Guys and Dolls

Guys and Dolls really shouldn't have worked. Helmed by a director with no experience with musicals, starring two legendarily feuding leads, neither of whose singing styles (crooning/mumbling-with-notes) fit the piece, it's a testament to the fundamental fun of the Broadway show (faithfully adapted here) that its filmic companion is somehow all the more infectiously charming as a summation of its disparate parts. Call it luck, call it skill, but, over sixty years on, director Joseph L. Mankiewicz's film remains one of the most beloved and enduring movie musicals of all time, and still well worth experiencing for the first or fifty-first time.

It's also somewhat of a time capsule for a genre in the midst of transition. Mankiewicz juxtaposing Michael Kidd's snappy, avant garde choreography with static sequences of the leads singing swooning songs to each other and the camera lands the film squarely betwixt classical and contemporary sensibilities. Amazingly, the duelling styles complement each other perfectly, infusing the seedy gambling sequences with a jazzy excitement, while painting the parallel romantic subplots with a gentle sweetness and elegance. Similarly, Mankiewicz shows a flair for infusing setting with personality, as the New York sequences bustle with a nervy energy, while colouring the dalliance to Havana with a sultry breeziness. At two-and-a-half hours, the film is indisputably overlong, but the gentle, teasing humour throughout, and little touches like the strangely eloquent gamblers and their strangely stilted, contraction-free dialogue make it a thoroughly pleasant romp, antiquated sexual politics and all.

That said, it's the dazzling, star-studded cast who really give the film its unforgettable lustre. As infamous sex symbol Sky Masterson, Marlon Brando is suave, sparkling-eyed charisma personified, practically gliding through his scenes with the lope of a panther. However, Brando is too consummate an actor to deliver a mere caricature, and he weaves his breeziness with a deceptively nuanced undercurrent of brusque pragmatism and soft regret, to better sell Masterson's somewhat forced character arc into decency. Despite his purported distaste at playing second banana Nathan Detroit, Frank Sinatra proves perfect casting, delivering the perfect blend of fast-talking weediness and bombastic romanticism to keep relentless bum Detroit a roguishly irresistible scoundrel. Jean Simmons is a scream throughout, bustling with such gusto and perfect screwball banter to selling her 'adorably corrupted buttoned up prude' schtick as fresh and natural, while Broadway carryover Vivian Blaine is exquisitely sharp and witty as she is shrill, lending her scenes with Sinatra a vivacious energy.

What might have seemed an ambitious gamble at the time now plays as a pair of loaded-ahem-"special" dice, as Mankiewicz's Guys and Dolls bubbles with a perfectly mischievous sense of fun and irresistible heart. It may be simpler, sweeter, and less memorable than other genre-defining classics such as Singin' in the Rain, but if you're seeking out a rollicking, robustly entertaining classical gem, you're in luck. And (you've been waiting for this), luck be a lady tonight.

-8/10

Along with South Pacific, Guys and Dolls is for grown-ups - - it is sassy, sexy, and full of men being men and women being strung along.

There is an energy and drive that makes this stand out from the pack - the strength of Jean Simmond's performance, and the charm of a young Brando, and an already masterful Sinatra add much to the overall feel and look of the piece.

Guys and Dolls wins as it is unashamedly what it is: an MGM musical.

Still good to look at and listen too with great tunes and dance numbers - it will remain one of the classics of 20th Century cinema and be watched with pleasure for years to come.

Warmly recommended.

I love this movie. I never realized all of the songs I recognized and sang in school were from this movie. A fantastic mix of singing, dancing and acting. Rich characters that you love from beginning to end. Of course there are better singers than Brando but Brando did hold his own with every tune, and he was the best one for the part with his usual magnificent acting and likability.

Frank Sinatra is in top form and I always love watching the great and stunning actress Jean Simmons. You are in for a great time with this enriching musical. Fun for everyone. Will leave you falling in love with musicals all over again. A Must see!

Joseph Mankiewicz's 'Guys and Dolls' is a funny musical comedy based on the famous musical play. Colourful and full of energy, filled with songs, dance and gambling, the pacing does occasionally stumble as it sometimes feels as though the songs overshadow the story. In my opinion, some of the songs could have been left out, like the pussycat number. The overall dance numbers are very well choreographed. Hats off to the art department for making the film look so beautiful and vibrant with different colours. The cinematography is brilliant.

I never thought I'd see Brando sing and dance. It wasn't something I'd even imagined but he does a decent job. Sinatra is already familiar with this genre. However, his role is barely developed. Of the women, Vivian Blaine and Jean Simmons do a fine job using their comic flair. Stubby Kaye provides fine support as Nicely.

Finally, in my opinion, 'Guys and Dolls' is among the better musical of the 50s. Amusing, entertaining, energetic and (at the very least) foot-tapping, just what a musical should be.

"Guys and Dolls" is a thoroughly enjoyable example of musical comedy at its very best. The acting is impeccable, and what's more, almost believable (for a musical at least), the singing is pretty decent (well, Marlon Brando is another story, but I'll get to that) and the whole thing is just so amusing and entertaining that you'll be singing the tunes and quoting the lines long after you've finished watching it. Critics and viewers seem to sometimes have a difficult time with taking the film too seriously, by this I mean that a) Marlon Brando was not cast because of his singing voice (which was admittedly not good, but bearable), I like to think it was because he had irresistible charm, b) the whole premise is so unbelievable, to which I say, "name me a musical that IS wholly believable", and c) the movie moves too slowly, which is patently absurd, unless one does not have a taste for the slower pace of old movies and long, well articulated dance numbers, and romantic love scenes. This film pre-dates my existence by some 3 decades, but it still manages to rank among my very favorite pieces of movie-making and is an absolute must-see for musical and non-musical fans alike. 10/10