User reviews

The Hollywood Revue of 1929 is certainly a simple curiosity by now. When it was made, the world had just been taken by storm by talking pictures, a revolutionary concept. All of the studios were hesitant to make themselves over for sound, especially MGM who housed an amazing cast of silent stars. This film is a sort of stage show exhibiting the talents of many of the major talents under contract to MGM. Conrad Nagel is the master of ceremonies along with Jack Benny. Nagel also sings to Anita Paige in the show. Joan Crawford dances and sings, Cliff "Ukelele Ike" Edwards sings several times, William Haines bullies Benny, Bessie Love speaks a few songs, Marie Dressler does the same, Laurel and Hardy do a comic magic act, Marion Davies sings and dances, Buster Keaton does a comic dance, Norma Shearer and John Gilbert recite Romeo and Juliet, and Lionel Barrymore directs. The grand finale is the entire cast singing Singin' in the Rain in color.

Everything is pretty primitive here. The camera is static, so much so that when the actors move it sometimes cuts off their heads. The sound synchronization is sometimes off too. The musical scenes feature bland routines by chorus girls in costumes with contrasting colors for visual affect. There is one overhead shot reminiscent of Busby Berkeley, though, who did not make his breakthrough 42nd Street until three years later.

Many of these clips are available in other places. The Davies documentary that Milestone released includes her scene toward the end. Joan Crawford: The Ultimate Movie Star utilizes most of Crawford's song. The thirteen part Hollywood series shows the Romeo and Juliet scene with Shearer and Gilbert. When The Lion Roars shows the "Lon Chaney's Gonna Get You" song. Various other sources show the Singin in the Rain finale. However, this film does include many scenes that aren't available elsewhere due to the obscurity of the star.

MGM used to boast that they had more stars than were in the heavens. This transitional picture shows some "stars", people who still have name recognition. Some of the performers were near the end of their career, some at the beginning, and others, probably did not have much of a career before or after this.

There's no real plot - it's pretty much a variety show hosted by Conrad Nagle and Jack Benny. There are some historical moments here - the first performance of "Singing in the Rain", the alleged cause of John Gilbert's career nosediving, Joan Crawford singing and dancing, some slapstick from Laurel & Hardy. There are appearances by the stunningly beautiful Anita Page who looks kind of sad while Conrad Nagle appears to be singing to her. William Haines, just before Louis B. Mayer ended his acting career, eating part of Jack Benny's clothing. Bessie Love appeared to come from one of Jack Benny's pockets - she said there was a $100 bill in the pocket, Benny quips that it's not his suit.

Parts of this was the inspiration of the movie "Singing in the Rain", which was done 20+ years later.

The pluses to this: some color sequences, including the closing performance of "Singing in the Rain", a weird dance sequence by Buster Keaton, who remains mute, and it's a great glimpse into Hollywood as it transitioned from the Silent Era to the age of "talkies". One interesting thing was the cameras weren't as static as they were for many of the early "talkies". There's also a kind of experimental dance sequence where it appears that they used some of the negatives in place of the processed film.

Some of the minuses are it wasn't a smooth transition from the Silent Era to the age of "talkies" - the sound quality is very inconsistent. Some people sounded kind of muffled, some people's voices weren't picked up very well. The version that was played by TCM on 8/4/08 wasn't closed captioned, so if you can't understand what someone is saying or singing, you don't have any captioning to help you out.

This is a good movie if you are interested in relatively early movies - it's almost 80 years old. It's also a chance to see some performers that didn't appear very often.

I love this film. I've commented before but just saw it again and have a few more "insights." It seems I like it better with each viewing. Along with The Broadway Melody and 42nd Street, one of the great early musicals--films that set the style and standard for decades to come. Yes there is debate as to the singing and dancing of Joan Crawford and Marion Davies, but there are great moments from Marie Dressler, Stan Laurel, Oliver Hardy, Buster Keaton, John Gilbert (I'm Utsnay about Ouyay), Norma Shearer, Cliff Edwards, the swell Brox Sisters, Conrad Nagel, Charles King, Polly Moran, Bessie Love, William Haines, Anita Page, the snappy June Purcell, Lionel Barrymore, Gus Edwards, a sly Jack Benny, and a slap-happy Ann Dvorak. Who could resist.

