Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

richard-1787 TCM ran this tonight, and I had to wander why. There's plenty of talent here, but not in the script or the direction.Poor Ann-Margret, who was an accomplished dancer - and, of course, a very attractive woman - gets stuck in a role where her only dancing is a very bad knock-off of what made her famous in Bye, Bye Birdie. She plays someone so naive and puritanical that all her sex appeal fails to overcome the impression that she's one frigid, repressed basket case.The rest of the movie isn't much better. Good to very good actors get stuck in roles that barely have two dimensions.And don't let the "Paris" in the title fool you. Most of this movie was filmed not just on sets - after all, that was true of An American in Paris as well, and that is a stupendous movie - but uninteresting sets, hotel rooms that may have been left over from MGM's 1939 Ninotchka. The only atmospheric moment is an embarrassment. AM and Louis Jourdain appear on the set used for Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron in AAIP, the great Seine River scene where the two great dancers dance and fall in love. This time, however, that same set is shot without any of the poetry that has immortalized it in AAIP. The song is not great Gershwin, but an forgettable flop. And there is no dancing. Even though AM was a great dancer. Talk about wasting an opportunity! In short, there really is nothing to recommend this movie. Those in it all did better, much better, elsewhere. It's often embarrassing to watch them here.Skip it.

Marco Trevisiol One of the series of mediocre films that saw Ann-Margret's film career stagnate until 'Carnal Knowledge', 'Made In Paris' looks great, has a decent cast and should be at the very least a harmless timewaster. But it's not even that.What really sinks it is (as other reviews here have noted) how badly written Ann-Margret's character is, going from prim and naive to a wildcat with no rhyme or reason.I think this is because the film was trying to have its cake and eat it too in trying to represent both the more permissive culture that was developing in mid-1960s America (even though this is mainly set in Paris), while dealing with the restrictions of the conservative Hays Code, then in its dying days. Unfortunately, the script and direction aren't good enough to overcome this contradiction and the film is a largely dreary mess.Ann-Margret is largely sunk by the horribly-written character she's saddled with. But she does display her skills during a fun dance number and provides some entertainment when briefly showing her 'wild side'.Of the rest of the cast, Crenna comes off best with a role that you wish had been more substantial. Everett is dull and Adams is wasted in a nothing role that is even more poorly-scripted than Ann-Margret's is.Only for die-hard Ann-Margret fans.

Poseidon-3 A film also exclusively for admirers of Ms. Margret (or of mid-60's couture), this fluffy romance starts off interestingly, but eventually wears out its welcome. Margret plays a model-turned-fashion buyer for a major New York department store. After a hit-or-miss courtship with the owner's son (Everett), she finds herself assigned to a Paris buying trip, thanks to the impromptu marriage of the normal buyer (Adams.) Upon arrival in Paris, Margret soon discovers that Adams had typically done some extra unzipping with one of the primary designers (Jourdan) and believes he wants her to provide the same type of service. This leads to some misunderstanding between Margret and Jourdan which is further complicated by the arrival of Everett and the presence of his pal Crenna, who he'd assigned to look out for her during her stint in The City of Love. A near wordless opening sequence between Everett and Margret demonstrates the dynamic between them, with him expecting to go to bed with her after a night on the town and with her batting her eyes, but refusing to go further than a kiss on the cheek. Most of the film involves her flip-flopping madly between behaving like a turned-on, panting, lovestruck feline or a chaste, buttoned-down virgin. Before too long, the audience becomes as frustrated as the men in her life trying to decipher exactly what she's after. Margret looks amazing throughout most of the film in a dazzling array of costume concoctions and with crazy hairstyles by Guilaroff (who did love to get his hands on her scalp.) Her baby doll voice is a matter of taste (including her left-field, dewy duet with Jourdan more than halfway in), but one can't deny that she had an interesting look and moved well. At this stage in her career, practically every A-M film had a gyrating dance number and this one is no exception with a quartet of male bar patrons somehow falling into full-on stage show choreography in support of her! Jourdan, ever the class act, does a nice job, but isn't required to do anything out of his usual comfort zone. Crenna seems to be enjoying his man-about-town role, though there isn't really anything special about it either. Adams isn't given very much to do, but looks lovely in her own set of sexy Helen Rose creations, especially a tight black gown in which Adams can almost walk! Everett is a Ken doll come to life, but manages to establish a little chemistry with Margret. Dalio and Calnan nicely portray the confused and concerned servants at Margret's Parisian apartment. Made at a time when audiences were supposed to be shocked (or at least MGM thought perhaps they might be shocked) that a man in pajamas has entered a woman's bedroom, the film is dated, to be sure, but does provide a colorful and sometimes lively diversion. Marked "for adults only", one would be hard-pressed to find anything objectionable about it, if one could even stay with it until the bitter end. It's hard to believe "Valley of the Dolls" was released merely one year later! A few critics at the time noted the double meaning of the title, but no one gets any action here! One highlight is a fashion show, replete with lanky models showing off the instantaneously-dated, to-die-for clothes, and featuring a truly ugly wedding gown which A-M describes as the most beautiful she has ever seen. (Rose had to settle that year for an Oscar nomination for "Mister Buddwing" in the black and white category, rather than for her rather eye-popping items here.) The nightclub scene with seductive Margret writhing for Jourdan's benefit is also fun (and the place is so smoky that Crenna can barely tell whose hand he's holding!) This was made during Everett's chief stab at film stardom, but within three years he would be on TV making his mark on "Medical Center", his signature role.

Ripshin Overall, this grab-bag of 60s genres really doesn't work very well. The MGM gloss is clearly evident, however, and some of the set pieces are not to be missed.Two-thirds of the way through this flick, I realized that I had lost interest, mainly due to weak characterizations, and stupid plot contrivances. The AM dance number and subsequent vocal come out of nowhere - this is definitely an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink script.AM's performance is unsubstantial, although LJ provides his usual touch of sophistication. RC and CE are completely inconsequential.Recommended only for set and costume design......and perhaps for the chance to see AM in her prime.