NOTE IMDb
6,4/10
4,7 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThree women each claim to be the widow of 1950s doo-wop singer Frankie Lymon, claiming legal rights to his estate.Three women each claim to be the widow of 1950s doo-wop singer Frankie Lymon, claiming legal rights to his estate.Three women each claim to be the widow of 1950s doo-wop singer Frankie Lymon, claiming legal rights to his estate.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires et 4 nominations au total
Miguel A. Núñez Jr.
- Young Little Richard
- (as Miguel A. Nunez Jr.)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWhen Tina Andrews wrote the original script, the part of Frankie Lymon was first offered to Michael Jackson.
- GaffesWhen the scenes changes to Lamberton Prison in 1985, Diana Ross' version of "Why Do Fools" is more than once referred to as a new hit, when in fact, it was released in 1981.
- Citations
Emira Eagle: Maybe there were three separate Frankies, and each of us got a piece.
- Bandes originalesWhy Do Fools Fall in Love
Written by Frankie Lymon and Morris Levy
Performed by Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers
Courtesy of Rhino Entertainment Company/EMI Records UK Ltd.
Commentaire à la une
Other commentators seem to feel this is, or should have been, a movie about the life of Frankie Lyman. However, as the title indicates, it is really about three women who fell in love ... with a guy named Frankie Lyman. As the movie brings home fairly early, there is not much about Frankie to love. He is portrayed as a shallow, self-centered fool, with as little understanding of the music business as of the women he scams into being his wives.
Did Frankie have raw talent? Of course he did. Did Frankie do anything to develop this raw talent into an enduring musical career? No evidence of that. So much for Frankie. Larenz Tate plays him fairly well on stage, and rather flat off stage. We are not given a clue as to what the attraction may have been.
And, since two of the women were relatively unaware of his celebrity status when they were first taken with him, and the third had a celebrity status of her own, we expect the movie to answer the title question. The women do not entirely succeed in this, but they are terrifically watchable while they try.
Halle Berry is great as Zola Taylor, singer with the Platters. Viveca Fox is almost as good as the home girl who turns hooker to support Frankie, and Lela Rachon is perfect as the goodie-two-shoes last wife, a God-fearing and educated working woman.
The music scenes are good, and the courtroom scenes are outrageously unrealistic.
This would have been a better movie if they had not specifically based the story on Lyman, but only alluded to him. In this manner, the Hollywoodization of the story would have been less noticeable. Unfortunately, realizing that such a course would inevitably preclude using the Lyman hits, they chose to make this a triography of the wives, and allow them to play off Tate's weak Lyman persona.
All in all, a good couple of hours of enjoyment that is not too compelling. When it was over, we found ourselves asking, "Why DID these three fools fall in love?"
Did Frankie have raw talent? Of course he did. Did Frankie do anything to develop this raw talent into an enduring musical career? No evidence of that. So much for Frankie. Larenz Tate plays him fairly well on stage, and rather flat off stage. We are not given a clue as to what the attraction may have been.
And, since two of the women were relatively unaware of his celebrity status when they were first taken with him, and the third had a celebrity status of her own, we expect the movie to answer the title question. The women do not entirely succeed in this, but they are terrifically watchable while they try.
Halle Berry is great as Zola Taylor, singer with the Platters. Viveca Fox is almost as good as the home girl who turns hooker to support Frankie, and Lela Rachon is perfect as the goodie-two-shoes last wife, a God-fearing and educated working woman.
The music scenes are good, and the courtroom scenes are outrageously unrealistic.
This would have been a better movie if they had not specifically based the story on Lyman, but only alluded to him. In this manner, the Hollywoodization of the story would have been less noticeable. Unfortunately, realizing that such a course would inevitably preclude using the Lyman hits, they chose to make this a triography of the wives, and allow them to play off Tate's weak Lyman persona.
All in all, a good couple of hours of enjoyment that is not too compelling. When it was over, we found ourselves asking, "Why DID these three fools fall in love?"
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Why Do Fools Fall in Love?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Why Do Fools Fall in Love
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 12 461 773 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 3 946 382 $US
- 30 août 1998
- Montant brut mondial
- 12 461 773 $US
- Durée1 heure 56 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Ménage à quatre (1998) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre