Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

dglink Released toward the end of the era of big-budget musicals, "Paint Your Wagon," with a tuneful score by Lerner and Lowe, was maligned by critics for its bloated production, non-singing leads, and clunky direction. However, more than four decades later, the film remains a guilty pleasure for many and offers enough entertainment to please most. However, while director Joshua Logan may have shown genius directing stage musicals, his work on film falls flat. His screen musical adaptations, "Camelot," "South Pacific," and this film were all directed with a heavy hand that failed to capture the stage magic in their transition to the screen. Vastly revised by Alan Jay Lerner and Paddy Chayefsky from the original Broadway production, "Paint Your Wagon" is set during the California Gold Rush, where two unlikely men partner up and share everything, eventually even a wife. Although most of the bawdy aspects are suggested rather than shown, the menage-a-trois at the core of the film may have been too adult for family audiences in the late 1960's, and extolling the virtues of prostitution for a virtually all male town is also quite adult.Although cast largely with non-singers in the tradition of such other screen adaptations as "My Fair Lady" and "Camelot," there is little damage to the songs, because many are choral numbers, and the show's best song, "They Call the Wind Maria," is sung by an accomplished Broadway musical star, Harve Presnell. Clint Eastwood has modest singing skills; his voice is not bad, his rendition of "I Talk to the Trees" is acceptable, and, to be fair, he did record an album of western songs at one point. Jean Seberg's voice was dubbed, but she is colorless in the lead female role; a Shirley Jones would have been stronger both vocally and dramatically. For a woman supposedly in love with two men, Seberg generates little heat or chemistry with her co-stars. Lee Marvin is appropriately colorful, although his voice is gravelly and rough, and he seems to be reprising his "Cat Ballou" performance. While the choreography has also been criticized, the sight of a group of scruffy miners breaking into perfectly synchronized dance steps like "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers," would look ludicrous.Admittedly "Paint Your Wagon" is over long and over produced; a silly prolonged climax that consists of endless special effects may have been intended for laughs, but it falls flat. However, despite much to justifiably criticize, the music is captivating, most of the performances are fun to watch, and the movie is often just plain fun.

a_baron "Paint Your Wagon" is based on the 1951 Broadway musical of the same name, but for the usual reasons the plot has been altered somewhat. Also, it would not have been possible to portray a ménage à trois on stage in 1951.Having said that, there isn't a great deal to the plot: prospectors during the California Gold Rush erect a new town called No Name City. Before that though, with four hundred men and no women at all...then two women arrive with their husband - singular. What happens next is far from edifying, and it is a little surprising that third wave feminists haven't organised a worldwide boycott of the video.Nevertheless, this is primarily a musical, and although most of the songs are not particularly strong, they are certainly passable, the two exceptional ones being "They Call The Wind Maria" and "Wand'rin' Star", the latter of which was performed by the gravelly voiced Lee Marvin and was a surprise number one hit in the UK.