Oddities for a talkie include silent bits by Keaton and Laurel (Hardy does all the talking, and some schtick from Karl Dane and George K. Arthur (neither destined for talkie success) during a Benny violin solo. To carry forth the "revue" concept the film is introduced over a live orchestra pit and the intermission sees the musicians taking their seats to reprise the early tunes--Crawford's "Gotta Feelin' for You" chief among them. As noted in other comments, some acts are introed; some are not.

Considering all were singing live (no lip syncing here) the musical numbers are not bad at all. The recording (still primitive) hurts a little. Charles King comes off best as a straight singer, and the great Cliff Edwards (as Ukelele Ike) is a treat as the comic singer. Edwards does a straight intro to Singin' in the Rain as well as his signature falsetto scat. Joan Crawford, who sang in a bunch of early talkies, has a decent if unpolished voice, and her dancing was par for the course for 1929: lively but a little clunky. Remember, movie musicals were new and hadn't really developed a cinematic choreography. Marion Davies' number is the weakest in the film, which is too bad because she was a delightful performer, but singing and dancing weren't her high points. Marie Dressler cannot hit a false note. No matter how badly she mugs and hams it up, she is great. This film also shows hints of what Bessie Love might have done during the 30s with better handling by MGM. And ditto Polly Moran, who was diminished to playing Dressler's foil in a series of early comedies.

The Jack Benny we remember from his 1950s TV show is exactly the same 25 year earlier. All his mannerisms are in place as is his superb timing. Several parts of the film are very badly edited and sometimes hurt the timing or punchlines of comic bits. William Haines, nearly choking on a licorice button he rips from Benny's jacket, is handsome and gracious in a cameo.And Conrad Nagel reveals a not-bad singing voice as he serenades a ravishing Anita Page.

The Singin' in the Rain number rates highest. From the art deco set of Cedric Gibbons to the terrific singing of Cliff Edwards and the Brox Sisters, this number is a true classic. The dancing is simple but effective, the rain effects are OK as is the reflecting "pool." The reprise by the Brox Sisters (all 3 wrapped in 1 raincoat) is wonderful--as is the comic reprise by Dressler, Love, and Moran. Note the arm motions made by the Brox Sisters; they are same as used by Jean Hagen in the 1952 Singin in the Rain.

I love this film.

If you answer 'yes,' then this film may prove entertaining. It certainly has historical value and fans of the stars involved will get a small kick out of seeing their favorites, even if it's in something as uninspired as this film.

The sketches throughout are mildly entertaining at best and painfully awkward at worst. How can Jack Benny and Laurel and Hardy NOT be funny? Conrad Nagel looks downright uncomfortable as he warbles a love song to Anita Page. I love Marie Dressler, but why did MGM give her that awful song to sing? There are a few charming moments, like Buster Keaton's drag routine and Norma Shearer and John Gilbert doing the balcony scene from "Romeo and Juliet" in modern slang, but those moments are sparse.

The whole thing is also un-cinematic, with a camera glued to the floor and everything shot like this is a stage show.

Just skip to the scenes where your favorite actors do their thing and then forget the rest. It's overlong and awkward.

As far as I know HOLLYWOOD REVUE OF 1929 is not available on VHS or DVD. I saw it on TMC. This is an all-star early MGM talkie. My main reason for viewing it was for the Buster Keaton "Princess Rajah" dance. It's pretty good, but not great. Laurel & Hardy also have a part. It didn't care for it. It seemed like Ollie was out of character and bullied Stan. Hollywood Revue of 1929 is worthwhile just to see the MGM stars of that era.

