Brilliant and touching

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

This movie was shown on TCM last week or so. It's the first time for me, and while watching it, I saw that it is almost the same script as Hello Dolly! It's a charming story and enjoyable movie overall. But Hello Dolly! is a favorite movie with me, and I think they did more with it. Even without the musical element, it developed a lot of scenes further, to the benefit of the story and viewer. Maybe it's also an appreciation for Barbra Streisand, though I do not like her in everything. Her over the top brass as an outrageous Dolly was so much fun. I don't like every musical either, but Hello Dolly! is a very lively and entertaining one to me. There is a lot of fun in it. It's certainly an attractive movie. The two are just different movies, each enjoyable for its own type and handling.

I am astounded at many to most of these imbecilic comments. The Matchmaker is an excellent play by a serious playwright; Hello, Dolly is a cheesy schtick, an excuse for a musical perpetrated by the felon also responsible for MAIM (oops, Mame). Shirley Booth is a multiple Tony-winning stage actress and star who is marvelous as always; Barbra Streisand, years too young for this part, plays herself as she always does, speaking of unbearable schticks. Walter Matthau is UTTERLY miscast as Horace; Paul Ford is dazzling in his usual style (which has nothing to do with 'bluster'). Shirley MacLaine is charm personified as Irene Malloy; Marianne McAndrew is synthetic and fake. I could go on, but there's no point. for anyone to compare these terrific performances with the overblown, hideous, bloviated mugging of the musical film version, much less to compare them unfavorably, is too ludicrous.

New York matchmaker Shirley Booth (as Dolly Gallagher Levi) is assigned to pick a mate for wealthy old gentleman Paul Ford (as Horace Vandergelder); but, Ms. Booth decides she wants him for herself. Meanwhile, Anthony Perkins (as Cornelius Hackl), who works for Mr. Ford, falls for young Shirley MacLaine (as Irene Molloy). However, Ms. MacLaine is Ford's hottest prospect. Can Ms. Booth get Ford to changes his preference for the very young? "Life's never quite interesting enough, somehow; you people who come to the movies know that," Booth explains, in the introduction. The statement could serve as a review for the film; it's never quite interesting enough, somehow. "The Matchmaker" is a bright production, with a likable cast, that really never achieves its full potential as a film. Its stage origins are clearly evident. In the transition, the film changes all the wrong things, and keeps what it should have discarded. For example, the characters "speaking to the camera" becomes tiresome, after Booth's charming opening.One thing filmmakers wisely kept was actor Robert Morse (as Barnaby Tucker), who essayed the role on stage, alongside Arthur Hill. Mr. Morse effortlessly equals his higher-billed co-stars. For as long as he's on camera, Morse does not for one moment surrender the screen to anyone. If the film were better received, Morse might have been considered for a "Best Supporting Actor" award."The Matchmaker" returned, to both stage and film, as "Hello, Dolly!"

This is old-time movie-making at its finest, featuring an ensemble of well-known, well-loved actors. Filmed before either Shirley MacLaine or Anthony Perkins had become established, this film doesn't feature a really big star. The headliner, Shirley Booth, delivers a typically nuanced, poignant performance, but she is hardly a big star. This film is all about ensemble acting. The story, the sets and the actors are all wonderful. This is a far better adaptation of Thornton Wilder than Our Town.There is one element of the film that prevents my rating it higher than an 8. Although they are consistent with Wilder's play, the constant asides, directed to the audience, are a distraction. As I watched the story, I found their constant reminder that I was watching a play instead of a depiction of life a real intrusion. I kept wanting to watch the story unfold in an uninterrupted fashion, and I wondered how that might have altered my perception of the story and the characters. Perhaps the device of the stage manager, as employed in Our Town, would have been more suitable and less distracting here. Or perhaps just breaking the fourth wall at the beginning and end of the film would have been better - employing some other method of imparting to the audience the information delivered in the asides. I just wished that this film had not employed the device of having the characters, themselves, step outside the story, directly addressing the audience. This doesn't ruin the film, but I think I would have enjoyed it more if the characters had all remained within the framework of the story. Simply put, I would have been more involved with the character of Dolly (and the other characters) had she been presented as "real" and not just a character within a play.Nonetheless, this is a highly entertaining film, superior to the succeeding musical versions of the story, and a better adaptation of Thornton Wilder than Our Town. I recommend it highly.