ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Maleeha Vincent It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

JohnHowardReid What we have here has been produced on an obviously moderate budget (which even relies on some stock footage), yet worse it comes across as very much a filmed stage play, as evidenced by all the talk in confined sets. True, there are occasional break-outs into the unexpectedly spectacular like the final surprise tap-dance production number. This is the best choreographed of the numbers, though Joel Grey's delightful solo runs it a close second for sheer energy, vitality and cleverness. Joel Grey is a one-man dance team and it is gratifying to see him acquit himself so well in a major part so early in his career. The rest of the players are not quite in his league, though Mr Wesson makes his usual game try. The girls (Kirk, Gibson and Stanley), though over-made up in typical mid-fifties style, are stylishly dressed and differentiate their characters amusingly. Alas, poor old Eddie Bracken has more than his share of the hokey plot to carry. His heart isn't in it. Even his pratfalls seem contrived and anticipated. But Cliff Ferre is especially good despite some obvious wigs. Keating and Baer also contribute their share to the fun. If only there wasn't so much talk. There's even a half-hour near the end where there's so much plot, even the songs don't get a look in. They are a pleasant if unmemorable lot, some of them quite lavishly (if not particularly inventively) staged.Del Ruth's direction is competent enough and other credits are "A". There's quite a lot of added material that's not in the original stage play and film, including the running gag with the hair dye.

mark.waltz I must confess that every time I try to watch this, I just more and more annoyed with it. Warner Brothers did not have the types of musicals that were being made at MGM or even 20th Century Fox, but at least they had stars like Doris Day and Gordon MacRae to star in them. MacRae gets the leading man role here in this remake of 1938's "Boy Meets Girl", but Miss Day was busy elsewhere in 1952 with leading men Ray Bolger and Ronald Reagan getting her. Phyllis Kirk, best known for the T.V. version of "The Thin Man" replaces her here, and while she's an attractive cookie, doesn't have the spark with MacRae that he had with Doris. Toss in Eddie Bracken and Dick Wesson as MacRae's pals, and the result is a musical comedy where the laughs don't come and as the film runs on, the only emotion you begin to feel is annoyance.The basic plot has the three guys as cadets at SMI (Southern Military Institute) where MacRae is secretly married, which is against the rules. There's also the animosity between the three cadets and Lieutenant Cliff Ferre whom they try to humiliate at every turn, even going as far as to put colored dye into his shampoo which results in a very embarrassing situation. A disciplined and obnoxious "by the books" man, he all of a sudden breaks into a tap dance while trying to hide the fact that he's got blue hair just takes the plot into a ridiculous circumstance that would have gotten the cadets not only kicked out of the service, but most likely court-marshaled. A very young Joel Grey does add some amusement as the eager newbie desperately trying to fit in. While Bracken's brand of comedy can get old really fast, he seems tame in comparison to the truly unfunny Wesson who only ever got laughs from me when he appeared in very ugly drag in "Calamity Jane".Musically, this is not really interesting either, and the songs are instantly forgettable. Years ago, a local Los Angeles station used to show all of the 1950's Warner Brothers musicals on a daily basis, so I got a crash course in Doris and Gordon in seeing their big hits, as well as others such as "The Daughter of Rosie O'Grady" and "Three Sailors and a Girl". But when this one came on, I sat there in shock as to how corny it was and how embarrassed I felt siting there watching it. Of course, none of them will ever be considered classics other than the ones which starred Doris, and when you see what was put out at the same time from MGM's Freed unit, you wonder where Warner Brothers' creative head was, especially since they were the studio that re-vitalized the musicals in the 1930's thanks to Busby Berkeley.

GManfred "About Face" is not really a bad movie - it's just not as good as it could be. It is a remake of a movie made in the 30's called "Brother Rat", which was based on a Broadway play. "Brother Rat" is a better movie than 'About Face" as it had a better cast and a more subtle approach to the comedy angle; "About Face" is somewhat heavy-handed in this regard.In my opinion, what really sinks "About Face" is the forgettable musical score. For some reason it was decided to remake it as a musical, but the songs are very ordinary. The songs are trifling and unmemorable, except for Joel Grey's number. And a reviewer above is right about the closing tap dancing number. It was a show-stopper, but the show was over.I saw "About Face" when it first came out. I was 11 and I loved it, and saw it several times. Funny how time and age can provide a different perspective. It is harmless fare and entertaining to a point, but sometimes a substantial time lapse can lead to disappointment.

dixie-18 This film is not bad, but a washed out version of "BROTHER RAT" (1938) that starred Ronald Reagan, Eddie Alber and Wayne Morris, three "rats" who are enrolled at Virginia Military Institute (VMI), a real place. There are never any freshmen at VMI, they are deemed "rats", and the bond between them usually is a lifelong one. This film is a black and white classic that is fondly screend at VMI, in Lexington, to this day.