South Pacific (2001 TV Movie) User Reviews

Perfectly acceptable remake of the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical classic, and a noted improvement over the original.

[gbrumburgh · 7/10 · 27 March 2001]

A long-anticipated remake, albeit made-for-TV, of the beloved Rodgers and Hammerstein Pulitzer Prize-winning musical finally gets things right. It's not perfect by any stretch, but its a vast improvement over the stagy, lumbering 1958 epic.

To its endless credit, this more cohesive version takes generous liberties with the book, punching up the dialogue and throwing in some welcomed new scenes. The result adds dimension and color to many of the leads, especially Nellie and Lt. Cable, allowing them more interaction and making their plights much more interesting. More than a few tugs and tweaks throughout have given some of the sluggish melodramatic sequences a renewed vitality and intensity, while the usually watered-down racial theme is handled with skill, taste and directness.

The actors fill their roles quite admirably. Some may think Glenn Close a bit long-in-the-tooth to be playing the perky Nellie Forbush, but not to worry. She fleshes out her character beautifully, giving the nurse a level of maturity not seen before, without losing any of the vibrancy. Rade Sherbedgia offers a fine, virile account of plantation Emile de Becque, while Harry Connick, Jr. as Lt. Cable benefits the most from the added scenes, pumping a bit more into a normally cardboard role. Lori Tan Chinn puts a delightful spin on her Bloody Mary, making her much more accessible, almost huggable, and Robert Pastorelli perks up the proceedings considerably as Billis.

The on-location filming (Australia, Tahiti) is visually resplendent. The interiors are quite impressive as well. More importantly, each and every song has a freshness and aliveness sorely lacking in the original. The choreography may be simple but its fun, especially Nellie's numbers.

The largest weakness, and its a big one, is the quality and strength of the singing voices. "Some Enchanted Evening," "Younger Than Springtime" and "Bali Ha'i", in particular, are begging for full, rich, soaring interpretations but they are not to be found here...and its a crushing disappointment. Everything else is so fresh and improved that I would have chanced having some of the lead voices dubbed, even Connick's. I was also a bit surprised to find the infectious "Happy Talk" number cut, since it is one of the musical's most popular songs.

All in all, however, this TV musical should please those of us who absolutely cannot tolerate the Mitzi Gaynor/Rossano Brazzi/John Kerr version. And, since they don't make 'em like they used to, I guess this will have to do for quite a long time.

Watchable

[lonniehare · 7/10 · 9 August 2018]

Although I do prefer the original version, i did enjoy this one. Perhaps we should refrain from comparisons and try to find its own qualities.

Younger than springtime.....are you.......

[simplebutright · 7/10 · 11 June 2005]

Personally, I liked it.

Maybe I'm one of the few that liked it, but that's okay. I though that Glen Close did a wonderful job, even if she is considered to be 'miscast'. Remakes never have to be exactly the same as the original, I think that the changes in age of that couple was very good and balanced out the young and old couples. I thought that Bloody Mary was wonderful! She was hilarious! I believe that her voice was excellently fit to the character, a person like that would not have a perfectly trained singing voice in most cases. So, I'm glad that her voice sounded a bit wretched. Harry Connick, Jr. was superb. I was already a fan of his singing, but his voice in 'Younger than Springtime' has kept that song running through my head for a week now. Overall, it wasn't a perfect movie, but it was good and well worth to see again.

An Unfortunate Miss.

[peacham · 1 November 2001]

While I had high hopes for this remake of South Pacific,I regret to say it fell far below My expectations.With a strong cast (including the much too old Glenn Close) I at least expected this film to be an improvement over the original Rosano Brazzi version.

The first problem was the cutting down of the supporting characters. Poor Jack Thompson,who was brilliantly cast as Capt. Brackett had all of his best moments left on the cutting room floor,Bloody Mary was unfairly deprived of "Happy Talk" and Robert Pastorelli's Billis did not get his wonderful scene in Brackett's office following the "diversionary tactics".