dimplet While "Hello, Dolly!" is a movie that some viewers feel compelled to admire, "Paint Your Wagon" is a movie some viewers feel compelled to criticize. I don't feel compelled to do either. What counts is whether you enjoy a movie, not whether you are "supposed to" admire a movie. I did not enjoy "Hello, Dolly!" despite giving it my best try several times. But I have enjoyed watching "Paint Your Wagon," even with several viewings over the years. I enjoy musicals. As a kid in the Sixties I would borrow the LPs of the Broadway cast or movie soundtrack from the library, before there were VHS or DVDs. I enjoyed listening to the great songs. But now we don't have to limit ourselves to just the music excerpts. This provides a clue to the difference between these two musicals. "Hello, Dolly!" had some very good music, of a Broadway sort, so we assumed it was an equally good musical. "Paint Your Wagon" had musical roots going back to the Fifties, and was a musical non-entity."Hello, Dolly!" the movie has lots of good Broadway songs and incredibly lavish sets and dance numbers, which are its raison d'etre. But the movie has a plot that is astonishingly weak, in light of its Broadway success. Watching a fleet of dancing waiters performing absurd acrobatics is not my idea of fun."Paint Your Wagon" has some decent musical numbers, and some almost feeble attempts at dancing, but no one in their right mind would see it just for its music and dancing. So judged on that score, alone, it would rate a flop. But it's got a reasonably interesting story and very good acting, including a fine comic performance by Lee Marvin (!), not to mention some memorable croaking that passes for singing. If you snipped out all the singing and dancing, "Paint Your Wagon" would still be a film worth watching."Hello, Dolly!" on the other hand, has acting that varies from mediocre to miserably atrocious, and a story line you wouldn't pay more than $100 for someone to write. If you cut out the music and dancing, the audience would walk out. The sore point with "Paint Your Wagon" is its budget. Reviewers relish reminding people of its $18 million budget. But "Hello, Dolly!" cost $25 million, and they both came out in the same year (although Dolly was filmed earlier and shelved). Because so much money was wasted on Wagon, we are not supposed to enjoy it. While it is easy to put down the musical side of Wagon, it should be pointed out that Lerner and Lowe, Nelson Riddle and Andre Previn are hardly slouches. And Clint Eastwood acquits himself remarkably well. With Wagon, the producers wisely picked actors who were right for the part, and dealt with the singing later. What I find most curious in comparing the two, is that Dolly seems two or three times as long as Wagon, even though it has faster pacing and is 146 minutes long, to Wagon's 158 minutes. Dolly is rushed, and painful to watch, while Wagon has a relaxed pace and is fun to watch. It is nice to see a movie that is not in a hurry, though Wagon could fit its story line into a shorter movie.Part of the problem with Dolly is that it is a comedy that just is not funny. With Wagon, the humor is built into the awkward situations and odd characters, so it works with repeated viewings. But it is those situations that may provide the real clue to Wagon's hostile reception: it's menage a trois. It was rated "M," or "R" today, just because of its implied three-way sex. It is something viewers hardly notice today, but in 1969, Wagon must have been viewed as sneering at religion and all morality (which is about right). This may be why I like it so much, but it is also undoubtedly why some people despise this movie, even today. Wagon is the original louche musical.For some people, musicals are supposed to embody family values. Wagon ridicules them. It makes a mockery of marriage, while glorifying prostitution, drinking, cigar smoking, violence and thievery. Dolly, on the other hand, couldn't be more old- fashioned and square. You cannot imagine, in your wildest dreams, Matthau and Streisand having sex, and yet Matthau, out of the blue, proposes to her, without even a kiss. Now that's family values. Wagon certainly is not one of the great musicals, but it is still a fun movie worth watching when you have a long evening and a lot of popcorn handy. The bottom line: I find "Paint Your Wagon" entertaining, but "Hello, Dolly!" pretentious. Watching Wagon, or even just recollecting it, brings a smile to my face.

tomsaint-10-359149 Paint Your Wagon has often been sited as an example of a big-budget film that lost its way. The problem for the film was that it was released at a time that the traditional Hollywood musical was dying. Motion pictures such as Bonnie and Clyde and Midnight Cowboy were ushering in the age of dramatic realism. However, with the film's release now more than forty years in the past, it holds up amazingly well and is thoroughly entertaining.The film follows the life of two gold mining partners (Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood) who find themselves in love with the same woman (Jean Seberg). The twist is that she is in love with both men. The solution is that Seberg's character marries and lives with both of them. This unusual family is made possible by the fact that they find themselves in a rough gold mining camp in the California wilderness. Eventually, the tri-marriage breaks down due to a variety of circumstances and one of the husband leaves and one stays.The often-dismissed production values of the film now look amazing. Alan Jay Lerner shot much of the film outside of Baker City, Oregon in the wilderness. The town, No Name City, was recreated to scale. Indeed, no studio would green-light this kind of big-budget musical film today. One of the things that make it so special is that a modern audience is seeing something that could not be produced in the present.Along with the production values, the music is exceptional. There are no throw-away songs, and against the backdrop of the Oregon wilderness they come alive. When it was released Marvin's and Eastwood's voices were ridiculed. Once again, the passing of time has led to audiences that don't expect the perfect pitch-and-tone musicals of the 1940s and 1950s. Their voices sound like that of a couple of gold miner's.No matter the age group, this is a film that is worth seeing. Undoubtedly it will be a pleasant surprise for young and old.