms.aspxmatchmaker
Number of films tagged: 160

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 8

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT16078Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bigcity/MemberTagFilms.aspxbigcity
Number of films tagged: 462

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 7

]]>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:02:23 GMT46267Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/boss-employer/MemberTagFilms.aspxboss-employer
Number of films tagged: 318

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 9

]]>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:01:43 GMT31859Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Babs/MemberTagFilms.aspxBabs
Number of films tagged: 8

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 12

]]>Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:18:33 GMT8412Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/promotion/MemberTagFilms.aspxpromotion
Number of films tagged: 82

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:20:28 GMT8245Tag