AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Jim Colyer Paul Newman made his best movie after becoming an old man. In Blaze, he plays Governor Earl Long of Louisiana. Earl has a scandalous affair with stripper Blaze Starr. I remember this being in the news in 1959. Blaze is played by Lolita Davidovich. She is Yugoslavian, of Serbian/Croatian descent. Blaze makes her way from West Virginia to New Orleans to the governor's mansion in Baton Rouge. Obviously Earl is a liberal. He is a Democrat who supports Civil Rights. This is a comedy, and there are some funny scenes, Earl having sex with his boots on and shooting his lawn mower. Robert Wuhl's character is interesting but has a small part. Blaze exits through the bathroom window and leaves him, taking her mother's advice not to trust any man who tells her to trust him. Blaze's affair with the governor continued until his death in 1960.I watched Blaze again last night and must say it is an underrated movie. Paul Newman's acting is superb. He should have gotten an Oscar for his portrayal of Earl Long. Lolita Davidovich is charming as stripper Blaze Starr. We all understand that movies stray from the facts for comedic purposes and dramatic effect. After all, how many of us care about Louisana politics in the 20th century. We are looking for an entertaining flick! Fact is, both Earl and Blaze were married when they met. When Earl died in 1960, he was the Democratic nominee for Congress but had not been elected. He left Blaze Starr $50,000 in his will which she refused to accept. There is not a dull moment in this film. It is one of my favorites.

mattymatt4ever Movies based on real-life stories and characters are known for being dependent on using certain comedic and dramatic devices to "keep the audience enthused," but this film felt so artificial that I had a hard time maintaining the thought that this was based on a true story. I wasn't given too much insight into these characters (all one- or two-dimensional), and it basically plays out like a farce that takes a serious turn in the last 45 minutes or so. The character arc or Blaze Starr is developed way too swiftly. In the first 10 minutes, she's this nice little small town gal who lives a healthy Christian life and has a passion for folk music. She gets on stage once, at first (very briefly) getting offended by the booing soldiers who want her to "take it off," and suddenly in that one little striptease she feels liberated? By the 10-minute mark, she's already this sultry, vanity-stricken stripper who gallops at any chance to show off her body to libidinous males. Hell, Elizabeth Berkeley had a more extensive character arc in "Showgirls." I can fathom the change in Blaze Starr's character. I just wanna know the steps in how those changes occurred, because I'm pretty damn sure they didn't occur so swiftly. I've seen several movies with Lolita Davidovich, and she's not a bad actress. She never blew me away with any particular performance, but I never had any negative criticisms about her. Well, this was Davidovich's first movie and...it pretty much shows. Though her character was written poorly, her cartoonish one-note performance doesn't help much. She never properly expresses the humanistic values of her character, and doesn't portray herself as much more than a dirty slut. Paul Newman's character of Earl Long wasn't written very well, and doesn't give the audience very much to sympathize with, but he plays it out the best he can. His energetic performance is about the only reason to check out this overlooked dud. But as I said, his character is written poorly and about all we learn about him is he's a dirty old man with psychological problems. The only good thing we learn about him is his persistence in awarding voting rights to African-Americans, and allowing them to be doctors. But I can see exactly why he was struggling to be re-elected as governor. I sure as hell wouldn't vote for him! That's not a good sign. Even when creating a character who's not perfectly sympathetic (which I have nothing wrong with) you must be able to express his/her good values effectively, even if it's done with subtlety. The country/western folk songs are a bit of a turn-off (at least to me), but I'm not gonna use that against the overall quality of the movie. After all, it is set in Louisiana. "Blaze" is not a terrible film, it's mildly entertaining, but I wanted to know a lot more about these 2 characters (even if the movie went on for 2 1/2 hours) and what resulted was no more than a throwaway comedy/drama. See it only for Newman's terrific performance.My score: 5 (out of 10)

davidholmesfr Southern politics and strip-tease dancers make for a steamy mix and although we don't feel the heat of `Big Easy' this does try to raise the temperature. But it's thwarted by its own lack of direction. There are, in effect, three stories here - firstly the fall and rise (and fall again) of Earl K Long (`fine Governor of the great State of Louisiana'); secondly, the rise of stripper Blaze Starr and thirdly, what happens when these two larger than life characters form a life-changing relationship. Shelton concentrates on the latter, leaving us feeling that there might actually have been more fertile ground in either of the first two.Newman (as Long) dominates the proceedings as a scoundrel of a politician that y'all are gonna love. His political opponents are totally against his support for Civil Rights - and his supporters are dubious too. His relationship with Starr doesn't exactly help his political chances. The politics alone, with Starr more in the background, could have made for an intense movie. Starr arrives on the scene as a leading light in the New Orleans strip joints (although quite how she makes the leap from nervous, reluctant stripper to top of the bill is omitted). Once they get together the film loses direction, not knowing whether to delve more deeply into the politics or whether to lighten the presentation by concentrating on the relationship. Some scenes seem to be included primarily so that some cute jokes can be kept in the script - `meet my yes men and their wives' is an example of a scene that doesn't add much to depth, but seems to be there for the laugh. Overall Shelton leans to the light touch and the whole ends up begging more questions than it answers.The film does acknowledge the changing times of the late 1950s and the advent of a more liberal society. Long foresees the advent of a successful Civil Rights movement, whilst Starr sees a future where strippers will be required to remove their G-strings. But overall this is a lost opportunity, concentrating on the veneer of a not-too-convincing relationship at the expense of a greater expose. In short Shelton should have removed the political G-string.

dwpollar 1st watched 1/21/2002 - 3 out of 10(Dir-Ron Shelton): Confusing, comedy/drama about a true life relationsip between a Governor of Louisiana and a stripper named Blaze Starr. The confusion lies in what this movie wants to be. The intention of the Director seems to change almost from scene to scene. Is it a drama about Starr? Is it a comedy about the loud-mothed politician who fell in love with her? Is it a bitter-sweet Pretty Woman-like retread? Is it a true story played out to the best of everyone's ability despite the comedy-like events that took place? It's hard to tell even up to the very end what the goal was of the filmmakers in this one. Newman & Davidovich do ok jobs with their roles but the story and it's lack of a clear direction is what causes this movie's failure. We're also not really sure what the character's are really grabbing for with their exploits. A real dissapointment coming from the writer of "Bull Durham" and the Academy award winning actor Paul Newman. I guess everyone's got to make a loser every once in a while.