Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Adeel Hail Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

sddavis63 It struck me that the focus was a bit off in this movie - a focus established by the title, which seems to put the spotlight on Esther. Janet Gaynor was excellent in the part of Esther in what was basically a very good movie - but nothing (not even the title) should have implied that Esther was the focus of the movie. Esther as a character just really didn't make that much of a connection with me. I didn't care all that much about her.Esther was a naive and innocent country girl - dazzled by the movies; attending the "moving pictures" in town, and reading all the gossip magazines. She harbours a dream to go to Hollywood and become a star herself. Her family is either amused by her dream, or they're disdainful of it and even antagonistic toward it - except for her grandmother, who finally gives her the cash to travel to California. Once there, Esther doesn't have much luck finding acting jobs, and money is hard to come by. But one day, working as a waitress at a big Hollywood party, she meets movie star Harold Maine (Fredric March), who is smitten with her and arranges for her to star opposite him in his next movie. Renamed Vicki Lester, Esther becomes a huge star. It's a success story, a story of following your dreams. And that's fine - except that the focus of this really needed to be on Harold.First, March was absolutely superb in the part. But more than that, Harold was simply the more interesting character. His career was on the downswing by the time he met Esther. Parts were getting harder for him to find, the reviews were getting worse and he was starting to drink heavily. I was sympathetic to him, as I watched his entire life crumble around him. I was embarrassed for him as I watched him stumble from one drunken public escapade to another. He loved Esther, but even then he found himself overshadowed by her, to the point at which he was barely recognized, and referred to as "Mr. Lester." March's concluding scene (after he's heard Esther say that she's going to give up her career to help him) is powerful. There's a marvellous message sent by director William Wellman as, during that final scene, he has Harold staring out the window at the sun setting over the ocean, and you know what's coming: an act of self-sacrifice, so that Esther won't have to give up her career to care for him. March's performance and the character himself is powerful; at times riveting.There's also a lot of reflection on the idea of "stars" - the publicity machine that makes them but just as easily spits them out; there's an early look at a sort of paparazzi frenzy around Harold; there's the adoring fans who pester Esther for an autograph - while she's leaving the church after Harold's funeral!It's a very well done movie. I just thought that it was a mistake to have the title focus on Esther, when the power of the movie was Harold's fall and ultimate demise. (9/10)