Secondly,the rearanging of the score blunted the emotional impact of some of Hammerstein's most heart wrenching moments. Having Cable sing "Carefully Taught" alone in his his Hospital room instead of to Emile blunts the songs impact. The same with Emile's "This Nearly Was Mine". For these songs to work they need another presence in the scene.

As for the acting. Glenn Close does her best but falls short of Mitzi Gaynor's on the money portrayal,Rade Serbedzija gives us a fine,sympathetic Emile and Equals,if not exceeds Brazzi's portrayal.Harry Connick is a great choice for Joe Cable and sings and acts his role well.Unfortunately the score was not recoreded lushly enough and some of the other vocals are a bit weak (Serbedzija's singing for example comes no where neat the immortal recording of Ezio Pinza.)The supporting cast does what it can whith their condensed roles but if would have been nice to have them fleshed out more. This film could have been a masterpiece if all the pieces were assembled properly,instead its a watchable but far from perfect screen adaptaion of a much better musical play.

Casting of Close and Connick---inspired!

[mitchellmark · 7/10 · 26 March 2001]

Nice to see a remake of Rodger's and Hammerstein's SOUTH PACIFIC. The casting of Harry Connick, Jr. is perfect as Lt. Cable, and Glenn Close is very good as Nellie Forbush (although the age difference portrayed in the original movie between Mitzi Gaynor and Rossano Brazzi is not part of the current storyline). Thanks for updating an American musical classic for a new TV audience.

Passion-less remake of the classic Rodgers & Hammerstein story

[snw-3 · 1/10 · 27 March 2001]

A flaccid, sad production, completely lacking in passion and showing little understanding or even appreciation for the powerful music in this classic. Someone even decided to throw out the great under-scoring for the scenes from the original Richard Rodgers music! Some idiot thought that original music would be used under the dialog, instead of the sweeping score that Rodgers so carefully crafted to go along with the dialog and move the emotions from scene to scene.

Glenn Close tries gamely in a role she is completely miscast in. She struggles to play a 20-ish role of an unworldly, naive young woman in love with a much older man. Playing what must be the Navy's oldest ensign, her flighty behavior might work for a young innocent, but in a 40ish (50ish?) woman just seems hopeless.

The director doesn't seem to understand the musical form or even the power and passion of the music. For all his actors, he seems to insist on intense staring to represent passion. Bal'i Hai is stripped of all mystery and exotic power, being merely a make-out island. This also strips the Bloody Mary character of her dignity and magical power.

The high-point of passion in this silly movie was Nellie's taking bows at the finale of the frivolous Thanksgiving follies. That was the only moment of passionate music -- a sad statement that the director of this show cannot find any passion in love or in a world at war, but only in the insular little world of entertainment.

Also, script changes reflected the writers unfamiliarity with military protocol, treating the direct disobeying of orders and the violent assault by an enlisted man against an officer as something unimportant, instead of the court-martial offenses that they are.

Where was the Rodgers & Hammerstein foundation when this was being made? Why aren't they protecting the integrity of this classic?

Very Good!

[TJ Kong · 7/10 · 27 March 2001]

Glenn Close is to be commended for bringing this great Musical to the screen once again! It is certainly better than that 1958 dubbed fiasco. The crew looked like they had a great time doing it, and of course the music is always wonderful. Richard Rodgers was a genius!

I'm bleeding out the ears.

[FrSallyBowles · 2/10 · 15 July 2005]

Heresy.

Unmitigated desecration of that which warrants more respect.

Blessed Mary Martin, pray for us.

Aside from quibbles arising from being local and recognising the locations this abomination has two central problems.