MGM's stupendously batty all star early talkie extravaganza from 1929 is a gloriously overproduced jamboree of jumping about, vaudeville comedy, tap-dancing, Minstrel antics, embarrassing and tedious comedy, and best of all - some two-color technicolor spotlights allowing for some standout moments. It is all so mad, a complete variety show more than a Follies with an endless parade of the 20s big names trying to be themselves and allow us into their glamorous lives for a few minutes. With wonderfully tinny sound, yelling, reprises galore of terrible songs - YOUR MOTHER AND MINE in particular... an underwater goddess grotto, harem aerobics, Buster Keaton being a caterpillar, people waving their arms about, annoying Ukulele Ike trilling and a finale on Noah's Ark...well yes it is The Hollywood Revue. If you love The Dawn Of Sound era and are fascinated with the Art Deco of the Vaudeville 20s then this film is a major treat. The jewel box and pearls sequence is Erte heaven. Many scenes are introduced by Jack Benny who often appears before some of the most beautiful glittering diamanté and velvet stage curtains you could imagine. Like a toy-box of musical madness, THE Hollywood REVUE OF 1929 is hilarious and annoying by turns but well worth the effort to sit through. A companion piece to GLORIFYING THE American GIRL of 1929 and KING OF JAZZ of 1930. My best tip to get friends to watch it is to play it at your next party as musical wallpaper. No sound, just the imagery playing to your own DVD collection....This is the sort of wonderful visual confection that nightclubs should play on a big wall screen. It is completely insane and unstoppable in its desire to pelt the viewer with musical silliness.. especially towards the end with trios of singing (yelling) stars leaping across the stage yowling at the camera in fantastic costumes. Marie Dressler must have nearly killed herself competing for facial contortion rights against younger and more agile stars.

This is a very odd little curio and despite my horribly low rating of 2, the film is strongly recommended for fans of the golden age of Hollywood. That's because despite being very bad and tedious, cinephiles will want to catch glimpses of some of their stars (such as Laurel and Hardy, Jack Benny, Joan Crawford and Buster Keaton) in very unusual roles.

The film is a chance to show off the new invention of talking pictures. So instead of a normal plot, the film is a bizarre showcase so that fans can finally see their MGM favorites in talking and singing roles. Oddly, many non-singers sang some god-awful numbers in the film since the movie is more like a filmed version of a talent show than a traditional movie. You even get to see Jack Benny competently play the violin for the film. It ain't great but unlike his later persona, it wasn't at all bad. What was bad was when he sang, as was singing by Joan Crawford and a couple others. Part of the problem with the singing isn't because all the stars had bad singing voices (though some did), but because the sound technology was so bad. The singing sounds exceptionally tinny and with more modern equipment, they would have sounded so much better. In fact, having everyone perform on a stage like they would at a real talent show was chosen because Hollywood still hadn't figured out how to get the sound right.

The reason I watched it was for Laurel and Hardy and Keaton. As for Stan and Ollie, they were only okay and were in way too little of the film. During the final giant production number, practically all the stars were there singing except the duo--which is odd, as Oliver Hardy had a very nice voice. Buster, on the other hand, was better simply because of his acrobatics. Seeing him so easily flip and fall was pretty amazing.

Another odd curio in the film were the Two-color Technicolor sequences. The first was a clever way to present Romeo and Juliet to modern audiences with Norma Shearer and John Gilbert hopelessly miscast as teen lovers!! The other sequence was a huge song and dance number that looked like a Busby Berkeley routine--though he didn't begin his work in Hollywood for one more year. The color sequences shown on this Turner Classic Movies release, unfortunately, looked very muddy and ugly and desperately need further restoration. Most Two-color films look almost this bad (though Hollywood REVIEW had lots of scratches that should be removed), but this primitive color process actually isn't as ugly as most people think. I've seen some amazingly beautiful Two-color films that look amazing--such as 1929 re-release of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA and the short THE TOY SHOP. It CAN look great but significant restoration is needed.

Overall, this is an interesting but amazingly dull and stagy film. The musical numbers are tedious or unintentionally funny and most of the non-singing numbers fall flat as well. Still, for a very, very unusual curio involving some of your favorite stars, I suggest you watch it and use your remote to speed through the more ponderous portions!

Finally, if you do watch, look for the horribly offensive black-face number at the beginning and the song "Old Black Joe". They're a rather sad sign of the times. Also, the Marie Dressler song isn't too bad--the words are cute. There's an amazingly slinky and practically naked dance near the end that will catch some by surprise. And finally, despite the movie SINGING IN THE RAIN, you'll see this song in a much faster and snappier version of the song "Singing in the Rain" in this film.

This is an amazing film, it has amazing special effects, it shows who made the transition from silent to talkie and who didn't, it has scenes in color (two-strip technicolor from what I understand), and it has some of the cutest costumes of any musical.

Some of the highlights of the movie are Joan Crawford song and dance number, which is too cute for words, and not terrible as another IMDB commenter would have you believe.

The Buster Keaton snake charmer dance is absoluetly hilarious. The Betty Johnson hiding in Jack Benny's pocket is pretty cute.

