Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

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.

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Fullhousefrk3566 all the people who have seen this movie thought Zooey Deschanel who plays Lady Larken was terrible but i thought she was OK She sings in a cabaret called "If all stars were pretty babies" so she has a jazz type of voice so people lay off the rude remarks! But MATTHEW MORRISON WAS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! he is so gorgeous! and Denis o'hare disgusted me on how he acts like a little kid and even how he sings is like hearing nails on a chalkboard! Tracey Ullman was better than expected but she doesn't knock your socks off and carol Burnett is never bad! she always does a amazing job! and Micheal boatman who plays the Jester is hilarious! I give this movie one thumb up but its worth watching!

vchimpanzee This is the first time I have seen any version of "Once Upon a Mattress". I thought Carol Burnett was wonderful as the domineering, often emotional and sometimes quite evil queen. And she could even sing. Tracey Ullman was outrageously quirky, especially when she tried to go to sleep. She could also be warm and pleasant, and she even had some singing talent--if that was her. Her first musical performance was more funny than anything else. Tom Smothers did quite a good job as the mute king, who could not talk after being cursed. Denis O'Hare also delivered. Zooey Deschanel and Matthew Morrison were very talented singers and did okay at acting. And Michael Boatman was very funny as the Jester, and Edward Hibbert deliciously evil as the Wizard.I would say this was clean enough for most children. I questioned the TV-PG rating until I heard a reference to premarital sex. But unless a child knows where babies come from, this would be meaningless. It might lead the child to ask where babies come from, and of course King Sextimus gave his son a hilarious explanation of the process which never really got to the point. Especially since it was all in mime.There was also a double entendre from Winnifred, but it would go over most kids' heads.I enjoyed the music for the most part. Despite the medieval setting and costumes, a lot of the music sounded like Rodgers and Hammerstein. Winnifred also performed a sultry jazz number that seemed appropriate for a stripper. The dancing and costumes also impressed.I won't say it was a Disney classic, but it was certainly up to the usual Disney standards.

bobwen Mattress is a great show... for those 16 or older. Like most Warner "Looney Tunes" it was never intended for children! Now, if you take that very premise, and try to make it palatable for the Christain set between our 2 mountain ranges, you kill the very premise for the show in the first place! The original plot revolves around, and is propelled by a pre-marital pregnancy, an Oedipal relationship, a woman-chasing father, and typical court intrigue. These are now, essentially all gone and with them went the engine that drives the show. That said, the actors here were all fine, and generally well cast (although I'd have gone with Marcel Marceau or the brilliant Bill Irwin for the King, even though Tommy Smothers was still great) and all the leads made the very wise choice of going with their own strengths as opposed to trying to out do the originals. Tracey Ullman was great as her own Winnifred, and Burnett created her own Queen, knowing that, like her own Winnifred of 1959, Jane White's original Queen is absolutely not copyable! The "dated" musical sound of the original was marvelously updated for today. All of which underscored the terrible rewriting of the book, and the stodgy direction accompanying it. Why take 5 minutes of droopy dialog to establish what "Opening For A Princess" did musically in 2? Where did that useless dungeon scene come from? "The Queen Has Ordered Quiet" and "Very Soft Shoes"" would have fit much better in the same amount of time. "Mattress" is a fully loaded freight train racing down a steep mountain grade, barely staying on the tracks, whistle and bells going all the way. Anything less (like the recent Broadway revival too) just falls flat. I wish they'd either re-release the 1964 B&W version, or someone please do a shot-by-shot remake, as it was written! No, Hollywood, you don't know better than the original Broadway writers and, no Disney, you don't know real comedy. You know "cute, innocent and humorous," but that's a long way from comedy! Please stop remaking Broadway musical comedies. Let someone else do it, please!

BestOfAllPossible I was very much looking forward to this new TV "Mattress," especially to see Carol Burnett playing the role she played opposite in the original Broadway production. I was a little skeptical about Tracy Ullman, but willing to see what this new version would be like.Well, my fears about Tracy Ullman were fulfilled, and then some. She was simply miscast in the role of Princess Winnifred. Though, even worse was the actress playing Lady Larkin as though she were in a bad '80s teeny-bopper movie. Her voice was not good enough to sing Larkin, so her harmonies with the marvelous Matthew Morrison were mucked with to the point that some of the songs were almost unrecognizable.And even the good performers (Carol Burnett, Denis O'Hare, Matthew Morrison) could not save it, due to poor direction. The choreography was pedestrian at best. The majority of the jokes were given away before the punchline was anywhere in sight.The highlight was the new song written for Carol Burnett as Queen Aggravaine. Still, the whole thing stayed very "safe," which you cannot do with musical theatre. Safe musical theatre is boring musical theatre.The whole thing, I'm sad to say, is a disappointment and an embarrassment.