1- Harry Connick Jnr. The man is about as charismatic as celery juice. Cable is not a role for his semi comatose croon. The way that he slaughters 'You Have to be Carefully Taught' is a good case for capital punishment.

and

2- That it is, as billed, very much a film of the Michener stories. R&H's SP picks up from the stories but the presence of the real war is all but totally removed. In the original libretto the only intrusion of the war into the world on stage is the sound of gunners overhead. My understanding is that this is a very conscious device to increase the drama of LaBeque's 'death' and reappearance, and to lend dramatic urgency to the evacuation. I suspect R&H meant that it should parallel American life during the war, there are disruptions but they are {unless you live in Pearl Harbor} in the outside world and largely filtered back as tales of exotic adventure.

Glenn Close is a fine singer and actor but for Nellee she is simply too old. I can't find a case to age the character so dramatically other than adherence to the Michener stories or... Glenn's ego. Her age messes up the dramatic dynamics and various sexual tensions that serve to deliver the 'message'.

Close's voice sounds unusually reedy here. Bad audio production or she's singing above her comfort zone.

Some of Australia's finest musical theatre performers are confined to one line roles. A great pity, Simon Burke would have made a much better Cable. Angela Toohey did a superb turn as Sally Bowles recently.

I don't think South Pacific will ever work on film- it's too finely balanced between beauty and horror for literal visual interpretation.

Shelve this one with Bette Midler's assault on Gypsy- ideally in a lead box, locked and kept safely from children.

Am I the only one who enjoyed this film?

[e-hallett · 10/10 · 20 March 2004]

Well, after looking at the other comments, I am beginning to wonder did we all see the same film?? I thoroughly enjoyed it, I thought it was better than the original, mind you, I am a fan of Glenn Close (so I could be biased there) and Robert Pastorelli (who sadly passed away earlier in March, this year). He died far too young, I was looking to seeing him in future films. I also thought Ilene Graff and Harry Connick played good supportive roles. I bought this film on DVD and am always cheered by it. So what, if people think that Glenn Close was a little older to play this film, Mary Martin was in her late 40's when she did this musical on the stage. What I see is a film, which I think was a happy experience for all those who appeared in it. I was glad to see the home movie of the film being made too, which was greatly enjoyed. We all have different tastes and talents, so I accept all people have different views, but I thought some of the views were a little harsh. I would like to see some of these people have the courage to appear in this type of film, knowing they could be savaged by reviews. It takes a lot of courage to remake a film like this. I know I could not have done it, so I appreciate those who can.

They Almost Got it Right the Second Time

[ScottAmundsen · 7/10 · 29 January 2012]

Rodgers and Hammerstein's musical drama masterpiece was given a rather bloated and unsatisfying film treatment in 1958, a badly shot film with a poor sense of pace; a cast that can best be described as uneven, and some wacky and inexplicable choices such as dubbing Juanita Hall's Bloody Mary when she was perfectly capable of singing her own songs, having created the role on Broadway. The two male leads could not do their own singing either, and Hollywood's practice of dubbing vocals has always irritated me.

So in 2001, director Richard Pierce set out to do a remake. For television, of all things. And all things considered, with just two rather egregious missteps, the proceedings were much better this time around and I found this remake far more satisfying than the 1958 film despite its flaws.

They start with a real winner: Glenn Close as Nellie Forbush. It is clear they were thinking more of Mary Martin here than of Mitzi Gaynor; Nellie is not yet middle-aged, but she is not a young girl, either. And Close's voice is more than equal to the task; she even manages to infuse it with the same "gee whiz" quality that Mary Martin did so well.

Her Emile is Rade Sherbedgia; his baritone is lighter than previous Emiles, so his renditions of songs like "Some Enchanted Evening" and "This Nearly Was Mine" are persuasive rather than bravura. But his voice is lovely, and his chemistry with Close far better than that between Mitzi Gaynor and Rossano Brazzi in the first film.

Also on hand are Lori Tan Chin as Bloody Mary and the late Robert Pastorelli as the comic-relief Luther Billis. I found Chan's speaking voice a bit unnerving at first: she speaks in a sharp, high-pitched whine that I found hard to believe was her natural speaking voice. But her singing is another story.

