VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 00:38:09 06/27/01 Wed
Author: IMDB's Jim Griffin
Subject: A terrible review from the IMDB's Jim Griffin, who couldn't seem to make it flow. Let's hope his next effort sees a return to form and reignites this brightest of stars from the IMDB...

Singin’ in the Rain (1951) ***

If you closed your eyes and threw a potato into a crowded street, you’d be guaranteed to hit someone who loves this movie. Everyone loves this movie. Just looking at the other reviews here, it’s hard to find anyone who thinks it’s anything less than a masterpiece. I guess I’ll just have to be Billy No-Mates, because I found it to be significantly less than that.

Whether you’ve seen it or not, you’ve at least heard of it and been made aware of its reputation, but as is so often the case, its reputation overstates its virtues. But while it may have been a fair distance from the five-star masterpiece I was expecting, it was still a good, and sometimes great, movie.

The first thing that struck me was Gene Kelly’s smile. Cheesier than a statue of Celine Dion carved in Gorgonzola, it simply refused to leave his face. He seemed incapable of frowning, and typified the mood of the movie. Its relentless cheer and optimism was infectious, and it is easy to understand why so many people describe it as a feelgood film. No one could be miserable watching this.

There is an unavoidable quaintness in the film. Set in the 1920s, as silent movies gave way to talkies, it both celebrates and gently mocks a legendary era in Hollywood history. But the movie itself is now part of another legendary era in Hollywood history, and this double-nostalgia works only in its favour and adds to its immense charm.

The cast is excellent without exception. Gene Kelly is great, and Donald O’Connor is just hilarious. He seems to be having the greatest time in the world making this movie and making ‘em laugh. His face-pulling scene is undoubtedly one of the funniest moments the film has to offer. Jean Hagan is perfect as Lina Lamont, and gives us a truly original character. The scene where her terrible voice is revealed was lessened somewhat by having seen a similar joke in The Man with Two Brains, but this deserves the laughs having got there thirty years earlier. Her stupidity is at its funniest when she insists she and Kelly are an item because she was told so by the gossip columns, and she is blessed with perhaps the funniest line of the film: “Why, I make more money than... than... than Calvin Coolidge, put together!”

It may be stating the obvious, but the dancing was just mesmerising. Kelly and O’Connor move as if on ice, and their energy is just stunning. To see real talent like theirs, and then switch to the jerky, simplified arm-waving that appears in every video on MTV, emphasises their genius. The songs, however, were something of a disappointment. With the exception of the title track and Make ‘Em Laugh, they are nothing special. There were times when they felt forced into the story rather awkwardly, with Good Morning being the most irritating example.

I can understand why so many people love this film, but I have no love for it myself. It was fun, and there were a load of great moments, but it didn’t come close to being a masterpiece. I know I’m in the minority. For most people, it’s a flawless classic. Like most of Cher, it will live forever, and that’s fair enough. There is a long list of classic movies which have all disappointed me, and this was by no means the worst offender. I just wish I could have liked it more.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.