Harvey

A remake of a classic film isn't usually the best place to start from, but I was pleasantly surprised that this one wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be. I can't say it is great, but I did enjoy it. Harry Anderson seemed to be trying a little too hard at times, but I could understand why with such a great performance in the original by Jimmy Stewart. His Elwood grew on me as the movie progressed. (Incidentally, Mr. Stewart wasn't happy with his performance, and wished he had done a better job putting more into the character, from what I've read).

Not great, but not horrible. I'd watch the original over this is a heartbeat, but I wouldn't change the channel if this version were to re-air. I gave it a 5 out of 10.

OB Loco

From what I read, I wasn't expecting much from Harry's performance. Jimmy was...extraordinary. And I kept comparing Harry to him, until the part where he meets Mrs. Chumley.

There, Harry just seemed to shine a bit and I forgot about comparing. I just concentrated on Harry as Elwood, instead. Not too bad.

I love Swoosie Kurtz. I like to watch her films. She's a fun actress. Veta is just a tough role to perfect. I'd say it is the strongest. I don't find Josephine Hull to be an easy actress to match. It's almost like the role of Veta was 'made for her'.

Hull's character was irritating but, also oddly charming and she nailed better than the other 'Veta' characters. Kurtz did have a few good moments. It just takes a certain kind of lady to make that role work on film. Otherwise, a stage performance may work better.

This movie is more of a 5/10 but, I'll give it a 6/10 due to Harry's effort.

Anyone who wants to remake "Harvey" better have a very good reason... It's hard to improve on a classic! But the creators of this "Harvey," and the actors in it, are predictably short on vision. The parts are miscast and misinterpreted -- again, how to improve on the original? Some of the choices are baffling -- Mrs. Chumley, a blond bombshell? (And a poor actress to boot?) I thought Nurse Kelly was supposed to be the sexy romantic lead. And who took the edge off Wilson's comic relief? Key parts of the script have been altered, and scenes added and deleted -- Mary Chase's pulitzer material wasn't good enough, apparently. Even Anderson is an embarrassment -- he seems uncomfortable with the project, as well he should be. Do yourself a favor -- boycott the silly remake and see the original!

This truly is a dire, catastrophic mess of a wonderful original. WHY do they have to remake things like this at all? And then castrate them, turning something great into bland pap? The thing that depresses me most of all is that several of the reviewers on here seem to be unaware that the James Stewart original even exists. Pathetic.

I was blessedly unaware of this version of the film until today. I am a great lover of the original starring James Stewart, and was today flicking through the TV channels when I came across this remake.

I cannot understand why the film was remade, especially with no real changes, just another cast and filmed in colour. The actor playing Elwood has none of the innocence and charm of James Stewart's portrayal and as far as I can tell is just trying to impersonate Stewart and failing terribly. The ultimate result is farcical, where the original is heart warming. The only scene that has any connection to the original is the taxi driver's speech towards the end, which verges on the magic of the original.

Leslie Neilsen gives a dreadful unconvincing hammy turn as the doctor, and the other actors are similar pantomime-esquire when compared to the 1950 version. If you have not seen the original I urge you not to watch this dreadful imitation first and see the real thing.

Pointless and an insult to the genius of the original.