I just saw the stage version with Bernadette Peters because I'd never seen any screen version - unexcellable; a worthy heiress of Ethel Merman. I wish I could say the same for Rosalind Russell.
As I said, I liked the Broadway musical but this production doesn't translate it well to the screen. Merman played (and Peters plays) Rose Hovick at comically over-the-top full-volume, which is the only way to make such an aggravating character likeable. Russell, however, strangely underplays her on the big screen. Perhaps it's her limited singing talent but I blame director Mervyn LeRoy. A director is responsible for what goes on the screen, and so much of what's on the screen doesn't work here.
Natalie Wood shines best as Louise, the plain-Jane "untalented" daughter before her metamorphosis into Gypsy Rose Lee -- where, like Russell, she doesn't shine as much as one would think. Karl Malden is a trouper as Herbie Sommers, the schmo who sticks by Rose longer than anyone who'd call himself a man would. The Sommers role is supposed to be a weakling but I just don't buy Malden in the role. On the other hand, it must have been good rehearsal for playing General Omar Bradley, who was portayed as yet another second banana to yet another raging prima donna in 'Patton (1970)'.
The sets also don't really work. They look exactly what they are - Hollywood stage sets, which here give neither impression of Broadway nor full-fledged Hollywood musical. Contrast this with the sets of 'Guys and Dolls (1955)' where the sets looked like Broadway sets and thus really made the picture.
LeRoy is sensible enough to have the actors do their own singing but neither actor is a singer, a fact which overshadows a musical full of otherwise showstopping tunes. However, too many elements just don't come together - the casting, the sets, the art direction. In short, I blame the director. And the producers.
As I said, I liked the Broadway musical but this production doesn't translate it well to the screen. Merman played (and Peters plays) Rose Hovick at comically over-the-top full-volume, which is the only way to make such an aggravating character likeable. Russell, however, strangely underplays her on the big screen. Perhaps it's her limited singing talent but I blame director Mervyn LeRoy. A director is responsible for what goes on the screen, and so much of what's on the screen doesn't work here.
Natalie Wood shines best as Louise, the plain-Jane "untalented" daughter before her metamorphosis into Gypsy Rose Lee -- where, like Russell, she doesn't shine as much as one would think. Karl Malden is a trouper as Herbie Sommers, the schmo who sticks by Rose longer than anyone who'd call himself a man would. The Sommers role is supposed to be a weakling but I just don't buy Malden in the role. On the other hand, it must have been good rehearsal for playing General Omar Bradley, who was portayed as yet another second banana to yet another raging prima donna in 'Patton (1970)'.
The sets also don't really work. They look exactly what they are - Hollywood stage sets, which here give neither impression of Broadway nor full-fledged Hollywood musical. Contrast this with the sets of 'Guys and Dolls (1955)' where the sets looked like Broadway sets and thus really made the picture.
LeRoy is sensible enough to have the actors do their own singing but neither actor is a singer, a fact which overshadows a musical full of otherwise showstopping tunes. However, too many elements just don't come together - the casting, the sets, the art direction. In short, I blame the director. And the producers.