Rating: 
Summary: WHY aren't movies like this being remade . . .
Review: instead of perfect or near-perfect, towering classics like "Planet of the Apes," "The Manchurian Candidate," "Psycho," "Charade," etc.? Don't get me wrong, I liked this film, even after reading the Herman Wouk magnum opus on which it's based, but in comparison to the novel it's an indisputably flawed film with some bad miscasting and its omittance of many key events and situations, which causes the film adaptation to lack much of the substance and soul which the book possessed.
"Marjorie Morningstar" stars Natalie Wood in the title part, a role she lobbied heavily for in her (ultimately) successul attempt to transition from a teen star/ingenue to a bona fide leading lady. The film starts off with Marjorie (then Morgenstern, her real last name; "Morningstar," her 'stage' name, comes later) fresh out of high school and a at a crossroads: Her traditional, conservative-minded parents (Claire Trevor & Everett Sloane) want her to attend college and marry her rich, great catch of a boyfriend, but the dreamy, yearning, starry-eyed, somewhat spoiled Marjorie disdains the conventional plans laid out for her, although she is unsure of what she wants to do. That uncertainty is resolved when her fun-loving, man-crazy best friend Marsha Zelenko (Carolyn Jones) persuades her to become a counselor at an all-girls summer camp, which just "happens" to be across the lake from an upscale grown-up resort where all sort of racy things occur. It is there that Marjorie will develop her serious aspirations to become an actress (and hence adopting the more harmonious, not to mention less ethnic, stage name "Morningstar") and where she will meet two young men who will play a pivotal part in her life: a stable, talented, aspiring playwright Wally Wronkin (Marty Milner) and the gifted but volatile Noel Airman nee Ehrman (Gene Kelly), the great love of her life. The latter man will (albeit intentionally or not) put her through hell but she ends up growing and maturing as a result; whereby the former, Wally, remains patiently to the end as a lighthouse does on the dunes, a comforting, stable, safe presence, as it appears to a ship navigating troubled, tumultuous waters, which is analagous to Marjorie's relationship and experience with Noel.
As mentioned earlier, this is a good enough film if one hasn't read the book, but if one has, the movie is at best acceptable and at worst deplorable. I tend to take the former view. Regarding the casting--I can't really think of an actress of the time that would immediately come to mind as epitomizing Marjorie, but Natalie Wood did well enough in the part. She certainly was of the right age, convincingly emoted the vulnerable uncertainty yet heady excitement of a girl on the cusp of womanhood, and what's more, had enough of the "look" to be convincing. I've often heard it said that Natalie was miscast in "ethnic" roles such as the part of the Jewish beauty Marjorie in this movie, the mulatto in "Kings Go Forth" and the Puerto Rican Maria in "West Side Story," but I've always found that view inexplicable. While Wood has always had a sort of 'wholesome' quality in her persona and appearance, to me there was a slightly exotic cast in her face (most evident in her large, expressive, enchantress-like dark eyes) which made her acceptable in more exotic-ethnic parts.
The always reliable Claire Trevor and Everett Sloane were solid in their parts as Marjorie's concerned, conventional parents, and though I have not mentioned him, so was the delightful Ed Wynn as Samson, Marjorie's lovable, understanding whale of an uncle (despite his performance sometimes bordering on this side of being hammy). The big sour note here is Gene Kelly, with Carolyn Jones as Marsha running a close 2nd and Marty Milner as Wally not far behind. Noel in the novel is 29 years old, very tall, lanky, blond, blue-eyed and handsome, like a Greek God. Kelly is the complete physical antithesis--46 years old, short, overweight, brunette. Even in his young and handsome days he still would be inappropriate, not only lookswise but performance as well. His acting is acceptable and in some parts even good, but doesn't quite hit the mark. If the similarly short and dark-haired, explosive and phenomenal actor John Garfield had still been alive and been cast in this part, he would have done a spectacular job as Noel (see him in a similar type of role in "Humoresque").
Then there is Carolyn Jones as Marjorie's best buddy Marsha, another complete miscast. Whereas Jones is good-looking, slender, sexy, vivacious and well-groomed, her character is supposed to be very unattractive (with glasses, too!), fat (in fact, this is mentioned over and over again!), of course not sexy in the least, ill-tempered and slovenly (another fact which is mentioned or inferred to countless times). She does turn in a warm, likable performance; however, she's supposed to be just the opposite. As for Marty Milner as Wally, as with Kelly, Milner is physically miscast--he is very tall, blond, blue-eyed and attractive when he should be the complete opposite. In fact, Kelly and he could have switched parts! Also, Milner's performance is too upbeat; his character should be more solemn.
