So much average

Good concept, poorly executed.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

I'm not going to bash this film and I'm not going to bash Matthew Broderick (not too much). This movie just doesn't have much of a spark. What there is comes from original script and the Meredith Wilson music. Broderick does a so so job of delivering things. For some reason, he seems to have caught the eye of Broadway producers who could have their pick of thousands of really competent people. I thought the musical version of "The Producers" was good, except for the flat, dull performance of Broderick. Anyway, it's absurd to criticize youth and inexperience here because the original actors were every bit as young (or nearly so). It's the production numbers that suffer. Comparing the "Marion the Librarian" from the Preston version to this one isn't even fair. There's also a gentleness to the original. The updating really diminishes things. This is a musical of a time and somehow that time has been stolen from this version. It poked fun at the great state of Iowa and small-town America. Somehow it falls flat in that respect.

This is one of the few movies where the remake is at least as good as, if not better than,the original. The dancing is just superb especially the library number. Matthew Broderick does a very good job as the professor. He is a very good dancer. Kristin Chenoweth has a wonderful voice. The new ending really was a delight because it tied the story together more than the original ending. If I had any complaints it is that the mayor is miscast. I see the mayor as a sort of clown. Victor Garber is not really believable as a clownish character. He is too polished to play a clown. This is a movie that I would see over and over again.

I was born in Gary and always thought this musical was a bit archaic. And now I read some of your comments. What are you all? About a hundred? Matthew Broderick is phenomenal. He practically makes this musical worthy of going down in history!!!! It's a beautiful cast, well choreographed numbers as well as great sets, costumes etc. I love Shirley Jones and Robert Preston, particularly in "Victor Victoria," However, their version is a cartoony 50's formula musical, which is fine. Think: Joe E. Brown does Al Jolson's "Jazz Singer!!!!" Boy are times a changin!!!! Give Broderick another chance!! He's reminiscent of the golden age of Hollywood for me in this day and age; up there with Johnny Depp and a very few others. His version is also cartoony, but much more appealing due to the underlying depth of his character however subtle compared to the one dimensional portrayal by Preston. Check this version out!!!!

This is an awful remake of the original. The colors of everything, houses, clothing, etc. are all muted and subdued. The musical performances are OK but not as good as the original. Matthew Broderick gives us a truly uninspired and emotionless Harold Hill. I guess he thought he was doing a remake of a Buster Keaton film. As wonderful as Kristin Chenoweth as Marian Paroo is, she cannot save this turkey. The original is 100 times better than this piece of junk. I would rather jump into a swimming pool filled with double edged razor blades than watch this a second time. If you saw the original and you saw this one, like me, I think you would be upset at what they did to this beautiful work of art.