La brune brûlante

when she realizes she likes boys, she just doesn't like Dwayne Hickman, it's sheer truth and delight! the rest of the cast is forced...Joanne Woodward is strident. Paul Newman is slumming, Joan Collins is adequate. Jack Carson is Carson. Dwayne Hickman deserves Weld's scorn. bad comedy, except for Weld's self-recognition. these 50's films try to be smart, but aren't. once in a while a performer can rise above the material. here it's only a young, precocious teenager who mesmerizes.

Weld was given praise by none other than Pauline Kael. in her review of Weld's classic '68, "Pretty Poison", she suggested Weld didn't have the career she deserved, "and maybe it isn't just her unlucky name...maybe she's the kind of actress who doesn't let you know she's acting, like Geraldine Page or Estelle Parsons do. how else can an actress give the kind of performances Tuesday Weld has given in "Rally 'round the Flag, Boys!", "Soldier in the Rain", "The Cincinatti Kid", and "Lord Love a Duck", and still not being taken seriously?"

You've gotta feel sorry for Harry (Paul Newman) in "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys!". His wife (Joanne Woodward) is ALWAYS busy with committees and projects and never has time for him. No sooner does he convince her to take out some time so they can go off to a romantic hotel than she agrees to head up yet another committee--one to fight a new army base coming to town! This time, she not only agrees to be the head but volunteers Harry for it as well! All Harry wants is to be with his wife....alone! At the same time, a VERY sexy neighbor (Joan Collins) is suffering from the same problem with her husband--a man who is practically never home. However, she deals with it very differently--she decides she wants Harry! And, she'll do ANYTHING to get him--even ruin his marriage. For a 1950s film, "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys!" is an amazingly sexual film. Think about it--the premise is that Harry is very sexually frustrated through no fault of his own! And, again and again, his libido is unfulfilled.

So is this little comedy worth seeing? Yes. However, just because it has Newman and Woodward does NOT mean it's a great film--which it isn't. The film suffers from two main problems--the unfulfilled libido and the marital problems in Harry's marriage do seem to go on a bit too long. Additionally, I found it difficult to enjoy at times because Woodward's character is really difficult to like. Plus, towards the end it all just degenerates into a bit of a mess. Still, it's a cute film and a decent way to spend 106 minutes of your life provided your expectations are not especially high.

By the way, the pageant about Pocahontas was perhaps even more insanely inaccurate than the Disney film. Imagine--Pocahontas greeting the Pilgrims lead by John Smith at Plymouth!! Firecrackers! Crazy.

Leo McCarey, whose credits were certainly nothing to be ashamed of, was a bit past his prime when he directed this minor misfire. 20th Century Fox gave it first-class production values and a cast that could have had a lot more fun had a less cautious approach to the material been allowed to prevail. Leon Shamroy's CinemaScope/DeLuxe Color lensing was, not unexpectedly, a treat for the eyes and a few minor bits (Tuesday Weld squealing with delight as a swain sings "You're My Boojum!" to her; Joan Collins and Paul Newman engaging in an inebriated slapstick sequence that involved swinging from a chandelier, no less) hit the mark. I remember being disappointed that things didn't take off, like the accidentally fired missile in a scene with Woodward and Newman. But anyone who thinks that Joan Collins' only forte is playing a ruthless bitch, as she did on the long-running TV series, "Dynasty," would probably be delighted with her witty romp as Angela Hoffa, for me this film's memorable highpoint.

I read the reviews before watching it again after many years. Shocked, I was, to see that they weren't good. My plan was to see the movie and mount a spirited defense of it on this very site.

I can't. I like romantic comedies. I like comedies from this era. I even like bad movies if they are sincere. This movie just makes me uncomfortable.

Paul Newman, never one of my favorites, but a pretty decent actor, has no real range or depth in this role. I watched, expecting him to suddenly step forward and take charge of the movie, but he disappointed me...

Joanne Woodward vacillates between stern wife and mother/retarded blonde. I think she was trying to be sexy, but came off as possibly addicted to Valium...

Joan Collins was the one bright spot in this movie. She was sexy and vivacious...even funny from time to time...

Gale Gordon (Mr. Mooney from the old Lucy Show) did okay with what he had.

What they managed to do with some pretty talented actors was to create a movie where not only did I not care about the lives of any of the characters, I don't think I would've cared if any of them had been tortured to death, either.

A couple of reviewers noted that they felt sorry for Paul Newman's character in "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys." I had the same sense at times. Newman's Harry Bannerman is a picture of sympathy much of the time. One can imagine Rock Hudson, Fred MacMurray or Cary Grant in that role. None of them would be likely to garner our sympathy. And they shouldn't. They would have us laughing at the predicament they were in and how they handled it. Sure, they would be just as innocent as Newman is. But they would have played the role for the comedy, where Newman's character can't seem to do that. But it may not be all his failing. I suspect it was a combination miscue involving screen writing, acting and directing.

I think Newman is capable of comedy – he later shows a knack for some simple and sophisticated humor ("The Sting," "Slap Shot," and in the Western crime and biopic, "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid"). But – as at least one other reviewer noted, he's not suited for the farcical. For that matter, neither is Joanne Woodward. A couple others said they didn't like her character. I think it would have been fine -- if she had made it funny. Woodward was an excellent dramatic actress. She won an Oscar for "The Three Faces of Eve," and received three more nominations. But her comedic abilities were limited to the witty and wry dialog type – nothing with mayhem and farce. Other reviewers talked about the humor in the novel by Max Shulman that this movie is based on, and the absence of so many good and witty lines in the film.

Jack Carson helped pick the film up some as an incompetent Army officer, Captain Hoxie. Carson was a first-rate supporting actor who often had considerable roles in movies. His film persona reminds me of Bud Abbott – a straight man who always seems serious, and whom others can play off with such great humor. Carson was an intelligent actor who knew he wasn't going to get male leads. He played his characters to the hilt. Carson died of cancer at age 52. Had he lived longer, he might have garnered an Oscar – for a comedy or dramatic supporting role. Other fine supporting actors earned greater recognition for their talents in their later years. Examples are Hume Cronyn and Harry Morgan.

This film has a couple of very funny scenes, but nothing more. Others have noted the silliness of the plot toward the end. I don't have a problem with that – comedy is comedy, of whatever degree of foolishness, farce, fantasy and silliness. But, it really should be funny. Regrettably, "Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys" doesn't have what it takes. Newman and Woodward were at the peak of their careers and popularity at the time, so the studio (20th Century Fox) probably thought they could do no wrong. Maybe fan appeal would be enough.

The film had a considerable budget for 1958, at nearly $1.9 million. It made money but it didn't set the world on fire back then either. The box office take was reported at $3.4 million.