rparker-14 First the good- Louis Armstrong-the grace Kelly and frank Sinatra your sensational number a convincing flirtation.grace Kelly was lot more attractive and less irritating than Katherine Hepburn in the 1940 film. the rest- Bing ludicrous as the ex suitor- looked old enough to be her grandpa. john lund twice as attractive made you wonder why she had a pensioner fixation Instead.Frank Sinatra with black hair looking like a left over from the munsters sang well enough but wasn't convincing. as a newspaper hack -then there was the always middle aged Celeste Holm in girly dresses looking like Sinatra's ma- finally there was father figure looking like serial killer, top that up with awful colour and ghastly sets- the garden was particularly awful.As it was Kelly's last film she looked as though she was already the true princess she became- .there was sense of her being above the whole dreary caper . all in all flat champagne with a plausible title change from high society to slumming it

chaswe-28402 The songs are memorable, and if you listen to the singing you don't need to see the people --- any of them. By which I mean that I've enjoyed listening to the music on a record, but that visually and socially this film is dated, and the cast is ill-adjusted. The plot is also over- extended and silly. In fact, the whole set-up seemed utterly nonsensical and ridiculous. I don't mind looking at Grace Kelly, but I'd seen her act better elsewhere, and she seemed to have something else on her mind. Sinatra can act, but wasn't asked to here. Crosby doesn't really act, he just behaves. Louis Calhern was better here than in Julius Caesar, which isn't saying a lot. John Lund had about the most thankless role imaginable. Whatever the society, Satchelmouth appeared to be highly high. Had he just been touring Europe and Scandinavia ?Cole Porter, however, was an exceptional song-writer. I'd forgotten almost everything about this story, not having seen it for some years. The songs, and the lyrics, although I doubt that rock and roll was exactly jazz, nevertheless kept echoing in my mind. But it was a mistake to re-watch whatever action there was.

mikerosslaw Wow. How do you miscast such towering talents such as Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby and make chumps out of them? You take the classic dramatic melodrama "The Philadelphia Story," give each of them second-banana parts, and then cast the female lead with the lightweight, former clothes-horse Grace Kelly (twenty-seven years younger than her "leading man," Bing) in the incredibly complex role of Tracy Lord, Katharine Hepburn's signature stage and film role. Throw in the cringe-worthy, patently out-of-place musical numbers by Der Bingle and Ol' Blues Eyes, corrupted by Kelly's tin-eared accompaniment, and the result is an unintentionally comical iteration of the poignant, multi-layered original. Sinatra had won Best Actor at the Oscars for his masterful portrayal of Maggio in "From Here To Eternity" just a few years before, but his miscast, ossified perf in pic was an embarrassment. Crosby's only bright spot is when he's jammin' with Satchmo (Grace Kelly reacted to Bing as if he had terminal halitosis). Going for the Big B.O. (Box Office) is a prime motivation of Hollywood productions. So Grace Kelly, in her last film perf before becoming a caged canary as the Princess of Monaco, is showcased as an updated Tracy Lord. What Big Slacks she had to fill after Hepburn. Kelly goes through her stilted modeling-poses, her "technique" of acting the challenging lead role, all without the slightest trace of human emotion marring her porcelain face. Though Sinatra as reporter Mike Connor valiantly tries to get a little chemistry going with Kelly, she gives off the unmistakable impression that she hasn't the slightest sexual interest in Frank or in any of the other male players. Phillip Barry wrote the role of Tracy Lord is written as a woman who appears totally self-absorbed and intolerant of human frailty in others, but still has deep-rooted emotional and sexual needs yet untapped. Hepburn, for whom the original play was written by Barry, was able to perceive the multi-faceted character and give us a nuanced, hypnotic performance. Hepburn deftly revealed Tracy's vulnerability in spite of her efforts to conceal it. She made you cheer for Tracy, in spite of her haughty, privileged patina.In stark and painful contrast, Grace Kelly's portrayal of Tracy is a stuffy, supercilious prig, who comes off - worst of all things for any leading lady - as a sexless mannequin, bereft of the slightest trace of suppressed sensuality. Her Serene Highness Grace seems like she'd really be a bum lay compared to the feisty, fiery Katharine Hepburn.Much has been written about the age differences between Kelly and the other creaky male stars populating the cast. Bing, playing Dexter, looks way older than he is with his fuddy-duddy wardrobe, his terrible rug, and his lack of any convincing physicality with Grace, and is hardly convincing as a man Kelly would have been married to. Sinatra looks simply terrible, probably in part by the die-job on his rug plus being shorter than Grace Kelly. The flat, unflattering lighting and cheap production values show up every wrinkle and line on everyones' faces. Watch the original with Hepburn, Grant, Stewart after viewing "High Society," and you'll be astounded at the difference in the quality of the acting and the wonderfully paced story in the original compared to this moribund musical masquerading as credible remake.

vincentlynch-moonoi I'm one of those who don't admire this film much.On the positive side, it's a lush production. It has a Cole Porter score -- my favorite composer -- although I'm impressed with only a few of the songs: "True Love" (of course), "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" (with a swellegant turn by Celeste Holm), and the bright "Well, Did You Evah!" (in a terrific duet by Bing and Frank); the other songs are forgettable.Another positive note are a number of the supporting actors -- Celeste Holm as a reporter, Louis Calhern as an uncle, Sidney Blackmer as the father, Margalo Gillmore as the mother, and young Lydia Reed as the younger sister.Unfortunately, I can't say as much for the lead cast. Bing Crosby is always very natural on screen, and is here. Grace Kelly has another turn as a spoiled brat, and as far as I'm concerned flubs the role terribly. Frank Sinatra plays the smart ass that he seemed to be in real life...which may have gone over well in the 1950s, but isn't as attractive today; and ironically, he played a poor drunk (type casting from the Rat Pack days?). John Lund as the fiancée????? Stick with the original "The Philadelphia Story", or watch this one as a comparison. Frankly, about the only reason this film was made was Bing's whim and Grace Kelly's rising star (in terms of the latter, thankfully it was the last film with her that we had to suffer through).