But overlooking the inexplicable miscasting, in my estimation the film adaptation left out the heart and soul and substance of the novel, which spanned many decades and touched upon some important and uncomfortable events and issues. The book starts with Marjorie at 17 and eventually ends off with her at middle-age--this is very crucial because it not only captures the painful, heartrending passage of time but also a nostalgic, reminiscent, almost aching yet loving fondness mixed with unflinching objectivity for things, places, events and people bygone, a perspective that can only be reached when a lot of time has gone by. The most important situation and event the movie leaves out concerns the Jewish individual's and community's place and struggle for acceptance and assimilation in what still was then a very Anglo-Saxon, WASP era, and the impending circumstances and eventual arrival of World War 2. The movie also fails to really capture the theme of the traditional vs the un-traditional, the "old ways" vs. the "new ways" in Marjorie's youthful defiance to be everything her parents are NOT.
All in all, "Marjorie Morningstar" is a somewhat entertaining, somewhat poignant coming-of-age romantic soap-opera fare amidst the background of Bar Mitzvahs, Summer Camps and Broadway, and while it tends to leave off the hot-button issue of the characters Jewish heritage and completely omits any mention to WW2 and instead transfers the era to well after the war, it does effectively present a portrait of stirring sexuality and young love in the vein of other such similar movies like "A Summer Place," "Splendor In The Grass," etc. But if you're interested in a movie which perfectly delivers what Wouk does in his novel--about how young love doesn't always last and how we can still end up quite happy when making practical choices, see "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg."
Rating:
Summary: Not Your Typical Gene Kelly Movie
Review: Let me preface everything I write by saying that I have not read Herman Wouk's book; therefore, all of my observations are based purely on the movie.
The story of the movie is the classic "good girl falls in love with older bad boy." The story has worked for many movies, as well as novels, and while watching "Marjorie Morningstar," I could not help comparing it with "Dirty Dancing." To avoid confusion, "Marjorie Morningstar" is not a musical and contains very little singing and even less dancing. Having said that, both "Marjorie Morningstar" and "Dirty Dancing" tell the story of the virtuous girl who falls for the man that every woman wants and no woman's parents approve of. Although I enjoyed the dancing in "Dirty Dancing" immensely, I did not like the movie as a whole; however, I did enjoy "Marjorie Morningstar" despite several key problems. First, since the story is one that is tried and true, it would seem that the rest of the writing would just fall into place, especially since the movie is an adaptation of the novel; however, this did not prove to be true. The character development is very poor, especially for Marjorie's character, which leads the viewer to wonder why everyone is so infatuated with her. Instead of transitioning from one scene to the next, the movie jumps around, which leaves the viewer asking what happened in the interim. At the same time, there are a several scenes (i.e., the bar mitzvah and Uncle Samson's bullfight) when the viewer wonders what the purpose of those scenes is and how and what they add to the plot. The times when there are chances for some really dynamic dialogue between the two lovers the lines are just not there. Though the movie does touch on some hard-hitting relationship issues, all it does is touch. The movie would have been better had the writers delved into those issues more fully. Second, the movie suffers from Natalie Wood's performance as Marjorie. All of her lines seem forced, as well as her actions (i.e., opening the chair to sit down in). Her dancing, which is in a minor scene, leaves a lot to be desired. For Natalie Wood fans, I highly recommend NOT watching this movie. Her performance does give credence to the claim that she had more luck than talent. Third, the movie is too long. Had the characters been developed more fully and/or some needed scenes added, the length would have been fine. So, why did I enjoy this movie? One reason was because of Gene Kelly, and I disagree with previous reviewers who say that he should not have been cast as Noel Airman. His performance is first-rate and in my opinion, the best of the movie. It is refreshing to see him in such a dramatic role. The scenes where he sings, where he dances, and where he throws a crazy fit are the best scenes of the movie. For those of you who are Gene Kelly fans, do not watch this expecting the typical optimistic song and dance musical, or you will most likely be disappointed. The second reason I enjoyed the movie was because of the hard-hitting relationship issues that were touched on (i.e., Noel says, "Marjorie, you are your mother.") Yes, other movies have touched on these same issues and done a much better job of doing it, so if it is that type of movie you are looking for, this is probably not the one for you. The final reason I liked this movie is because the story is tried and true, and all the women I know (myself included) have at one time or another fallen for "a bad boy." It is surprising to see how the story plays out in "Marjorie Morningstar."
