IMDb user comments for
Guys and Dolls (1955/I) Plus avec IMDbPro »

Page 1 sur 11:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

104 commentaires au total

32 utilisateurs sur 34 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
"Ummm... Filled with such fun good fellowship..."- Nathan Detroit, "Guys and Dolls", 2 août 2004
Auteur : allegretto902 de DC

"Guys and Dolls" is a thoroughly enjoyable example of musical comedy at its very best. The acting is impeccable, and what's more, almost believable (for a musical at least), the singing is pretty decent (well, Marlon Brando is another story, but I'll get to that) and the whole thing is just so amusing and entertaining that you'll be singing the tunes and quoting the lines long after you've finished watching it. Critics and viewers seem to sometimes have a difficult time with taking the film too seriously, by this I mean that a) Marlon Brando was not cast because of his singing voice (which was admittedly not good, but bearable), I like to think it was because he had irresistible charm, b) the whole premise is so unbelievable, to which I say, "name me a musical that IS wholly believable", and c) the movie moves too slowly, which is patently absurd, unless one does not have a taste for the slower pace of old movies and long, well articulated dance numbers, and romantic love scenes. This film pre-dates my existence by some 3 decades, but it still manages to rank among my very favorite pieces of movie-making and is an absolute must-see for musical and non-musical fans alike. 10/10

22 utilisateurs sur 24 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Times Square according to Damon Runyon, 17 février 2005

Auteur : jotix100 de New York

Damon Runyon's world of Times Square, in New York, prior to its Disneyfication, is the basis for this musical. Joseph L. Mankiewicz, a man who knew about movies, directed this nostalgic tribute to the "crossroads of the world" that show us that underside of New York of the past. Frank Loesser's music sounds great. We watch a magnificent cast of characters that were typical of the area. People at the edges of society tended to gravitate toward that area because of the lights, the action, the possibilities in that part of town. This underbelly of the city made a living out of the street life that was so intense.

Some of the songs from the original production were not included in the film. We don't know whether this makes sense, but this is not unusual for a Hollywood musical to change and alter what worked on the stage. That original cast included the wonderful Vivian Blaine and Stubby Kaye, and we wonder about the decision of not letting Robert Alda, Sam Levene, Isabel Bigley repeat their original roles. These were distinguished actors that could have made an amazing contribution.

The film, visually, is amazing. The look follows closely the fashions of the times. As far as the casting of Marlon Brando, otherwise not known for his singing abilities, Frank Sinatra and Jean Simmons, seem to work in the film. Sky Masterson is, after all, a man's man, who would look otherwise sissy if he presented a different 'look'. Frank Sinatra is good as Nathan Detroit. Jean Simmons, as Sarah Brown, does a nice job portraying the woman from the Salvation Army who suddenly finds fulfillment with the same kind of man she is trying to save.

Vivian Blaine is a delight. She never ceases to amaze as Miss Adelaide, a woman with a heart of gold who's Nathan Detroit's love interest. Ms. Blaine makes a fantastic impression as the show girl who is wiser than she lets out to be. Stubby Kaye makes a wonderful job out of reprising his Nicely Nicely Johnson.

The wonderful production owes a lot to the talented Abe Burrows, who made the adaptation to the screen. The costumes by Irene Sharaff set the right tone.

17 utilisateurs sur 22 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Simply a great screen adaptation of a stage classic!, 25 décembre 2000

Auteur : (schuchat@hotmail.com) de Miami, FL.

In 1954 Marlon Brando was THE hot actor after his performances in Streetcar Named Desire and On The Waterfront. Frank Sinatra had yet to re-invent himself on the silver screen. But Sinatra's portrayal as the erstwhile Nathan Detroit, helped re-establish Sinatra with his fans.

It is a great screen version of a great play and the choices of leads and support players are terrific. Imagine a movie where Brando sings? This was his one and only singing role as he portrayed Sky Masterson. In addition the female leads, Jean Simmons and Vivian Blaine(replaying her stage role as Nathan's long suffering girlfriend Adelade), put in superlative efforts. Special mention goes to the great Stubby Kaye(as Nicely Nicely), and with all due respect to Eric Clapton, no one's version of Rockin' The Boat even comes close to Stubby's. Sheldon Leonard, who would go on to fame as TV producer of such shows as The Danny Thomas Show and The Dick Van Dyke Show does "Harry The Horse" wonders, B.S.Pulley is excellent as the harsh mannered and rough talking "Big Julie", and even Regis Toomey offers his excellence as "Brother Arvide".