And the Singing in the Rain number is great, with it's simple yet beautiful art deco set and it's great reflective floor textured with the pitter patter of rain.

If you ever get a chance to see this film, take advantage of it. It is so strange to see every MGM start (except Garbo and Lon Chaney) in the same film, especially since many of them didn't continue making a lot of talking pictures.

Outstanding!!!!!

Nominated for Best Picture of 1929 (it didn't win).

MGM trots out almost all of its stars to show off how they sound in one of its first talking films. It's basically one act after another. They had some obvious problems with the sound--the lion roaring at the beginning sounds really bad and the sound fades in and out occasionally.

The high lights (and low lights) include: Jack Benny and Conrad Nagel as the MCs and giving us some very bad and (then topical) comedy; Nagel singing (quite well); a young Joan Crawford singing and dancing very badly; William Haines (looking fat and old) doing a VERY bad comedy skit with Benny; Bessie Love being tossed around (literally) by 12 guys; Marie Dressler singing (sort of); Laurel & Hardy do an OK routine; Marion Davies looking miserable and dancing; the fun little novelty tune "Lon Chaney Will Get You If You Don't Watch Out" with (I believe) a silent appearance by Lon himself (he died in 1930); Norma Shearer and John Gilbert in (faded) color doing the balcony scene from "Romeo & Juliet" (Gilbert's voice is hysterically bad and they do a second version of it with "updated" dialogue) and the big finale where everybody pops up belting out "Singin' in the Rain".

Sounds great but it's a real trial to sit through. All the dancing is great but it gets monotonous real quickly; the comedy is lousy; the color faded and there are some truly rotten acts. Even if you're a film buff (like me) it's rough going. Still this movie, as a historical document, is invaluable. It's entertainment value is just not as good as you might wish.

So, proceed at your own risk.

Originally this film was 2 hours and 10 minutes. All existing prints are just under 2 hours thank goodness!

MGM's "Hollywood Revue" often comes off like an elaborate amateur "Talent Show" from an otherwise uninvolved in show business group of people. It could be any school, or workplace. Everyone gets a role, and a few people stand out. The early appearance by Joan Crawford sets the tone. She is clearly not at her best, performing a song and dance; but, she is enthusiastic. So, the company's workforce goes through their assigned tasks, for better or worse. As a variety show, the movie is sometimes good; but, the brighter spots can't justify its length. It's also a chance to see some big name "stars" in a disappointing light.

Without a doubt, the three MGM stars shining brightest are the non-appearing Greta Garbo, Lon Chaney, and Ramon Novarro. Mr. Navarro would have appeared; but, he was abroad, with his family. Of those appearing, Conrad Nagel and Jack Benny (his debut) do well hosting. Mr. Nagel is especially good, singing "You Were Meant for Me" (to Anita Page) well enough to have pursued a singing career. Nagel and Bessie Love were already "sound" investments for MGM. The middle rendition of "Singin' in the Rain" (the black and white one) is nice looking; and, it's a terrific song.

Plans to make the "Hollywood Revue" an annual embarrassment were canceled.

***** The Hollywood Revue of 1929 (8/14/29) Charles Reisner ~ Jack Benny, Conrad Nagel, John Gilbert

THE Hollywood REVUE OF 1929 allows some important Silent stars to exercise their vocal chords.

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Hollywood's mightiest film studio, bowed to the inevitability of sound with this cinematic variety show which highlighted performances from most of their top talent. (Conspicuous by their absence are Garbo, Chaney & Novarro, each of whom would make their talkie debut elsewhere.) Like all the other studios, it was vitally important for box-office reasons that MGM establish the viability of their top performers in the new medium, even though some of those appearing here would find their film careers swept away almost immediately.

This should be looked on as a representative of its time. Much of the humor is now flat and a few of the performances sag badly, but it should be remembered that this is a cinematic collection of scared individuals, desperate to make good in the frightening new world of talk.

Naturally, MGM's own in-house composers are heavily relied upon in the film, with the tunes of Nacio Herb Brown & Arthur Freed and Joe Goodwin & Gus Edwards much in evidence.

Highlights include songs by Marie Dressler, a dance by Buster Keaton and Cliff Edwards' "Singing in the Rain."

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.

