I, too, have been longing forever (since VCRs appeared) for this musical to become available on video. The Sherman & Sherman (& Morley) songs are perfectly good, and the choreography is super, but what I remember best is the great, iconoclastically non-chalant Fairy Godmother character (Annette Crosbie). I put her among the greatest steal-the-show supporting characters of all time, right along with Nicol Williamson's Merlin in "Excalibur."
85 Reviews
Creative Take on the Classis Cinderella Story
morenoapb32 July 2005
This is a very clever and entertaining remake of Cinderella, with wonderful music, beautiful costumes and scenery, and a very talented ensemble cast. It also has a good deal of dry wit, particularly from the King, played marvelously by Michael Hordern, which sets it apart from other productions of Cinderella. It also features Richard Chamberlain trying his hand at his first musical, in the role of Prince Edward, the royal heir to the throne of Euphrania, who simply wants to marry for love, not political expediency. He is terrific in this role--handsome, aristocratic, with a very pleasant singing voice, and extremely graceful on the dance floor--he looks very much "The Prince." Gemma Craven is good in the role of Cinderella, and I particularly like her singing in the haunting "Tell Him Anything." The song "Secret Kingdom" with Richard and Gemma is beautiful, and one of the highlights of the entire movie. Though the film itself runs a little too long, I still love all the fine performances from this very talented cast, and recommend it to anyone who enjoys the musical genre.
Overlong but lavish musical!
TheLittleSongbird12 February 2009
This is definitely underrated. I managed to find this on video and I fell in love with it. It is overlong, and there are discrepancies with the script, but the whole film looks gorgeous, with the lavish costumes and breathtaking scenery. The songs are actually really pleasant, but the staging is a bit long, and the whole film unfortunately lacks magic. The performances were very good though. Gemma Craven was a bit too young, but her sweet voice and doll like face gave Cinderella a certain charm. Richard Chamberlain was perfect as the prince, and there is scene-stealing support from Margaret Lockwood, Kenneth More, Michael Horden and Edith Evans.Don't forget Annette Crosbie's funny performance as the Fairy Godmother.There were some touching moments, and the costumes are the main reason, why this movie should be watched. 7/10 Bethany Cox
A Childhood Treasure rediscovered
acaldwell20 March 2002
My parents taped this movie from TV for me when I was young, and it has always remained one of my favorites. I've worn the tape out over the years, because even now that I'm a (supposed) grown up, I still get the urge to go back and watch again and again.
The film is beautiful, filmed on location in Europe (Austria, I think?) with a whimsical and richly romantic air. What I love most about this movie is that it makes the effort to flesh out the characters into three dimensional figures and to set against an (at least plausible) historical backdrop, while still maintaining a tiny bit of tongue-in-cheek self-awareness--a live-action period piece that enjoys the fact that it's really a fairytale and a musical. I've always thought that gave it just a hint of sophistication. The movie also explores more of the complexities of the stories and the characters' motivations. It carries us past the classic "slipper" moment and allows for a more complete ending, which I found more fulfilling.
As for the characters themselves, I loved Cinderella, neither the modernized girl-power of "Ever After" (which I loved, by the way) nor the blank goody-goody-ness of the Disney classic, but a very human and lovely blend of the two--with a gorgeous voice thrown in for good measure. Prince Edward, played flawlessly by Richard Chamberlain, gives us a hero to root for, in addition to our traditional heroine. You don't just wait for her to be found, you cheer for each of them to find the other. The rest of the cast is filled in with real people that the viewer comes to care for and value in the story almost as much as the main pair. You are not left with the typical stock characters that you see so often in fairy tales. I especially loved the Fairy Godmother, the Prince's Companion, the Chamberlain, the senile King, the Dowager queen...okay, I really love them all. Even the dog. :)
I despaired of every finding a "real" copy on VHS until recently. The VHS retained a few scenes that were edited from the TV version (I assume) for time, and I have to say I think that I liked the short version better. I thought that the it flowed more smoothly, and I found that I did not miss the musical numbers they cut. I was especially disappointed with "Find a Mate" (yes, they're serious) and the scene in the Fairy Godmother's house...very contrived and corny. They really don't equal the rest of the film. Although the Prince's prayer at the end is wonderful, and was cut from the TV version.
All in all, I just have to say that I love this movie, and always will.
The film is beautiful, filmed on location in Europe (Austria, I think?) with a whimsical and richly romantic air. What I love most about this movie is that it makes the effort to flesh out the characters into three dimensional figures and to set against an (at least plausible) historical backdrop, while still maintaining a tiny bit of tongue-in-cheek self-awareness--a live-action period piece that enjoys the fact that it's really a fairytale and a musical. I've always thought that gave it just a hint of sophistication. The movie also explores more of the complexities of the stories and the characters' motivations. It carries us past the classic "slipper" moment and allows for a more complete ending, which I found more fulfilling.
As for the characters themselves, I loved Cinderella, neither the modernized girl-power of "Ever After" (which I loved, by the way) nor the blank goody-goody-ness of the Disney classic, but a very human and lovely blend of the two--with a gorgeous voice thrown in for good measure. Prince Edward, played flawlessly by Richard Chamberlain, gives us a hero to root for, in addition to our traditional heroine. You don't just wait for her to be found, you cheer for each of them to find the other. The rest of the cast is filled in with real people that the viewer comes to care for and value in the story almost as much as the main pair. You are not left with the typical stock characters that you see so often in fairy tales. I especially loved the Fairy Godmother, the Prince's Companion, the Chamberlain, the senile King, the Dowager queen...okay, I really love them all. Even the dog. :)
I despaired of every finding a "real" copy on VHS until recently. The VHS retained a few scenes that were edited from the TV version (I assume) for time, and I have to say I think that I liked the short version better. I thought that the it flowed more smoothly, and I found that I did not miss the musical numbers they cut. I was especially disappointed with "Find a Mate" (yes, they're serious) and the scene in the Fairy Godmother's house...very contrived and corny. They really don't equal the rest of the film. Although the Prince's prayer at the end is wonderful, and was cut from the TV version.
