Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

JohnHowardReid When M-G-M bought the rights from Paramount in order to film a Red Skelton re-make in 1947, they also acquired the negative. This they suppressed. The movie was never shown on American TV and thus all the people who wrote the books on Claudette Colbert, Fredric March, Gary Cooper, Maurice Chevalier and the rest were forced to rely largely on guesswork, leavened with what could be gleaned from contemporary reviews in Variety, Photoplay, Time and The New York and Los Angeles Times. The only critic who got nearly everything right was Homer Dickens who had the good sense to hunt through the files of the British Film Institute where he came upon a spread in "Picture Show" featuring Stuart Erwin with his hero, Gary Cooper. All the others relied simply upon their own powers of deduction and the way "guest stars" were treated in movies they were familiar with. They reasoned that Paramount would treat their guest stars with a certain amount of indulgence and fanfare. This is far from the case. The treatment is, to say the least, decidedly casual. This is one of the film's charms. True, Chevalier is given an "entrance", but that's all it amounts to. Cooper is handed a line of dialogue about dropping into wardrobe. Bankhead waves him a two-word farewell. Jack Oakie and Charlie Ruggles enter the preview theater together, conversing briefly. A glum and silent Fredric March can be glimpsed in a corner of the same lobby, signing autographs. From memory, I don't think that Merton is "introduced" to any of the guest stars at all. Nor does he have any conversations with them. In fact, by and large, the "guests" are dropped into the action so casually, most modern viewers will not be made aware of Brook, Colbert, Holmes, March or Sidney at all. Thus do errors repeat themselves and the uninspired guesswork of self-styled "cinema historians" becomes elevated to "facts". The real "guest star" of "Make Me a Star" is none other than the movie's actual director, William Beaudine, who contrives some wonderfully riotous run-ins between his assistant director character, stumble-bum Erwin and Oscar Apfel. Apfel is an absolute howl as a tactful but not-so- patient director (obviously modeled on — you guessed it — Beaudine himself). Confused? Make a point of seeing this movie TWICE and it will all work out!The Hollywood scenes are undoubtedly the most entertaining in the movie. They are helped out not only by Bill Beaudine's unusually stylish direction with its masterly use of the Paramount lot itself (masquerading in the film as Majestic Pictures) but by the presence of that vital, alluring, vivacious little blonde bundle of warmth and cynicism, Joan Blondell. Perfectly cast here, Miss Blondell can snap out put-down lines with all the rapid-fire command of a Glenda Farrell, whilst still displaying the warmth and sympathy, the caressing kindliness of an Irene Dunne.Erwin does okay as Merton, though one often has the feeling that his performance is more mechanical than heartfelt. Aside from Blondell, it's the support players that make the movie. Charles Sellon, repeating his role from the silent version, as the mean and mangy storekeeper, Ruth Donnelly as the wise-cracking "countess", Sam Hardy as the guiding hand of Loadstone, Oscar Apfel as the no- frills director. And of course, Ben Turpin, — though his part is brief and amounts almost to slightly uncomfortable self-parody. But maybe that's what the clever script is getting at. Maybe that's the whole point of "Make Me a Star". Where's the glamour the script seems to be asking? Hollywood is a factory town. This is the aspect the script makes time and time again. The gloom of the cheerless casting office is not exactly cast aside by the time we finally enter through that door which has closed over numerous exits and at last reach our goal — the lot itself. Where's the glamour? And what of "Flips"? What role actually is she playing? She seems at first to be Donnelly's boss and then her assistant. Then an actress (extra? star?), then a girl with an "in" to various executives — to the assistant director whom she pressures into giving Merton his first break; to the Loadstone chief whom she talks into experimenting with parody. She obviously has the freedom of the lot, yet there's an implication this freedom was purchased for the usual price. Yes, "Make Me a Star" is definitely a movie that will repay more than one visit.

bbrebozo I'm old enough to remember Joan Blondell as a funny and sassy old lady when she was a guest on television talk shows in the 1960's and 1970s, and I've enjoyed Stuart Erwin's other films, so I really wanted to love this movie. Sadly, I didn't, for two reasons.First, because Stuart...Erwin gave almost...all of his lines a...halting reading that I think was...supposed to make...him seem like...a humble and ignorant country boy...but got...really annoying...after a while. It was like two hours of a really bad Christopher Walken imitation.Second, I found Stuart Erwin's character very unlikeable. Basically, he plays an ignorant and untalented narcissist who shows up in Hollywood expecting to be given big dramatic roles with one specific studio. When Joan Blondell takes an inexplicable liking to him, and gets him a job as a movie extra (which he initially thinks is beneath him), he blows his line and gets fired. So instead of trying to get work at another studio, or getting a regular job, he stays behind the studio walls and lives on scraps from the trash.Again, Blondell comes to the rescue, and gives him another shot at movies. But since he despises what he calls "cross-eyed comedies" (a shot at legendary cross-eyed movie comedian Ben Turpin, who co-stars with him), they cast him in a movie without telling him it's a comedy. He becomes a big star, largely because he is so untalented that it's funny. But because he is the star of his despised cross-eyed comedies, he's hurt, has a hissy fit, and makes plan to return to his hometown.He ends up staying, apparently because of the mutual love between him and Joan Blondell. However, there is absolutely no chemistry between Blondell and Erwin at all. So the ending makes no sense and is pretty unsatisfying.I did like the twist, unusual for the 1930's, of a successful woman using her position of power to rescue a weak and vulnerable man. Unfortunately, because the movie was ineptly done, this twist was underplayed and buried.To those who rated this film highly: Believe me, I wish I could have agreed with you.

MartinHafer I must first point out that I have never seen the silent version or the Red Skelton remake (both titled "Merton of the movies"), so I really cannot compare this film to the previous or later versions.The film begins in a small town. Local boy, Merton (Stu Erwin) has ambitions to become a cowboy star in movies and has just completed his correspondence course in acting. However, it's obvious to the viewer that Merton, though likable, is a terrible actor and a bit of a boob. So, when he heads off for Hollywood it's not surprising he is in way over his head. However, a lady at the studio (Joan Blondell) feels sorry for him after weeks of coming in to the casting office and helps him get a job. But, he's terrible at acting and they haven't the heart to tell this nice guy. In fact, he's so bad they decide to cast him in a comedy--but not tell him it's NOT a serious western. In the end, he discovers the ruse and feels heartbroken...and then the movie unexpectedly ends.This film has kernels of a good film but doesn't quite make it. Sure, Erwin in likable (as usual) but he's too serious and pathetic in the film to make this a comedy--and at times, I felt uncomfortable watching him. He was, instead of funny, quite pathetic. I assume Skelton played it more for laughs--and that's probably a better way to have played it. In addition, the film has no real ending...it just stops and seems quite incomplete. An interesting but flawed concept.By the way, Harold Lloyd made a similar film but it was much, much, much better. "Movie Crazy" is a terrific film about a boob who arrives in Hollywood and has no idea that the folks are laughing at his dramatic performances--and he becomes an inexplicable star.

judith-38 "Make me a Star" is a heartrending film, one that superbly demonstrates the sincerity, honesty, and versatility of Stuart Erwin. Although many of the early scenes are farcical and satirize slapstick comedy, specifically the kind directed by Mack Sennett, the movie turns serious when it delves into the boorish behavior of the Hollywood studio system moguls, who prey upon starstruck acting hopefuls. And Stuart Erwin, as one of these unworldly hopefuls, handles both the farce and the drama equally adroitly. The final scene between Erwin and Joan Blondell is heartbreaking. In fact, I was so impressed with the movie that I decided to devote much of one chapter to this remarkable film in my book on Stuart Erwin.