It is one of the fun musicals to see, good comedy, and you get Sinatra and Brando. Soooooo "Luck Be A Lady Tonight" and brother..."it's your dice"

17 utilisateurs sur 22 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
the oldest established ..., 29 juin 2000
Auteur : didi-5 de Royaume-Uni

Yes, its the one where the gamblers find a sort of redemption in their dolls after much singing and dancing and stuff. Maybe. This film seems to have lived alongside me for years - round exam time, through getting ditched, you name it. Sister Sarah and Sky and Nathan and Miss Adelaide and their chums were always there with those great Loesser melodies. Top of the tree is the Luck Be A Lady number which Brando puts across quite nicely, despite hardly being a singer. His great charm makes him a very good Sky. The scenes in Havana are hilarious and Vivian Blaine back at the club gives good value in her two big stage numbers. Looks like it belongs in a theatre, this film, but I bet you remember the tunes and huge chunks of the dialogue for a long time afterwards.

17 utilisateurs sur 23 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Three for One, 30 août 2001
Auteur : tedg (tedg@FilmsFolded.com) de Virginia Beach

*** Ce commentaire peut contenir des spoilers ***

Spoilers herein.

Mankiewicz is a film genius, in my mind one of very few intelligent men in the old Hollywood until destroyed by Cleopatra. But here he is in his element.

Here's the opportunity: it is as far from Broadway to film as from a book, comic, or TeeVee show. In fact the distance is greater because it is apparently less.

And since Mankiewicz is an intelligent writer (who makes up a lot as he goes), he has here devised three films in one: three visions co-existing.

We have the Broadway piece, supported by actors from the show. Mostly, this is nicely in the `stage' numbers at the Hotbox plus anything from Adelaide, but there are two male dance set scenes in this vein. And the `siddown you're rocking the boat' number.

Then we have the Frankie stuff. Adelaide is played straight -- that is she is played as a stage character, a fiction. Frank plays himself, because he actually is a cheap hood. The director relaxes all these scenes, and the music is allowed to become languid. See how the sets and camera differ for him.

But the most remarkable is Brando. He is in his prime here. What he does is act the role of a Broadway actor! Watch him look at the camera in fleeting moments as if to say, watch me do this. I can't sing or dance, but I can become someone who can. As with the Sinatra songs, the musical tone is adjusted for Marlon (and Simmons), to become led by the orchestra rather than the other way around as with `real' Broadwayites.

Mankiewicz had just directed Brando in Shakespeare, and knew what he had. Check this out -- it is the first selfreferential film musical, and you can't watch `Dancer in the Dark' or `Moulin Rouge,' without referencing this.

11 utilisateurs sur 13 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
"Still It's Better Than Even Money", 11 septembre 2007

Auteur : bkoganbing de Buffalo, New York

As the title song of Guys and Dolls philosophizes what we guys will not do to our dolls to win a bet or get a dice game going. That's the dilemma facing promoter of said dice game Nathan Detroit who can't come up with the $1000.00 for the Biltmore Hotel garage for the what is generally known as the oldest established permanent floating crap game in New York.

What to do, bet a reckless gambler Sky Masterson. Sucker him into betting he can't sweep a doll off her feet for a romantic idyll in pre-Castro Havana. The doll you pick for Sky is Sister Sarah Brown of the Salvation Army. Of course Nathan's life is also complicated by his 14 year long engagement to Adelaide of the Hot Box Revue.

Considering the resentments that festered between Marlon Brando and Frank Sinatra who played Sky and Nathan, I can't believe this film got made at all. Especially when you consider both these guys never hesitated in walking off film sets if their anger was aroused. In Sinatra's case I can understand since Brando's playing the part he should have done. Proof of that can be found on Guys and Dolls cast album that Sinatra did for his Reprise record label in the early sixties where he shows what he could do with the Masterson songs.

Still Brando is not great, but not bad as a singer and Frank Loesser did write the Adelaide song for Sinatra for the film. Unfortunately he also wrote A Woman In Love for the score which Brando sings and which became a big hit. Not for Marlon Brando, but for another Frankie named Laine.

Jean Simmons is our Salvation Army Sergeant and she shows once again why was the most under appreciated film star of the fifties. That woman was in so many of the best films of that decade and never got any real recognition for her talent. I like her the best from this movie.