Like "The Show of Shows" and "Happy Days," this was one of the early talkie revues, with MGM bringing out all of the stars in its heaven. It's very much a mixed bag, as some of the routines fall flat, particularly the Laurel and Hardy and Buster Keaton comic routines, which don't click. Like "The Show of Shows," there's an emcee problem here, with a badly misused Jack Benny.

The two 2-strip Technicolor sequences, a Shearer/Gilbert rendition of Romeo and Juliet in classical and late 20s versions, and Charles King singing "Orange Blossom Time" have a lot of charm, and look very attractive. But the big attraction is "Singin' in the Rain," both in a black and white sequence, and in the all-star color finale.

I don't think this is as good as "The Show of Shows," but it is still worth having a look.

I watched the tape I had made on 4/18/02 again today and read over some of the comments that have been made on this old curio and I felt the need to add a few more observations of my own.

- Firstly, I enjoy watching old films. I see them not as competitors with current entertainment but as portholes into the past. I see the past as a series of presents and the present as living history that we are privileged to witness. Old films allow us to `look' at past era, such as 1929, up close. Each era contains its classics, such as this same year's `All Quiet on the Western Front', that are so good that they are timeless. But most of what was created was material such as Hollywood Review of 1929, designed to provide entertainment for the masses, to the tastes of the age. These people were not making this film to entertain us but rather to entertain the audiences of 1929. They must have done a good job, as this was a big hit. There is plenty of material being produced today that will look just as silly to future generations. Some of it looks pretty silly right now.

- Keep in mind that while the cinema was three decades old at this time, sound recording was an infant. Not only do we hear the `clump…clump…clump of the dancer's feet but the limitations imposed on the camera by the new technology had stripped a generation of innovations from the medium and what we have is a very flat rendering of a stage review. In time, Hollywood would rediscover how to make films- essentially they filmed much of them in silence and added what sounds they wished us to hear afterwards. We could hear the tap of Fred Astaire's shoes but the clump of the dancer's feet would be muted. The songs would be dubbed in under controlled conditions in a studio. The same presentation would have been done a lot better just a few years later. But this is the best that could be done in 1929.

- In the wake of the development of sound, Hollywood rushed out movies that exploited the new technology as fast as they could, (this one was put together in 28 days), just as a lot of films today use computer generated monsters, armies, cliffs, etc., just to show off what they can do. We have to remember what a miracle watching movies stars talk must have seemed like at the time. Whenever a technical process becomes a drawing card in itself, other aspects of the movies are going to suffer- just as today we see many movies designed simply to show off computer technology that neglect to create human characters we can relate to or tell a coherent plot. I'm not sure I wouldn't rather see `Hollywood Revue of 1929' again than to see `Van Helsing' again. I wonder what the cast of the first would have thought of the second. They might have liked their product a little better.

- It was decided that the best way to exploit the new medium was to produce musicals. Talking was fine but people wanted to hear music, as well. And singing and dancing filled the bill. But the people who had become silent movie stars were not necessarily talented musical performers. Joan Crawford was a chorus girl but that's a long way from being a lead singer or dancer. Imagine modern Hollywood putting on a show like this- with Tom Cruise playing comic foil to some Saturday Night Live types and Julia Roberts dancing and singing. Would it come out any better?

It's best not to be too critical and just look through the crystal ball of the TV at the year nineteen hundred and twenty nine, up close and personal.

MGM was one of the last studios to convert from silent to sound movies. To break the ice for the stars' talkie transformation, studio executives felt if they dipped their collective toes on a sound stage these silent movie actors and actresses wouldn't be so scared to hear their recorded voices for the first time. The June 1929 "The Hollywood Revue of 1929" proved to be a grab bag of MGM performers mixing song-and-dance routines with comedic acts. The movie served as a predecessor to television variety shows such as 'Ed Sullivan Show,' while at the same time harkened back to those earlier vaudeville days.

The 'moving camera' of the later silent movie era was all but discarded for a stationary one anchored just behind the orchestra pit in the audience seats. Additional cameras captured close-up and two shots. But the majority of scenes took in all the stage action in one wide frame. The two-hour length of "The Hollywood Revue of 1929" served as an entire evening's entertainment to those not used to seeing huge Broadway musicals. Despite being contained on one stage, the movie still cost over $400,000 to produce, and was filmed over a 25-day period.

The revue, billed as an "All-Star Musical Extravaganza," was well received by the curious public. Stars not known for their singing and dancing, such as Marion Davies and Bessie Love, were given quick lessons in both to showcase their limited musical talents. Joan Crawford, a previous dancer, said "the revue "was one of those let's-throw-everyone-on-the-lot-into-a musical thing, but I did a good song-and-dance number." The feature film had so many fans flocking to those theaters wired for sound to hear their silent film stars vocalize on film for the first time that MGM earned an enormous $1 million profit. "The Hollywood Revue of 1929" was nominated Outstanding Picture, the only revue movie ever to be considered for the Academy Awards Best Picture.

The many acts were tied together by emcees Conrad Nagel and Jack Benny, appearing in his first film. As a vaudeville and stand-up comedian beginning in 1911, Benjamin Kubelsky (stage name Jack Benny), along with his trusty violin, bounced around the country for years. His agent, Sammy Lyons, approached MGM's Irving Thalberg, and asked the producer to give Benny a look-see at the local Orpheum Theatre in Los Angeles. Thalberg liked Benny so much he sign him to a contract, beginning with "The Hollywood Revue of 1929." Not only was Benny a co-anchor to the show, he came up with the special effects introducing actress Bessie Love by taking a miniature version of her out of his pocket and placing her on the stage. She quickly grows larger like the Wonder Bread commercial boy. To achieve such an effect, the actress was in front of a black velvet curtain while the camera moves in.

The movie is also noteworthy for the performance of actor John Gilbert, who plays Romeo in a tongue-in-cheek sketch with Thalberg's wife, Norma Shearer. Claims of Gilbert possessing a high, shrill voice aren't found in the color clip where his deliberate pacing isn't as bad as film historians claim it was in his later films. Additionally, one of the highlighted comedic acts was delivered by the Laurel and Hardy team, who had just released the pair's first talkie a few weeks earlier in "Unaccustomed As We Are."

In another skit where the song "Lon Chaney Will Get You if You Don't Watch Out," viewers are introduced to the Chaney character played up by actor Gus Edwards. Chaney inked a three-picture a year deal with MGM. The actor wanted "The Hollywood Revue of 1929" to count as one of those films, even though his appearance would be only five minutes of reel time. The studio balked at the expense of paying Chaney for the short performance, which would eat up a good portion of the film's planned budget. It flatly refused. The actor wasn't happy to find out the song about him was going forward. But the untimely death of Chaney a few months later forced MGM to cut the song while in theaters that summer. The studio did put the sequence back into the motion picture when re-released years later.

Director Charles Reisner got MGM to film the last-minute inclusion of the grand finale with the song 'Singin' in the Rain.' The sequence was shot 10 days before the movie's premier at Grauman's Chinese Theatre. The Technicolor ending included those stars who appeared in the previous acts to report to the studio stage to film late into night. Movie critics in the day appreciated the final coda with the New York Times praising "the most extravagant and extensive musical comedy so far presented by the talking pictures, and is in itself a complete evening's entertainment."

After years of mainly knowing this movie as the first time Laurel & Hardy appeared on film outside of their home studio of Hal Roach Productions, I finally watched this on DVD just now. Stan & Ollie play unprepared magicians on stage while emcee Jack Benny gets the results! That was the highlight of this hodgepodge which also showcases Joan Crawford singing, Buster Keaton doing a comic dance in an Egyptian costume, and Cliff Edwards-years before his iconic work voicing Jiminy Cricket in Walt Disney's Pinocchio-becoming the first personality to perform that now-iconic song "Singin' in the Rain" which is reprised with nearly the whole cast at the end. Those were pretty entertaining though at two hours, this was a pretty long picture and there's quite some tedious moments in between the scenes I've cited. There's also some two-strip Technicolor scenes that looked scratchy though historically they're interesting to look at. Also monotonous is the fact that much of the camera work is stationary with rare angle changes of which includes some overhead shots pre-Busby Berkeley. Still, The Hollywood Revue of 1929 should be of interest to anyone interested in completing their viewing of certain stars I listed above...P.S. Among the players is Lionel Barrymore who's among the cast of my favorite movie-It's a Wonderful Life-I always like to cite when someone from there appears in another movie I review on this site...

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.

