Gleason

This movie captures the raw Gleason to the point of dislike; however, movie reflects that he was a driven man who knew what the audience wanted...frankly, by their reactions to prior performances. Brad Garrett captures this well and Michael Chieffo is an excellent Art Carney (who should play Carney in his own movie as the man is that convincing.)

When viewing this film pay close attention to the earlier years when Gleason is a boy and the expressions used by his father around the house and in treating his mother. Gleason eventually turns what would be deemed as closet skeletons into humor. Nicely done!

Brad Garrett was outstanding in portraying Gleason, and the director did an expert job in avoiding distractions which would have occurred if his 6'8"+ height had been shown in its true proportion to other cast members.

Jack Benny was noted as perhaps Hollywood's biggest tipper. Vincent Price and Edward G. Robinson were noted art collectors and connoisseurs, not just among entertainment persons, but the entire nation.

There seems often to be a tendency for famous entertainers to possess different personas in real life, and in instances like the above, even to emphasize them when in contrast to either more negative, or less attractive, characterizations in their roles.

Many comedians have also been reputed or shown to be somewhat different in "real life." Certainly one can understand their not wanting to be funny or "on" all the time in their personal lives, and undoubtedly they tire of people often expecting them to be.

But many are simply different from the humorous presences in their performances. Arthur Godfrey, and even Will Rogers, were far from the warm figures they portrayed on-air, on-screen or other professional venues. Jerry Lewis, Johnny Carson and many others have had a sharper edge in private/offstage.

This storyline believably portrayed Jackie Gleason's dominating, egocentric, hard-edged sides, as well as the insecurities he always carried from a childhood far from affluent or very happy.

One might wish the film had included a bit more regarding his movie work, but that aside, it captured not only the Gleason character, but also the flavor of the periods in the past as his success grew to its mammoth proportion..

Since these films don't possess the budgets of Hollywood big-screen offerings, even where well-presented, they can fall short in authenticity and details, like conveying scenes occurring in past times, foreign locales, and the like. But this flick captures the feel of the era portrayed excellently.

Along with Garrett's, all the supporting characters were well-cast, with superior performances

Brad Garrett (now an Emmy-winner for "Everybody Loves Raymond") really pulled this off superbly. Judging from the wealth of mannerisms, tics, vocal inflections, attitudes, and body language, it would seem that he made a careful study of Jackie Gleason in the various stages of his life. The hard work paid off in a vivid characterization that really brought the man to life without any cartoon-like exaggerations. The rest of the cast were uniformly good, but if Garrett hadn't managed as well as he did, it would hardly have mattered.

The writing, direction, and cinematography were above average for a TV movie, in my opinion, and I didn't really find the three-level flashbacks all that confusing. As an earlier commentator said, this was a long, turbulent, and wide-ranging life, and the three levels of flashback were an effective way of touching on several different stages of Gleason's life without expanding it to miniseries length.

I too was interested to see if any of Gleason's movie work would be portrayed, as I have fond memories of "Soldier in the Rain," "The Hustler," "Requiem for a Heavyweight," and that strange film where he tried to do a Chaplinesque turn as a mute simpleton, "Gigot." I'm guessing that in the interest of keeping it under two hours, and in consideration of the fact that most people see Gleason as a TV star first and foremost, that part of the story was jettisoned. It would have been interesting, though.

Before having seen it, I'd read some statements cautioning avid "Honeymooners" fans that they might be annoyed with the recreations in this film. I can see what they were talking about, in that several scenes from the show about Ralph getting a TV set were smooshed together into a single scene. While it managed to get the most memorable lines from the show together in a single compact scene, it could be a bit off-putting to those who know the shows so well that they've memorized the scripts (that's me, I'm afraid). The overall excellence of the production, and Garrett's outstanding performance, made this a forgivable sin for me.

Gleason's personality is not shown in a particularly good light in this piece. He is portrayed as being insecure, egocentric, petty, tyrannical, abrasive, possessive, and yet aloof from even his closest friends and colleagues. From everything I've read about the man, that's pretty much true. I still love Gleason and the expansive, lovable, down-to-earth everyman character he created for himself, even if I know it's not really true, but it tends to confirm my suspicion that it's always best to worship your heroes from afar.

Brad Garrett did an excellent job of portraying Gleason in this movie. I'll admit that this story held a very Poignant spot in my heart. Jackie Gleason not only grew up on Chauncey Street in Brooklyn in the WWI era, so did my Dad. And they actually LOOKED a lot alike, though they did not know each other.

Anyway, in the 50s and 60s Gleason was ever-present on our TV. He was not the Funniest guy alive, but you could tell where he came from, by the characters he invented. The Honeymooners' Brooklyn apartment was sparsely furnished - NO decorations, nothing on the walls. Gleason's irascible temper (probably born out of frustration with his Bus-driver job at $60.00 a week) belied his actual love for his wife, played by Audrey Meadows in the Honeymooners series. She was perfect for the role.

Garrett made up for his not-exactly-resemblance of Gleason, by imitating Gleason's voice and mannerisms to a T. The real-life Gleason was sort of a Bull in a china shop. People said he was hard to like. But that, if you got drunk with him, you'd be best buddies forever. His acquaintances and friends likened looking in his eyes to that of a pig's.

I recommend this movie to those (mostly older) viewers who lived through the 1950s and '60s, and to those who are curious about the man they only knew later in life, from the Burt Reynolds movies. Incidentally, Gleason WAS hailed as a very credible dramatic actor, in serious roles such as Minnesota Fats ("The Hustler"), also starring a YOUNG Paul Newman and as a deaf-mute Janitor in "Gigot". Gleason was, if nothing else, an entirely self-made man and a fascinating character.

Good Bio drama of a bygone era. Brad Garrett inhabits the role of Gleason. A man who's power overshadowed the 50's and 60's television world, without rival. Even Lucille Ball. Very evocative of the times. I highly recommend it. Its a 9 of 10. I rate it so high, because of the production value, and how it portrays the times Gleason lived in. Make no mistake, there are factual inaccuracies here. I am pretty big on historical inaccuracy in movies. But that's as it relates to real history. When it comes to the entertainment business itself though, malleability is part of what they do. Nonetheless, that's why its not a 10 of 10. To me, this was a film about those times. A gone with the wind era, never to return. This was entertainment for entertainment's sake.