KnotMissPriceless
Why so much hype?
ShangLuda
Admirable film.
FirstWitch
A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.
Jonah Abbott
There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.
TheLittleSongbird
I like the Rosalind Russell version a lot(I perhaps prefer it just a tad) and Russell in it, but this Gypsy has a lot to recommend. It is not quite on par with the musical itself(neither film version is) which is a masterpiece of character and music, but it has its spirit, heart and charm. The spirit is droll and sincere and the story has so much heart to it. The music is wonderful and the lyrics positively delight. The production values are kitsch, bright and colourful. While I prefer Malden and Wood in their respective roles in the 1962 film, Peter Reigert(though his singing leaves a lot to be desired) and Cynthia Gibb are truly charming and entertaining, and Christine Ebersole steals all her scenes. If there are any preferences I have at all over the 1962 film, it is the staging and choreography, which is less clunky and moves more effortlessly, and Bette Midler's singing, Russell's was raspy and off-key sometimes whereas Midler's is big and brassy. Midler is just superb as Mama Rose, although Russell was superb also Midler's Mama Rose is truer to what Mama Rose should be like. Overall, a fine Gypsy. 8/10 Bethany Cox
AztecQueen2000
After seeing both the 1962 version and this one, I'd say each has its own strengths. It's too hard to compare any two Mama Rose's. Each one is working with a different director with a different vision. (To tell the truth, I liked them both.) Actually, the casting issues I had a problem with involved Tessy Tura and Dainty June. While Dainty June was played by a talented actress, she looked more like late thirties than thirteen. Also, Tessy Tura looked way too fresh-faced for a blasé stripper stuck in Wichita. My advice--switch 'em. Truth is, I thought the actresses that played both Louise and June were too old for their roles) Other than that, the 1993 version is better from a technological standpoint (Miss Electra doesn't look like she's wearing Christmas lights) and features all the songs from the original. I liked Bette Midler as Rose. Well-done, but not great.
westegg
The '90s was such a wasteland for musicals--with Disney animation at least restoring some luster by way of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, THE LION KING etc. But live-action? Not a prayer. Yet with GYPSY, a modestly budgeted TV-movie version of the Broadway show, with a first rate cast and crew, did an exceptional job showing how such things can still happen. Midler was the necessary powerhouse as Mama Rose, and the entire cast held their own just fine. A musical shouldn't have to be bogged down with socio-political baggage to make it relevant nowadays--a production like this shows what sheer showmanship and celebration of music and dance can still be all about, albeit derived from a forty year-old source. To see a renewal of this kind of exuberant entertainment would be a wonderful thing; at least this GYPSY shows how it can still work.
sroimoi
I loved this production of "Gypsy" so much that when my audiocassette of the Ethel Merman production got ruined I replaced it with a CD of the Midler "Gypsy." Bette Midler has the fire to do justice to this demanding role, and her supporting cast seemed agreeable to let her shine. But the highlight of the film for me was "You Gotta Have a Gimmick." The three strip women as a group are a comic delight.
