That was an excellent one.

Simply Perfect

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Reading the Citadel Film series book on the Films of Mae West I got the distinct impression there was no one really in charge of this film. This was certainly not Gore Vidal's vision of a satirical novel on gender stereotyping and transitioning. His name was on the credit as involved with the production, but this was not his film.Instead it was both a Mae West vanity film and a trashy and exploitive treatment of some new ideas that were being discussed publicly about gender identification. Gay man Rex Reed has decided that in his sexual journey he is indeed a transgender person. Surgery transforms Reed into Raquel Welch.What Raquel/Rex does is decide to cash in on an early inheritance. Raquel Welch travels west and says that she is Rex's widow and that through her mother as sister of old time cowboy star John Huston who runs a phony acting school. Raquel demands and gets a half interest, but Huston smells something wrong.As for Mae West she has a supporting part as a talent agent who only represents strapping and sturdy young men. One of them in a bit role is Tom Selleck. Mae demanded and got top billing though this is a Raquel Welch film. This was a move of sheer vanity on Mae's part, but not as bad as Sextette which was to come.Despite the billing the youth market surely came to see Raquel Welch in her prime taking it out on the male of the species for her treatment while she was one of them. Issues of homophobia and transphobia are raised, but they're not dealt with satisfactorily.One thing that was raised put me in mind of a question my young nephew raised many years ago when his other uncle who had Down's Syndrome died. He asked his mother will Uncle Jimmy be retarded in heaven? There is an afterlife coda to Myra Breckinridge where the issue is raised just who is in said afterlife Rex Reed or Raquel Welch? But you won't find an interesting point of view raised here.

I don't think Myra Beckinridge is quite as bad as its reputation suggests. However that's not saying very much, as a film it is an interesting curiosity but also its a mess. Starting with the good things, I liked the soundtrack and some of the fashions and scenery. Farrah Fawcett and Mae West are decent, and Raquel Welch also gives a good performance despite having some of the worst lines of the film. On the other hand, what Myra Breckinridge suffers from especially are scenes that jump wildly and frequently all over the place with no smoothness, this is both in editing and storytelling and the incoherent script. The story was interesting at first glance, but became very disjointed, while the direction fares no better. The film is only about 95 or so minutes, but because the pace is so uneven sometimes it feels longer. The rest of the cast are not good at all, Red Reed is horrible, Roger Herren is bland and John Huston-who I love both as an actor and director-is overbearing and chews the scenery to pieces. Overall, Myra Breckinridge is interesting, but it is a mess as well. 4/10 Bethany Cox

This is actually one of the films (like "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls") that are miles out of my normal comfort zone but that I uncharacteristically liked; perhaps because -- as one disgruntled IMDb reviewer complains -- for all the myriad sexual references it is not actually at all erotic, and there is little that is actually offensive (although there are certainly one or two jaw-dropping sequences...) It is also, of course, a loving if comic homage to the classic Hollywood constantly shown or referred to in the script, from Gloria Swanson and Al Jolson through to the Technicolor era; Myra, with her 1940s hairstyles and tailored costumes that contrast with the blue-jeans students, is after all on a one-woman crusade to educate modern youth as to the talents of the Andrews Sisters and the folly of the Method approach to acting.John Huston excels as the over-the-top and over-the-hill former cowboy star, and Raquel Welch is both commanding and funny as Myra, apparently every transsexual's fantasy. Rex Reed (who has a rather sweet dance sequence with his alter ego at the beginning of the film) actually looks as if he has a potential woman in him, while Mae West -- whose screen persona was always a thoroughly artificial creation -- appears to have changed remarkably little from her last film appearance, with the exception of an obviously very fake wig and the loss of her singing voice; she still has her old timing with an innuendo.I thought the device of interpolating archive clips to make a satirical comment or illustration of events was a surprisingly successful one -- more so than the similar 'montage' effects introduced by Soviet experimentalists into silent films -- and of course for the old film buff there is infinite fun to be had in identifying the allusions as they rush by, as in recognising the famous faces on the walls of Myra's rooms or Uncle Buck's academy. In this context it may be observed that only 20th Century Fox film footage was made available: thus we have Shirley Temple, but only sequences from the late-period Laurel & Hardy productions.Ultimately I enjoyed "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" more as a film, because I found myself caring more about the characters as people. But I wouldn't agree with the comment that the film is wholly heartless or unrelentingly vicious; it's hard not to sympathise with Myra as she goes about her self-appointed mission of exploding the myths of contemporary Hollywood, or out-foxing the smarter-than-he-acts Uncle Buck, and there is a genuine poignancy to Myron's increasing confidence and enchantment as he begins to dance opposite his ravishing alter ego, and to the ironic realisation in the end that 'she' cannot find love without being a man.Despite a two-hour-plus running time the film never committed the sin of being boring, although it was sometimes hard to watch (the opening scenes had the audience discernibly squirming in discomfort!) According to the director, it was originally intended as a comedy about the Sixties, elements of which ultimately turned sour as the decade itself soured into disillusionment; much of it is still very funny, even if the humour is often aghast. Possibly not a film for the nervous of disposition (although I myself am living evidence that it can after all be enjoyed by the easily-offended!), but definitely not a "Heaven's Gate" for 20th Century Fox.

It was a disappointment to see this DVD after so many years. For me the main problem's the uneven script.While some of it is witty and hip, quite a bit of it is dull, unfunny and lifeless. Many of the gags just sit there, lacking spark and energy.Of the cast, Mae West and Rachel Welch come over well. Roger Herren in the role of Rusty shines (too bad he didn't make more films). But for my money, there's just too much of John Huston, and poor Rex Reed isn't hardly given a fighting chance. His character seems relegated to skim around on the sidelines, wondering what he's doing in this film.The low user rating should give an idea as to the public's opinion of this piece. Vidal's original provided much potential that was pretty much wasted. Not even the 'classic' film clips did much. All in all a rather sub par effort, and it's not likely to get much better with time.