Barrymore

As John Barrymore (Christopher Plummer) reckons with the ravages of his life of excess, he rents an old theater to rehearse for a backer's audition to raise money for a revival of his 1920 Broadway triumph in Richard III.

I am not as familiar with Plummer's work as I should be, or the work of John Barrymore for that matter. But this (almost) one-man show with dirty jokes and running commentary is great. Few films feature just one person (the only other jumping to mind right now is Robert Altman's film on Nixon), but sometimes these are the most powerful, letting the actor test their range.

More people should see this... and I should make a point to see more of Plummer and Barrymore's work.

Christopher Plummer plays John Barrymore, the legendary silent film actor who transitioned into talkie movies in the 1920s & 1930s and starred in legendary films like Grand Hotel & along with Charlie Chaplin was considered by some film historians as the most talented actor in Hollywood during that time period, and of course he is Drew Barrymore's Grandfather. It takes place in 1942, right before John Barrymore died. It is an extremely good movie, I give it 7 of 10 stars, but Christopher Plummer's performance is a Masterpiece and I give his performance 10 of 10 stars. I would recommend this film as it is extremely good, but if you want to see the brilliant acting of Christopher Plummer it's a must see!

It is 1942. Barrymore prepares for a backer's audition as he dreams of a triumphant comeback. This is Christopher Plummer reprising his one man play as the alcoholic John Barrymore. There is no doubt that Plummer is an acting God. He shows it here in spades. But it doesn't add up to be a compelling movie.

It's one of those age old question of how to adapt a play onto the big screen. This felt like a slightly drunk old grandfather telling the young'uns about the old times. Sometimes it's funny as Barrymore and CW Fields try to sign up for WWI. But it's mostly a series of never ending stories. He is alone with Frank who is just off stage. It doesn't really allow for great interaction. We don't get the full power of Plummer's presence that I assume we would get from the play. For Plummer as an actor, I would give him a 10. But as a movie, this is only a 5.

Christopher Plummer is "Barrymore" in this 2014 filming of the two-person play by William Luce, which was first performed by Plummer in 1996.

In the play, Barrymore has rented a theater in order to rehearse for a backers audition of a Richard III revival. The play had been one of his great triumphs in the theater. He can't remember his lines and is drunk, so he needs the rehearsal. Offstage is a prompter, Frank (John Plumpis) who feeds him lines and puts up with the erratic actor throughout.

During rehearsal, Barrymore confronts his growing up, his marriages, his brother and sister, his friends, his successes and his failures, every once in a while coming out with something that's actually from Richard III, with some other Shakespeare thrown in.

Christopher Plummer is phenomenal. He sounds just like Barrymore, and he is superb at bringing out the humor and pathos of the script, as well as reciting some of the beautiful Shakespearian speeches.

I realize some people didn't care for this, and probably seeing this on stage is a different experience. One poster mentioned that this is "dated material and a subject long forgotten." The name Barrymore is not forgotten, and there's nothing dated about Shakespeare. John Barrymore was a fascinating person, an important part of theater, and a presence in films. And Christopher Plummer is a treasure.

In BARRYMORE, Christopher Plummer, one of the greatest stage actors living, essays the role of John Barrymore, one of the greatest stage actors of a previous generation. Delicious, I thought. I can't miss this.

I've been a fan of Plummer forever, seeing him in minor films and minor roles in major films, and always wishing to see more of him. I'm also a fan of Ethel, Lionel, and John Barrymore, and have read a great deal about their lives. I read Plummer's memoir a few years back and enjoyed it immensely just to learn of the verve with which he approaches life, however alcohol-induced that verve may be; and also to read the tidbits about famous actors he has known and worked with.

The movie should be of interest to fans of old-school theater, but I suspect it will leave most audiences cold, or at least more than a little confused. Plummer is excellent--squeezing the juice out of every second he is on stage--but I was never convinced he was John Barrymore, even though he was telling me stories as if he was. I never heard how much young John hated his father, and somehow I cannot quite believe it. He saw the man's descent into hell through syphilis and was probably too young to understand or forgive it, but I never read that he was the one walking the old drunk into whorehouses. It may have happened, and it would have been traumatic, but I hadn't heard that one. I'm certain he would have treasured memories of his mother as he was 11 when she died, but in this play he says he hardly remembers her. It has often been stated how devoted he was to his grandmother, Mrs. Drew, until the day she died. This play doesn't capture that, but maybe I'm asking too much. To be as complex and confounding as John Barrymore was, one could not have had good memories of childhood, could one?

John Barrymore was indeed a garrulous drunk, and probably a fiercely angry one, which we didn't see. Somehow there were too many digressions to silly songs like "I Got a Gal in Kalamazoo," and "When the Midnight Choo-Choo Leaves for Alabam", getting in the way of the picture of the classical actor we know he was. One silly song, I could have accepted, but two is one too many. The real John Barrymore did refer to his marriages as bus accidents, and his grandmother did call him her little Greengoose. She also is known to have said she loved him so much because he was "a bad boy--like my husband." The script is interesting, but it doesn't quite capture the bad boy, or the madness, or the self-loathing that caused Barrymore's retreat into the bottle. And Plummer is missing the main tool Barrymore had in his actor's bag of tricks--his magnificent, multidimensional voice. I was aware every moment that I was hearing Christopher Plummer relating Jack Barrymore stories, and it only made me want to find a DVD of a movie with John Barrymore.