Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-16 23:36:27

FOR THE WORLD!

To tell you the truth, I love this movie. Bette Midler can act in anything-comedy or drama-anything! But I like her most in drama. This movie was Bette Midler's second Academy Award nomination. Directed by the same man who directed the movie The Rose (also with Bette Midler-her first Academy Award nomination).I find this movie to be delightful, funny, heartbreaking, and VERY well acted!Bette Midler sings in this movie, and it only adds to the superior quality of the film. The acting, the story, the music is worth watching over and over again. Like I said, I love this movie, and I recommend it to one and all!

2012-05-16 06:39:09

Another soft spoken wonder

This review is from: For the Boys [VHS] (VHS Tape) This movie is great the way it sneaks up at you and touches your heart. It makes you feel wonderful and sad all at the same time, and makes you evaluate your life

moonspinner55 2012-05-16 18:17:17

Long, overreaching nostalgic drama is only sporadically enjoyable...

Both brash and plastic, Mark Rydell's "For The Boys" isn't everconvincing, but with so much talent on-hand it is seldom dull. Playingthe star-duo of a musical-comedy act which spans the decades, JamesCaan and Bette Midler have no chemistry together. Their bickering iscontrived and mechanical, and their routines on stage don't soar withhilarity (everything about this union is heavily grounded, and theactors look unhappy throughout). Bette Midler is good when she's flyingsolo, and not being forced to be wacky. She has a lovely moment singing"In My Life" to a group of soldiers, but the scene is undermined bygunfire (a cue for director Rydell to make a ham-handed statement aboutthe senselessness of war). Lackluster, overeager, and unsubtle, thepicture has too much star-power to be lousy, is instead glossy,well-produced swill. ** from ****

KerrSmith2306 2012-05-16 00:41:21

Great music, nice story

What a musical masterpiece that movie is. Just listen to the variety ofsongs and styles provided by Bette Midler and the rest of the cast. Butthestory has it's downside. Too many subjects, too many levels, and the makeupdepartment didn't do their best job when giving Midler and Caan the "age"look. It's too plastic. But Ms. Midler still is a great singer / actressunder the bad make up, so I can still recomend this movie. Bringtissues!

2012-05-13 03:46:54

For this boy ...

Many moons ago I received the DVD of "Norma Rae," and there was a trailer included in the special features for "For the Boys." The trailer featured Bette's character singing "In My Life" during the Vietnam War, while flashes of history are played on the screen. Perhaps needless to say, I CRIED my eyes out while watching this! It made me believe that the movie would be outstanding, or, at least, as emotional as that song. Anyway, I was looking forward to seeing it, and bought it for cheap somewhere. AS USUAL I had to watch the movie a few times before I really started appreciating it, and now I can say that I love it, DESPITE the scathing reviews it received. But I do agree on a few points:Unfortunately, the best part of the entire movie is the first forty minutes or so, and considering the movie is two-and-one-half hours long, that perhaps isn't saying much. But watching Bette perform in these scenes is enough to sustain you throughout the rest. Basically, you just wind up wishing the movie would "pick up," but you're stuck waiting for the other half of a one-two punch; it never REALLY comes.The entire movie in itself IS emotional, cute, funny, tragic ... all the adjectives you'd expect. But all of these things working together don't add up to a perfect whole. And the ending is somewhat unsatisfying. It's the ending we were expecting, but ... it could have been executed a bit better. At times it seems as though it were a TV-movie. And everyone complains about the age makeup, but ... this was 1990; this was "For the Boys," not "Lord of the Rings." All-in-all it's the songs and one-liners that are going to stay with you, and, again, Bette's performance in those first forty minutes. I guess I'm just biased, but ... I believe this movie DOES have an audience if you're open-minded, and can view this as a flawed masterpiece. If you've read any entertainment "news" from 1991, then you'd know that Bette's own production company brought "For the Boys" to fruition, and it was truly a love-letter to all her fans. Maybe sometime before the 2000s are over she'll have one more big hit, and maybe she'll finally get an Oscar. I hope. :)

2012-05-12 11:29:39

For The Boys

Oh!, I Love this movie, Bette Middler Performance is exceptionally beautiful. The theme of war is sad but the happiness they give to these boys is something to think that made a difference. Great theme, great performance, great music.

Steve O. 2012-05-06 11:09:50

Political clichés sink a promising film

After FOR THE BOYS flopped at the box office, Bette Midler angrily toldthe press she would never make another musical.But the trouble was she DIDN'T make a musical. She threw a few numbersinto a heavy-handed "message picture" that strikes political poseswhich are obvious and overly-familiar.It starts out so well, a real old-time star vehicle, perfectlyshowcasing Midler's musical and comedic gifts, but less than an hourin, it transforms into something much less interesting.Musical numbers disappear, replaced by pious liberal sermonettes,teaching us that blacklisting, patriotism, sexism, and the Viet Nam warare all Very Bad.FOR THE BOYS illustrates the damage done to a story when the writersrefuse to be fair to a major character. Here, James Caan is painted insuch broad strokes as a two-dimensional villain (sexist! adulterous!untalented! corrupt!), the whole film becomes a cartoon.By the time you see them in the worst old age make-up in Hollywoodhistory (it looks like someone stuck pie dough on Midler and Caan'sfaces), what little credibility remains is swept away for good.But the first 45 minutes reminds you how great Midler can be in theright vehicle. Will someone please cast her in another musical? A REALone this time.

annmason1 2012-05-05 19:06:33

Head for the Trenches

This is a terrible movie that uses every trite sentimental piece offlotsom and jetsom that the irresponsible producers (Bette was one)could throw in.Here is the stout hearted troop entertaining other stout hearted troopsfrom which hubby emerges to be sung to by his sexy smart mouthedhoofer/singer/wife on stage. His last hurrah. Cut to widow in blackweeds. Here, worst of all, is the god-awful wrung out slow motionmachine gun death of a perfect top-of-his-West-Point-class son, tryingto reach Mom who, incidentally, probably drew the enemy fire in thefirst place with her belted out songs and thudding around the stage. It must be said in the son's favor, however, that he managed to get hishair stylishly cut (just a whisper of mousse)and deliver a movinganti-war speech to his slack jawed mom before biting the dust (dust hewouldn't have bit if he had the sense to come in out of the flack). Bythe way, didn't anyone casting this turkey realize that the son's bonestructure and genetic characteristics would not have completely alteredover the years from childhood? I think the adult son actor is hunky,but he must have been a Walk In for the other kid.It is deeply offensive to portray any young man dying the way thismovie does. It is vicious and unnecessary, given the countlessthousands of non-chic snipped young men who died in Vietnam. And, let'sjust say it, it is an insult to West Point. I mean, really, if theycan't even teach their "point man" to keep his damn head down underfire, we might as well turn the place into a day care center.However, all that said, I would definitely recommend you see thismovie. Bette in a rubber ducky suit is worth the price. Why is it thatspecial effects people can give us incredible illusions like Star Wars,and can't make one middle aged Jewish woman believable as a dotteringold crone? Just as well, it's hilarious to watch her waddle. When I sawOld Bette in that purple Balenciaga ballgown, I reflexively looked forthe tie down rope.I can't bear to share my thoughts about the tear jerking (fromlaughter) final scene in this flick. Let's just say that "For the Boys"should be in a boxed set with the remake of "Lost Horizon".