Vivian Blaine, Johnny Silver, B.S. Pully, and Stubby Kaye all came over from the original Broadway cast. They all contribute their unique talents to parts that became career roles for them.

With some smarter casting it's better than even money that Guys and Dolls would be a great and not a good film.

14 utilisateurs sur 20 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Has Some Very Good Sequences; A Bit Uneven Overall, 17 décembre 2004
Auteur : Snow Leopard de Ohio

Something of a mixed bag, the screen version of "Guys and Dolls" is worth seeing for the cast and for a number of very good sequences. Its main drawbacks are that it is rather uneven, and that there are too many times when the pace slows down, making it somewhat overlong.

The cast is good, although the performers do not always get the chance to use their abilities as fully as they could have. Frank Sinatra is always good in any singing role, but his character here does not give him much to work with aside from the songs. Marlon Brando and Jean Simmons were interesting choices. There are times when they work well, and other times when the material really doesn't suit them all that well.

The story is entertaining, yet slight, and is certainly not meant to be taken as anything more than a pretext for the musical numbers. The songs are good in general, with "Luck Be a Lady Tonight" as the highlight. Yet not all of them quite reach that standard, for one reason or another.

Overall, the movie is not bad, just not as much as you might hope for given who and what went into it. It's possible that this is simply a show that works better on stage, or it's possible that the movie could have been even better with a few improvements here and there.

8 utilisateurs sur 12 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Couldn't be better!, 11 juin 2004

Auteur : Kate Fox de Boise, Idaho

*** Ce commentaire peut contenir des spoilers ***

Guys and Dolls is a unique play based on the characters. Sky Masterson

(Marlon Brando) is a high-class gambler who takes up a bet with Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) for one-thousand dollars. Nathan needs the money so he can

run his usual crap game and make a fortune. The bet was that Sky wouldn't be able to take just any girl to Havana, Cuba and the "doll" he chose was Sarah

Brown (Jean Simmons) who was in charge of a missionary. Sky finally bribes

Sarah enough to go to Havana with him. They end up falling in love with each other, but later she accuses him of something he had no part in. Nathan ran a crap game in the missionary the night they were gone. Nathan's 14 year fiancé Adelaide (Vivian Blaine) disapproves of Nathan's gambling and tries to stop him from doing it. However, when the movie ends it all ends happy with a double

wedding.

The songs in this movie are just wonderful no matter who sings it. Marlon

Brando has no singing voice at all and true they could have dubbed him but it didn't really matter. He did a wonderful acting job (obviously seeing as it's Brando) and played his character very well. I have seen a few movies with Jean Simmons and thought that this movie was her weakest one, she also couldn't

sing at all. However, the singing is made up by Frank Sinatra, Vivien Blaine, and Stubby Kaye. Vivien Blaine and Stubby Kaye was also in the original

Broadway production of Guys and Dolls. Vivien Blaine had a terrific voice and was the perfect Adelaide. If you like musical, and even if you don't, i advise you to watch this.

13 utilisateurs sur 22 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
The Best Parts Still Shine, 4 septembre 1999
Auteur : Eric-62-2 de Morristown, NJ

It almost seems like they went out of their way to muck up this film as best they could. First they dropped several great songs from the original score ("Bushel And A Peck", "I've Never Been In Love Before", "More I Cannot Wish You", "Marry The Man Today") and replaced them with songs that are distinctly inferior. Then they badly miscast Marlon Brando in the lead (his one great moment in the film is when he delivers the line, "Dad, I've got cider in my ear!") and tampered with the ending, in effect eliminating the final punchline of the show.

But what makes "Guys And Dolls" ultimately different from other Broadways shows mucked up by the movies is that the parts that are great elevate the film so much that you can be charitable for the mistakes made. Jean Simmons' lack of vocal training hurts "I'll Know" but she redeems herself wonderfully on "If I Were A Bell" and gives a great performance overall as Sister Sarah Brown. And thank goodness Stubby Kaye's memorable "Sit Down You're Rocking The Boat" was transferred intact. Great sets and other supporting characters also help too.