All in all, I just have to say that I love this movie, and always will.
If it had been an American film, people would hate it.
movibuf196223 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I should clarify that I actually love "Cinderella" stories. I think what I really love is the challenge of how each subsequent version is going to differ from (or somehow outshine) the last one. Each Cinderella story is infused with new things, old things, and just plain bizarre things. In this telling, there is much more emphasis on the prince- after all, Richard Chamberlain is top billed. Unfortunately, the characterization of his prince Edward is no different from any other fictional depiction of royalty: born of privilege, but hating it and wanting to live like 'regular people.' (If these were actual royal figures, such a wish would never commence.) The story also expands roughly a half hour beyond the glass slipper finding its rightful owner, and for me this dragged the film out considerably. Nevertheless, it's still the quintessential fairy story.
Yet I am amazed that so many posters hail it as some sort of Kirousawa-like masterpiece. Is this because it's a British film? We always seem to rate European films just a little higher than American ones, calling them high art and so forth. And as critical as so many are especially about musical films recently- RENT, CHICAGO, THE PRODUCERS, and perhaps most acerbically and nastily, DREAMGIRLS- they all seem to turn a deaf ear on this one. I did like the costumes and set pieces, but was not thrilled with most of the Sherman Brothers' score- save two rather exquisite songs. It paces a bit sluggishly and, at 143 minutes, is about 43 minutes too long.
There are two saving graces: One is in the name of Annette Crosbie. Her fairy godmother is a dream and a scream at the same time. Possessing incredibly dry wit and very sly on the subject of magic, it appears that she works with other famous fairy tale heroines (some of whom are referenced throughout the film). Her introduction to Cinderella as a simple, practical woman who shuns the "sparkle and glitter," and seems to want to unionize fairies worldwide, is hilarious. And the rags-to-riches sequence built around the song "Suddenly It Happens" is magical indeed. (How could it not be, with mice that turn into ballet dancers even before they turn into horses?) The other saving grace is the ball: easily some of the most exquisite costumes ever assembled for a period film, all in an amazing rainbow of sherbet-like pastels. The ball sequence is climaxed by a glorious grand waltz, which begins with two dancers on an empty floor, then adds other couples- two and four at a time- joining into the swirling and spinning choreography, until all are waltzing in the same direction and having a marvelous time. A truly breathtaking sequence. I almost wished the film had ended right there.
Yet I am amazed that so many posters hail it as some sort of Kirousawa-like masterpiece. Is this because it's a British film? We always seem to rate European films just a little higher than American ones, calling them high art and so forth. And as critical as so many are especially about musical films recently- RENT, CHICAGO, THE PRODUCERS, and perhaps most acerbically and nastily, DREAMGIRLS- they all seem to turn a deaf ear on this one. I did like the costumes and set pieces, but was not thrilled with most of the Sherman Brothers' score- save two rather exquisite songs. It paces a bit sluggishly and, at 143 minutes, is about 43 minutes too long.
There are two saving graces: One is in the name of Annette Crosbie. Her fairy godmother is a dream and a scream at the same time. Possessing incredibly dry wit and very sly on the subject of magic, it appears that she works with other famous fairy tale heroines (some of whom are referenced throughout the film). Her introduction to Cinderella as a simple, practical woman who shuns the "sparkle and glitter," and seems to want to unionize fairies worldwide, is hilarious. And the rags-to-riches sequence built around the song "Suddenly It Happens" is magical indeed. (How could it not be, with mice that turn into ballet dancers even before they turn into horses?) The other saving grace is the ball: easily some of the most exquisite costumes ever assembled for a period film, all in an amazing rainbow of sherbet-like pastels. The ball sequence is climaxed by a glorious grand waltz, which begins with two dancers on an empty floor, then adds other couples- two and four at a time- joining into the swirling and spinning choreography, until all are waltzing in the same direction and having a marvelous time. A truly breathtaking sequence. I almost wished the film had ended right there.
Lovely film, although a few parts drag
Celeste_197724 March 2021
I've been searching for some film remakes of the Cinderella story, and this one is the prettiest one that I've seen so far. The costumes are excellent, the music is new-ish but still okay. I feel that some of the parts dragged a little, but there was such nice scenography here and the plotline was nice too. I have watched it in a hurry, skipping a few parts, but this is my review. It is an overall nice film and I would recommend if you'd like to see a "movie" version based on this old story
''You'll Forget Every Other Love Story You Ever Saw....''
phillindholm8 August 2005
"The Slipper And The Rose" is a beautiful version of the classic Cinderella story. Made in England and released in 1976, it retells the familiar story with warmth, humor and wonderful songs by the Sherman brothers, who also did the music for countless Disney films, notably "Mary Poppins". Prince Edward (Richard Chamberlain), heir to the throne of Euphrania, is expected by his father the king (Michael Hordern in another wonderful performance) and his mother the queen (Lally Bowers) to choose a wife and settle down. To this end, they plan a court ball to which all the princesses they can locate will be invited. Meanwhile, young Cinderella (Gemma Craven) has just lost her beloved father. But things go from bad to worse for her, when her selfish stepmother (the great Margaret Lockwood, in her first film in over 20 years, and her last) and spoiled stepsisters (Rosalind Ayres and Sherrie Hewson) reduce her to the status of a servant in her own home. Thankfully, however, her fairy godmother (Annette Crosbie) is waiting in the wings to see that she goes to the ball and meet the prince. The rest is up to them... With an excellent cast and fine support from Kenneth More, as the Lord Chamberlain, Christopher Gable as the prince's friend John, and especially Dame Edith Evans as the dowager Queen, "The Slipper and the Rose" is magical film-making.A few twists in the story keep it fresh, while all the charm of the original is preserved. The lavish production, handsome location photography beautiful costumes and a witty, sophisticated script has appeal for all ages.And enough cannot be said for the Sherman's music, which is, in turn, delightful, hilarious and, when the occasion calls for it, heartbreaking. Craven's ballad ''Tell Him Anything-But Not That I Love Him''is a perfect example of the latter. This film just gets better as the years pass,and it's truly one of the best film versions of "Cinderella" ever made.
