Nonureva Really Surprised!

Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

malcolmgsw A good musical must have some tuneful melodies,reasonable book and not outsmart its welcome.This film fails on all three counts.Furthermore it has Sid Field in the lead.Now whilst this may be a good thing for music hall historians he simply is not up to the lead role in a film.Furthermore if you don't enjoy the humour of his sketches then you really are stuck.He has a good supporting cast in Claude Hulbert Sonnie Hale and Jerry Desmonde.It is difficult to understand why Rank let Wesley Ruggles direct it,then allow it to be released in a version over two hours long.By 1950 Rank was overdrawn by millions of pounds and brought in John Davis to wield the axe.

stephen-wallin Now that the full film is finally available on DVD, complete with the deleted scenes restored in the right order, the film is no longer to be seen as such a turkey. It lost money, embarrassed it's backer's, affected careers, and was badly directed by Wesley Ruggles, brought in at Sid Fields request. It still suffers from a missing laughter track in some sketches, and due to his sudden demise, few know Sid Fields huge reputation as a top comic. Rank tore the film apart in efforts to get it through the US censor system, added the cost of the rebuild of Shepperton to the bills, and restricted the distribution to the UK at first. The film is not bad, just disjointed in places, with a poor story line, but the musical numbers work fine. Sid Fields routines are flat because there is no audience roaring with mirth at his every prat fall and joke. The 1980's issue made things worst, with numbers chopped and altered in order, making it a mess from start to finish. But now restored, even the joke apology ending, and re-ordered, it works as a fine nostalgic look at a 1940's review show, in excellent colour, and now very pristine look. Kay Kendal said it ruined her career, yes, but because it stalled at the US box office, not because it was bad, after all it did good business in the UK when new. She had been slated for stardom before the film, and lots of publicity was given , that backfired when they could not sell it to the US distributors, leaving her career in limbo.

dsewizzrd-1 Petula Clark stars as a young girl in this confused (post-modernist ?) musical, with a whole cast of down-on-their-luck stars producing a variety of songs on some very expensive sets that don't seem to _quite_ make sense.There is evidence of much cutting, particularly in the 'gay' scene (well that's what it looked like to me) which cuts out and runs out of true, but also with the fact that the story is often incoherent and introduces unexplained new elements (such as 'The Amsted Way' ??).The comedy act at the end is terrible, and the lead is as well.Wildly expensively made in Technicolour, perhaps as an experiment ? (Maybe that's why J. Arthur kept in black & white for so long).

edward wilgar Interesting today mainly as a historical record of the Music Hall (Vaudeville to our American cousins), this is fairly slow and unfunny when not actually showing the performances.Featuring Sid Field, a big star of the thirties and forties. He had a pleasant light singing voice but his act included a Golf Lesson routine not in the class of his namesake, W.C. Two-ton Tessie O'Shea, literally a big star, showed that she had lots of personality and there's an enjoyable Pearlie Kings act with `Any Old Iron?' etc.Surprisingly in (pretty gaudy) colour.