Very disappointing...

Too much of everything

best movie i've ever seen.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

'Babes in Arms' is one of Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart's best musicals, and one of their biggest successes, with wonderful songs (some of their best) and a witty script.This film version starring Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland doesn't come up to its level. Although "Lady is a Tramp" is heard in brief instrumental form, the best songs from the musical don't appear and the script does lack the wit and sharpness of the stage show's, instead feeling bland and flimsy. Other flaws are that the story does lack oomph and sometimes drags and the supporting cast are variable, with the best performance coming from a very good Margaret Hamilton, Betty Jaynes and Douglas McPhail sing beautifully.June Preisser and Charles Winniger are terribly annoying however. My biggest complaint however is the minstrel number, there is no denying that it is exuberantly performed but there is a lot to dislike about the number, it is not for the easily offended, it appears randomly, feels out of place, goes on for far too long and has to be up there as one of the most overblown scenes in early film musicals.Flaws aside, there is still a good deal to enjoy in 'Babes in Arms'. While it is a bowdlerisation adaptation-wise, the songs are still of good quality, it was interesting to hear "Good Morning", "Broadway Melody" and "Singin in the Rain", while "You are My Lucky Star" and especially the poignant "I Cried for You" are the standouts. "God's Country" is the sole misfire. The use of pre-existing material and operatic excerpts are also a delight, as are the sumptuous production values and lavish photography. Busby Berkeley's direction is not as imaginative, witty or dazzling as some of his other films, but it doesn't come over heavy-handedly and it has charm and energy, especially the clever staging of the title number.As said, the supporting cast are variable, but it's Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland that make 'Babes in Arms' worth seeing. Their chemistry shines beautifully, his brashness contrasting beautifully with her vulnerability. Rooney's performance does feel excessive and hammy sometimes and when it comes to the Oscar nomination he was nowhere near to the level of the other nominees in my opinion, however the boundless enthusiasm is there as is the charm. Garland is luminous and incredibly touching, her voice is also one that you can listen to for hours and not get enough of.On the whole, has a lot to like, especially Rooney, Garland and their chemistry, but it is patchy too. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Let's put on a show. Did that phrase originate with this movie? At any rate, I watched it and am reviewing it.I loved it. I have some peeves, but they will arise later. Right now, I am missing dear Mickey because he passed away last year, 2014. In his interviews, he used to literally cry about missing the dear departed Judy and about the way she was mistreated by the studio system. Judy's career would go on hot and heavy for about another ten years after this movie, before her star began to fade off. Her adult movie career was rather short, if you measure the years of her successes, but power packed with all of her cinematic productions and private life stories in between.Re Mickey: Night in/at the Museum, eat your heart out. Older actors have to eat, and earn money to afford that SAG card membership.You look at this film, Babes in Arms, and you see young, energetic Mr. Mickey Rooney, slim, quick-footed and fast with impersonations of Clark Gable, Lionel Barrymore and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was trying to direct and teach the other teenagers his way of acting properly on stage. Mickey was first-listed as star of this movie; he was all domineering and screechy but probably deserved all of the hype.Judy was excellent, and her Eleanor Roosevelt My Day number was superb and nostalgic. Yes, Judy's swing vs. opera number reminded me very much of her 1936 Sunday in the Park (was that the name?) with Deanna Durbin. In real life, IMO Deanna was siphoned off in favor of Judy as a future star.Another actress IMO who was shoved under the bus in favor of Judy was (hold your breath) Shirley Temple. Shirley didn't get Wizard of Oz, but Judy did. Temple's career was about over soon after The Little Princess, I feel, 1938. In this movie, Babes in Arms, the June Preisser character is a has-been child actress who has starred in such previous filmers in particular as "The Baby Colonel"/Baby General or something like that, that reminded me of Shirley's "The Little Colonel"/Littlest General (?). Was this a satirical innuendo?Some bad as follows, I feel, but I am still giving this movie a 10 for sentimental reasons and still loving Mickey and Judy in all that they did: a pox on the bonfire and related singing, ala Nazis and possibly even Hitler Youth: similar bonfire done in a later Judy movie Meet Me in St. Louis which is a creepy/pun intended Halloween scene, which I also despised along with the homemade stupid Halloween costumes in the St. Louis movie -- and also throwing the wooden furniture into the bonfire. Ugh.African American character in this movie: June Preisser's maid. Other than herself, here were white actors who "blacked up" in the supposed spirit of vaudevillian minstrelsy tradition -- could this type of blackface dance scene even be done today, 2015? Back to the good: Douglas McPhail I felt was one powerful singer, who outsang everybody else. He was maybe the only white performer in the blackface minstrelsy scene, but I feel he helped carry it off.IT WAS THE GREAT DEPRESSION. No wonder the older actors were broke. Moviegoers who had the ten cents or whatever it cost, could see talking films way cheaper than to see live vaudevillians of the old days. How could the former performers afford all the houses in that community, and pay for all the churches, etc.? Hardly any could have been real headliners, and most statistically could barely afford to even stay in rooming houses much less pay for permanent real estate.FINALLY, POST-WAR BABY BOOM. You have to realize that most of these actors were born, say, around 1920 (like Mickey) or 1922 (like Judy), and that they were teenagers when making this movie. This means that they were born right after World War One ended. The irony is that in real life some of these teen actors would go into World War Two and have post-war baby boom babies themselves.Mickey Rooney went on to serve in World War Two, he of the seven wives (I think) and maybe even countless babies? Yes, it was child real-life Mickey in the tap dancing film clip interspersed into the life of the movie's child Mickey Moran. This was no imposter playing Mickey Rooney/Mickey Moran.I am a theatrical historian and movie reviewer. I have a Bachelor of Arts Degree in American History, which includes close to a minor in performing arts studies in theatre, dance and voice, plus fine arts. I took the American History major in order to study more the decades surrounding much of our theatrical/stage and movie/cinematic history and actors and actresses thereof. I also studied cinematic techniques and theatrical censorship and critiquing.In my historian and theatrical coursework, I wrote scripts and portrayed actresses such as Sophia Loren (speaking Italian), Mae West (in a boa), and Lucille Ball (screaming at Ricky Ricardo that he's a fancy bandleader while she's a homebound wifey).At any rate, you know from my other reviews that song and dance movies are my absolute favorites. Some people say that some of these movies are plot-less or slim of plot, but so what? Who cares? This movie is a classic. Yes, it talks about Der Fuhrer and Il Duce, and Douglas McPhail does a cool goose-step. God's Country reminds one of the huge patriotic dance scene in the later 1942 Yankee Doodle Dandy.Critiquing this movie through today's lenses (2015), RIP Mickey Rooney, and even with the aforementioned sadder parts, I still give this movie:10/10