Beautiful Score, But A Tad Long
deenariley-4987019 October 2021
As beautiful as the score is for The Slipper and the Rose is and no matter how well produced and photographed it might be, it still wears out its welcome occasionally. There's a lot of wit and some smart characterizations, especially for the Prince and royal family which is a nice change of pace, but Cinderella herself gets the short straw and comes across as a bit underdeveloped. It's not Gemma Craven's fault. She plays the role beautifully and has a lovely singing voice, but she doesn't have as much to do as I'd have liked. The extended ending, detailing what happens after the traditional fairy tale ends, is a nice change of pace.
A wonderful movie finally coming to video in America!!
PrincessIncognita27 June 1999
This story of Cinderella is the best version I have ever ever seen. Richard Chamberlain is wonderful and Gemma Craven is positively charming.
Filmed partly on location in Austria, the scenery is beautiful and the sets and costumes very authentic. Part of what makes this movie so great is that the music helps tell the story. The music is beautiful and the lyrics, although at times very comical, are very important in building the characters, and expressing their emotions.
Perhaps one of the most interesting points of this movie is the fact that they address the question of Cinderella not being of Royal blood. It actually adds a nice twist to the story, but of course, Cinderella eventually gets her Prince.
This brilliant musical has been my ultimate favorite since I was about 12 years old. And at long last, it is finally coming to VHS and DVD.
Filmed partly on location in Austria, the scenery is beautiful and the sets and costumes very authentic. Part of what makes this movie so great is that the music helps tell the story. The music is beautiful and the lyrics, although at times very comical, are very important in building the characters, and expressing their emotions.
Perhaps one of the most interesting points of this movie is the fact that they address the question of Cinderella not being of Royal blood. It actually adds a nice twist to the story, but of course, Cinderella eventually gets her Prince.
This brilliant musical has been my ultimate favorite since I was about 12 years old. And at long last, it is finally coming to VHS and DVD.
Good, but not great, musical version of Cinderella
llltdesq4 October 2001
This is a good movie with a good score, a cast full of recognizabe faces, nice costumes and beautiful sets. While certainly not a wonderful film, it is more than worth seeing. The principal problem here is that the movie drags a bit in spots. A bit of judicious editing to shorten it about ten minutes would probably improve the pacing remarkably. The leads actually complement one another quite. A cut above your average costumed musical with more than a few good moments. Worth watching.
Despite the Sherman Brothers' involvement, the handling is too heavy for whimsical romance
moonspinner551 August 2017
The Cinderella tale retold, this time with as much emphasis on the prince as on the would-be princess. Setting this magical romance among the snow-covered mountains of Austria--in ancient castles with expansive, echoing rooms--and placing its older actors in white wigs and cumbersome costumes, the familiar fairy tale isn't so much transformed as it is embalmed. The chilly milieu is too realistic for a magical romance; Tony Imi's cinematography is coldly bright (with intrusive interior shadows). Working with director Bryan Forbes on the screenplay, songwriters and Disney mainstays Robert B. and Richard M. Sherman probably didn't expect such an impersonal treatment (the project certainly misses the mark of their previous studio); Forbes keeps the camera at such a distance from the merrily crooning actors that all we see are the half-empty rooms they're standing in. Juxtaposing the prince's romance-starved existence with Cinderella's troubles in dealing with her step-family was obviously meant to give Richard Chamberlain the same amount of screen time and substance as his romantic counterpart, but the wealthy royals are an ungodly bore (especially when they're 'dancing'). The picture simply does not look magical, with colors that are muddy or mildewy, and Forbes' stiffly-directed action exudes no personality. None of the Shermans' songs can give the narrative a lift and, instead of happily awaiting for this tale to unfold, one instead becomes anesthetized by the misjudged conception. *1/2 from ****
A Forever Favorite
clare-1130 July 1999
Picture my little sister and I dancing around our living room, gleefully singing and delighting in the wonderful Cinderella-story called The Slipper and the Rose. Add to the picture the fact that we were living at the time in the depths of Africa, Kinshasa, Zaire to be specific. It makes a funny picture- two little American girls in the middle of Africa madly in love with Prince Edward (Richard Chamberlain) and his right hand man John (Christopher Gable). To this day (we're now in our mid-20s and living in the States) The Slipper and the Rose continues to be one of our biggest in-jokes. We rejoice in the fact that we know every line, complete with the gaudy inflections of the wicked step-sisters and the droll intonation of the King and Queen. I will proudly admit that we show no shame in breaking out in complete renditions of songs such as "Position and positioning." which is the perfect song to accompany laundry-folding. We still howl with laughter at how much we love The Slipper and the Rose.
Although, the movie is a musical, it is by no means a 'fluff' version of the Cinderella Story. Much like Ever After, the more recent Cinderella film starring Drew Barrymore, The Slipper and the Rose approaches the tale with a vigorous bite. It fulfills everything that makes Cinderella the compelling fairytale that it is. The wicked Step Mother and her two vile daughters are truly vicious and conniving. Their sniveling, whining, and shrieking make Cinderella's plight heart-felt. Prince Albert is plagued with a desire to be his own person, not trapped into the confines of his princely status ("Why can't I be TWO people.?"). The endearing King is struggling to avoid a possible war ("For we MUST be Protocoligorically Correct.'Else the kingdom will be wrecked!") And Cinderella's glittering gown, slippers and carriage are as beautiful as can be imagined. Decked out in shimmering pink, Cinderella's entrance to the "Bride Finding Ball" as Princess Incognita is truly memorable.
