Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

earlytalkie There is a disclaimer near the end of the credits on this film that explain that the facts and characters present in this version of Jacquline Susann's life have been altered somewhat. That said, forget about the inaccuracies and have a good time with the campy dialog and beautiful 60s trappings that this film is wrapped in. No, this isn't the definitive biography of the authoress, but it does entertain. When Bette Midler is on the screen it is pretty hard to look away, and she is the whole show in this. She looks like Bette Midler going trick-or-treating as Jackie here, but never you mind. Bette always entertains. I defy you to have a dry eye after seeing the tearful finale. It seems that the makers were consciously trying to make this film look and sound like Valley Of The Dolls, right down to the candy-colors and Dionne Warwick singing the title tune! This film will getcha if you let it!

Derek Sheldon Isn't She Great! and TCM's Robert OsborneDer ya to listen to this:I wanted to post on this movie awhile ago, however I didn't use my energy to create an account on DA "blogspot". Today I feel as if everyone gives their opinions and soon what does it matter what anyone says. It's not like Truman Capote is around anymore! Not that I even like Truman, who the F was he anyway? So pressing on to this movie. I watched this movie and balled at it, like I am a sucker for pretty much any good sappy movie. I can attest that I have seen pretty much every movie since 1936. You name it, I saw it. I wish Robert Osborne would =call me some time soon I am getting older here. I want this man J.O.B., frankly I think I am a little hotter too..what do you think TCM.....audition? No honestly he is a brilliant film historian. I would love to work with him someday. I do however have serious doubts about his side kick Ben Mankiewicz. What a miserable personality eh? OK I guess this is for another post. Today we (yes the royal WE) talk about "Isn't She Great." I absoulty love and adored this movie. All I read is blasts of negativity from critics and lectures about how horrid these two were...CAPITAL F>A>L>S>E! I do not believe anyone could of cast this movie any better. The cast was so brilliant together and a perfect team. Not only do I adore Bette in any movie, but her touchable real side was exposed in this movie. She swore, she drank, she was just generally a normal person who could let go in this film. Granted the character she played the infamous Jacqueline Susann, allowed her to ham it up. Together Nathan Lane and Bette Midler connected. I do not know how the critics of this movie could bash them. They loved working together and you could see this. David Hyde Pierce who I personally cannot stand, was great in this movie as well. Thank you Dave, (may I call you Dave?) for renewing my faith in stuffed shirt tight wad characters. The language and the determination in this movie was well put on screen. I simply love Jacqueline Susann for doing it HER WAY. I love that Bette could bring this story to light. While I did not care so much for "Valley of the Dolls" it was quite addicting, least the movie. I do not read so much these days this might attest for my atrocious writing skills which everyone apparently must notice. I cannot express to you how much I liked the assemble of this cast, John Cleese..amazing! Stockard Channing was a pre-runner to that blonde chick I like in Sex and the City! I think its Samantha? BTW Ms. Channing if you read this, I believe I am your biggest fan! What an amazing range for all of this cast. While others might criticize this movie...I found it to be a touching story with a powerful message. Something I believe that most movies lack in 2009. Yes it was not a Joan Crawford movie, but it just was touching. The way the cast interacted during this movie was fanominal to me. It was the message and the cast that made this movie special. Maybe I am the person who fights all lost causes, but as Jimmy Stewart says they are the only ones worth fighting for. I encourage you to re-look at this movie and give it another shot. I think the best parts in this movie for me was when Bette as Ms. Susann goes to the tree in central park to "talk to God." She is so matter of fact and vulgar to God and I love it. She identifies God as a light source though a tree, and it is so child-like, yet so close to your heart. It just shows how real Jacqueline Susann was and how Bette Midler understood her. I do think that Jackie would of loved this movie due to the fact that everyone else hated it. To me, that alone makes this film 4 stars in my book. Watch this movie again with an open heart you overpriced movie critics.

happipuppi13 Picture a man walking up to his local movie theatre and there just really is nothing playing that interests him. After scanning the titles available that day I chose this film. I had heard it was about Jacqueline Sussan,who wrote "Valley Of The Dolls",that it takes place in the '60s and it stars Bette Midler & Nathan Lane. Who could go wrong with that?The answer after sitting through this...just about anybody! First off,movie titles that ask a question are lame and open all involved to answers (and reviewer title) they may not want. All the standard things are there for a movie about another era and the people of it's time but the acting/reacting on Midler & Lane and others seems about as lively as a Sunday afternoon without a car to drive someplace too!If this was meant to be a biopic,it told the unvarnished story of her exploits but somehow (unlike say..."Ray") they're not surprising or shocking or even very interesting. I kid you not when i say that,literally,by the time I got home the only part of the film I could remember was when they turned "Valley Of The Dolls" into a movie.Maybe I did because,even that laughable 60's flick is a lot more entertaining than this pedestrian in a deserted city street outing. One star,for a film with many stars but,given the results...you'd never know it! (END)

preppy-3 This movie is supposedly about Jacqueline Susann (Bette Midler) and husband Irving Mansfield (Nathan Lane). It chronicles how they met, fell in love and how she got "Valley of the Dolls" published. But this movie is a mess...and completely inaccurate.For starters, Midler doesn't even remotely look like Susann or act like her. I've read at least 3 books on Susann as well as various articles - she was an ambitious, intelligent, driven woman. As Midler portrays her she is stupid, obnoxious, VERY loud and foul-mouthed. I'm no prude but there's way too much swearing from her in this--I have my doubts that Susann ever talked like that. Also they take actual events from Susann's life and fictionalizes them. When she is told in the movie to edit her book she acts like an idiot and refuses to help. In real life, Susann agreed to help make the book better with no fuss. And, Susann had a "Wishing Hill" (as she called it) in Central Park. It was basically a huge pile of rocks where she sat to clear her mind and relax. Here it's turned into a giant tree (????) and we have sequences with Lane and Midler talking, yelling and swearing at it. It's a wonder that those two managed to pull it off without looking like idiots.As you can see, this is a bad film--but just so much FUN to watch! The incredible costumes and set design are just great--colorful and very true to the period. Some of the lines are actually very funny. Nathan Lane is great as Mansfield and Stockard Channing (as her best friend) and David Hyde Pierce (as her publisher) are hysterical and offer strong support. And Christopher McDonald and John Larroquette throw in cameos. Also John Cleese is on hand but he's wasted. Then there's Midler....she's AWFUL! Loud, shrill and thoroughly unlikable. When she was dying at the end I could have cared less. If she had toned down her performance and not played every scene at full tilt this might have worked. But she doesn't. However, she is fun to watch--a textbook example of how NOT to play a role.The studio (understandably) threw this film away. It came and went VERY quickly and was a commercial disaster. Still, I'm giving it a 7--it's so incredibly bad that it's fun to watch! A must-see on that level.