Rating: 
Summary: Words do not do this film justice...it is wonderful...
Review: Like the previous reviewer, I'm somewhat surprised at the less than appreciative reviews on Marjorie Morningstar. It is a truly remarkable movie. I'd like to rebuke the comment one reviewer made about Gene Kelly being bloated. Surely she/he must have been mistaken. Handsome Gene Kelly was absolutely believable as the dashing Noel Airman, even at 46yrs old. The acting from Natalie Wood was good enough, nothing brilliant though. However, the brilliance of the story more than makes up fot that. Gene Kelly's performance was truly breathtaking. Many film critics have dismissed Gene Kelly's acting abilities, labeling him a song and dance man and incapable of fine acting. They have obviously not seen this film. Gene Kelly was magnificent as Noel Airman. His portrayal was not only sensitive, moving, but full of understanding of the character played. The ending of Marjorie Morningstar is poignant, tinged with sadness. I recommend this film to all, especially if you are a Gene Kelly fan and want to see just how good he can act, minus the tap shoes.
Rating: 
Summary: Read the book, don't bother with this movie
Review: Marjorie Morningstar is one of my absolute favorite books of all time. (Actually, Herman Wouk is one of my favorite writers, with The Caine Mutiny being my favorite book period, but this is a close second.)
Which is why I have to warn other Wouk/Marjorie fans out there to avoid this film at all costs. It is totally unfaithful to the book. Gene Kelly is ridiculous as Noel Airman, who in the novel is a tall skinny blonde, dashingly handsome and fascinatingly intellectual, but ultimately irresponsible and unwilling to grow up. Gene Kelly is dumpy, short, practically bald, and probably one of the most childish, boorish characters ever in a film. (Example: Novel Noel ends up writing radio ad copy; Movie Noel goes back to the adult camp, where Marjorie is told by a friend, "He's happy here," as if Noel had just checked into a rest home!)
The book takes place over several years and chronicles Marjorie's journey to womanhood, with all that that entails; the film makes this journey seem like a lark, undertaken by a simple-minded floosy who is, for some reason, drawn to childish tantrum-throwers. Characters like Marsha Zelenko, who are in the novel for a purpose, are only in the movie to get Marjorie where she needs to be to meet Noel; there is no other reason for them to exist and certainly they have no part in the transformation she undergoes (which isn't represented in the film anyway.)
And I was infuriated by the whole "colored lights" scene, which in the novel sums up the entire plot in a diary entry full of longing and nostalgia (and it was LILACS, not lights!!) The film uses it as a disposable one-off. Which is just what the film itself is.
I gave it one star because Natalie Wood is beautiful and perfect for the role; she just wasn't given anything worthwhile to work with.
Rating: 
Summary: A weak echo of a classic novel
Review: Marjorie Morningstar is one of my all-time favorite books. I discovered it as a teenager in the 70's & I have reread it countless times since. Each time I read it I find some phrase or detail that I missed in previous readings. I love the way the book conveys the feeling of New York in the 30's. The book's ending has never failed to make me shed tears of regret because Marjorie gives up her dream of an acting career as well as the great love of her youth, Noel Airman. Even though I am much older & wiser than I was the first time I read the book, I am still moved by Noel's appearance at Marjorie's wedding & by the final visit that Wally pays to Marjorie in later years. Neither of these poignant moments is included in the movie. I am a Natalie Wood fan & even though she did not readily come to mind as "being" Marjorie when I read the book (I did not see the movie until years later), I still think she did an adequate job in the role given the fact that the movie adaptation was lacking in so many ways. However, the movie might have been salvaged if someone other than Gene Kelly were cast in the role of Noel Airman & if Martin Milner were not cast as Wally. Milner was much too handsome & mature for the role of Wally. Where is the homely,bespectacled,gawky teenaged Wally, that, even in a successful middle-age treasures the memory of Marjorie's kiss under the lilacs? While I think some of the other reviewers' comments regarding Gene Kelly's appearance are a bit harsh, he looks nothing like the lean, blonde Noel described in the book. Even so, his role might have been salvaged if it had been written to include some of Noel's intelligence, wit, & charm. Noel was a writer, singer, & wanna-be philosopher, a pre-James Dean rebel, he was not a dancer! I also found it dissappointing to see the story moved from the 1930's to the 1950's. In the context of the 1930's we can understand Marjorie's choices. The movie doesn't focus enough on Marjorie's career ambitions either. The movie does seem dated today, but seen in the context of 1930's pre-feminist,pre-sexual revolution society, if the movie had been more faithful to the entire story of Marjorie, it would be an interesting glimpse into another time. I've given the movie two stars, because if I had seen the movie without ever reading the book, that would be my rating. However, if I were comparing the movie & the book, my rating of this movie would be in the negative numbers.