Those of you who love the Slipper and the Rose as much as I do might want to check out the TV series (now on Video) called Faerie Tale Theatre. This series depicts fairytales such as The Princess and the Pea, The Emperors New Clothes, and yes, Cinderella. Well known actors such as Liza Minnelli, Matthew Broderick, Jennifer Beals, and Joan Collins portray our favorite fairytale characters without pretension.
Although, the movie is a musical, it is by no means a 'fluff' version of the Cinderella Story. Much like Ever After, the more recent Cinderella film starring Drew Barrymore, The Slipper and the Rose approaches the tale with a vigorous bite. It fulfills everything that makes Cinderella the compelling fairytale that it is. The wicked Step Mother and her two vile daughters are truly vicious and conniving. Their sniveling, whining, and shrieking make Cinderella's plight heart-felt. Prince Albert is plagued with a desire to be his own person, not trapped into the confines of his princely status ("Why can't I be TWO people.?"). The endearing King is struggling to avoid a possible war ("For we MUST be Protocoligorically Correct.'Else the kingdom will be wrecked!") And Cinderella's glittering gown, slippers and carriage are as beautiful as can be imagined. Decked out in shimmering pink, Cinderella's entrance to the "Bride Finding Ball" as Princess Incognita is truly memorable.
Those of you who love the Slipper and the Rose as much as I do might want to check out the TV series (now on Video) called Faerie Tale Theatre. This series depicts fairytales such as The Princess and the Pea, The Emperors New Clothes, and yes, Cinderella. Well known actors such as Liza Minnelli, Matthew Broderick, Jennifer Beals, and Joan Collins portray our favorite fairytale characters without pretension.
My brief review of the film
sol-28 September 2005
A well directed and lively choreographed music with dance version of the Cinderella story, it is generally enjoyable to watch, with great songs and music, however it is ultimately overlong and too verbose, and this may particularly be a problem for the younger viewers. Forbes' opening shots establish the atmosphere well, and there is interesting mirror work throughout. It has excellent period costumes, a great set design. and Horden is a delight in a BAFTA nominated role. It is surprisingly witty at times and rather funny, but otherwise a touch stale between the dance and music numbers, especially towards the end. The film tries to say something about how it is right to marry for love, but it does not succeed, however this is mainly due to the original material, which has an underdeveloped romance. But what can one say overall here? This is a strong vision of the classic story and good viewing in general. It could arguably be improved upon, but it is still fine as it is.
Cinderella's Bad Trip
EdgarST1 January 2018
This is a good lesson for filmmakers: if you are going to shoot a movie with songs, do not let your songwriters also write the script, because they would add a song into the story every five or ten pages. The worst part can be if their muse is on vacation or retired. This was the case of this lame version of Cinderella by Bryan Forbes. It is terrible and overlong! I give it a few points for the beautiful Austrian locations and because Forbes, in the last big opportunity that industrial cinema offered him after becoming an "international director", knew the trade and skillfully put the stories on screen, although it is merely academic, without any flight of inspiration. Richard Chamberlain and Gemma Craven look somewhat old for the roles of prince and orphan, poor Edith Evans is used as a clownish little old lady, the art direction seems to be the work of Margaret "Big Eyes" Keane, the choreography by Marc Breaux is mostly routine (and sometimes even ugly, as the dance in the royal mausoleum) and the songs by brothers Robert and Richard Sherman... oh, boy! Far are the days of "Chim Chim Cher-ee", "A Spoonful of Sugar", "Feed the Birds" or "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" (which were not wondrous either, but they accompanied very well the adventures of "Mary Poppins") and what we have instead are monotonous concoctions with lyrics about protocol, dead kings or royal weddings. Of the whole thing, I think the best are Annette Crosbie as the Fairy Godmother and Margaret Lockwood as the Stepmother, although you have to be a very bad actor to ruin these two stereotypes. So proceed at your own risk.
Love this version
oftenwrong11 April 2002
The first time I saw this movie, I couldn't believe it had Richard Chamberlain singing! I really was impressed by the production though some of the singing and dancing sequences seemed a bit long, it was, overall, a well made version of the classic Cinderella story. I thought it told the fairy tale 'to perfection'. I had just recently bought the video and was pleasantly surprised by all the extra footage it included. My daughters all enjoy it and like watching it over and over. The sets and costumes and the lovely landscapes were exceptionally beautiful. I thought Gemma Craven was the perfect Cinderella including a beautiful singing voice. But the one I thought stole the movie was the fairy godmother, played by Annette Crosbie. Her grumpy affection towards Cinderella made her a more interesting character. A must-see for anyone who wants to escape for a couple of hours with an entertaining tale.
Not the British Cinema's Forte
JamesHitchcock27 August 2020
Musicals are not normally the British cinema's forte. There have been great musicals set in Britain, such as "My Fair Lady" or "Mary Poppins", but both of those were made in America by American studios. Even the success of the Oscar-winning "Oliver!" from 1968 was something of a one-off and did not lead to a boom in British musicals.
"The Slipper and the Rose" is therefore something of a rarity. Unlike "Oliver!" it was not based upon a stage musical but upon a well-known fairy-tale, the story of Cinderella, so well-known that I don't need to set out the plot. The action is set in the fictional Kingdom of Euphrania some time during the 18th century, a period beloved of the makers of fairy-tale movies because of the ridiculous extravagance of the costumes, both male and female.
Although this was a British film, we clearly felt that we needed some help from across the Atlantic, because we imported an American leading man in the shape of Richard Chamberlain, although he plays his role with a British accent. (As Euphrania is supposedly somewhere in Continental Europe its people presumably do not speak English with any sort of accent, but somehow a British one seems more appropriate than an American one in a fairy-tale). We also hired two Americans, the Sherman Brothers, to write the songs. (They had also written the songs for "Mary Poppins").
Unfortunately, in neither case can it be said that this was one of Britain's most successful imports. Chamberlain as the hero Prince Edward (possibly named after the Queen's youngest son) is bland and unmemorable. The same can be said of the Shermans' songs. They had had a huge success with "Mary Poppins" but were unable to repeat it here. They try hard, coming up with a mixture of comic numbers such as "Protocolligorically Correct" (betraying the same fondness for made-up words they had revealed with "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious") and romantic ballads like "Secret Kingdom", but somehow none of these achieve the same standard as the likes of "Feed the Birds" or "Chim-chim-cheree". Vincent Canby of the New York Times accused them of "parodying the worst of the Broadway musical theatre of the '50s".
The previously unknown Gemma Craven was chosen to play the heroine and was tipped as the Next Big Thing of British cinema, a prediction which stubbornly failed to materialise, although she has had more success on television and on the stage. Here she comes across as sweetly innocent, but does not really justify her Next Big Thing status. There are, however, some good performances from the supporting cast, especially from Michael Hordern as Edward's father, the well-meaning but ineffectual King of Euphrania and Annette Crosbie as the heroine's Fairy Godmother. Other positive features are the attractively designed sets and costumes.
The film had a mixed critical reception when first released in 1976, but today it has largely faded from memory, unlike, say, "Oliver!" which is regularly revived on television. If you want a film version of the tale of Cinderella, I would recommend either the Disney cartoon or its recent live-action remake. 6/10
"The Slipper and the Rose" is therefore something of a rarity. Unlike "Oliver!" it was not based upon a stage musical but upon a well-known fairy-tale, the story of Cinderella, so well-known that I don't need to set out the plot. The action is set in the fictional Kingdom of Euphrania some time during the 18th century, a period beloved of the makers of fairy-tale movies because of the ridiculous extravagance of the costumes, both male and female.
Although this was a British film, we clearly felt that we needed some help from across the Atlantic, because we imported an American leading man in the shape of Richard Chamberlain, although he plays his role with a British accent. (As Euphrania is supposedly somewhere in Continental Europe its people presumably do not speak English with any sort of accent, but somehow a British one seems more appropriate than an American one in a fairy-tale). We also hired two Americans, the Sherman Brothers, to write the songs. (They had also written the songs for "Mary Poppins").
Unfortunately, in neither case can it be said that this was one of Britain's most successful imports. Chamberlain as the hero Prince Edward (possibly named after the Queen's youngest son) is bland and unmemorable. The same can be said of the Shermans' songs. They had had a huge success with "Mary Poppins" but were unable to repeat it here. They try hard, coming up with a mixture of comic numbers such as "Protocolligorically Correct" (betraying the same fondness for made-up words they had revealed with "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious") and romantic ballads like "Secret Kingdom", but somehow none of these achieve the same standard as the likes of "Feed the Birds" or "Chim-chim-cheree". Vincent Canby of the New York Times accused them of "parodying the worst of the Broadway musical theatre of the '50s".
The previously unknown Gemma Craven was chosen to play the heroine and was tipped as the Next Big Thing of British cinema, a prediction which stubbornly failed to materialise, although she has had more success on television and on the stage. Here she comes across as sweetly innocent, but does not really justify her Next Big Thing status. There are, however, some good performances from the supporting cast, especially from Michael Hordern as Edward's father, the well-meaning but ineffectual King of Euphrania and Annette Crosbie as the heroine's Fairy Godmother. Other positive features are the attractively designed sets and costumes.
The film had a mixed critical reception when first released in 1976, but today it has largely faded from memory, unlike, say, "Oliver!" which is regularly revived on television. If you want a film version of the tale of Cinderella, I would recommend either the Disney cartoon or its recent live-action remake. 6/10
True love never runs smooth
helpless_dancer29 September 2001
As Lawrence Welk would have said "wunnerful, wunnerful". Here is a different take on an old tale, and a well done one. Most of the film concentrated on the problems of the Prince and his family instead of the other way around. The fairy godmother was played very unusually in that she was so imperfect....and she had a dog. Great costumes and props, and lush color throughout made for a spectacular event. Love is simply grand!
The best version of Cinderella there is!
Jenial24 January 2003
The Slipper and The Rose is a beautiful version of the Cinderella story with picturesque scenery, excellent design and costume and lots of 70's soft-focus romantic-type shooting.
This isn't a run-of-the-mill Cinderella story. You actually get some depth of character motivation. The characters are generally extremely believable - the "wicked" stepmother not being hideous enough for one to question why anyone would marry her and the "ugly" sisters, both slim and quite pretty, but instead ugly from the inside.
This film is brilliantly cast with some of the finest British actors/comedy actors of all time (Kenneth More, Annette Crosbie to name two!). Richard Chamberlain acts, dances, sings! Gemma Craven is radiant. She has a beautiful voice and does a great job with a very passive character. Let's face it, in the traditional story of Cinderella (as this is), she doesn't really make any decisions except that she might quite like to go to the ball.
It's just great to see people cast on ability, not solely looks/cleavage/plastic surgery, (although I suppose the features all fit a certain time-period of what was considered beautiful.)
The script is very witty and intelligent and I love the songs.. Fantastic music. Lyrics aren't dumbed down at all! Words of more than one syllable. What other musical has a song with the title "Protocoligorically Correct" in it? None, I should imagine!
Incidentally, I believe Sherman & Sherman who did the songs/music also did Mary Poppins (i.e. supercalifragilisticexpialadocious). Perhaps they just like long words.
This is believable escapism, and apart from the odd haircut here and there and occasional choreography, doesn't really date.
I love it. It's magical. A great family film.
This isn't a run-of-the-mill Cinderella story. You actually get some depth of character motivation. The characters are generally extremely believable - the "wicked" stepmother not being hideous enough for one to question why anyone would marry her and the "ugly" sisters, both slim and quite pretty, but instead ugly from the inside.
