My Fair Lady (1964) User Reviews

But What Had Henry Learned?

[frankwiener · 7/10 · 20 September 2017]

Having undergone extensive voice training for the role, upon learning that all of her songs would be dubbed by Marni Nixon, Audrey Hepburn walked off the set in a state of bitter disappointment but humbly apologized to the cast on the next day. Class act, Audrey. Even in the worst of circumstances, she never failed to live up to our idealized image of her. When I recently listened to the film soundtrack, I decided that Nixon did not enhance the music significantly enough to warrant Hepburn's abrupt replacement. For the sake of authenticity alone, I would have preferred Audrey's singing. Audrey was Eliza and should have sung Eliza's songs.

While Rex Harrison "talked" his songs, often as he contemplated his feelings and course of action, and while Ms. Nixon intoned Eliza's tunes, the one member of the cast who actually sang his songs was Stanley Holloway, who replayed his original Broadway role as Alfred P. Doolittle, Eliza's father. Holloway was born for the role. Sporting a dustman's cap with great authenticity and then donning an elegant tuxedo for his own wedding, he stole the show with his two iconic musical numbers. Unforgettable!

Unfortunately, not all of the songs in the show were as impressive as Holloway's, and, for me, a musical is only as good as its music, especially when it is brought to film. A few of the lesser tunes could have been eliminated without losing the gist of the story. The film also ran much too long with dialogue that seemed to repeat itself and actually became tiring. Eliza felt used and abused while Professor Higgins was slowly falling in love with her. Got it! No need to hammer these situations into our heads more than necessary.

I also had trouble with the ending. While Harrison perfectly performs "I've Grown Accustomed to Her Face", again in that special, introspective manner, and suddenly realizes how emotionally attached he had become to Eliza, what was the message of the final scene? That Henry was still the same arrogant egotist that he had always been? Shouldn't the movie have ended with a much more confident Eliza assertively instructing him to get his own bloomin' slippers? To the very end, Henry and Eliza never enter into a physical relationship, and I suppose that was consistent with Shaw's original play, upon which this musical was based. I can somehow accept that, but what had Henry learned during the past two hours and fifty minutes of film time? Apparently, not much. He was the same pompous ass at the end that he was at the beginning.

Perfect, Except for the Ending

[VikingBurialService · 9/10 · 7 February 2022]

Love, love, love it. Basically, cockney-accented woman named Eliza Doolittle in post-Edwardian England gets taught proper pronunciation by self-absorbed language professor. Everything feel so original - the plot, the characters, the dialogue. The musical numbers are great. The period is great. The Dickens-like characters are great. Audrey Hepburn is great. Its all so damned wonderful.

About as good as the 1938 film

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 17 March 2009]

I've seen MY FAIR LADY several times. However, it wasn't until last night that I finally saw the 1938 version of PYGMALION and this was very interesting indeed. It seems that MY FAIR LADY is actually NOT based on the George Bernard Shaw play as much as it's based on the Leslie Howard movie. That's because the dialog (particularly Henry Higgins') is often word-for-word that of the film. Additionally, both films have the same ending--one that is NOT the same as the original play. In the play, the ending was more sad but also much more realistic and consistent with the characters and their growth (or lack thereof in the case of Henry Higgins).

Quality-wise, both films are superb and I enjoyed them immensely. One very obvious difference is that MY FAIR LADY is a musical with lovely songs, so it's a much longer movie. Another is that although Leslie Howard did a very fine job, somehow Rex Harrison came off as grouchier and more entertaining in the lead. Another major difference is that MY FAIR LADY feels more like a comedy and PYGMALION feels much more sad and deeper emotionally. Because it is a bright and colorful musical, the characters in MY FAIR LADY seem a bit less real, but with PYGMALION you are almost brought to tears late in the film.

My recommendation is that you see them both. Both are exquisitely produced and acted and you can't go wrong with either one. I could say more in my review about this film, but considering that there are already a zillion other reviews, I'll end it here.

UPDATE--Only days after posting this review, I got quite a few "not helpfuls". I assume this is from fans who adored this 1964 film. Well, my response is that it can't merit anything more than an 8 because the dialog was directly lifted from the earlier film AND so much of the singing was NOT done by the stars themselves. To me, these are flaws that prevent the film from earning a higher score. And, while I think about it, cannot justify the many 10s I see for the film.

What Can I Say?