Rating:
Summary: So Bad It's Good
Review: My wife and I laughed so hard we GUFFAWED at this sublime example of cheesy 1950s film-making at its cheesiest. Gene Kelly blowing his stack at a trio of Broadway producers is so off-the-wall and over-the-top it's worth the price of admission by itself; all that's missing is his stepping out of character at the end of the scene and exclaiming "ACTING!" a la SNL's classic "Master Thespian" gag. We truly did not want this movie to end -- and never for a moment believed it was what Herman Wouk had in mind.
Rating: 
Summary: A romance to touch your heart
Review: Natalie Wood is luminous in the celebrated film version of Herman Wouk's novel MARJORIE MORNINGSTAR. Entranced by the magic of the theatre, and the dashing composer Noel Airman (Gene Kelly), Marjorie enters the acting world. The film tells of the affair with Noel that changed her life, but it also tells of the struggles that a young Jewish girl has to go through in order to be in complete control of her life. A moving film, which features the Oscar-nominated song 'A Very Precious Love'.
Rating:
Summary: Natalie Wood and Gene Kelly Shine in Adaptation of Novel
Review: Natalie Wood is stunning as the young woman who seeks to become a Broadway star and to marry the love of her life. Gene Kelly also gives a heartwarming performance as the older man who captures her heart with his flamboyant lifestyle and immense talent. Unlike the book which was set in the 30's, the film is reset to the post-war 50's and avoids the political implications of Hilter's rise to power on the Jewish Marjorie. The movie does, however, maintain all the futility of her search for stardom and her tumultuous love affair with Noel Airman. My only criticism of the movie might have been that the ending was completely changed. However, after feeling so sad at the realistic ending of the novel, I finished watching the video smiling at its happier conclusion. Gene Kelly is unquestionably an actor, but his one dance number and his beautiful singing of "A Very Precious Love" lit up the screen. Martin Milner shines as the friend besotted with love for Marjorie, Carolyn Jones is wonderful as her outspoken friend, and Ed Wynn is charming as the uncle, particularly in a campy scene dressed as a bullfighter. Watch also for 60's heartthrob Edd "Kookie" Byrnes as one of Marjorie's first boyfriends. If you've never read the novel, you will still be enchanted with this classic love story. If you have read the novel, you will be mesmerized as Wouk's characters come to life.
Rating:
Summary: Natalie Wood and Gene Kelly Shine in Adaptation of Novel
Review: Natalie Wood is stunning as the young woman who seeks to become a Broadway star and to marry the love of her life. Gene Kelly also gives a heartwarming performance as the older man who captures her heart with his flamboyant lifestyle and immense talent. Unlike the book which was set in the 30's, the film is reset to the post-war 50's and avoids the political implications of Hilter's rise to power on the Jewish Marjorie. The movie does, however, maintain all the futility of her search for stardom and her tumultuous love affair with Noel Airman. My only criticism of the movie might have been that the ending was completely changed. However, after feeling so sad at the realistic ending of the novel, I finished watching the video smiling at its happier conclusion. Gene Kelly is unquestionably an actor, but his one dance number and his beautiful singing of "A Very Precious Love" lit up the screen. Martin Milner shines as the friend besotted with love for Marjorie, Carolyn Jones is wonderful as her outspoken friend, and Ed Wynn is charming as the uncle, particularly in a campy scene dressed as a bullfighter. Watch also for 60's heartthrob Edd "Kookie" Byrnes as one of Marjorie's first boyfriends. If you've never read the novel, you will still be enchanted with this classic love story. If you have read the novel, you will be mesmerized as Wouk's characters come to life.
|