This film is brilliantly cast with some of the finest British actors/comedy actors of all time (Kenneth More, Annette Crosbie to name two!). Richard Chamberlain acts, dances, sings! Gemma Craven is radiant. She has a beautiful voice and does a great job with a very passive character. Let's face it, in the traditional story of Cinderella (as this is), she doesn't really make any decisions except that she might quite like to go to the ball.
It's just great to see people cast on ability, not solely looks/cleavage/plastic surgery, (although I suppose the features all fit a certain time-period of what was considered beautiful.)
The script is very witty and intelligent and I love the songs.. Fantastic music. Lyrics aren't dumbed down at all! Words of more than one syllable. What other musical has a song with the title "Protocoligorically Correct" in it? None, I should imagine!
Incidentally, I believe Sherman & Sherman who did the songs/music also did Mary Poppins (i.e. supercalifragilisticexpialadocious). Perhaps they just like long words.
This is believable escapism, and apart from the odd haircut here and there and occasional choreography, doesn't really date.
I love it. It's magical. A great family film.
The Slipper and the Rose
CinemaSerf25 December 2022
Bryan Forbes has managed to assemble the combined talents of the "Mary Poppins" writing Sherman brothers and a fine cast of British stage giants for this gentle retelling of the "Cinderella" tale. Now, I will admit - I am not a fan of Richard Chamberlain. I may never forgive him for totally destroying my images of Alan Quatermain and Edmond Dantes in years to come, but for the most part here - he is OK. He is the poor old prince "Edward" constantly harangued by his father (Sir Michael Hordern) and his chancellor (Kenneth More) to marry. Even his scene-stealing grandmother (Dame Edith Evans) is in on that scheme too. A glittering ball is the answer, and all the eligible ladies from far and wide will be invited. Meantime, poor old "Cinders" (Gemma Craven) has fallen foul of her wicked stepmother (Margaret Lockwood) and so an invitation for her is somewhat unlikely. Luckily, though, Annette Crosbie swings by and with a wave of her wand, our young heroine is conveyed to the palace in a pumpkin with some mice and toads in attendance. Home by midnight, remember... The Sherman's do bring a bit of unsentimental pith to their songs here - "What Has Love To Do With Getting Married" first amongst them, but there is still the charming ballad "Suddenly It happens" to balance the fairy tale elements of this quite entertaining adaptation of the fable. The costumes are sumptuous, the scenery splendid (Salzburg) and in the end this is not bad at all. Yes, it is far too long - and sags a bit in the third quarter, but Forbes does manage to elicit engaging performances from his cast who demonstrate a versatility of skills that illustrate the depth of talent needed to survive as an actor back then. It's good fun, this and most importantly - it does not subject us to loads of squeaking beasties!
This is great film in both DVD and VHS versions having been restored to full length.
deploec21 June 2001
I have recently purchased the DVD and VHS versions of this film. I love the music, the dancing, the story line and the humor. The dancing is the best I have seen in a long time. Gemma Craven and Richard Chamberlain are excellent in the rolls of Cinderella and the Prince. I love the sound of Gemma's voice both while talking and singing. She brings a freshness to the roll in that she is the personification of the girl/woman that I have always imagined Cinderella to be. She is petite and very lovely in her roll. The all star cast really helps when you see the fully restored version. The costumes are excellent. The DVD is nice in that it also has a trailer on the "Making of the Slipper and the Rose". There is also a voice over capability by Brian Forbes that can be activated during Film. He provides comment on various aspects of the film that are a real plus. There is also an interview with the Sherman brothers, who with Brian Forbes were responsible for the initial script and of course they wrote the music and provided the lyrics for the film script. My only regrets are that I had ignored this Gem for so long and that there were no other films in which Gemma Craven was allowed to sing in.
Mr Forbes' chums shine like a good deed on a dull day.
ianlouisiana24 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Step forward and take a bow Mr K.More,Mr M.Hordern,Miss L.Bowers,Miss A.Crosbie, Dame Edith and Miss M.Lockwood,for your combined efforts in turning a saccharine Sherman Brothers musical from a pumpkin to something a little more substantial."The slipper and the rose" suffers from the rather basic defect of having no memorable songs whatsoever. Some of the lyrics are "clever" in a Cole Porter - ish sort of way,but the melodies are distinctly of the "ho - hum" variety.The dancing - from "Mary Poppins" out of "Oliver" - is no more than adequate ,with the honourable exception of those members of The Royal Ballet who appear as various rodents and reptiles in a sequence redolent of their "Tales of Beatrix Potter" production. Mr R.Chamberlain strides about in long boots like "Dandini" in the pantomime,his performance verging at times on the arch.I waited - sadly in vain - for him to for him to stand,arms akimbo,and toss back his head before laughing manfully and asking members of the audience onstage to take part in a sing - song. Miss G.Craven is a little too mousy as Cinderella and she is not sufficiently eye - catching as Princess Incognito to have caused such a furore at the Palace Ball. Unfortunately Mr C.Gable makes absolutely no impact as the Prince's companion and it is only the remarkable cast of British thesps that Mr Forbes gathered round him rather like a security blanket that save the "The slipper and the rose" from children's TV movie status. I must single out Miss A.Crosbie,an actress not particularly well - represented on film.She is beautiful,smart and has a wonderful speaking voice.She does not normally do cockney,scouse or geordie - the staple of Brit TV casts - and I doubt if she'll ever be in a Mike Leigh movie,but she shines here as the Fairy Godmother.Unfortunately her performance totally eclipses that of Miss Craven in all of their scenes. She is quite captivating and - along with Mr K.More - the main reason for watching this movie. There is a rather moving scene near the end where Mr More, as the Chamberlain,has to tell Cinderella that she cannot marry the prince because she is a commoner.It takes just a couple of minutes screen time but Mr More - quietly spoken and with a minimum of facial gestures - turns this brief moment into something true,speaking with genuine compassion and knowledge of human frailty,the burden of power resting uneasily on his shoulders.I would be very surprised if Mr Forbes didn't have a bit of a blub at that. "The slipper and the rose" is really two movies;the Cinderella story told competently,without great directorial sweeps,with adequate performances and dull songs and the serio - comic tale of an embattled kingdom surrounded by predator - nations waiting for one false move to justify war.This is told with wit and affection and performed by actors who play off each other with the ease and apparent spontaneity born only of years of experience and directed so well that they hardly seem to have been directed at all.They shine like a good deed on a dull day.
