dborden1-1 I just watched the DVD for the first time last night. Personally, I found most of the performances average at best, except for Zooey Deschanel. After seeing her in Elf, then Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy, I would love to be able to see her cabaret act in person. She has an awesome singing voice, gorgeous eyes, and a seductiveness that seems unmatched by any other actress/singer of her generation. She is a true breath of fresh air! There are so many plastic singers out there right now, as well as many young actresses that try so hard to make you like them that they come across as flighty. But Zooey has a relaxed attitude that just automatically makes you smile. I am really hoping that the many projects she is currently in filming for 2007 release give her the opportunity to display all of her talents.

oreoking When I first read of this production, with Carol Burnett as the Queen, I was very excited! I thought it would be fabulous. I was wrong. In the first 5 minutes I knew my popcorn would go unfinished, having lost my appetite when "Many Moons Ago" was chopped to but a few phrases. But when the cast started throwing away every good line with total disregard to the well-written tempo intended, I needed to get my Cast Recording ready and fire up the phonograph to get this director's bad taste out of my ears. Another reviewer mentioned the "rule of threes" - threes are everywhere in the script, but I don't think the delivery of ANY one was correct in this version. From the dismissing of Princess #12 ("Goodbye, good luck, now get out") to the discussion of Winnifred's test before "Sensitivity" ("Sounds fair (beat), seems fair, (beat), but isn't fair.") every opportunity to spin verbal straw into gold (I know, wrong fairy tale) was wasted. Larkin's revelation of pregnancy to Harry was real let-down. No build-up at all. She might as well have passed him a note.I didn't have a problem with any of the casting based on age or appearance - both can be overcome & overlooked with a good performance. But the writers/director didn't give the cast any help, so the weaker performers fell flat and the veterans just collected a paycheck.Where was the Minstrel? For that matter, where were the Jester and the King? Oh, the roles were there, but reduced to bit parts. The knights in "Shy" got to do more just by saying "Hey, Nonny nonny nonny, NO." Maybe Meatloaf thinks two-out-of-three ain't bad, but in this case, it IS bad. And I bet the writers thought they were clever switching the impetus for "Normandy" from "where can a pregnant Larkin go to hide" offered by the Minstrel to "where can Larkin go on a honeymoon" offered by Harry. Lame. And the Wizard as the Nightingale was just stupid. Hibbert's contract must have insisted on a minimum of screen time and since they eliminated the scene where the Minstrel schmoozes the Wizard, they made up for it with a chicken costume. I've gone on far too long, but better you spend a few extra minutes here than waste a few hours on this production. Now if you watch it anyway, you look for the things all these reviews have warned you about and make up your own mind.

Karina Okay, I may have given this movie one too many stars, but the performances of Carol Burnett and Tracy Ullman deserve it. And I think previous criticisms may have been too harsh. The reason this movie deserves at least 7 stars is because despite that it has Disney Channel-like sets and was made for T.V., the story is a pleasant one. The movie could have catered to the 4 to 10 year old age range, but it doesn't, it has enough witty dialog and dry humor to appeal to adults alike. Dry humor is found in the quick dialog, for instance, when Sir Harry tells Lady Larken that her pregnancy was caused by "a moment of weakness," or any of Carol Burnett's countless facial expressions that make you just happy to be in the same room as the comical genius, even though she's only on T.V. I was sad to see it end so quickly.I had never seen the story before and felt very justified in sitting in front of it for two hours. I bet watching it on DVD without commercials would be even more satisfying. If any of you were a fan of the Albert Finney "Annie" movie, you'll love this one. That's my two cents.

carol3135 As a fan of the musical, I was terribly disappointed at the Disneyfied TV version. First off, it appeared to me that it was simply a vehicle for Carol Burnett. Her costumes far outshone all others, her acting was way over the top, her singing (which was never good to begin with) was worse than usual, and to add insult to injury, they deleted better songs and added a new one for La Burnett.Tracey Ullman was far too old for Winnifred, Dennis O'Hare was far too fey for Dauntless, the girl who played Larkin was so boring that I can't even remember her name. Each time she and Matthew Morrison came on screen, I fast forwarded.As someone who would like to see more musicals shown on television, I thought this was a poor example. Boring, Boring, Boring.They should have shown this to Winnifred ... it would have knocked her right out!