BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Manthast Absolutely amazing

HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

calvinnme ...except in one respect; Elmer Bernstein's Oscar winning score carries the film, from its title song, to Carol Channing's "I'm A Jazz Baby" number, through the film's slow/irritating/self-consciously "Cute" spots.Director George Roy Hill has to be given credit; he attempted a spoof of early silent movies, with effects like wipes, title cards, and visuals like using pastels for most of the colors, especially Mary Tyler Moore's outfits. He does an extended riff on Harold Lloyd's "Safety Last" (1923), which is funny and effective. Sometimes he is off by a decade or so, though. For example, when the secondary pair of lovers first meet, they duet to "Ah, Sweet Mystery of Life", which is amusing, but thirteen years early (film is set in 1922). Each character spoofs a type.Julie Andrews is the perky heroine. Her parody is right on target, and her singing and dancing are also near perfect. I found Mary Tyler Moore irritatingly helpless, until I recognized her type was the helpless rich girl who never does anything for herself. Then, I was able to appreciate her performance. James Fox was enjoyable in his role; I didn't know he could sing. John Gavin, as Millie's boss, must have been directed to act as wooden as humanly possible; again, I didn't know he could sing.This was one of the last 1960's "Roadshow" musicals to make a profit. It has a wonderful musical score, but an uneven script and too many "cutesy" moments offset that strength. Still, it is more than worth seeing if it comes your way.

slabihoud My goodness! I saw this film as a child and I can only think I must have been VERY young because I liked it and that was the reason I bought the DVD so see it again. Well, some films should remain in memory land and this one is a good example! It starts our quite interesting, with a crime story at the bottom which is very unusually for a musical.Julie Andrews is doing her best but no one can help such a silly screenplay. Almost every joke is blown up out of any proportions. And some actors, especially the male ones, seemed to have forgotten to act at all. James Fox's character has the depth of a cardboard cut-out and all he does is smiling almost entirely throughout the picture. Where is the guy who played in "The Servant"? I would have liked to kick him just to get an honest reaction out of him.John Gavin was never much of an actor but here he is really miserable. In some scenes near the end he "freezes" by being treated with some poison and he doesn't look very different from when he is not freezing! But also Carole Channing's role is such a painful character, singing and smiling and talking absolute nonsense. The whole film is at least an hour too long and such a mixture of good and bad, but the bad far exceeding! The Chinese are the criminals and the (officially) stupid people of the story and their subplot about the kidnapping of young white girls is somehow odd because it changes from being taken serious to being the source of ridicule and therefore not really fitting in with the silliness of the rest of the story. Unbelievable, that it was quite a success when it came out!

vincentlynch-moonoi Usually I can tell you whether I like or dislike a film...and why. But this film has me befuddled, so I'm giving it a low grade -- 6.The pros: Well, watching Julie Andrews is always a pleasure. George Roy Hill did something that usually gets very high marks from me -- something different. I really can't think of any other film that is much like this one. It was a joy to see the famous Beatrice Lilly, and so sad that she was already suffering from Alzheimer's when this film was made.The cons: Well, the story seems kinda...which word shall I use -- silly or foolish? Or maybe shallow. How would any one know they were going to watch a comedy about white slavery????? And, for worst actress, the award goes to Mary Tyler Moore...which really surprised me, because she was a bit of a favorite of mine, but seems to do better on the small screen than wide screen. John Gavin seems totally wasted here; why did he even agree to do this film? And Carol Channing...I never understood the attraction...and still don't. And for a musical, where is the notable, memorable song? There isn't one.Bottom line: Silly or foolish, and certainly not worth 138 minutes of celluloid!