Here comes the first egregious mistake: Bloody Mary's sweet little number "Happy Talk" was cut because the producers felt it was too "politically incorrect (?!?!?!?)." Yeah I know; don't ask me either. But thank heaven, they did NOT cut her signature tune, "Bali Ha'i;" her singing voice is lovely and she truly makes the song her own.

Billis, of course, is the one character who does not need a great singing voice; in fact it is better if he doesn't have one, and Pastorelli certainly has the necessary comic chops to make his Billis a proud successor to that of Ray Walston.

Now I come to the bit of casting that, if the rest of the picture were not so wonderfully done, would have sunk the proceedings completely: Harry Connick, Jr as Lieutenant Joe Cable. He looks way too old for the part, for starters; Connick was thirty-four when he made this but looks ten years older. And his voice is totally wrong for the part. It is a swell voice for a lot of things, but not for a Broadway musical. Cable is supposed to be a tenor; Connick, a baritone, could not possibly reach the notes in the original score so his songs were all transposed down a third. "You've Got to Be Taught" does not suffer too much from the transition; it is sung with a soft intensity that any vocal range can accommodate. But Cable's signature tune, "Younger than Springtime," is a disaster. For starters, having a man who looks like he is tottering on the edge of middle age sing a song called "Younger than Springtime" creates an irony that was not intended by the authors, and the climactic final notes of the song simply fail to land when the highest note is an E as opposed to the high G of the original. And Connick being a crooner, even if he had been able to sing the higher register, is not and never has been a belter. Power was what was needed here, and the song simply fails to land. It would have been better had they simply cut it.

But all in all, there is more right than wrong with this mostly remarkable production, and the fact that it was done for TV and done successfully is all the more remarkable. At the end of the day, the evening really belongs to Glenn Close and Rade Sherbedgia, and they acquit themselves so beautifully that even with the flaws I have mentioned this is a joy to watch.

Absolutely Awful Remake

[bam-9 · 1/10 · 28 March 2001]

This movie remake was as awful of a one I have seen in a while. Every character was miscast, especially Nellie, Bloody Mary and Luther. They absolutely murdered this remake of the original. I'd like to shake the hand of the idiot who came up with the idea to do this movie. He/she deserves to be punished. Don't blame the actors in the movie. They already have been punished enough for actually participating in such a horrible piece of trash. Give me the original South Pacific any day. At least in the original, you had true to life actors performing the roles with exceptional acting. The 2001 version is downright fakey, and the acting (if that is what you can call it) is forced and dull. I wish they would leave well enough alone. You know the saying, "If it ain't broke, why fix it."

Well, *I* liked it a lot!

[toni-28 · 9/10 · 29 March 2001]

I thought the casting was excellent, unlike some of the reviews I've read. I'm 55, which may make a difference - grin - but I found the relationship between Nellie and Emil more believable than the one in the movie...Nellie's feelings about the children mirror my mother's in many ways: Equality is fine until it REALLY comes down to the nitty gritty.

I also liked the casting of Bloody Mary. Having her sing was more enjoyable than the other version's dubbing, too. Robert Pastorelli was a bit of a cipher, though. I really enjoy him in parts that show off his talents. Somehow it was REAL obvious that his part had been rewritten so he didn't have to sing. Didn't leave him with much.

A comment on Nellie's age...

[bluebird-mb · 7/10 · 29 September 2001]

A great deal of time has been spent criticizing Glenn Close's age in respect to the character of Nellie Forbush. I feel this is due to people's familiarity with the 1958 film version and not the 1949 Broadway original.

Mary Martin was 36 when she played the part on Broadway. The part was never intended to be that of a girl in her 20's. Martin's characterization was that of a woman, and not of a ditzy blonde as Mitzi Gaynor (at age 28) portrayed it.

