Das gibt es nur in Kansas

This movie started out promising with a very big eye opener for women to realize they are nothing without a man, something which I as Muslim can identify with. Unfortunately some of the most crazy Hollywood show cases followed and the result of it all wasn't that bad,but plainly weird, and I was like hey, this feel like someone just forced me to drink too much orange juice. Sure... Such a waste of talent to

In my view, this is a neglected musical gem, with a fine adaptation of the Lysistrata story. Jeanne Crain never looked lovelier (some of the closeups on her as George Nader sings to her through a window are ravishing). Bert Lahr basically reprised his lion from Wizard of Oz, especially in his vocal at the end. Mamie van Doren was a delight. It's a pity they cast her as a sexpot in other movies. Otherwise she might have been groomed as a more mainstream star. Jimmy Boyd of "that" children's Christmas song did remarkably well, almost flawlessly delivering his lines like a real pro. The film sagged a little in the unnecessary scene where Bert Lahr teaches Boyd unsuccessfully what sex means. I found that scene pointless.

The fine athletic dances were modeled on Kidd's choreography for a similar but superior film, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers. But then MGM could do musicals in its sleep. The choreography was also similar to that in Li'l Abner.

Some songs were quite good (especially the opening song), but others were pedestrian (George Nader's song). For some reason Hank Mancini is credited as composer on one site but the credits show he didn't write any of the songs.

If the film has a weakness it's due to the action sequences, which could have been filmed with more drama and imagination (compare the action sequences in Seven Brides).

That's a typical couplet from this Universal musical, a rather desperate attempt to cash in on MGM's success with "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers." It hews to that formula very closely: Take an ancient myth ("Lysistrata" instead of "Rape of the Sabine Women"), set it out West, write a plot-specific score (in this instance, by many hands), and cap it with lots of athletic choreography (by Lee Scott, who's no Michael Kidd, but that is, admittedly, a high bar). George Marshall, by now something of a Western musical veteran, having just wrapped "Red Garters," directs briskly, and it's an interesting cast. Neither George Nader nor Jeanne Crain could sing, both are dubbed, but both sure were pretty. Kitty Kallen, a popular recording artist at the time who didn't have much luck with movies, has one nice ballad. The always wonderful Tommy Rall, inexplicably eighth-billed, does some astounding leaps. Keith Andes, too hunky to be playing a priest, gets to sing a song, one of those pseudo-religious mid-'50s things, while chopping down a tree, and winds up with Mamie van Doren. Bert Lahr clowns, Paul Gilbert gets a big specialty number, Jimmy Boyd squeaks, and the story gets spun out decently enough. It's another enterprising mid-'50s musical, trying to keep a fading genre alive. Is it good? Not very. But fun? You bet.

This is one of the nuttiest musicals ever put on film. I caught it a few years ago early in the morning on AMC. Let's just say it starts out with a big production number of all these women caterwauling about "What good is a woman without a man" and goes down(?)hill from there. With lyrics like "The Lysistrata, the Lysistrata, cuz we gotta gotta gotta get our men back" Oi! Throw in Mamie Van Doren, Bert Lahr and a dream ballet with Tommy Rall, what more could you want? If you can catch it, it's worth the time for the jaw dropping factor alone.

Almost totally unseen now this comedy/musical/ western is I feel an ambitious failure. I wonder if Universal wanted to make another ' daring ' film to compete with the charm and success of ' Seven Brides For Seven Brothers ' and despite all the singing and dancing, plus a number of mediocre songs it sadly falls flat. The story is simple and is based very loosely on Aristophanes ' Lysistrata ' where women go on a sexual strike when their men are more fond of warring instead of loving. The problem is the lack of any sexual chemistry among the cast to make this plausible. The former ' Seven Brides For Seven Brothers ' had a randiness about it that made it work, and the film shows its sexual frustration well, but this film does not. An example is an annoying teenager who goes around asking what sex means and what it is like, and not for a minute do you believe he does not know. George Nadar does his best and so does Jeanne Crain in the lead roles, but neither shine and although they try, perhaps George Marshall the director, did not work on them enough. Mamie Van Doren's attraction towards Keith Andes as an unlikely minister is amusing, and something could have been made of that but isn't. The copy I saw was not in Cinemascope and the colour was murky, but I doubted if a pristine copy would have changed my opinion. The reason for reviewing this lost film is because I have never worked out how and why a film is excellent, and why those which have good casts and high ambitions do not. This mystery is at the core of all cinema, and the secret of magic on screen can never be predicted. The answer is perhaps quite simple; we will never know and that is why watching film is so exciting and full of expectancy. I give it a 5 for a good idea that did not quite make it.