Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

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

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Eric266 I live in small town in Kansas. Last year, the local drama club put on a production of Gypsy at the performing arts theater. I have to say, the local production ran circles around this effort. I kept comparing the movie to the local theater and I was awed at how lacking the movie was in comparison.I love Rosalind Russell from her time playing Hildy Johnson in His Girl Friday. Her rapid fire dialogue with Cary Grant was perfect. She was good as Rose, but something just wasn't right about her portrayal. I struggled to accept that she was this cold-hearted. Her version of Rose PLAYED at being cold-hearted, she didn't SEEM cold-hearted. The scenes at her childhood home should have resonated and shown why she was so selfish and self-centered. They seemed to breeze through those scenes. As an aside, there is a scene near the end of the movie where Rose is contemplating her life. She mentions coming from the wrong side of the tracks. In the local production, as the the actress playing Rose said this, a real train went zipping by the theater as if on cue. The entire audience broke out laughing in what was supposed to be a solemn scene. The actress on stage stayed in character, wept, and mentions so many trains leaving her behind. It was funny and bittersweet at the same time.Karl Malden was great as Herbie. I was pleased by his performance. His Herbie had the right amount of sensitivity and love, while also eventually resigning himself to the fact Rose was never going to change.Natalie Wood was a very good Louise. She was so beautiful and it was tragic that she died so young. Again, the actress in the local production had a much better voice, but Ms. Wood had a tremendous stage presence. Her Louise tried so hard to please her mother while knowing deep down, she never would. The scenes between Rose and Louise at the end crackled with emotion.Paul Wallace as one of the backup dancer's, Tulsa, who Louise falls in love with, was completely wasted. It was obvious Mr. Wallace was hired for his dancing skills (which were awesome and his dance number with Ms. Wood was a delight) but his character is mostly under developed. Inconceivably, the movie version of June runs off with another character while it was Tulsa she departs with in the Broadway version, breaking Louise's heart. Ann Jillian did a really nice job as "Dainty June" considering she was a last minute replacement. Her voice is tremendous. The only awkward thing was having 24-year old Wood pretending to be younger than the 12-year old Jillian. Their dance number to "If Mama was Married" sounded amazing but visually it really stretched credibility.The cast did a nice job and the movie was very entertaining. However, when it can't compare to a summer stock production (in my opinion), it leaves something to be desired.

Robert D. Ruplenas What a great piece of film making. Some critics have called Gypsy the greatest musical ever produced, and I think I see why they say so. I've never seen a staged performance so I can't compare, but I don't see how this movie version could be any better than it is. Everything is at the highest level - casting, script, acting, direction, cinematography. The story is gripping, as one watches how a driven, obsessed, controlling woman warps the lives of those around her. Evidently Ethel Merman was furious that Russell was chosen for the part Merman created on Broadway, but Russell's performance is powerful. Karl Malden is just great as poor Herbie. Natalie Wood is flawless as Jean. The moment near the end when she looks at herself in the mirror before going onstage for her stripping debut, and suddenly recognizes her own femininity ("I'm a pretty girl, mama") is heartbreaking. The script never lets up on the dramatic tension, and the cinematography - in beautiful, extinct Technicolor - is a feast for the eyes. Evidently Russell couldn't sing and had to be dubbed. I've heard that Merman kept the outtakes of Russell's singing as a vicious memento (I'd kill to hear them). At any rate this is one of the all time greats, not to be missed.

Brian Press 'Gypsy' starts off simple enough. A mother barrels down the stage to yell 'sing out, Louise!' as her two 'daughters' fervently act, sing and dance. This is the beginning of a long and harrowing psychological journey through the minds of people who all have a dream. Louise, the blossoming wallflower - always in her sister's shadow wants to be part of a dance team with Tulsa, who wants to create it. Little Dainty June wants to finally be a Broadway star. The beleaguered Herbie wants to simply settle down and have a home of his home with a wife and children. The heart of the show however, is Rose Hovick. Her drives and ambitions are what moves the plot along, causing the drives and ambitions of her 'proxy-star' troupe to grow more rapidly - specifically..to get away from her. No matter who plays Rose, the character is up for great interpretation. The first time you watch Gypsy, you may think that she's just some lovable, wacky mother who's a bit goofy and just likes to travel and help her kids become stars...even when you find out or already knew the reason she did it. Repeated viewings give a deep psychological glimpse into the inner-workings of how a person who lives through others acts. Rose is very quick, but not quick enough. Whether or not she did it all for herself is up for interpretation, but Rose continues to endear the hearts and minds of musical afficianados because she speaks for a generation. A generation of the lonely, the depressed, the left in the background. That's why Gypsy endures.

vincentlynch-moonoi I suppose most musicals are dated. But in a sense, this one seems more so, even though it was released in 1962. But somehow, film musicals like "Bells Are Ringing" (1960) seemed more modern. Ah well, that's not to say this film isn't worth a watch, because it is.First off, it's a great cast. Although some disagree -- perhaps because of a less than stellar singing voice -- Rosiland Russell's performance as the stage mother is exceptional. Here, her voice was combined in some numbers with a professional singer (and done rather well, BTW), so I think she shines...and at least in terms of a film, so much better than I think Ethel Merman would have (although I enjoyed EM in "There's No Business Like Show Business"). And Karl Malder -- what a gifted and underrated actor. He's perfect here...although how anyone could love the mother here is anybody's guess...but (relative) truth is stranger than fiction. And, although I'm not a fan, Natalie Wood turns in a stellar performance here, as well.Then, there's the music. "Small World", "Some People", "All I Need Is the Girl", "Everything's Coming Up Roses", "Let Me Entertain You" are the show-stoppers by Stephen Sondheim (lyrics) and Jule Styne (music).And, of course, it's a relatively true story. I'm old enough to remember Gypsy Rose Lee...on television, not in burlesque, and it's difficult for me to imagine she was that "hot" at one time (take either meaning you wish). But, she did make history.Definitely worth watching, but again, and not because of the era of the story, this film seems very dated...but enjoyable. Rose's Turn ... Rose