This TV-movie adaption is not without it's flaws, yet it offers a much more realistic approach to the story and better characterizations than the 1958 film.

A problem with both versions is the fact that the original continuity of the play has been tampered with. On Broadway the show opened with "Dites Moi," which led into the scene with Nellie and Emile ("Cock-eyed Optimist/Twin Soliloquies/Some Enchanted Evening"). This establishes the two main characters and is the hub of the entire production. Both the 1958 and 2001 versions begin with the character of Cable arriving on the island which creates an imbalance of plot focus which neither version fully recovers from. The '58 film puts the "Bloody Mary/Nothin' Like a Dame/Bali Ha'i" sequence ahead of the Nellie/Emile scene, while the 2001 version begins with "Dame" and scatters the other songs around throughout the next scenes. The '01 version also placed the "Wash That Man/Wonderful Guy" sequence after Cable's first trip to "Bali Ha'i" which was a bad decision.

In recreating Broadway shows for film one should take a lesson from 1993's TV version of GYPSY, which left the stage show roots intact and was wildly successful in it's adaption of that great work as a result. The 1962 film adaption of THE MUSIC MAN is another example of this.

All in all this new version of SOUTH PACIFIC is pretty good. At least it wasn't as abysmal as it's 1958 predecessor.

Worst South Pacific ever

[BeckeySue2 · 1/10 · 3 August 2005]

Glenn Close was far too old, couldn't sing, and did not look soft and sweetly naive, but rather brusque.

The only other cast member almost as bad as Close was the actress who played "Bloody Mary." She was funny looking, could not sing, and seemed downright evil.

Gone was the comedy, which was needed. Not having painted backdrops instead of sets was probably the only improvement on the original. Whoever was responsible for this seemed to be trying to screw up the story line as much as possible in the name of originality.

It was AWFUL. I will be shocked if this one is EVER repeated. It should be destroyed.

Bali-Low!

[yenlo · 27 March 2001]

Without a doubt Glenn Close an exceptional actress with many brilliant performances throughout her career is horribly miscast as "Young" Ensign Nellie Forbush. This more than anything sent this made for TV production of this classic musical and James A. Michener story right into the bilges. She resembled nothing less than a female Naval Officer who is in her mid 50's and would be more interested in romantically pursuing the other nurses than the Emile de Becque character. If you want to watch this story then the 1958 version with Mitzi Gaynor and Ray Walston is the one to go with because this one gets the Deep Six.

Interesting adaptation from stage to movie; does not rely on the music to tell the story

[kmullen-4 · 6/10 · 14 September 2010]

Only recently did I fall in love with this musical when I watched Lincoln Center's stage production on PBS. I was curious to know more of its history and watched the movie adaptations from 1958 and 2001. Movies are definitely a different genre from the stage, and it was interesting to see that in each version, the choice was to develop dialog into visual action, focusing on rounding out a fuller story, rather than relying on the musical emphasis to tell the story. Stage productions demand more movement from the characters, more choreography, while the camera allows for more still and close encounters. On stage, the movement and music are what tell the story.

In the bonus feature of the DVD, Ms. Close says something along the lines that a classic is a classic when it can endure many interpretations and retain its integrity. She also stated that she had wanted to do this all her life and remembered Mary Martin as the model for this role. It seems circumstances happened for her to fulfill her dream, albeit at middle-age. So it seems that a new adaptation for this more mature casting lent a new interpretation to this classic. They followed the precedent of the 1958 version in many ways, and even used colored filters for the Bali Hai number – with much better technique and effects! Overall, I thought the story, as they chose to adapt it, was put together very skillfully.

I noticed in this adaptation that most all of the comic edge was taken out. In its place was a kind of dramatic /romantic pathos, which made the tempo a little slower and more deliberate. The re-arranging of some scenes, and certain deletions, contributed to a change in tensions between characters and in the flow of the story than found in the stage production.

