Trey Yancy
With Kiss Me Kate, the play-within-a play concept, in which the "real world" story parallels that of the inner play, works very well onstage. The tremendous success of the play bears this out. As for the film adaptation, they try to add another layer - that of the production of Kiss Me Kate itself. This makes a bit of a mess of it. The real Kiss Me Kate did not have and actor playing Cole Porter, etc.
Generally speaking, the film doesn't succeed. Between Ann Miller and Bob Fosse, the dance numbers are really what it is all about. What should have been the heart of the thing seems like it's patched in piecemeal. It lacks the smoothly integrated feel of the stage show - something that makes the parallels between Kate and Kathryn, and Fred and Petruchio much more natural. Plus there is a something a bit off when a musical number is completed, they take a couple of beats, then do an encore (something that was added to the Broadway production in response to the live audience).
Having played in the orchestra for a truly excellent production of the musical, I was hoping that the movie version would have the same magic, but it didn't.
My advice is that viewers don't go in with high expectations regarding the story but that rather they check out Ann Miller's stellar performance in the dance numbers.
edwagreen
With music and dancing like that, how could this film miss? It was just marvelous to view a divorced couple, Howard Keel and Kathryn Grayson appear in the show with the film title and act out their frustrations, inhibitions and general attitudes as the divorced couple.Ann Miller, Bobby Van, and as the two hoods looking for money owed, James Whitmore and Keenan Wynn steal the scenes they are in. Their memorable rendition of Brush up your Shakespeare is a classic in itself.The movie was a fabulous one and I liked the idea of Grayson and Keel working their situation while on stage and then resuming it between various scenes.
efisch
I've always thought this was a great musical and saw it in 3D over 30 years ago. In 2D it was great--in 3D it's a wonder. Now that it is available on DVD in 3D it is a must. I bought my 3D TV 5 years ago hoping they would release this film in 3D. It here and it's great-- probably the best movie ever made in 3D. The depth of 3D is amazing, the film frame just disappears in the 1:75 DVD release (there is no picture loss in widescreen), and the print that is used is flawless-- even better than the 2D version that accompanies it. Fabulous stereo sound that sounds like it was recorded yesterday. A brilliant musical with great performances in a adaptation that is even better than the stage show. Trivia--Kathryn Grayson's red wig in the Kate sequences looks exactly like the wig worn by Eleanor Parker in "Scaramouche" from earlier in 1953.
writers_reign
... to borrow the title of an earlier Cole Porter song. This was indubitably Porter's finest score and as we ARE talking Cole Porter that's saying something. Bella Spewack who co-wrote the book with husband Sam is on record as saying that this was one Broadway show that required no tinkering or re-writing or, as Ethel Merman might have said, it was 'frozen' from the first run-through. Porter's outstanding score is more or less singer-proof which is just as well because I can think of a dozen singers of each sex who could - and in some case have - drawn more feeling and/or nuance out of such gems as So In Love, Why Can't You Behave, Always True To You In My Fashion etc. On the other hand Keel and Grayson are well suited for Wunderbar, a number in which two hams reminisce about a hammy show in which they once appeared, and Keel handles Where Is The Life That Late I Led well, albeit in a truncated and bowdlerised version. In the end the best way to approach this is to forget the sometimes dubious 'acting' and just bask in the score.
AD
