Sadly Over-hyped

Let's be realistic.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

I love musicals and had never heard of this one. After watching some of it. I no longer wonder why.I love Debbie Reynolds but even she can't improve this film.The film begins with a terrible song and singer, and then Debbie and an odd sounding woman - who I thought at first was Lauren Bacall - start singing and it's dreadful! I've heard of Eddie Fisher but this is the first film of his I've seen.. He's not a natural, his acting is poor, really poor. It seems as though his lines are stuck near the camera. The songs aren't good and his singing is dreadful.Unlike Singing in the Rain, Guys and Dolls etc this film is very dated. This a gift but its off to the charity shop.

In the light of the sad demise of Debbie Reynolds, I was keen to see this film, since I had never seen anything with Debbie and her husband Eddie Fisher. It's a very silly film unfortunately and the suspension of disbelief is so drastic that I find it very difficult to deal with. We are supposed to believe that in the 1950s a woman can suddenly produce a 1 year-old child, having had a full-time job, no one noticed that she was pregnant, she wasn't off work, no one looks after the child, she doesn't know the name or gender of her own child, and her employer is happy for her. At the same time, she is denying that she is the mother of the child and no one believes her!Apparently everyone was very broadminded and didn't understand how human reproduction works. I was born in the 1960-s and my adopted brother in 1970, at which time there was still a huge stigma to single mothers. In the 50s it would have been worse. I assume that audiences for this film would have just bought it as pure fantasy.Apart from that, it was a fun film, apart from the songs which are not memorable. Debbie Reynolds is a legend. Eddie Fisher on the other hand, seemed rather underwhelming.

"Bachelor Mother" was a delightful movie, but one can imagine why a musical, in color, remake would crop up. Debbie Reynolds as Polly Parrish was a good choice, and wound up carrying the movie. Eddie Fisher, as the junior Merlin, was not such a good choice. Many other actors at the time would have been far better. Had someone like Donald O'Connor had the role, it could have been an unmitigated success. Too bad Fisher got the job.Overall, the movie is delightful. The basic plot, of a sales clerk in a large department store who winds up with a baby that's not hers, but that no one believes is not hers, is an excellent set-up for comedy. This one does a good job. "Bachelor Mother" does a better job. And an even better one may pop up in the future.gaynor wild

Eddie Fischer was simply bad. Possibly the worst scene came early in the movie when he broke into a spontaneous song and dance number centered around a piano and some conveniently placed employees. The song was totally stupid... I think I could drunkenly offer a few lines on a sheet of paper that would far exceed it and probably win a Grammy. Then, as if the writers could come up with no better way to escape the ridiculousness of the scene, Fischer says something to the effect of, "Don't tell (insert the guy's name). He doesn't like music" and smiles. I can't describe how bad this is, I felt a little embarrassed. And that guy Debbie Reynolds works with and who's always hitting on her is so annoying too. I can't even imagine someone like her wasting a fraction of time on him. The jokes were delivered without any sort of chemistry between characters which made the movie crawl by. At least the baby had cute hair. The two stars are for Reynolds, who was like a swan among ugly ducklings.See Bachelor Mother instead.