I thought the acting was very good all around. Ms. Close also talks about using dramatic interpretation for the songs, while singing. I very much appreciated her dramatic interpretation of the songs. But also felt there was a limitation in voice skill, and perhaps due to careful casting, the rest of the cast did not give her much competition. The interpretations through music seemed consistent with the pathos already established through dialog. There was no singing between Emile and Nellie in the scene at Emile's house when the guests have gone home. And Bloody Mary's 'Happy Talk" was also cut, as well as 'My girl back home…'. Again, the kinds of music deletions (as well as interpretations) gave the film a different emphasis. Even though it is a musical and uses music, it did not rely on the music (singing and orchestra) to tell the story as much as a stage production.

However, the choral numbers (Nothin like a dame..." and "Wash that man..") I thought well were thought out and executed very well. Especially, the former: I fully enjoyed the composition of the shots and the editing. I noticed very wonderful composition of shots throughout.

Though there is no specific age given for Nellie, plot elements do define it to some degree. Nellie struggles with her mother's assumptions and expectations for her daughter, especially regarding men and marriage, which might apply more to a younger woman transitioning away from home and parents, rather than a middle-aged woman. Indeed, the lines about marriage and men for Ms. Close's Nellie were cut in this scene with her mother's letter, as was any serious indication of an emotional struggle. This struggle, and the struggle with if she really knows enough about this man, give her character an emotional juggling act more typical for a younger woman in the new stages of love. But with the first struggle essentially cut,the tension of two struggles and the juggling is lost. Indeed, Ms.Close's Nellie seemed very confident, independent and secure, never too overwhelmed. Also, with a middle-aged Nellie, there has to be some assumption that she has her own romantic history, a certain wisdom from experience. Not all the traditional elements of the original play work for this interpretation.

Another characteristic of Nellie is her southern roots. Ms. Close did not play her with any dialect, perhaps wisely. But I found that emphasizing to some degree this characteristic helps in the development of Nellie and her reaction to the news of Emile's children's mother.

One of my favorite roles of Ms. Close is Sarah in "Sarah, Plain and Tall" (and its sequels), and she plays Nellie in a very similar fashion, which helped me understand her interpretation of Nellie a little better. (I personally would have preferred a softer hair-do and a few more feminine costumes for her Nellie.)

It's Ballyhoo... not Bali Hai!

[benbrae76 · 2/10 · 29 August 2006]

Is there anything good I can I say about this dire remake of "South Pacific"? The answer is an emphatic no. It is just awful.

Firstly..."South Pacific" is not really a war story as partially depicted here. It is a romantic musical in a war setting (with a few comments on racial bigotry thrown in).

Secondly...The singing is listless, the acting abominable, the dancing lifeless, the casting uninspired and the settings abysmal, and in fact all of the above adjectives can be interchangeable. I've seen better productions (and performances) by amateur companies, and even at a school play.

Thirdly...Whoever thought of casting Glenn Close as a perky 20 year old nurse, must have serious eye and brain defects, or perhaps an extreme attack of vanity, and the rest of the actors looked as if they couldn't believe what they'd let themselves in for. I'm not surprised, and why this atrocious insult to a great musical was made is beyond comprehension, and all involved should be tested for their sanity (or insanity).

Fourthly...There are many remarks made by reviewers of the similarity of the age of Glenn Close to that of Mary Martin when the latter was performing the same role. But none of them made the point that Mary Martin performed on stage, and thus at a distance (and with make-up) she could quite easily get away with portraying a younger woman. But Glenn Close performed in front of the camera which (one is always told) never lies. And it certainly didn't here.

And finally...The only reason to watch this movie, is to judge how bad it is, especially in comparison to the vivaciously energetic and enchanting qualities of the 1958 production. This 2001 remake doesn't even come close.

An older cast in a new version

[ElianaM · 7/10 · 23 May 2001]

Maybe, it will take something like MOULIN ROUGE to revive the American musical genre. What we see implied, once again, in this new "South Pacific" is that no youngish actors can either play or want to be in the classic ones anymore. Furthermore, the characterizations have changed, the singing is anything but innovative.

