1/10
That's (Not) Entertainment!
21 February 2006
Sam Goldwyn's creative juices must have been frozen when he came with the idea of this film, a bad remake of the more successful "Ziegfeld Follies". This movie shows how imitation was the worst form of flattery. The ingredients that went into this "stew", might have appeared to be right at the super market, but what comes out as a result is an indelible mess.

George Marshall doesn't show any inspiration in the way the material is presented. The timing is off and the movie feels fake from the start.

Giving the film makers the benefit of the doubt, this project appeared to have been doomed from the start. The mere idea of a big Hollywood producer like Oliver Martin relying on the taste of a naive young woman with not an ounce of sophistication, or any idea what the movies were about, is not to be believed. Granted, those were other times, but it asks a lot from the viewer. The other thing that is wrong in the movie is the way the musical numbers are presented. The horrible ballet sequence about Romeo and Juliet with a happy ending and danced by half of the company tap dancing, while the rest are in tutus and toe shoes, is not to be believed, even if the creator was George Ballanchine, himself.

The Ritz brothers are obnoxious every time we see them. That song about the pussy cats has to be one of the worst ever. Kenny Baker singing "Love Walked In" while frying hamburgers is laughable, at best. Vera Zorina's Olga is another annoying figure, as is Edgar Bergen, whose only job is to act as a buffer between numbers. Adolph Menjou does what he can in a thankless job. Andrea Leeds appears as Hazel, who Oliver calls Miss Humanity.

Not even the wonderful Gershwin songs, or the cinematography of the great Gregg Toland can save this pastiche. As Wayne Malin has commented in this forum, "The Goldwyn Follies" turns out to be a camp fest about two hours too long!
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed