The other comment here is that this movie has no plot. Well, there is, but it's a thin one. But, consider the social context of this film, the beginning of the 50s, a time when musicals were king and the world was still optimistic. Things looked good: the horrible WW2 was over and the boys were home; the economy was so-so but people were hopeful: many ex-GIs had returned to school (a social feature which would bear fruits in the coming years); Rosie the Riveter had put up her tools and was now in maternity clothes waiting to socialize her daughters and make them aware that they could earn money just like the men and not have to stand for being deprived of the opportunity to do so; the Korean war was still a year away. Things looked good. So, why not have a bit of Hollywood costume mind pablum about a guy inheriting a small plantation in Tahiti, having a romance with swimarina Esther Williams in dark-skinned make-up and all of that. No plot? Sure, there is. It's just not very tension-fraught. Is that bad? To tell the truth, I don't think folks went to see this film for extensive intellectual challenges. It is full of memorable songs, lovely-to-look-at moments and some nice shots of Tahiti. Rosie and her back-from-the-war GI Joe likely held hands during the colorful dream sequences, unknowing that their daughters and granddaughters would be horrified at the chauvinist late 40s dialogue. I missed this film as a kid and saw it on video a few years ago. I loved Howard Keel and Esther Williams as a kid and would likely have loved it more then. But still, there were moments, e.g., during the confusing (and somewhat confused) dream sequence, when I could smile, losing myself in the same way that thousands who go to Las Vegas and see shows at the club do-- and it only cost me a few dollars! Check it out. I agree. The plot is scarce but, doggone it, it's sure fun to see.
Review of Pagan Love Song