With the popularity of "talkies" (talking motion pictures), vaudeville stage performers find themselves increasingly out of work in the early 1930s. Practically born at the Palace Theatre, energetic teenager Mickey Rooney (as Michael "Mickey" Moran) tries to help out his parents and their generation of fading live performers by writing a stage show. His lead singer and potential love interest is spunky Judy Garland (as Patsy "Pat" Barton). However, there is a rival for Mr. Rooney's affections. Their Seaport, Long Island show could be destined for Broadway, but it's not all smooth sailing...MGM "teen idols" Rooney and Garland were more wholesome than those kids at other studios - especially the "Dead End" kids at Warner Bros. "Babes in Arms" entertained teens, parents - and even grandparents - with a cross-generational, albeit flimsy, story. It's a tuneful trip, despite being trimmed of some original stage songs; the medleys and production numbers make it seem bigger and more musical. This is Rooney's film, with director Busby Berkeley and co-star Garland more or less inviting you to join in and share his screen. Everyone does a good job for the star...You get the impression there isn't anything Rooney won't try. He postures throughout. The box office champ impersonates Clark Gable and Lionel Barrymore well but doesn't do Franklin D. Roosevelt justice. Be prepared to cringe at the "minstrel show" wherein Rooney and Garland lead the troupe in a "blackface" barnstormer. This entertainment staple comes across dreadfully; others, most specifically Al Jolson, could get under the colored skin and perform with pathos, dignity and a bit of respect. Here, you have stereotypical exaggeration, with no imagination.***** Babes in Arms (9/15/39) Busby Berkeley ~ Mickey Rooney, Judy Garland, Douglas McPhail, June Preisser

Former child-stars Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland both star in this movie about two young talented artist who try to make it in the world of show-business. It wasn't the first movie they appeared in together and it also wouldn't be the last. They appeared in several Andy Hardy movies together for instance, in which Mickey Rooney played the title role.Judy Garland was actually still only 17 when she appeared in the movie, the same year she did "The Wizard of Oz" and also Mickey Rooney looked like he was 15, while he was actually around 19 years old at the time. Both also play young teenagers in this movie and it earned Mickey Rooney actually an Oscar nomination. There of course weren't a lot of musicals around at the time which purely had teenagers in it. In that regard this movie is a refreshing little entry in the musical genre.It's an enjoyable and obviously light movie. But this of course also has as a result that the movie doesn't really ever reaches the a level of true greatness. The movie is enjoyable but just nothing more than that. It's obviously rather formulaic and predictable but this doesn't take away the entertainment value of it all. The movie is dragging in some parts but then again which '30's movie doesn't do so in parts? The movie perhaps also doesn't end in the way as it should have had, when some more sentimental themes start to kick in.In all fairness, the movie features some good songs. I'm normally not particularly too fond of songs featured in most musical movies but this movie does form an exception. Nothing I would be singing along with but it's nice sounding and of course gets performed by some capable artist.I enjoyed watching this movie simply for what it was.7/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/