Even comic routines from Buster Keaton and Laurel & Hardy fail to expel the monotony of this all-star early-talkie revue movie from MGM. It's notable for a couple of things though: Cliff Edwards performs Singin' in the Rain (without splashing through puddles or jumping onto lamp-posts) and John Gilbert unveils his voice to the movie-going world in a comic skit on the Romeo & Juliet balcony scene. His voice was fine - but the film is something of an ordeal.

I love this film. I've commented before but just saw it again and have a few more "insights." It seems I like it better with each viewing. Along with The Broadway Melody and 42nd Street, one of the great early musicals--films that set the style and standard for decades to come. Yes there is debate as to the singing and dancing of Joan Crawford and Marion Davies, but there are great (and lesser but charming) moments from Marie Dressler, Stan Laurel, Oliver Hardy, Buster Keaton, John Gilbert (I'm Utsnay about Ouyay), Norma Shearer, Cliff Edwards, the swell Brox Sisters, Conrad Nagel, Charles King, Polly Moran, Bessie Love, William Haines, Anita Page, the snappy June Purcell, Lionel Barrymore, Gus Edwards, a sly Jack Benny, and a slap-happy Ann Dvorak. Who could resist.

Oddities for a talkie include silent bits by Keaton and Laurel (Hardy does all the talking, and some schtick from Karl Dane and George K. Arthur (neither destined for talkie success) during a Benny violin solo. To carry forth the "revue" concept the film is introduced over a live orchestra pit and the intermission sees the musicians taking their seats to reprise the early tunes--Crawford's "Gotta Feelin' for You" chief among them. As noted in other comments, some acts are introed; some are not.

Considering all were singing live (no lip syncing here) the musical numbers are bad at all. The recording (still primitive) hurts a little. Charles King comes off best as a straight singer, and the great Cliff Edwards (as Ukelele Ike) is a treat as the comic singer. Edwards does a straight intro to Singin' in the Rain as well as his signatures falsetto scat. Joan Crawford, who sang in a bunch of early talkies, has a decent if unpolished voice, and her dancing was par for the course for 1929: lively but a little clunky. Remember, movie musicals were new and hadn't really developed a cinematic choreography. Marion Davies' number is the weakest in the film, which is too bad because she was a delightful performer, but singing and dancing weren't her high points. Marie Dressler cannot hit a false note. No matter how badly she mugs and hams it up, she is great. This film also shows hints of what Bessie Love might have done during the 30s with better handling by MGM. And ditto Polly Moran, who was diminished by playing Dressler's foil in a series of early comedies.

The Jack Benny we remember from his 1950s TV show is exactly the same 25 year earlier. All his mannerisms are in place as is his timing. Several parts of the film are very badly edited and sometimes hurt the timing or punchlines of comic bits. William Haines, nearly choking on a licorice button he rips from Benny jacket, is handsome and gracious in a cameo.And Conrad Nagel reveals a not-bad singing voice as he serenades a ravishing Anita Page.

The Singin' in the Rain number rates highest. From the art deco set of Cedric Gibbons to the terrific singing of Cliff Edwards and the Brox Sisters, this number is a true classic. The dancing is simple but effective, the rain effects are ok as is the reflcting "pool." The reprise by the Brox Sisters (all 3 wrapped in 1 raincoat) is wonderful--as is the comic reprise by Dressler, Love, and Moran. Note the arm motions made by the Brox Sisters; they are same as used by Jean Hagen in the 1951 Singin in the Rain.

I love this film.

THE STORY & GENRE -- Variety show adds a few genre elements via trick camera and the Lon Chaney "Gonna Get You" song, but otherwise not genre. Good period cast. Color inserts 2-strip Technicolor.

THE VERDICT -- Not a bad film in the least, but not one you'll want to watch again very soon after.

ONLINE FREE -- Overseas websites at 118 minutes, which is the Turner print. I have not seen a 130-minute version and it may not exist anymore.

What a crass attempt by "the studio with more stars than the heavens" to try and blind you with them in this ill conceived, poorly mounted musical comedy review in which our headliners could used a lot more rehearsal time. In no particular order MGM major stars Joan Crawford, Norma Shearer, John Gilbert, Laurel and Hardy, Buster Keaton and an uncomfortable looking Marie Dressler fumble their way through this ill conceived all star variety show featuring both Hollywood stalwarts and Broadway players clumsily handled by co masters of ceremony Conrad Nagel, who gets to show off his rusty pipes and Jack Benny, who delivers more misses than hits. It is all a rather sloppy affair poorly edited and paced as comedy routines go lame and large dance numbers look more like stampedes than chorus numbers.