For the Chamber(lain) pot!
drchazan17 February 2006
This is the absolute worst Cinderella version ever made. The songs are sappy and unmemorable, the choreography tasteless - for instance there's a scene where Chamberlain dances on the coffins of his ancestors! What WERE they thinking?
There's nothing unique or special about this in any way. Moreover Chamberlain can't sing or dance, so why did they cast him in the part? One would think that because of his looks, he'd make a good Prince Charming - and yes, he is charming, but that's where this ends. There are so many versions of this story out there that this one becomes totally forgettable, and I wouldn't even have written this review if I hadn't been suckered into seeing it in a theater back when it came out in 1979. There's a couple of hours of my life I'll never get back!
Sorry, but if you want a good version, watch any of them, but not this one. Disney's old one is still the best, if you ask me. There's also a Hallmark production from a totally different angle, called "Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister" which is marvelous with Stockard Channing.
There's nothing unique or special about this in any way. Moreover Chamberlain can't sing or dance, so why did they cast him in the part? One would think that because of his looks, he'd make a good Prince Charming - and yes, he is charming, but that's where this ends. There are so many versions of this story out there that this one becomes totally forgettable, and I wouldn't even have written this review if I hadn't been suckered into seeing it in a theater back when it came out in 1979. There's a couple of hours of my life I'll never get back!
Sorry, but if you want a good version, watch any of them, but not this one. Disney's old one is still the best, if you ask me. There's also a Hallmark production from a totally different angle, called "Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister" which is marvelous with Stockard Channing.
A wonderful fairytale romance
staceym2 October 2004
I am a long-term fan of this movie. I love musicals anyway, but was totally blown away by 'The Slipper and the Rose'.
The score by the Sherman brothers is wonderful, particularly the Oscar-nominated 'He/She Danced with Me' and all of the cast cope well with the singing, despite most not being singers primarily. Gemma Craven's debut is an excellent one, as she manages to play the very well known character of Cinderella uniquely and with skill.
The movie is well directed by Bryan Forbes and excellently choreographed (Position and Positioning being a prime example), and this rounds out an overall wonderful cinematic experience.
Margaret Lockwood is a joy to watch as the venomous stepmother, but all of the British greats present (Edith Evans, Kenneth More, Michael Hordern, Annette Crosbie et al) add class and gravitas to the proceedings.
Well worth the effort!
The score by the Sherman brothers is wonderful, particularly the Oscar-nominated 'He/She Danced with Me' and all of the cast cope well with the singing, despite most not being singers primarily. Gemma Craven's debut is an excellent one, as she manages to play the very well known character of Cinderella uniquely and with skill.
The movie is well directed by Bryan Forbes and excellently choreographed (Position and Positioning being a prime example), and this rounds out an overall wonderful cinematic experience.
Margaret Lockwood is a joy to watch as the venomous stepmother, but all of the British greats present (Edith Evans, Kenneth More, Michael Hordern, Annette Crosbie et al) add class and gravitas to the proceedings.
Well worth the effort!
A lovely addition to any Library
mbnotchures17 May 2006
I received this movie as a gift from a good friend. I was wonderfully surprised. If you love the Fary Tales, you will love this. It is unique enough to keep you interested and the music is written well enough you don't feel the need to skip to the next scene. Although it is an older version, I didn't feel that that detracted from the charm, it's still works today. It will be a movie you will watch again. The filming is decent, with beautiful scenery, and the actors do a good job. Richard and Gemma have a good chemistry that works well together. Richard gives Prince Charming more personality than your Disney version - Thankfully. Gemma's Cinderella has a deeper role that shows why she was everything the fairy tales hinted at.
Really a lovely addition to your Library.
Enjoy
Really a lovely addition to your Library.
Enjoy
Love a good 'Cinderella' re-telling - Do NOT Love This Movie.
aromano-327 March 2005
First off, I love just about any re-telling of the classic Fairy Tale of "Cinderella". From the beautiful Disney Film, all the way to Shelley Duvall's 'Faerie Tale Theatre' version with Jennifer Beals and Matthew Broderick. So back in 2000 I bought this DVD sight unseen. I figured, 'C'mon, it's Cinderella!'. Also, I had heard about this UK produced film for a long time, and knew it had established a cult following. Right up my alley people. WOW was I disappointed. Dis-a-pointed!! Twenty minutes in, and I was bored out of my mind. Not one single song had a strong melody, and the lyrics were forgettable. Nothing was engaging me. I kept telling myself 'It will get better - It will get better'. It just didn't. I have never seen a musical where the camera stayed so very still. There was none of that 'flow' that most great musicals have (See: "My Fair Lady", "Funny Girl", "Oklahoma", "Grease", "The Sound of Music", "Oliver", "Chicago", "West Side Story", etc.) You know, that uplifting spell that only a special musical can cast. Remember what it was like the first time you saw "My Fair Lady"? THAT's the feeling.
I do love The Sherman Brothers' people. I do. So Imagine my shock at how bad the music was. These are the guys who did "Mary Poppins", "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang", and even "The Parent Trap"! So I just could not get over how dead and uninspired every single song was. The minute the song was over, I could not remember a note. Most good musicals leave you with at least ONE song you are humming by the end. Even so, I carried on, and forced myself to watch the entire movie, and found it utterly painful to get through. When I was done, I went on line to see what others thought, and I was shocked to read all the raves, and I wondered "Did I watch the same movie?" Upon further investigation I found out that the film was universally panned by critics and audiences alike, both in the states and the UK. Phew. Which then made me question all these other people on the internet who were calling this "The BEST MOVIE EVER!" What? The best movie ever? Huh? God no! I tried to then look at it as a 'guilty pleasure', but I found no pleasure in watching this movie. I've been known to like a guilty pleasure or two myself...I mean I own "Grease 2" on DVD. But at least I was humming 'Cool Rider' on the way out of the theater people!