ptb-8 2012-05-05 13:31:52

plays better in 2005

FOR THE BOYS might just be a "Better Midler" film today, in a period ofanother middle east war and albeit a more tragic and unpopular one witha far more critical and on going media focus than the first 1991war.....This exceptionally well made musical drama, made for about $70million in 1991 and really a protest musical parable, did not reach theintended at the time and the first Iraq war was over before this filmhad a chance to make an impact. Seen in 2006, now is actually the righttime for this film. We are also quite a while from other Bette Midlerfilms of the 80s and as a result FTB has a stronger solo spotlight.Having appreciated this film in that light, I believe it is possiblyone of the last great semi musicals of the 20th century and is helpedimmeasurably by a very pungent script. At times it is not unlike NEWYORK NEW YORK both in look and romantic combat. Cann and Midler work sowell against and with each other, underlined by George Segal in a rolethat is actually substantial for him. Apparently this is loosely basedon the life of Martha Raye, who complained bitterly upon release that"this fact" was not recognized. FOR THE BOYS is a major musical filmbut tapers off tune wise in the last 40 minutes while the starling andharrowing (but slightly illogical) Vietnam War scenes are played out.Midler is front and center star at all times and the production valuesshow the huge budget well spent on screen. If reissued today might geta better reception given the Iraq war to play against and thereforehave more impact. It's a good film, serious and with excellent musicand comedy in the first hour especially.

2012-05-05 06:06:26

Sweet!

This review is from: For the Boys (DVD) I really liked the movie, I thought it would be one way and it turned out to be an other. I also liked the speed in which I recieved the movie, it was really fast!

Ian-100 2012-04-28 21:23:04

Almost a nice try at poeticising wars.

Surprised that I took the time to watch this gross simplification ofinternational events of the past 60 years, I saw a grating deja-vuperformance from Bette Midler combine admittedly well with acharacteristically capable James Caan to create a movie which seemsdesperate to make a point or two but falls a fair distance short.Though charming for moments of its attempt to be close to "epic", ittrivialises wars it tries to either document or romanticise. The end effectis a lack of empathy with our protagonists and a slight disappointment withthe schmalzty approach to severe and devastating events.

AndrewPhillips 2012-04-28 11:55:57

For All

It's very easy to criticise a film like "for the boys", after all it issentimental and there is singing, a sure fire vote killer. Despite thisI liked it, in fact I more than liked it. Why because it has a heart itmay be sentimental sometimes but it works, the singing works, and thereisn't that much of it.The reason this film really works is Bette Midler that age old phrase atour de force is the only thing that you can say, the woman isfantastic. Sassy, vulnerable, moving. She brings to the part a greatdepth and an impressive range of emotions, most of which areunderplayed, making them all the more powerful for it. Well deservingof her Oscar nomination and a little robbed not being chosen as thewinner. James Cann is also very good and the production values are highwell written and all in all much better than you might think.Yes there are some dodgy bits like the old age make up, though themakeup in the sixties was better, the ending is weak and it was a pityto go out with a whimper considering the rest of the film had suchballs. These though are not enough to spoil the film.

2012-04-22 13:27:23

BETTE WAS ROBBED YET A SECOND TIME AT THE OSCARS!

The only reason Miss Midler didn't win that year, (Jodie Foster won for Silence of the Lambs) was because 'For the Boys' was a box-office dud. I wish back then the marketing executives at 20th Century Fox would've sold this movie a little better. First of all the soundtrack had two possible mega hits, 'In My Life' the Beatles' tune in which Bette's renditon turned into an emotionally packed moment in the movie. I get a lump in the throat every time I see it. The other tune, 'Every road leads Back to you', like 'Wind beneath my wings' is a wonderful song reflecting on a bumpy and long, yet close and loving friendship. These songs should've been airing over the radio way before the movie was released. Secondly, 'For the boys' was pitted against 'Beauty and the Beast' and 'Addams Family' when it was released. It's no wonder this movie got shoved aside. As for the movie itself, it's evident that Miss Midler poured her soul and guts into the whole project. Yes, the movie does try to cover a lot of war-history in 2 1/2 hours, but Bette as Dixie and her love-hate relationship with Caan as Eddie do have an appealing quality despite all their tumultuus bickering behind the scenes of entertaining the boys. Critics complained about how awful the aging makeup looked on Midler and Caan. Well my argumnent to them is, when you see an elderly performers win a lifetime acheivement award on TV, aren't they supposed to look somewhat gray and wrinkled...Or do all aged show biz icons have to look like Joan Collins and Dick Clark? Nevertheless, the scene of Dixies's first time singing with the troops in 1942 is the reason why people love to see Bette....I just wish more people would have done so when this was released in 1991. TL