[Hitchcoc · 10/10 · 21 September 2001]

I don't know how much I can add to this. The musical stands alone, as far as I'm concerned, so it puts a lot of pressure on the director, George Cukor, one of the greatest, to complement it. This is a lot to ask. I love this movie. I never got a chance to see the Broadway cast (I was four when it opened), but I have never been disappointed. The production numbers are grand, the byplay between the smug, offensive Higgins and Eliza is precious (my favorite song is "Just You Wait, Henry Higgins"). I've always been intrigued how Freddy never even has a chance (I can't watch those wonderful Sherlock Holmes episodes without imagining the grim visage of Jeremy Brett singing "On the Street Where You Live."). The one thing that made an impression on me, though some may see it as a criticism, is how "clean" everything is. There is no doubt in my mind that Cukor was elevating not only the dialogue but the visual images. It's probably not fair to like a movie because you like looking at an actress, but Audrey Hepburn glows in her Eliza, and I don't care if she is or was a street girl, she is the magical rose on the landscape before she ever meets Higgins. The business about who sings the songs is of no significance to me. This is a movie, not the Broadway show, so the images and sounds are melded and presented. Knowing that Audrey Hepburn has a beautiful voice makes it moot as well. I don't know if she could carry the picture or not--maybe not, but it doesn't concern me. When I first saw Stanley Holloway, there was something about him that grated on me (too many performances on the Ed Sullivan Show). He grated on me as Eliza's father. Now, every time I see this film, I thoroughly enjoy him and I really like the comedic qualities of his song. I love how he and his cronies cavort around London with total disregard for their base roots. I could go on, but I really like this film because it is filled with class: George Bernard Shaw filtered through George Cukor. Not bad!

A musical with a brain as well as a heart

[eliza-doolittle · 10/10 · 28 August 2003]

There's a lot of negative things been said about Audrey Hepburn's interpretation of the role of Eliza. Perhaps she's not ideal in the earliest scenes of the movie - her "dirtiness" is never quite believable - but it has to be said that despite this smallish drawback she still glows, and makes an amazing Eliza overall.

The reason for this is simple; Audrey Hepburn brings her "own spark of divine fire", (to quote Higgins) to the role and her vulnerability, mixed with her sweet, naive charm and even her wonderfully juvenile pettishness shown in "Just You Wait" all prove what a talented actress she really is. For an example of this, just watch Eliza's facial expression at Ascot, when she realises her opportunity to demonstrate her new-found mastery of the English tongue - sweetly hilarious.

MFL has been criticized as being too romanticized, too overblown. I disagree; musicals are suposed to be lavish affairs, and none pull it off quite so well as "My Fair Lady" does. It's a momentous film but it has its subtle points: watch the way in which Eliza's eyes are centred on Higgins when she enters at the ball, and the way in which the two of them stare at each other for a few seconds at the top of the stairs a few moments later.

It musn't be overlooked that, thanks to its being based on a Bernard Shaw play, "My Fair Lady" has what the great majority of musicals lack: a deeper meaning and something really quite profound to say.

The actor in the role of Colonel Pickering is a little weak, but it must be said that Rex Harrison IS Henry Higgins. In a lot of ways (in fact, in most ways) Higgins has an objectionable personality: rude, snobbish, impatient and even misogynistic, but somehow Rex Harrison pulls it all off and makes us like Higgins without betraying the character. As to romance, his song "I've Grown Accustomed to Her Face" is an ode to the kind of love which sneaks up on you. Overall, this movie is romantic, but not too sentimental. It has just enough romance to be dramatically fulfilling, but it never becomes soppy or mawkish. The word "love" is never mentioned at all and the two leads never even kiss. The famous end sequence is perfect and does the movie justice; after all, a big happy bow tied around a perfect romance at the end would simply not fit with everything we have learned about the two protagonists.

The character of Henry Higgins is greatly misunderstood by many and so is the film.

[llltdesq · 8/10 · 28 December 2003]

I have read in a great many places (including the IMDb) that Henry Higgins is a misogynist. It has also been said that the film is a misogynist's fairy tale. Anyone saying this has clearly not watched this film too closely.

First, Higgins is not a misogynist. A misogynist hates women. What Higgins is, in reality, is a misanthrope. A misanthrope basically dislikes and distrusts everyone! Watch the film and you'll notice that Higgins treats everyone with the same disregard-Col. Pickering, Eliza's father, his own mother-everyone receives his rather cynical disdain. Some of the minor characters come off being treated worse than the principals do. It's simply more noticeable with Eliza because it's more frequent, it's newer with Eliza because the other principal characters have known Higgins longer and thus take it in stride. The myth that Higgins is a misogynist is perpetuated by the song, "Why Can't A Woman Be More Like a Man?".

Second, it can hardly be called a misogynist's fairy tale. If that were the case, I doubt Alfred Doolittle would have cause to sing, "Get Me To the Church On Time", as he'd hardly be getting married. His life is just as "ruined" as Eliza's by his encounters with Higgins, just as altered as her life has been.

This is a great musical, a good movie and it was even better as the original play by Shaw. Well worth seeing. Recommended.

