richspenc I actually rate this film about a 6 and a half, but I decided to round it off to a 7. My title up above for this film is my feelings for it in a nutshell. Where I said a good look at roaring 20s music, I meant some roaring 20s music was the kind of music in this film. The other kind of popular 1920s music was all the jazz and ragtime from that era. This film "Hollywood revue" is not a story and has no plot. It's a long stretch of then popular songs and dances. I read somewhere that people complained about some of the first few films with sound in the late 1920s being all music and no story, and that's why starting in the early 1930s musicals had a story with funny and interesting speaking parts as well as songs ("Footlight parade", "Dames", "42nd St" and the Gold diggers films are still my favorites). I've also read, however, that people back then loved the musical numbers and really enjoyed most sound films in general whether stories or musicals since it was all such a brand new novelty and exciting. That's the one I believe more. I didn't like this as much as some of the great films that were to come in the next following years, but there were a number of songs and numbers that I really did like. First, the 1920s version of "Singing in the rain". It was pretty good although not my favorite version. It played more like an old folk song here on guitar, and had some good dancers and sprinklers pouring down rain from the ceiling. It was the first of several versions. Judy Garland's version was beautiful, just like most of her stuff. And of course, the most famous one of all, Gene Kelly's raincoat and streetlamp legendary great from film of the same name. I loved Joan Crawford in her early things, she was so beautiful in her distinctive way. She was great in "Grand hotel", and she was great here performing "Got a feeling for you" with her beautiful looks and voice, and loved that dance move of hers where she kicked forward and backward to the side while hopping on her other foot. I love Joan and I really don't like how they made her look so ugly and cruel with that largely inaccurate story about her in 1980's "Mommie dearest". Other great songs in this film include one of which looks like one of the first things ever filmed in color which was Charles King singing to a pretty girl under a blossom tree and then a group of more pretty girls in green skirts dancing, a second version of "Singing in the rain" which looked like Noah's ark and also a very early color bit, the songs "Swanee river", "Your mother and mine", "Take it off", and "You were meant for me" that was sung to the beautiful Anita Paige from "Broadway Melody". Ones I didn't care for were "The Italian trio", the one with a bunch of people in skeleton and Halloween type costumes, and Laurel and Hardy's skit was not one of their better ones and they have had some really good and funny ones. I didn't think "I'm the queen" was too good either, but I loved her long gown. I always love women's long gowns, wide and long skirts to the floor or hoop skirts, and floor length dresses of the early 1900s, 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s. It's a shame how rarely you see any modern women today wearing the beautiful, classy, old fashioned feminine attire. Too many people today consider old fashioned a bad word, I consider it a great word.

classicsoncall Sorry to say, I'm badly out of synch with the majority of reviewers who have elevated this picture to a 7.6 rating at the time I write this. I realize all the caveats that go with watching something like this, it was MGM's very first musical revue and a daring excursion into a variety format for the era, but I'd sure like to hear of anyone's first hand impression of the show who might have been there. Impossible now of course, but I guess you really had to be there.Probably the best that can be said from my perspective is that the picture offers a first look at some of the up and coming film and stage stars that would make their mark in the years after this movie's release. The show was hosted by the now all but forgotten Conrad Nagle and on stage partner Jack Benny. The acts ranged from the passable to downright dreadful in some cases, as evidenced by the Gypsy trio that appeared near the end of the show. Cliff Edwards, in the persona of Ukelele Ike had an irritating, nails on chalkboard voice that was made only worse when he went into falsetto mode.Not to say that the show was a total disaster, but it just didn't do anything for this viewer. If I had to pick a unique surprise moment, it would have been an unrecognizably young Joan Crawford singing early in the program. Laurel and Hardy's magician routine could have used more punch, while the one sit up and take notice moment occurred during a racy song number by a girl in minimal attire. Since the movie was presented as a musical variety type show, it seemed odd to me that the film makers opted to withhold an audience response to the acts; I might have felt better about some of the presentations if I could hear a crowd offering it's approval.

utgard14 All-star talent show of MGM silent stars, many of which in their first talkie. They sing, they dance, they do comedy bits. Most of it is a poor representation of the talent of those involved. Still, I found something quaintly charming and entertaining about it. It's certainly interesting from a film history perspective. Yes, it suffers from the crudeness of sound filmmaking in these early days but I try not to hold that against it too severely.Two of the more entertaining parts were Buster Keaton's sketch and "Singin' in the Rain." But I must admit my personal favorite was the "Lon Chaney's Gonna Get You if You Don't Watch Out" number. The worst was probably Marion Davies. For as much as people bash Joan Crawford's dance routine in this, Marion Davies was a million times worse. She sang off key and did what was supposed to be dancing. Just dreadful. As for Joan, the song she did was fine I thought but yes the dancing was a little goofy looking. The flapper dances were generally graceless to begin with but this was especially silly to watch. The other segment that gets talked about a lot is the "Romeo & Juliet" part with Norma Shearer, John Gilbert, and Lionel Barrymore. This was one of the few parts of the movie done in early Technicolor. I actually don't think this was a bad segment. The part where they do Romeo & Juliet updated for modern language was amusing.Overall, it's not great but it's way better than a lot of the critiques I've read have given it credit for. If you're a film buff you should see it. Everybody else, check it out if you are already familiar with early sound films and aren't going to harp on its technical failings. If you don't have the patience for that then just avoid it and save yourself the headache.

mkilmer This was a nice introduction to sound film put together by MGM with most of their biggest stars. Conrad Nagle starts as the master of ceremonies, but he disappears part way through the film and is replaced by Jack Benny. We never see Nagle again, and I've no idea why.The highlights are many, including a young Joan Crawford, splendid "gams" and all, singing a song. Buster Keaton is as fantastic as we'd expect. Some of the choral numbers in between the real performances tend to drag, but they were gunning for the two-hour mark.One part was somewhat troubling. Lon Chaney does not appear in the review, but there is a scene where an actor sings a warning to actresses portraying little girls, warning them that Lon Chaney, the actor, is going to sneak up at any moment and kill them all. I had read he was a gentleman in real life, but you go figure.If you enjoy old cinema, its studios, and most especially its stars, you should enjoy this as a step back in time.