SimonJack I saw all three versions of "A Star is Born" in the past, and enjoyed watching this original and the 1954 remake again after so many years. What superb acting by Frederic March as Norman Maine, Janet Gaynor as Vicki Lester/Esther Blodgett, and all of the rest of this excellent cast. After many years between viewings, I was struck by the uniqueness of this film. Two aspects in particular stand out. First, that it is really three movies in one, with distinct stories. Second, that it has at least three major messages. The latter are so carefully woven into the script – and so well acted out – that most viewers may not be consciously aware of them. So, the genius of the script is in its putting all of this together in a most enjoyable and watchable story, without hitches or glitches.Most movies have a single story, with the different characters and roles as part of it. Usually, they center on the hero or heroine, the romance of the two, or a major plot of war, crime, intrigue or adventure. But, in this original, we see first, a story of a young small-town girl, Esther/Vicki, who dreams of becoming a movie star. The opening scenes set the stage for her "escape" to Hollywood. The message is about taking risks to chase one's dreams (as her grandmother counsels and relates of past family history). The next scenes show her difficulties in trying to break into the movies. She is behind in her rent and finds odd jobs as she looks for a break. We see the hopelessness and little likelihood of someone making it in Hollywood (one in 100,000, the woman at the acting agency tells her). But, we also see her determination to keep trying.Now the second story begins to unfold. Only, we understand that the male lead's story (Norman Maine) has been going on for many years in Hollywood. He has reached his peak, and while still near the top, he has become a headache and problem to his studio because of his drinking the past several years. We don't know why he apparently has never married, but it's clear that his career has been his obsession. Now he is becoming a big publicity problem for the studio. By coincidence, these two people meet, and the third story begins. A deep love blossoms between the two with their ultimate marriage. Lester's star rises and the first story fades as her dream is fulfilled – she has become a star. The male lead's story and the love story are now tightly (no pun intended) intertwined. In his love for her, and awareness of his drinking problem and acting decline, Maine bows out of films and stops drinking. Over time, he becomes distant as he realizes that he is no longer recognized. Finally, after a messenger boy calls him by his wife's stage name ("Mr. Lester"), he snaps and goes back to drinking. After more run-ins with the law and drying out in a sanitarium, Maine is set to return home. But a chance encounter with the studio publicity man, Matt Libby (excellently played by Lionel Stander), spells doom for Maine. He can't stand the PRs insults about being ed by his wife, and after a brawl, he steps up to the bar to resume his drinking. The next scenes show Lester and studio head Oliver Niles (Adolphe Menjou) worrying about where Maine is after four days. They get a call and Lester gets a judge to release Maine to her care. The courtroom scene is a great example of the humiliation of the man, now having sobered up, standing with other drunks, many of whom may live in the gutter, and being further embarrassed by having his wife appeal for him. Back in their California beachfront estate, Lester and Niles have put Maine to bed. They think he is sleeping but he hears them talking in the next room. Because of her love for Maine, Lester tells Niles that she is quitting the movies, and that she and Maine will go away together. Maine can hear Niles urge Lester not to give up her career at its peak. We can see the anguish and torment on his face. In Maine, we have a real story of conflict between the man, with his ego and no longer being revered as a movie idol, and his deep love for his wife and genuine respect and hopes for her success.I won't describe the last scenes – of Maine and Lester. His story ends on a tragic note. And the love story ends on a sad note. The subtle messages become clear. First, stardom, wealth and success don't buy happiness. the veranda scene when Maine tells Lester that she now owns the world as they look out over the city lights below? And then he says that he has never found happiness with success. Second, that pride and ego can destroy love when one person can't humble himself and struggle to rise above his failings for himself and that love. Even as an alcoholic, Maine was able to quit once – with help. But now he doesn't want to try again. Third, we should not be fooled by the allure of Hollywood and success that come mostly from phony build-ups and PR (i.e. the fictitious bio and lies by the studio PR guy to the press and public). I couldn't help but think of the adulation so many still heap on the movie stars and celebrities of today. And, how so few of them seem to have real happiness and love with their wealth and worldly success.

jonathankamiel It took me a long time to get round to seeing this classic and perhaps my expectations were a little unrealistic but I struggled through this film. May Robson plays the role of grandma irably enough, but the beginning was unbelievably corny and the dialogue throughout the film is not particularly sophisticated apart from a retort or two from Fredric March. Without March, I don't think I could have made it through to the end of the film. And I'm prepared to accept that Janet Gaynor is a great actress but she's so underwhelming as Vicki Lester. Judy Garland might not have been a stunner but as soon as she opened her voice to sing, all was forgiven. And I think Gaynor's casting makes the whole film's premise extremely difficult to believe. I reading more than once that this film is still one of the most accurate portrayals of Hollywood at the time and it definitely touches on the cruelty of the star system which sees one actor catapulted into the stratosphere while another falls from great heights into the gutter. However, I think there's a more cynical side to this movie's message. And that was to keep feeding the audience with the mantra that anyone can make it in movies, however "average" your looks or talent.

moonspinner55 A Hollywood love story, with the participants at cross-purposes in their respective careers, and alcohol a constant troubling factor. Though not profound--and steeped in sentiment, besides--this initial version of "A Star Is Born" makes a direct connection with the audience based on empathy for its characters, not songs or razzle-dazzle. Janet Gaynor, though a very big star in the 1930s, hasn't attained a large latter-day following for (most likely) the very reason she became an attraction initially: her giving, unselfish nature makes her a prime victim for love's heartaches, and one longs for her Esther Blodgett/Vicki Lester to mature on-screen. However, the set-up for this collapseable union doesn't allow for grown-up emotions, and Gaynor remains a noble, twinkling doormat for fading actor Fredric March. If you can get ed the tearjerker angle (which also permeated the 1954 and 1976 remakes), this look at early Hollywood is surprisingly canny and sharp, and the deep, rich Technicolor makes it a marvel to look at. Story idea lifted from 1932's "What Price Hollywood?", with a screenplay worked on by at least ten different writers (some credited, some not). **1/2 from ****