Review of My Fair Lady (1964) by Daniel K — 11 Jan 2012

4: One of the rare classic Hollywood musicals that don't star any of the familiar faces (i.e. Astaire, Rogers, Charisse, Kelly, etc). The Sound of Music, which is much better and was made in the same year, would be another.

I'm sure Julie Christie was great in the role of Eliza on the stage, but she'll always be Audrey Hepburn for me. She perfectly inhabits the role, even if the producers were idiotic enough to dub her voice on occasion.

I've heard her versions of the songs and they were definitely worthy renditions. The production values are obviously through the roof, but what really makes it work is the story. George Bernard Shaw knew how to tell and good tale, and Rex and Audrey more than know how to perform it.

It's funny, but when I think back on the film I don't necessarily think of it being a musical first and foremost; I think of it mainly as a compelling story. This is not true of The Sound of Music though, even if it is also a good story.

Music just seems more integral to it though, whereas in My Fair Lady it seems subservient to the story and the performances. This is undoubtedly partially because it was not a musical in its original form, but also because the music is, for the most part, less than exultingly superior.

There are some very good numbers and very catchy tunes, but nothing on the level of a film like The Sound of Music, Singin in the Rain, or Love Me Tonight. I still enjoy it despite its faults and would rank it among the classic of Hollywood musicals, albeit in the lower tier.