There are also a couple of early Technicolor scenes, one featuring a shrill Shearer as an over aged Juliet and John Gilbert's billy goat voiced Romeo in a scene directed by Lionel Barrymore that is near painful to endure.

Revue is not a complete disaster with Ukelele Ike introducing Singing in the Rain to movie audiences, Natova and Company providing a spirited dance number, Bessie Love being dangerously tossed about the stage in a piece of slapstick, and Marion Davies being the only star not embarrassing herself on stage. There is also a provocative large dance scene among the hoofers with the girls white and the guys in black face with the scene changing from print to negative to re-enforce the contrast. I doubt very much this scene got past censors down South.

Hollywood was still struggling with sound around the time of Revue and it is evident in many scenes but with jokes falling flat, the lack of cohesion in scene transition as well as dance numbers this musical comedy show remains off key from end to end.

Key word here is "revue." Don't look for a plot--there isn't one. MGM's first big "talkie," this film also served as the official "talkie" debut for a number of major silent-screen stars. Some parts are duds; others are gems. Best of all is the "Singin' in the Rain" numbers with Cliff Edwards and the Brox Sisters. The comic reprise with Marie Dressler, Polly Moran & Bessie Love is fun too. Norma Shearer and John Gilbert do well with a few versions of the balcony scene from "Romeo & Juliet." Laurel and Hardy, Jack Benny, William Haines, Joan Crawford, Marion Davies, and Conrad Nagel are among the stars. Take this film for what it is, and remember that it was an "event picture" back in 1929, seeing all those stars talk and sing! It was nominated for an Oscar as best picture of the year.

This is one of those Dated, Corny, and Cringe-Inducers that Film Buff's, usually Reluctantly, sit through to say They have and add another Notch to the Belt, a much Deserved Reward for making it through the Two-Hour Running Time.

Sure there are Some Folks who are Fans of the "Old School" Movie Stars and devour this Stuff and think its a Gay and Glorious Movie full of Wonderful Tunes and Dance Numbers.

However, even Film Fanatics who Love Movies in Any Era, from the Silents to Today can discover that some Serious Time Displacement and an Extra Effort is Required to Tuff These Things Out.

This is Considered the First of its Kind, there were many from Various Studios to Follow. A Big Box-Office Hit in the Day (no surprise) and was even Nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.

Conrad Nagel is OK, and Jack Benny as the MC throughout the Show does the Same Overrated Schicht that He did His whole Career, which Isn't Much. But all of this is Relative, You see, because it's in the Eye of the Beholder.

There are some Highlights that Attract Attention, some Not for the Right Reasons, like the Joan Crawford Hoofing and Marie Dressler Mugging away Dressed Up as a Little Girl, the Embarrassing Laurel and Hardy Skit, and there are many Other Good Performers not Shown in the Best Light.

But others, like the "Lon Chaney's Gonna Get You If You Don't Watch Out" Bit, with some Truly Scary Masks and is a well Choreographed Skit.

There is Buster Keaton in Drag, a Few Color Sequences, one Featuring John Barrymore as a Director who is Forced by the Studio to Update Shakespeare, and a "Singing in the Rain" Extended Finale and a few others that make it Worth a Watch.

Note...Many other Hollywood Icons and now Forgotten Stars appear that are not mentioned here.

Note 2...An important Time-Capsule no matter what You think of it.

This film really tried my patience. Fifteen minutes of star-studded entertainment spread out over a two-hour endurance test. The editing is pathetic. I've seen better cinematography in home movies. Most of the songs are totally forgettable, as are half the acts, especially Joan Crawford, who has all the dancing grace of a bull in a china shop (and a singing voice to match). All but a few jokes fall flat. Even the brief appearance by the immortal Laurel and Hardy was an embarrassment. The one saving feature was the closing color production of "Singing in the Rain".

That this film was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar says that either 1929 was a terrible year for films, or that MGM had a lot of influence with the nominations. Somewhat similar to the film's of 2000 and the influence of Miramax ("Chocolat")!!

By the way, this was not MGM's first "talkie". In the film, references are made to "Broadway Melody", which was also a "talkie".