Fifty to fifty-five year old women in roles written for young women in their twenties or thirties; an aging Yugoslav playing a not-so old Frenchmen; Ethnic Chinese replace Polynesian islanders; More "natural" singing replaces the operatic or "pop" voices of old....

All these are typical of the new 2001 Version of 'South Pacific,' last shown on a screen in 1958 starring a young, musical starlet (Mitzi Gaynor), a dashing Italian as the Frenchmen, and a Polynesian looking woman.

OK. A different style. But, I believe "creative casting" is only possible in staged musicals or operas, not in a new "modern" version. Still, the version, new or old, should be historically correct, and avoid rewriting American military history. Though politically correct, unsegregated groups of multi ethnic servicemen, the African American ones singing and dancing in arms with their white counterparts in particular, are just unacceptable, even offensive to previously disadvantaged races, whose past is mocked by being sanitized like this.

The times have certainly changed, and this production's only obvious achievement is the obvious, almost archival comparison that contrast 1958 and 2001 sensitivities, and realities. It is now confirmed that great singing is strictly the reduct of the filmed sung opera; ethnic Chinese and Indians have taken over the South Pacific islands; and mid 50s is the undisputed prime of life, the age to fall in love, an acting "like a schoolboy" or a "schoolgirl."

As for those last lines, maybe they should be rewritten as in "West Side Story" where Maria no longer "feels pretty, and witty and gay," but rather "pretty and witty and bright."

It will be interesting to see if in another 43 years or so, 30 year old navy seals will be in their sixties; a Frenchman will be played by anyone remotely European, and whether there will be any attempt at all at singing the songs as originally written-that is, for singers!

This production is a Geritol-set, rapper-like version of SOUTH PACIFIC, in a rewritten historical context.

Really, as much as I admire them, how much longer can the ageless Glenn Close and Bernadette Peters, both now well into their 50s, remain ageless and the only female musical stars of Anglo-Saxon culture worldwide? The only ones who appear in TV or video musicals. Can the American musical ever come back as something close to the original? Other than as dubbed Disney cartoons, of course.

This SOUTH PACIFIC suggests the art form is forever gone. Well, maybe Madonna, Whitney Houston, and John Travolta are its future, if they ever come out of their eternal adolescence. Or is its future a totally revamped Hollywood musical, like one hitting the screens now in 2001?

Absurd!

[rjmcdaniel · 1/10 · 27 March 2001]

Mitzi Gaylor was pert, sexy, downhome in in her mid 20's when she starred in the 1958 version of South Pacific. She was a perfect choice for the role. The women casted in the 2001 version, in her mid 50's, would fit in better with the frumpy, herbal tea sipping, NPR listener crowd that a group of gigglely, nubile military nurses. I am sure there were a number of talented young actresses ideal for the part who were past over, and are angry that they were never given the chance to display their talents on a national network.

Very good adaptation, shows great showmanship - and preserves personality!

[BadWebDiver · 8/10 · 16 July 2005]

I think this version of the classic stage musical works very well. It manages to capture the drama and a lot of the comedy of the original stage play, as well as fleshing out the locations and presenting the character drama very well.

I especially like the way that the musical numbers are presented "dramatically"; not just glorified pop songs that are tacked on to the storyline as in a lot of contemporary musical films (like EVERYONE SAYS I LOVE YOU and even MOULIN ROUGE). It helps that the songs are purposely written for the story. The lyrics are delivered like dialogue that has been set to music, and I can tell the actors have been told to play their characters even through the song numbers.

It's the main reason I think Glenn Close actually works as the lead female role here - even if she may be technically a bit old for the young love-lorn romantic; she certainly has the personality, and presents her role with enthusiasm; which goes along way in musical presentations.

