Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

ibrahimctit What I liked about this film: -The movie begins with promise. We are presented with a very motivated and driven character who has a desire- to be a successful actor- and an obstacle before that goal, no one wants to hire him. This leaves the audience excited for what he will do to get their. -The themes of identity and how it is connected to gender are refreshing, if not communicated as well as they could/should have been. -Most of the interactions between Michael and his agent. What I did not like about this film: -When Does Micheal Grow/ The Conclusion: Let's just right into it. The conclusion of this film is not good, for a number of reasons. I'm not talking about the last scene, I'm talking about most of the second half of the movie and how it leads up to the "resolution". Michael is a talented actor who can't get work because his obsession over character, so he decides to go to extreme measures. He pretends to be a woman and auditions for a part in a Soap so he can finally start acting working and so that he can raise money for a production he and his friends are putting on. He gets the gig, and as Dorothy, the character his is playing, he develops the reputation as a woman who doesn't put up with the shit you usually have to deal with in the business. At this point, the viewer is expecting the film to be simply about the trials Michael faces in trying to maintain this facade. Michael begins forming a deep connection with one of his co-workers, a woman also starring in the show, and he falls in love with her. The goal then shifts from how will Michael maintain this facade, to how will Michael win the heart of this woman when at some point she will inevitably discover she...is actually a he. This on top of the established challenge. The movie spends a lot of time showing us Michael dealing with the degrading treatment woman can face in working in the TV/Film industry. The audience now expects the film to show Michael learn what it is like to be the opposite sex. This actually allows the story the potential to go in some interesting directions. Here are the problems. Michael experiences "being" a woman and sees how they often get treated in the business, but he doesn't start out as someone that is particularly sexist/ oblivious to the challenges others face. Michael falls in love but doesn't start out as some averse to love. What does Michael ever actually learn? How does he grow? -Michael's Friend: Michael has a female friend who he's been close to for years, and one day they have sex. No promises are made about oh, I guess we're in a relationship now, but he treats her poorly. He doesn't see her when he says he will see her and he's not up front about how he doesn't truly love her, but another woman. This is a perfect reflection to the relationship between Julie, the woman he falls in love with, and Ron, the director of the show they're both on. Dorothy/Michael continually advises Julie to dump Ron, as he does not treat her as well as she deserves to be treated. This holds up a perfect mirror to Michael's own actions, providing an opportunity for a powerful character moment, but the movie never really acknowledges that what Michael is doing is wrong. They just kind of skip over it, seeming to be more focused on getting Michael and Julie to end up together. Feeling bad for the people you hurt doesn't equal growth. Julie's Dad: Michael meets Julie's dad in a bar after Julie discovered his true identity and reacted poorly to it. He basically gives him his blessing in being with his daughter, and this makes no sense. Why? Julie's dad kinda fell in love with Dorothy. Julie' s dad, a man who has been with no other woman since his wife, begins to yearn for another "woman" one again for the first time. He even tries to marry "her". By this point in the movie, he has become privy to the fact that Dorothy is actually Michael, as he watched the unveiling on TV. He is clearly quite the traditionalist based on the things he says to Dorothy and the way he reacts when a man, Michael, tries to return a wedding ring to him in public. In reality, this man would be furious. To have been made a fool of and for Michael having been lying to him and especially his daughter. They slept in the same bed for the Flying Spaghetti Monster's sake! Michael watched Julie's child while she was gone! A man clearly being afraid as being seen as homosexual fell in love with a man! He would be furious, I repeat! But Michael has a rational conversation with the mildly upset dad, asks about his daughter, and manages to to escape with a begrudgingly forgiving punch on his shoulder, things presumably settled between them. Not at all believable. -Julie: To Julie, the (should have been) protagonist of the film, Dorothy is a person she admires, enjoys the company of, and looks up to as an empowering figure. Julie has issues with her belief in her own self-worth and Dorothy/Michael makes her feel more worthy. So much so that she has the confidence to leave Ron. If we focus on the one character who actually changes, this is a movie about Julie finding her identity. So at the end of the movie, when Michael approaches her to rekindle their relationship and clearly have in be romantic in nature this time, instead of Julie learning to be independent as she has been learning all along, and Michael seeing that he doesn't need to be with her in that sense or even really expect to after all that's happened. In the end to go strolling off into the sunset. What? Okay, okay. I obviously don't blame Michael for disguising himself as he did or falling in love with Julie, but in the end he lied to her, whether he meant to or not. In the end does it make sense for Julie, who has spent the movie building up a sense of self-worth, to fall in love with a man who has essentially been lying to her all along. Does it not make more sense for he to either completely turn him away, and Michael must learn to reconcile with this. Or perhaps even, she accepts him back into her life, but as a friend filling the roll emotional guide as Dorothy did, because after all didn't Michael tell Julie that Dorothy was still here? In a movie about identity, Julie is still the prize/ ultimate goal, when the culmination should have been both character realizing who they are. -Kinda boring/ Not very funny