mark.waltz When I was 13, this became one of my new "favorites". By the age of 30, that opinion had shrunk a bit. Now, umpteen years later, it remains a friendly memory, but the qualities of the film I thought were gems are now rhinestones. The audience knows immediately it is getting something special when Julie Andrews' voice sings the title song as she walks down Fifth Avenue, first a non-stylish frump, and bit by bit transforming herself into a "modern". Over the credits, there are bits and pieces of subtitles expressing Andrews' feelings, and this pops up throughout the movie. First, she comments on how ridiculous that her figure doesn't allow her beads to hang straight, and much later, notices that all society girls seem to be flat chester. Throughout the film, she performs a Jewish Wedding Song and dances with James Fox about a new dance he just made up called the "Tapioca" (which she gleefully announces she had for pudding). Of course, her whole world falls apart when her new boss (John Gavin) whom she had her sites on (for his alleged money), falls for her new pal, Dorothy (Mary Tyler Moore). But when Dorothy suddenly disappears, Andrews, Gavin and Fox all realize that something nefarious has occurred, and it all involves Mrs. Meers (Beatrice Lillie), Andrews' landlady.The opening shot of the squeaky laundry cart remains totally and hysterically unforgettable, as does the shot of the chopstick hair wearing Bea Lillie, playing a comic Mrs. Danvers/Maleficent/Gale Sondergaard's "The Letter" character spoof. "Oh, pook!", she rants when frustrated,"Shoo show" when ordering her "dumber than a bleached blonde" sidekicks about, and her ominous "Sad to be all alone in the world", which has more meaning than the compassion she pretends to have for the orphans she encounters at her 1920's Manhattan hotel for single young ladies. From the time she utters this at the newly arrived Mary Tyler Moore (as an orphan) to her final hick-up after saying the line, Lillie is hysterical. In short, this is her film, even in spite of the leading lady (Julie Andrews) and the Oscar Nominated Carol Channing.No doubt that Ms. Channing was worthy of the nomination. Wouldn't you after tap-dancing on a Xylaphone to "Jazz Baby" and being shot out of a cannon into a group of acrobats and immediately breaking into the song "Do It Again"? Her line "Rasberrys!", like some of Mrs. Meer's (Lillie) mutterings, has hidden meanings. Channing was Broadway's darling after her triumph in "Hello, Dolly!", and got a lot of sympathy from the inside Hollywood crowd after young Barbra Streisand got her role in the movie version of that long-running smash. Channing plays a wealthy earth-mother type who takes an interest in Andrews, and tries to persuade her that true love is the only way to make a marriage work.As for Andrews, in 1967, she could do no wrong, and audiences were thrilled to have her back in a musical after two dramas in 1966 ("Hawaii" and "Torn Curtain"). That would change the following year with the over-long "Star!". With hair like Maria Von Trapp and some stylish 20's fashions, Andrews made a perfect "modern". Who better to break up Mrs. Meers' white slavery ring than Mary Poppins? Mary Tyler Moore does what she can with a really unexceptional part, but like Andrews and Channing was at the top of her popularity after the hit TV series "The Dick Van Dyke Show". Her role is simply too goody goody to believe, although she does occasionally break out of it, such as her crack about a nasty socialite at Channing's Long Island party.The men are James Fox, as the eager beaver who hopes to date Millie, and John Gavin as the oh-so-swell boss. Fox and Andrews share a joy ride after the tapioca sequence, and later Fox repeats an old Harold Lloyd gag when he climbs up the building Millie works in after a misunderstanding. When they must try to entrap Mrs. Meers, Fox dresses in drag, looking more like Hedda Hopper than a new-in-town orphaned girl. It's all quite fun and harmless, yet about 20 minutes too long. Film critic Judith Christ said it would make a perfect 65 minute movie. There are some great minor characters as well, particularly Andrews' possessive supervisor and the nasty Judith Tremaine (the flat-chested socialite at Muzzy's party). Unfortunately, the 2002 Broadway version took out most of the camp, even if it did introduce the unflappable Sutton Foster to Broadway stardom. In a season with "Urinetown" and "Mamma Mia!", it was "Millie" that won the Tony. So for total camp, see the movie, but be aware that some moments really are "Thoroughly dumb and silly".