Lee Eisenberg 2012-04-22 11:23:38

boy oh boy

In full brassy form, Bette Midler plays Dixie Leonard, who does USOperformances in WWII, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Throughoutpleasant times and hard times (and even through tragedies), she andco-star Eddie Sparks (James Caan) always have to find a way to makesure that the show goes on.I don't know whether I would call this a masterpiece, but it's somegood nostalgia. Midler shows off her talents the same as she did in"The Rose". And moreover, "For the Boys" also looks at the sorts ofthings going on during those wars, including Cold War-era red-baiting.Worth seeing.

2012-04-21 19:21:00

Not That Good

First of all I am not 12, I'm 14. I just don't go away just because I'm an unexpiranced viewer of good movies. I saw this on tv and was expecting a moving movie musical from Bette Midler (Beaches/Gypsy) but was soon very dissipointed. It follows the story of two preformers that preform together for over fifty years. It trys to be good but it just dosn't move me at all. It achuly gets boring! Try to avoid it.

Isaac5855 2012-04-21 06:36:33

Bette's powerhouse performance sustains a somewhat lackluster film

Bette Midler proves that she can single-handedly make a film worthwatching in FOR THE BOYS, an overlong but rewarding comedy-drama withmusic which chronicles the relationship between singer Dixie Leonardand comic Eddie Sparks (James Caan), a character clearly patternedafter Bob Hope, which begins during a WWII USO tour and concludes inthe present where the glamorously aging couple are being reunited for atelevision special. Bette received her second Best Actress Oscarnomination for her commanding performance here, She lights up thescreen whether Dixie is upstaging Eddie in front of thousands of troopsduring WWII, cursing out sponsors during her and Eddie's televisionshow, or tearing Eddie a new one when she thinks he is trying to stealher son away from her. As expected, she makes the most of her musicalmoments in the film with "Stuff Like that There" and "Come Rain or ComeShine" as standouts. Caan works hard in the role of Eddie Sparks,managing to make a pretty despicable character rather likable for themajority of the story. The only big mistake here was director MarkRydell's casting of his real-life son, Christopher in the pivotal roleof Dixie's adult son. Rydell's lifeless performance is a majordetriment to an important part of the film, but for the most part, FORTHE BOYS is grand entertainment, thanks to the Divine Miss M.

Texasrep 2012-04-12 13:15:29

2nd Best of Bette's Movies

Bette was magnificent in "The Rose", in my opinion the best movie she'smade. In a totally different personna she plays Dixie equally wonderfully."For The Boys" is, for a reason I cannot discern, one of my all timefavorite movies. I love the movie and Bette is as always, the best. Ifyouadore Bette, and if you've never "For The Boys", rent it or buy it andyou'll see what I'm talking about.

Hmm H 2012-04-12 02:34:22

Great until the end

This was a great movie until it starts getting more serious. The very end wasn't bad. It is worth watching though, I would fast-forward the serious parts though.

2012-04-04 17:01:41

bette midlar films

as always any film with bette in is always good value for money her co-star is equally excellent and the story line was compelling to watch.

2012-04-04 04:43:50

Thanks for the date and FOR THE BOYS

I invited a date to the movies and when she picked FOR THE BOYS, I cringed a little. But I liked FOR THE BOYS a lot, as it turned out. Predictable, well, yeah, but it conveys the unavoidable intimacy of the long, albeit working, relationship of the characters portrayed by James Caan and Bette Midler. And in addition to the two lead actors, George Segal turns in a good performance. See FOR THE BOYS.