padawanmovies (SPOILERS AHEAD) Initially I always thought this was jus a funny cross dressing flick; definitely was wrong... This movie gave insight into how genders are viewed by both sexes. It would've been very easy to downplay the directors sexiest attitude: calling the women Toots, Honey; while calling the men by their names, not allowing Julia to give her answer when asked if she wants a bagel, Jon's trying to force himself on Dorothy. It no doubt could've been a movie where being a woman was the sole basis for the comedy but there was a real subtle quality to the funniness. It allowed a man to understand the difficulties of being a woman especially in entertainment where looks r to a fault, seen as more important than talent; in addition to the comedy I believe these r the reasons this movie is viewed so positively. Two slight inquiries I have r how was he able to come up with the idea of becoming a woman so quickly and y on Earth did he agree to sleep with Sandy just bc she caught him with his pants around his ankles (he couldn't find any other justification)???Some of my favorite moments: The absurdity of being asked to walk across a stage while ur dying, the tomato scene in his agents' office, the scene where Mr. Carlisle tries to guide Dorothy out the studio and calls him a macho sh*thead (plus the great line "power makes women masculine or masculine women r ugly"; hope ppl, men mostly, don't feel that way), the part of how far could they pull the camera back to make her look attractive, the taxi scene where Dorothy's cab was swiped by a guy and she hit him with a shopping bag then threw his suitcase out before yelling thank u (lol), the way Dr. Brewster eyes Dorothy and his cue cards (haha), the photo shoot was Hilarious, when Michael pushes the mime in the park, the line "I don't like u" to baby Amy (feel that way about most babies), and of course the big finale: i don't know y the Tangiers part cracks me up and the stammering is Wonderful. It was a great reveal that really makes me enjoy this flick. Believe it's a good portrayal of gender studies since a lot of these mindsets still unfortunately exist.

Woodyanders Talented, but notoriously difficult struggling actor Michael Dorsey (superbly played by Dustin Hoffman) poses in drag as actress Dorothy Michaels in order to land a role on a popular soap opera. Complications ensue when "Dorothy" befriends and subsequently falls for co-star Julie Nichols (a fine and affecting performance by Jessica Lange).Director Sydney Pollack, working from a clever and perceptive script by Larry Gelbart and Murray Schisgal, wisely treats the outrageous premise straight so that the humor comes across as natural and spontaneous instead of strained and contrived. Moreover, this film not only offers some biting insights pertaining to complex gender roles, the competitive cut-throat nature of show business, and the intrinsic mounting problems one inevitably encounters from trying to pull off an elaborate ruse for any length of time, but also gains considerable depth and poignancy from the way Dorsey learns to be a better man by pretending to be a woman.In addition, it's acted with tremendous skill and zest by a tip-top cast: Bill Murray lends hilarious support as Dorsey's flaky roommate Jeff, Charles Durning contributes a touching turn as Julie's lonely and smitten father Les, and Dabney Coleman smarms it up perfectly as sexist pig director Ron, plus there's praiseworthy work from Teri Garr as the neurotic Sandy, Geena Davis as the sweetly sexy April, George Gaynes as pompous ham John Van Horn, Pollack as Dorsey's no-nonsense agent George Fields, and Doris Belack as feisty producer Rita. Both Owen Roizman's crisp widescreen cinematography and Dave Grusin's bouncy score are up to par. A total treat.

hirotohirotogackt First of all, I regard Dustin Hoffman who plays Michael Dorsey as a good actor because he performs as if he were a woman. I feel discomfort in his performance. Although this film had serious scenes, it made me smile once in a while so that I was not bored with it. This title also has humor. Watching the peculiar man who dressed up as a woman, I felt that it was fresh because I have never been disguised as a woman. In addition, there is another thing I learned. To have desperate efforts to do what we want is important and wonderful. For example, Michael Dorsey was fired from his job, but he decided to apply for the role of a woman in one drama none the less. This is just his passion to act the part even if he must become a woman. As a whole, I like this movie.