Cortechba Overrated

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Rexanne It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

jacobs-greenwood Jimmy Broadbent (Harrison), who has a daughter Jane (Dee) by first wife, an American, is now married to fellow Britisher Sheila (Kendall). When the comely Jane comes to live with them in London, Sheila is so jealous of her friend Mabel's (Angela Lansbury) braggadocio about introducing daughter Clarissa (Diane Clare) to society that she decides to hold a debutante ball for Jane, who is less than thrilled with the idea.What follows is an often amusing, sometimes boring, comedic exposé of the British society of the time, beautifully rendered by Director Vincente Minnelli, cinematographer Joseph Ruttenberg, Art Director Jean d'Eaubonne (because of Harrison's tax troubles, Pandro S. Berman had to produce it in Paris), and Costume Designer Helen Rose.Much of the comedy stems from misunderstandings - Kendall's Sheila is deliciously confused -mostly due to the fact that both of Jane's would-be suitors are named David: the debonair Italian-American drummer Parkson (played by John Saxon), with a questionable reputation, and the monotonous Brit Fenner (Peter Myers), a Palace Guard. Clarissa adores David Fenner, but he prefers the bright virginal American, whom he pursues with repugnant abandon despite Mabel's scheming and Jane's repeated rejections.The film's best scenes are between Harrison and Saxon, whose characters come to an understanding in part because of Jimmy's insight and then knowledge of Parkson's past and, subsequently, his future. It is weakest in the middle, when the repetitious high society debutante ball season is overplayed to emphasize the exhaustive nature of it. The bedroom door staging near the end approaches being overdone as well, but the movie is saved by Jimmy's manipulation of his wife, whom he silences with a kiss at its close.

MartinHafer I am not sure why this film isn't more famous, as it was a very entertaining romantic-comedy. Considering that it was directed by Vincente Minelli and stars Rex Harrison, it can't help but be good. It's apparently good enough that the film was remade just a few years ago as WHAT A GIRL WANTS.As the film begins, the cream of British society is readying itself for a long string of debutante balls--just as Rex Harrison's daughter from a previous marriage arrives from America (Sandra Dee). His new wife (played by his real-life wife, Kay Kendell) is having a disagreeable conversation with an annoying friend (Angela Lansbury) about these society dances when she feels compelled to announce that her step-daughter will be introduced to society at the next ball--even though the girl and her father have no interest in these stuffy affairs. But to please the step-mom, they go through with it. Unfortunately, Kay is pretty snobby and tries to arrange a marriage with an in-bred idiot and Sandra. At the same time, Kay is horrified that Sandra is falling for a lowly drummer with a lousy reputation (John Saxon). How all this is worked out to everyone's satisfaction is pretty funny and quite romantic. I think most of this is due to good writing and the nice gentle nature of the film. In fact, the longer I watched it, the more I liked it and found myself really being pulled into the story. It's a very good and often overlooked film--pity, as it really should be more widely seen.

trpdean I quite like this movie.The story is written like a Restoration mistaken identity comedy (think Wycherly, Congreve or Farquahar) but without the low necklines and with much less bawdiness (yes, you may wonder what's left).The lines given Saxon and Dee are pretty bad - and although Saxon does the best he can, I don't think Sandra Dee does an interesting job at all - she looks quite bored (if pretty). When they're on screen, this is incredibly dull.Yet the adults, working with almost nothing, go all out and make this a pleasure -- you'll wish that the story were a variant of Unfaithfully Yours with Harrison or Kendall suspecting the other of infidelity and no children in sight.Yet despite all,Minnelli makes the movie stunningly beautiful (you very much want to be there) with great rich colors, London shown in glorious sweeping color, and the movie goes swiftly with wonderful and amusing editing ---- the costumes and sets are just so beautiful ---- Rex Harrison is in as finely comic a mode (don't expect his Henry IV or wonderful Julius Caesar here) as he's ever been - and that is VERY high praise -- -- Kay Kendall is a moviegoer's dream - stunningly beautiful, an exquisite comedic touch, wonderful with either a line or a pratfall. In movies like this, Genevieve, Les Girls, she is an aristocratic Lucille Ball if you can imagine that - as giddy, as wildly inventive -- but haute.-- Angela Lansbury takes a thankless part and really gets into it - and Lansbury is superb.So, sure, the story is gossamer, there aren't many amusing lines, but the panache brought by the director, costume and set designers, Harrison, Kendall and Lansbury combine to make this quite enjoyable.There's something to be said for a movie that you want to see again and again simply because you wish you were there. I own relatively few movies, but this is one.

gregorybnyc I can't add much to what has already been said of this delightful movie. But nobody has mentioned the costumes. It's astonishing to note that Balmain created the dresses for both Kay Kendall and Angela Lansbury. Nearly 50 years later, Kendall still looks ravishingly current in her haute couture day and evening wear. The magnificent red dress she wears in the first party scene is a perfect example and she had the stunning figure to enhance these wonderful costumes. Angela, who had a nifty figure herself, is a more full-figured woman. She's also playing a nasty bitch in this film, and her costumes reflect this aspect of her personality. Instead of looking chic, she looks dowdy. Sandra Dee's costumes were created by MGM's Helen Rose. I didn't care for any of her daytime wear which was very much a product of the 50s, but it is with gowns that Rose's talent shines, and there's a lovely blue gown with tiny blue bows in the final scenes of this movie that you really notice, and Dee wears the dress like the prom queen she was. Rex Harrison could wear stylish men's clothing with panache, and he does so here too. I love this sophisticated movie, which I only discovered a few years ago. And the interior sets are equally beautiful.