Supelice Dreadfully Boring

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

JohnHowardReid Producers: Jack H. Skirball and Bruce Manning. Copyright 9 December 1946 by Hallmark Productions, Inc. A Jack H. Skirball-Bruce Manning production, released through Universal-International. New York opening at Loew's Criterion: 7 December 1946. U.S. release: November 1946. U.K. release: 5 May 1947. Australian release: 29 May 1947. 8,710 feet. 96½ minutes. Australian release title: MAGNIFICENT LADY.SYNOPSIS: Quaker's daughter, forced into an unwilling marriage, is freed by the death of her husband to pursue political ambitions in Philadelphia. Time: around 1790-1814.COMMENT: The stills from the film look great - Ginger, radiant in lavish period costumes with feathered hats, set against colorful backgrounds crowded with picturesque props - but the film itself is something of a disappointment. Borzage's slow, turgid direction does nothing to enliven Irving Stone's embarrassingly pedestrian script which reduces the sweep of major historical events to common¬place domesticities. Mind you, we should be grateful - for the one time Mr Stone attempts to demonstrate the sterner facts of Constitutional freedom, he veers into unintended parody.Nonetheless, despite the handicaps of unsympathetic direction and a soap-operettish script, the players manage to provide some measure of interest. Admittedly, actual acting is often poor. Ginger gives one of the least convincing impersonations of her career and often seems to be floundering in too-deep waters (although it's doubtful if even a Helen Hayes could carry off the contrived oratory of the climax). And David Niven too seems ill-at-ease with Aaron Burr. The transition from charming patriot to psycho czar is handled with a fair degree of skill but doesn't quite succeed. Even a normally solidly reliable actor like Burgess Meredith has obvious difficulty with such unworldly dialogue (particularly in his scene with Rogers in the empty Hall of Congress).Usually, having chided the principals for minor shortcomings, the critic can point to the support players as faring better. Oddly enough, with only one or two exceptions (Peggy Wood, Francis McDonald), this is not the case here. Most of the character cast seem even more uncomfortable and less-suited to their roles. Some are nothing short of inept.Despite its major problems in script, direction and acting, Magnificent Doll has been produced on a remarkably lavish budget. Photography, sets and costumes are always so attractive that even at its dullest or most juvenile, the picture is worth watching. In a way, all the money was wasted. The sets and the big crowd scenes could have had much more impact in the hands of a stronger, less jaded director. (But then what forceful director would agree to film such amateurish, historically laughable tosh as Magnificent Doll?)

dbdumonteil It's considered polite to consider Borzage's post -war movies mediocre,which is completely unfair.Although they cannot match the director's 1927-1940 brilliant production (who can anyway?),some of them are acceptable,and some even highly commendable:such is the case of " I've always loved you" (1946) or "moonrise" (1948)."The Spanish main" (1945) although hailed by some as a pirates classic ,fails to excite ,perhaps because it is an impersonal movie."Magnificent doll" blends love stories with political subjects .David Niven ,cast against type ,plays the part of the villain,a politician who won't be satisfied till he owns everything .Ginger Rogers is good,but her character is a bit unbelievable.In fact,at least to my eyes,only the first part is Borzagesque: Dolly's first husband is the good man we meet in many of his movies,the one ready to give it all ,to sacrifice everything,even his own happiness if the woman he loves is happy ;that was the story of the heroes/heroines of "street angel" "lucky star" "green light" "big city" ....

MARIO GAUCI Bizarrely cast and talky historical drama about the romantic and political involvement of the titular Southern belle (Ginger Rogers) with the then-U.S. Secretary of State James Madison (Burgess Meredith) and misguidedly ambitious Presidential nominee Aaron Burr (David Niven). Given that Niven ends up losing both the girl and the candidature (to Thomas Jefferson), he is understandably glum throughout – but the tragic fact that the beloved British actor had just lost his wife in a freak accident at home surely cannot have aided his countenance any! As usual, my fondness for films depicting political machinations perhaps made this appeal to me more than it would have otherwise but, while everybody concerned was clearly seen at a better advantage elsewhere, it must be said here that the narrative certainly wasn't a familiar one and, consequently, it held my interest throughout.

Rotundy I stumbled across this movie in a rather old presidential quiz book. Already knowing a great deal about Dolley Madison before I bought the movie wondering how they were going to dramatize one America's most beloved first ladies. I started the movie with mixed emotions and finished it feeling the same.Ginger Rogers was a great actress but she doesn't pull off a convincing Dolley Madison-there's something missing. I don't know what it is, but it just isn't there. I did manage to overlook Rogers performance and applaud David Niven who was perhaps my favorite character. He pulled off the scheming Aaron Burr to perfection. From the beginning as a senator, to the tie with Jefferson in the election of 1800, to the treason trial that forced him into obscurity. It was Aaron Burr who introduced Dolley to James Madison in the first place. Reading the box I knew Burgess Meredith would play James Madison it was a shock to see him (I'm dating myself here when I say the first time I saw him was in Grumpy Old Men). I liked him second, his smallness (after all James Madison is still our shortest president at 5'6') and his quiet way made it easy to understand why Dolley Madison choice him instead of Aaron Burr.After watching this movie I had rather hoped that Hollywood would find someone to redo this movie. I think Dolley Madison's life is just as interesting as Thomas Jefferson's. Maybe if they do choose to redo this movie they could show that she had two sons (in the movie it only mentions one son who died in the yellow fever epidemic but actually she had one older that lived). The elder son, named Payne Todd, from Dolley's first husband who died in the Philadelphia yellow fever epidemic of 1794, is the one who caused many heartaches in Dolley's later years even though she didn't admit it. He was a drunkard and a scoundrel and spent money lavishly. To get back to the movie, overall it wasn't bad. If you like period pieces and good verses evil you'll enjoy this movie. It wasn't the best movie I've seen but wasn't the worst. The acting was good; especially David Niven and Burgess Meredith did an okay job. They played a little bit with Dolley's life but you can't expect Hollywood to get it right all the time.