2 utilisateurs sur 2 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Guys and Dolls on Reel 13, 17 octobre 2008
Auteur : eplromeo8 de Etats-Unis

What many people don't know is that I started in musical theater before I got into film-making, so my familiarity with Guys and Dolls, in all its incarnations, goes back a long way. (Fun fact: Did you know that Damon Runyan's character of Sky Masterson was actually based on famed Western lawman Bat Masterson, who actually lived the last part of his life in NYC?). And the plain fact remains: I've never liked the show to begin with so director Joseph L. Mankiewicz (All About Eve) and his creative team had their work cut out for them if they were going to change my mind.

There is one key improvement the film makes over the show and that relates to the character of Sarah Brown. As written in the show, Brown is a flat, uninteresting character, but here Jean Simmons, with the help of some fine rewriting by Mankiewicz elevates the character to a new level and gives her much-needed depth. I have already expounded upon the wonders of Jean Simmons in the blog for The Robe and her legend increases here. Apparently, she even used her own voice for the songs, which is noble, even though she struggled on some of them (as did co-star Brando). Her version of "If I Were a Bell", though, is even better than the original from the show, especially given the change in orchestration from a soprano ballad to an upbeat alto song. As a matter of fact, the best scenes in the whole film are the snappy dialogue scenes between Brando and Simmons, those scenes in which they really get to act. It seems that Mankiewicz really took his time to work on these scenes – especially as a writer – and improve on a part of the show that came off as trite.

Conversely, he seems to have de-emphasized the most memorable character from the show, Adelaide, played in both versions by Vivian Blaine. One of her key songs ("A Bushel and a Peck") was cut (or actually replaced with something less memorable), the balance of screen time severely shifted toward the other couple and her more famous punch lines that would draw guffaws in a live audience seem to flounder and die on the screen. The film is really long as it is, so I guess something had to go – it's just odd that Mank (Mr. Mankiewicz's nickname throughout his career) would trifle with one of the keys to the success of the show.

The biggest disappointment in the film version of G&D are the musical numbers themselves and as you can imagine, in a movie musical, that's a big problem to have. Too much screen time was given to choreographer Michael Kidd to play with – his dancers are often acrobatic, but rarely are they (and their blocking) interesting enough to warrant the time spent on them (Kidd does a much better job in Seven Brides for Seven Brothers). The opening sequence is a perfect example – Kidd seems to be doing an homage to the final sequence in 42nd Street with his dancers/performers doing little vignettes to give the flavor of the Times Square life at the time. But Kidd is no Busby Berkley. First of all, Berkley was less than a choreographer with dancers than he was with the camera. Secondly, Berkley was a better storyteller. Kidd's vignettes are lifeless and boring – Berkley managed to weave tap dancing, comedy, fun, high drama, sex and political commentary all into the six or seven minute sequence. Kidd barely manages a laugh here. I'm surprised Mankiewicz gave him that much of a leash – it seems a much better opening would have been a long track through the streets (sans vignettes) into a tight shot of the racing forms. The racing horn starts. Pull out to reveal out three singers and start the fugue. There's your opening – efficient, cinematic and effective.

I don't mean to wholly blame Kidd for the failure of the numbers. Mankiewicz is also culpable - he doesn't seem to know how to shoot a musical sequence. The shot choices are unusual and often poor. Musical sequences and dances require more coverage than usual – they need to match the rhythm of the music and perhaps more importantly, the shot choices have to take advantage of being a movie. In other words, Mank frequently used static long shots, presumably shot on a sound stage. How is it really all that different from seeing it on stage? (For a good example of movie musical film-making, check out Meet Me in St. Louis – Minnelli's masterpiece of camera usage and the mise-en-scene).

You can certainly argue that I had a predisposition against Guys and Dolls to begin with and that explains my negativity. And there's something to that – I only like two or three of the songs, I don't like the stylized way in which the gamblers talk and worst of all, the story just isn't that good. I heartily commend Mankiewicz for his efforts to shore up the screenplay, but it seems even some of Hollywood's greatest can't turn water into wine.

Page 1 sur 11:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Ajouter un autre commentaire

Liens liés

Plot summary	résumé du Amazon.com	Notes
Récompenses	Revues externes	Plot keywords
Principaux Détails	Your user comments	Your vote history

Liens rapides

Top liens

Vue d'ensemble

Récompenses et critiques

Synopsis et citations

Curiosités

Autres infos

Matériel publicitaire

Liens externes

IMDb user comments forGuys and Dolls (1955/I) Plus avec IMDbPro »

Liens liés

IMDb user comments for
Guys and Dolls (1955/I) Plus avec IMDbPro »