And Robert Pastorelli as the mischievous Luther is also very well-cast and has the right "feel" for the role; even if he isn't the sort you would normally associate with a classic musical role.

As as an Aussie I have to congratulate Jack Thompson for playing the role of the Commander, who I think is one of the most underrated non-singing comic support roles in a musical. He puts a lot of personality in the role, and his balance or enthusiasm and dramatic gravitas was very well presented.

Harry Connick Jnr is still one of my favourite modern singers, and he handled the military aspects and the romantic ballads very professionally. His personality seems somewhat subdued in this production; though I personally attribute that to the rather bland character that I think Cable is. I haven't seen any performance of this character I would regard as memorable.

Overall a very high standard production that plays the story very well - and really kicks the stuffing out of the earlier film version, quite frankly.

An OK remake of an OK musical

[ijonesiii · 6/10 · 23 December 2005]

I don't even know why I chose to watch this remake of SOUTH PACIFIC when it premiered on ABC. I love musicals but this is one of my least favorite musicals and I HATED the 1958 film version so it's amazing that I even watched this at all but I did. Glenn Close actually made a credible Nellie Forbush even she might be a little too old for the role. Glenn's squeeze at the time, the late Robert Patorelli, made a great Billis, but the best part of this show for me was Harry Connick Jr. as Lieutenant Cable. His rendition of "Younger than Sprintime" was dreamy and his "You've Got to be Carefully Taught" was appropriately disturbing. The cinematography is lovely and the show is well mounted, even if it goes on a little too long, but if you're a fan of the musical, I guess this remake is pretty good. If you're a Glenn Close fan and you like this musical, you will probably like this remake.

i love this movie!

[nicbudd · 10/10 · 17 April 2001]

I have been a big Rogers and Hammerstein lover for years and years, and when they came out with a new South Pacific, with 2 huge stars in it, I figured it'd be completely reinterpreted and pretty poor quality. But I watched it, because I would've been too curious if I hadn't. And I was so happily surprised. I watched it twice in a row. Glenn close has the BEST personality in the movie, and so does Bloody Mary, and Harry Connick Jr. plays a great part. I was so pleased. The music is great too!

South Pacific-Come to Me ***

[edwagreen · 7/10 · 18 February 2008]

Rodgers and Hammerstein's great music is the salvation of this 2001 movie.

For starters, Glenn Close was too old to play Nellie. Her singing voice can't be compared to Mitzi Gaynor.

Emile De Becque as played by the Rade person had no singing range at all. He was like dumbfounded in the part.

Some good acting is displayed by Lori Tam Chinn in the role of Bloody Mary. Her speech pattern works and is similar to that of Juanita Moore. Her singing of Bali Hai was inspirational to say the least.

John Kerr fared much better in the original movie. There was a certain depth to his performance which is missing in Harry Connick Jr.'s interpretation of the role of Cable.

Yet, the music and scenery transcends all. The original show and movie were definite achievements for facing racial prejudice. How original to depict prejudice via the musical route.

So bad I couldn't even laugh at it!

[ledga · 4/10 · 19 December 2003]

I consider myself a South Pacific devotee, (both 1958 version and stage) and although I watched this remake with a very open mind and I couldn't believe how crappy it was! I thought it was so bad I couldn't even pretend it was a sendup and laugh at it!

The leads are all talented people but definitely miscast for this movie.

-Harry Connick Jr has a vacant look throughout the movie. -Glenn Close is too old and there is no "magic" between Nellie and Emile. -Lori Tan Chinn (Bloody Mary)looks and sounds like she should be in a Lord of the Rings movie as a Hobbit. Her version of Bali H'ai appears to be dubbed with someone who can't even sing -flat as a tack! -Robert Pastorelli (Luther Billis) looks like he's been thrown back from modern day and is still in a time warp. -Jack Thompson is a talented actor but he sure needs some help with his U.S. accent.

This telemovie version guarantees the original 1958 version looks even better!