Some of the previous reviewers say kind things about the acting and script here. I can't see it.
Eartha Kitt not only sings well - VERY well - but does a great job acting her role as well. Juano Hernandez is good as Handy's very strict father, but it's a two-dimensional role. Nat King Cole isn't much of an actor here, in my opinion. But then, his singing is spectacular, so I'll deal with his acting as the price for enjoying, very much, his singing.
The script is strictly from hunger. As others have remarked, it's a reworking of the cliched plot in *The Jazz Singer*. And, as almost all the reviewers have pointed out, it bears little resemblance to the historical truth. The Aeolian Hall concert is pure fiction, for example, and seems to have been inspired by the real concert Paul Whiteman gave there in 1924 that introduced Gershwin's immortal *Rhapsody in Blue* - and a lot of now forgotten efforts by other composers. It was also evidently inspired by the scene in the 1945 movie *Rhapsody in Blue*, which, like *The Jazz Singer*, also deals with a conflict between popular and "serious" music.
It's also very pious, which I found strange in a movie about the birth of the blues. Whom did the producers imagine their audience to be? The reviewers seem to think this was aimed at Black audiences, but I doubt that. When we see Handy and Gogo singing in the nightclub, they play to a strictly white audience, one interested in jazz and the blues. I can only assume that the producers imagined a similar audience for this movie.
But enough of the negatives. The positives here - and they are VERY positive - are the musical performances. In how many movies can you dream of finding first-rate performances by:
Nate King Cole Eartha Kitt Mahalia Jackson Ella Fitzgerald and Pearl Bailey?
With the exception of Fitzgerald's number, these are not one-off isolated performances that are only incidental to the plot. The first three singers get several numbers each, all wonderful.
They alone make it worth your while to watch this movie. Ignore the pious plot.
Eartha Kitt not only sings well - VERY well - but does a great job acting her role as well. Juano Hernandez is good as Handy's very strict father, but it's a two-dimensional role. Nat King Cole isn't much of an actor here, in my opinion. But then, his singing is spectacular, so I'll deal with his acting as the price for enjoying, very much, his singing.
The script is strictly from hunger. As others have remarked, it's a reworking of the cliched plot in *The Jazz Singer*. And, as almost all the reviewers have pointed out, it bears little resemblance to the historical truth. The Aeolian Hall concert is pure fiction, for example, and seems to have been inspired by the real concert Paul Whiteman gave there in 1924 that introduced Gershwin's immortal *Rhapsody in Blue* - and a lot of now forgotten efforts by other composers. It was also evidently inspired by the scene in the 1945 movie *Rhapsody in Blue*, which, like *The Jazz Singer*, also deals with a conflict between popular and "serious" music.
It's also very pious, which I found strange in a movie about the birth of the blues. Whom did the producers imagine their audience to be? The reviewers seem to think this was aimed at Black audiences, but I doubt that. When we see Handy and Gogo singing in the nightclub, they play to a strictly white audience, one interested in jazz and the blues. I can only assume that the producers imagined a similar audience for this movie.
But enough of the negatives. The positives here - and they are VERY positive - are the musical performances. In how many movies can you dream of finding first-rate performances by:
Nate King Cole Eartha Kitt Mahalia Jackson Ella Fitzgerald and Pearl Bailey?
With the exception of Fitzgerald's number, these are not one-off isolated performances that are only incidental to the plot. The first three singers get several numbers each, all wonderful.
They alone make it worth your while to watch this movie. Ignore the pious plot.