Time passed, and I re-discovered the Lesley Anne Warren version from 1965. That brought back wonderful childhood memories for me. While the show does not hold up well by today's standards, it was warm and fun, and every song is a winner. Rodgers and Hammerstein wrote such a lovely score that stands the test of time. Then came the 1997 version on ABC. To my complete shock and joy, I loved it. I mean, LOVED IT. The movie has wit, color, style and heart. I was completely moved and entertained from beginning to end. I laughed out loud at Whoopi Goldberg's hilarious Queen, and appropriately loathed Bernadette Peter's inspired evil Step Mother. Actually, I was surprised Bernadette was over-looked at Emmy time. Brandy brought a sweetness and a modern twist to the role, and Pablo Montalban was literally perfect as the Prince. Every aspect of the production was top notch, and stunning. This production was the first real endeavor from the wonderful artists that would eventually bring us "Chicago". So THAT'S why the choreography and camera work was so amazing! Bravo to the entire company for finally producing THE DEFINITIVE MUSICAL VERSION OF "CINDERELLA".
So anyway, a few years passed, and it was time to give "The Slipper and The Rose" another go. I got all comfortable and cozy on a lazy Sunday and put in the DVD. WOW, it was even worse then I remembered. The choreography and staging was stunted and amateurish. I felt embarrassed for the filmmakers at ever attempt of wit and cleverness that flopped miserably. This film was directed by Bryan Forbes, who just came off of "The Stepford Wives" at the time, which had the same slowness to it, but that worked for that film. It's as if he is a one-note director who attempts different genres, but uses the same techniques. He clearly had no passion for this project. If he did, he was then definitely 'miscast' as the director, and not the man to be behind the camera for such an obviously large production. I will say this though, the gowns / costumes were beautiful to look at.
The sets were empty and over-sized. The cinematography was motionless and the color palette was dull. The acting by all was two dimensional and wooden. The singing was, oh god, the singing was horrible. Every single joke just fell flat. Again, I felt so bad for the filmmakers! If I can sum this review up in one sentence, I would have to say: Dull, uninspired, forgettable and a waste of two hours and twenty three minutes - Twice!!!
Do yourself a favor, watch the DVD of the 1997 Rodgers and Hammerstein version. It has magic in it, and is destined to become a classic.
I do love The Sherman Brothers' people. I do. So Imagine my shock at how bad the music was. These are the guys who did "Mary Poppins", "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang", and even "The Parent Trap"! So I just could not get over how dead and uninspired every single song was. The minute the song was over, I could not remember a note. Most good musicals leave you with at least ONE song you are humming by the end. Even so, I carried on, and forced myself to watch the entire movie, and found it utterly painful to get through. When I was done, I went on line to see what others thought, and I was shocked to read all the raves, and I wondered "Did I watch the same movie?" Upon further investigation I found out that the film was universally panned by critics and audiences alike, both in the states and the UK. Phew. Which then made me question all these other people on the internet who were calling this "The BEST MOVIE EVER!" What? The best movie ever? Huh? God no! I tried to then look at it as a 'guilty pleasure', but I found no pleasure in watching this movie. I've been known to like a guilty pleasure or two myself...I mean I own "Grease 2" on DVD. But at least I was humming 'Cool Rider' on the way out of the theater people!
Time passed, and I re-discovered the Lesley Anne Warren version from 1965. That brought back wonderful childhood memories for me. While the show does not hold up well by today's standards, it was warm and fun, and every song is a winner. Rodgers and Hammerstein wrote such a lovely score that stands the test of time. Then came the 1997 version on ABC. To my complete shock and joy, I loved it. I mean, LOVED IT. The movie has wit, color, style and heart. I was completely moved and entertained from beginning to end. I laughed out loud at Whoopi Goldberg's hilarious Queen, and appropriately loathed Bernadette Peter's inspired evil Step Mother. Actually, I was surprised Bernadette was over-looked at Emmy time. Brandy brought a sweetness and a modern twist to the role, and Pablo Montalban was literally perfect as the Prince. Every aspect of the production was top notch, and stunning. This production was the first real endeavor from the wonderful artists that would eventually bring us "Chicago". So THAT'S why the choreography and camera work was so amazing! Bravo to the entire company for finally producing THE DEFINITIVE MUSICAL VERSION OF "CINDERELLA".
So anyway, a few years passed, and it was time to give "The Slipper and The Rose" another go. I got all comfortable and cozy on a lazy Sunday and put in the DVD. WOW, it was even worse then I remembered. The choreography and staging was stunted and amateurish. I felt embarrassed for the filmmakers at ever attempt of wit and cleverness that flopped miserably. This film was directed by Bryan Forbes, who just came off of "The Stepford Wives" at the time, which had the same slowness to it, but that worked for that film. It's as if he is a one-note director who attempts different genres, but uses the same techniques. He clearly had no passion for this project. If he did, he was then definitely 'miscast' as the director, and not the man to be behind the camera for such an obviously large production. I will say this though, the gowns / costumes were beautiful to look at.
The sets were empty and over-sized. The cinematography was motionless and the color palette was dull. The acting by all was two dimensional and wooden. The singing was, oh god, the singing was horrible. Every single joke just fell flat. Again, I felt so bad for the filmmakers! If I can sum this review up in one sentence, I would have to say: Dull, uninspired, forgettable and a waste of two hours and twenty three minutes - Twice!!!
Do yourself a favor, watch the DVD of the 1997 Rodgers and Hammerstein version. It has magic in it, and is destined to become a classic.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
