Sober-Friend I am one of the few people that saw this in the theater. The Ballet "Nutcracker" was very expensive to see. I was 21 and I wanted to take my niece & nephew to see it but 3 tickets would have cost about $80 back in 1986. (Around $140 in 2017 Dollars). So I saw this film being advertised in the paper. 3 tickets for this film was $12.00 and it was money well spent. Also we were only the only 3 in the cinema. I have never seen this play before. I did not know the story. So I was like a child at Disneyland watching this. The costumes were nice bright & beautiful. The sound was an experience unto itself. I loved this film. It was not a bore. It was just a treat for the senses. Years later I bought this on DVD and was shocked that the film looked so colorless. This film may not have been filmed in technicolor but it was a beautiful looking film. What is not out on DVD looks like the film was shot in VHS.MGM owns this film. Since they have never released it on blu-ray I hope maybe someday that SHOUT FACTORY will. If not them then KINO LORBER or Olive Films. This is the type of release that those companies specialize in!

Christmas-Reviewer BEWARE OF FALSE REVIEWS & REVIEWERS. SOME REVIEWERS HAVE ONLY ONE REVIEW TO THEIR NAME. NOW WHEN ITS A POSITIVE REVIEW THAT TELLS ME THEY WERE INVOLVED WITH THE MOVIE. IF ITS A NEGATIVE REVIEW THEN THEY MIGHT HAVE A GRUDGE AGAINST THE FILM . NOW I HAVE REVIEWED OVER 300 HOLIDAY FILMS & SPECIALS. I HAVE NO AGENDA.Every year there seems to be on variations on "Christmas Classics" There is always new "twist" done to "It's a Wonderful Life", "A Christmas Carol", "Groundhog Day", "The Gift of the Magi" and even variations on "The Nutcracker"The Nutcracker has been done as "A CARTOON" " A movie with no dancing" "A Semi-Musical" and even on "On Ice" This film however is not a twist it is just a beautiful filmed version of the famous ballet. Nutcracker: The Motion Picture, like the Stowell-Sendak stage production on which it is based, is presented as Clara's coming-of- age story. It depicts Clara's inner conflict and confusion, as well as the beginning of her sexual awakening, as she approaches adolescence; similar themes occur in many of Sendak's books.The film especially emphasizes the darker aspects of Hoffmann's original story and the significance of dreams and the imagination. The cinematography, by making considerable use of closeups and medium shots, attempts to bring viewers closer to the psychology of the main characters.For the film's soundtrack, Sir Charles Mackerras conducted the London Symphony Orchestra at the Watford Town Hall in London in a new recording of Tchaikovsky's score. The passage for chorus was performed by the Tiffin School Boys' Choir. The soundtrack also includes the "Duet of Daphnis and Chloe" from Tchaikovsky's opera The Queen of Spades, performed by Cathryn Pope and Sarah Walker. Telarc released the complete soundtrack on compact disc, coinciding with the release of the filmThis film however was not met with great reviews upon its initial release. They were okay at best. It was a huge box office bomb taking in less than $1 Million during its entire run. However since 1986 the film has developed a following and it is easy to understand why. The soundtrack / orchestra is perfect. You will never hear the score sound better. The staging and costumes are wonderful. Its was directed with such craftsmanship that even if your NOT a huge ballet lover (Which I am not) you will be swept into the scope of this production. If you stumble across it on TV once you watch 10 seconds your hooked. That is what happened to me. On home video however the film has never had a great release. The original VHS that was released by Paramount was only out for a short time and went out of print. It was later released by GOODTIMES home video and it was in the dreaded LP speed and lacked the stereo mix that the Paramount release had. Even today the film has never had a DVD release that was worth buying. When MGM finally released a DVD they used an old master that was most likely from the Paramount Home Video release some 25 years earlier. What worked for a VHS release doesn't work for a DVD. In fact its not even a Pressed DVD it is a MOD DVD which makes the picture even softer! Plus is was in the old 4x3 (Pan and Scan) format. Most film released on DVD are presented in the Widescreen Format if the movie was shot in that format. "The Nutcracker" was shot that way but MGM was to cheap to re-master the film. So we get a DVD that is soft and at times un- focused. The stereo soundtrack however is very good. There is however room for improvement if there is a future blu-ray release. I doubt a blu-ray release will ever see the light of day. Even if MGM wants to release a blu-ray the film will most likely need to have a restoration. I hope it gets one. On the bright side HD-NET a cable/satellite channel does have a respectable transfer of the film that they show. It is 16x9 and the sound mix is great and its also in stereo. Now why hasn't MGM used this transfer for a DVD is beyond me. Now back to the film itself. It is the best presentation that has ever been put on film! The only thing wrong is there is no "Mother Ginger in this production". The colors and costumes are as eye popping. The orchestra is one that will put others to shame. For years Video Stores (if they had a copy) reported that this was a huge rental during the holidays! A few years later Warner Brothers decided to make their version of the film! Just like other remakes the film industry thought they could do another film and do it better. So in 1993 they released a "Bigger Budget" production. That version was not 1/2 as good. The only thing it had that the 1986 version didn't was Macaulay Culkin and Mother Ginger. Catch this 1986 Version! Its worth seeing.

keala What is this thing some ballet directors have with portraying Clara's godfather as a dirty old man? I wouldn't complain if it helped the story, but as a matter of fact it kind of screws it up. It diverts attention away from Clara's relationship with the Nutcracker, which is strange and ambiguous enough in itself, and since I can't see any interesting reason for the older man's unsavory attitude, it strikes me as gratuitous.The ballet has its usual disproportions (what were the original adapters thinking when they placed the battle so early in the story). There is the usual awkwardness of filming events as they happen on a stage, with sets and special effects that would probably be very effective in person but are naturally trivialized on film. Most of the acting isn't very good, and though Julie Harris' narration is well-voiced, it's very intrusive.The dancing is great, but I don't think that can save the movie.

Spleen I'm one of those people who think classical ballet is dull, dull, dull. It's not the music. I never get tired of listening to Tchaikovsky's ballet scores - `The Nutcracker' is something I can enjoy in any mood - and I have different kinds of fondnesses for Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Delibes, Khachaturyan, et al. But what's the deal with the dancing? If storytelling is the point, then the dance is a remarkably inefficient means to that end; if some kind of pure expressionism, it's too earthbound and formalised. I'd much rather watch an orchestra.In any event, transferring classical ballet to the cinema screen is a daft idea. (Not that I have a quarrel with a film ABOUT classical ballet - that's a different thing altogether.) It's like filming stage productions of Shakespeare. Shakespeare can survive, intact, in the cinema; but only if one throws out the whole apparatus of the theatre and starts thinking of the cinema screen. Tchaikovsky's ballet music, too, can work on the screen. For proof look no further than the Nutcracker sections of `Fantasia', which are so good I think they're the kind of thing the music was REALLY meant to accompany, all along.`Nutcracker' looks at first as if it will be a cinematic treatment of the score, with no connection to stage-bound dancing - but this hope is dashed within the first quarter hour or so. The second act in particular is just a stage presentation with extra-lavish effects. But then, unless one is prepared to be REALLY radical (the way Disney was), what else is there to do? The other thing that dooms the project is the disjointed nature of the narrative behind Tchaikovsky's ballet, the second act being just a succession of dances without a plot. Tchaikovsky had to push himself to wring any decent music out of the material.I'm not being hard on the dancers, the director, or anyone: I think they've done a first-class job, given the impossible task they've set themselves. But when I saw `Nutcracker' I'd already seen `Fantasia'. Nothing will now convince me that a screen version of classical ballet is a good idea.