the audience applauded

It is not only a funny movie, but it allows a great amount of joy for anyone who watches it.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Gypsy is arguably the greatest Broadway show ever written. It's funny, scary, dramatic, moving, sexy...everything you'd ever want from a show. Why Hollywood felt the need to mess with perfection is beyond me, but they did.Warner's 1962 version of Gypsy gets off to such a rough start that it's impossible to ever redeem itself even when it finally gets back on track later in the film. The first act portion of Warner's Gypsy mixes song/scene order, combines characters, adds needless voice overs, and destroys the pacing of the film completely.With this cast's less than stellar vocal abilities, the music score was never going to soar like it usually does with better singers at the helm, but the slow tempos sure don't help.Rosalind Russell does as best she can in a role she's not terribly well-suited for, but she does manage to wring a bit of comedy out of the dreary first half of the film and give the character of Rose a bit of pathos in the second half of the film. Her voice isn't up to task for the songs, but she gives it her all and you have to admire that.Of the whole cast, Natalie Wood comes across the best. Her voice isn't perfect, but she pulls her songs off well enough and makes Louise a real person, despite the screenwriter and studio's attempts to sabotage her at every turn. For instance, why make June run away with a random chorus boy named Jerry instead of Louise's crush, Tulsa? It takes away a big moment for her character.Once the act 2 portion gets going, the film evens out and it becomes a bit more watchable, as it stays rather faithfully to the original stage script. Unfortunately, by that point, it's too little too late and the damage has been done.If this movie is your only option, it's worth a shot, but the stage version is infinitely better and more worth your time.

What a great piece of film making. Some critics have called Gypsy the greatest musical ever produced, and I think I see why they say so. I've never seen a staged performance so I can't compare, but I don't see how this movie version could be any better than it is. Everything is at the highest level - casting, script, acting, direction, cinematography. The story is gripping, as one watches how a driven, obsessed, controlling woman warps the lives of those around her. Evidently Ethel Merman was furious that Russell was chosen for the part Merman created on Broadway, but Russell's performance is powerful. Karl Malden is just great as poor Herbie. Natalie Wood is flawless as Jean. The moment near the end when she looks at herself in the mirror before going onstage for her stripping debut, and suddenly recognizes her own femininity ("I'm a pretty girl, mama") is heartbreaking. The script never lets up on the dramatic tension, and the cinematography - in beautiful, extinct Technicolor - is a feast for the eyes. Evidently Russell couldn't sing and had to be dubbed. I've heard that Merman kept the outtakes of Russell's singing as a vicious memento (I'd kill to hear them). At any rate this is one of the all time greats, not to be missed.

In my opinion, this 1962 film, based upon the 1957 book "Gypsy: A Memoir" written by Gypsy Rose Lee, herself, would have faired so much better had it been presented as a straight drama. I certainly found that both the musical numbers and the frequent lapses into comedy really weakened the overall punch that this film undoubtedly could've produced had these unnecessary elements not dominated a good part of the story.I also thought that Rosalind Russell's character as Rose Hovick, the ultimate, overbearing stage-mother-from-hell (who tyrannized the entire story) was given way-way too much attention and screen-time for my liking.From start to finish Russell's willful, one-note character literally chewed-up every bit of scenery with her loud, controlling and bossy histrionics. I found that this decidedly annoying character lost the novelty of her appeal within the first 30 minutes of the story.I also found that "Gypsy's" 143-minute running time to be almost unendurable to sit through. If a good 30 minutes had been carefully edited from this production I think that it would've been so much easier to enjoy.This movie just went on and on and on. (Ho-hum!) And its story just seemed to be going around and around in a vicious circle that ended up, in the long run, going absolutely nowhere at all.Another serious problem with "Gypsy" was the miscasting of Natalie Wood as the title character. From my point of view, Wood (though undeniably attractive) just didn't seem to possess the crucial dramatic resources to draw upon for this very demanding part. Wood simply played her part sweet & simple and this inevitably reduced her "Gypsy" to being nothing but an unambitious square - In other words, she was an accidental success.Yes. I fully understand that this film was clearly a product of early-1960's movie-making and that strict censorship was still in full swing back then - But, with that said, I really thought that it was completely laughable that Gypsy Rose Lee's meteoric rise to becoming a very hot burlesque queen was depicted as though just a sly wink, a sexy wiggle, and the revealing of a naked shoulder (and nothing else) was all that was required of her to achieve this special status of "striptease" royalty.Even though "Gypsy" was obviously a big-budget production that might have worked its intended magic as a stage play, on screen it was a truly disappointing let-down that certainly left a whole helluva lot to be desired.All-in-all - I would never recommend this film to anyone.

First of all let me join the throngs who feel Ethel Merman should have played Mama Rose to repeat Her legendary performance, and even the star of this movie Roz Russell was quoted as saying "Why couldn't they let Merman do it?" but after J L Warner decided Merman was not box office Roz Russell went after this part and was the first billed star. Roz got it because she could open the picture overseas as a worldwide Movie Star and because of her great success in WB's 'Auntie Mame', Warner Bros felt the magic would repeat. Just as Audrey Hepburn was unfairly maligned for doing 'My Fair Lady' instead of Julie Andrews, many critics went on a tear about Ms. Russell doing the film instead of evaluating the film on its merits. Roz Russell brings a leathery and determined force to Mama Rose and Roz knew and loved the camera and vice versa; Merman did not. Natalie Wood, the resident Queen of the Warner Bros lot, enchanting and beautiful is Gypsy Rose Lee. Ms. Wood was nothing like the real Gypsy but got the role anyway because of her stature at WB. Mervyn LeRoy who had decades of experience at Warners directs professionally. Karl Malden contributes a fine performance. The movie was filmed at Warner Bros studio in Burbank and for that I want to say while the sets look like a movie back lot-they were-it is one of the things I enjoyed of this movie. Both Ms. Russell and Ms. Wood would go on separately to a great starring decade in the 60's in other films. As did Mervyn Le Roy. A good film, not a great film, but a good film.