An enchanting musical, that is a joy to the eyes as well as to the ears.

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 13 July 2009]

My Fair Lady, loosely based on George Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalian was a film I saw recently, and I absolutely loved it, and I am 17. It wasn't just the acting, but also the overall look of the film and the music. Mind you, I saw the restored version.

The film looks exquisite, with stunning sets and truly luscious costumes. A prime example is the ballroom scene. Audrey Hepburn's dresses were also a marvel to look at. This was also helped by the superb cinematography, and the detailed direction, provided by George Cukor. The scene at the racetrack was one of my personal favourite scenes from the film. Oh, and the choreography is fabulous.

The script is witty and acerbic, with excellent scenes with the social commentary. The story is simple, but is well told, and fits the lengthy running time perfectly.

The music by Frederick Loewe is just outstanding. Asides from the costumes, the songs are ones that you hear once and never forget. Songs like I Could Have danced All Night, With a Little bit of Luck, Just You wait, Why Can't A Woman Be More Like A Man? and Wouldn't it be Loverly linger long into the memory, and are a joy to the ear. I loved the incidental music at the beginning, then again I am the sort of person who is raised on classical music, and appreciates music for what it is.

The performances also added a lot to the film; Rex Harrison was just superb as the cynical, misanthropic Professor Henry Higgins, who transforms Eliza Doolittle to the woman she is at the end of the film. The Belgian actress Audrey Hepburn is perfectly enchanting as Eliza, and Marnie Nixon provides her singing voice beautifully.(yes she was dubbed, and Audrey Hepburn is not a slut) There is solid support from Stanley Holloway and Gladys Cooper, and watch out for Sherlock Holmes actor Jeremy Brett as Freddy.

In conclusion, a truly beautiful film, that deserved all the praise it got, it is an amazing film, that is misunderstood. It is also a perfect treat for around Easter time. Honestly, for those who think it is the worst movie ever made, see something like Home Alone 4, the only film I can think of that deserves a minus rating, that's how terrible that film is. My Fair Lady gets a 10/10 from me, Bethany Cox.

A Loverly Film!

[movie_lover_gurl · 26 June 2001]

My Fair Lady is a musical which is very witty. The dialogue is wonderful. The story begins as Henry Higgins (Rex Harrison) makes a bet that he can transform flower girl Eliza Dolittle (Audrey Hepburn) into a high society lady. Henry Higgins is the perfect example of high society snobbery of the times. What he wasn't counting on was falling in love with his "project". Some people may find this film to be sexist but it is really quite the opposite. While it is about a sexist person it is not actually sexist at all. In fact it is all about the irony in the relationship between that of Eliza Dolittle and Henry Higgins. It is not unbelievable that Henry and Eliza should fall in love because they are not "compatible". Opposites often attract after all. Even though there is an anti-romantic disclaimer in the original play Pygmalion , it is obvious that Eliza and Higgins are meant for one another in the end of My Fair Lady. My Fair Lady is really different from Pygmalion. There is a movie version of Pygmalion which is the dull non-musical version of My Fair Lady. Rex Harrison is simply wonderful as Henry Higgins. He is not one bit tired with his role. And even though Julie Andrews originated the role of Eliza on Broadway, Audrey Hepburn is great in the role. It would be unfair to say that she didn't deserve the role just because her voice was dubbed. The supporting cast is first rate as well. This film is more than just good, it is great. If you have not seen it yet you certainly should!

*****/ ***** stars

Funny thing about musicals from this era...

[AlsExGal · 7/10 · 1 February 2021]

... that being the late 50s to the late 60s. They don't particularly age well .Looking back on them in the context of the 1960s they seem downright anachronistic. . At least this film is not offensive. Gigi, which won Best Picture of 1958, has a young woman's relatives trying to turn her into a prostitute, from which she wisely figures out there is no coming back, while Maurice Chevalier musically ogles little girls from the shelter of the bushes. That one didn't age well in a bunch of ways.

This one has fabulous music, magnificent art design, quite a bit of great dry humor, and perfect casting - except I really wish James Cagney had taken the part of Eliza's father. It would have made a great bookend for his film career. The direction is perfectly on target for late career George Cukor. He won Best Director Oscar for this and didn't make another film for five years.

Rex Harrison certainly deserved his Best Actor Oscar as misanthropic phoneticist Henry Higgins. He is both stern and humorous, his vocals in both song and word are alive and nothing less than perfect. Also, Wilfrid Hyde-White as Pickering adds a great deal to the film, and I appreciate him more on successive viewings.

Thus it is hard to give a film with such great production values less than a 7/10. I have a couple of problems with it. First, it is just too long. Clocking in at two hours and fifty minutes, there is just too much movie for too little story. Pygmalian, starring Leslie Howard, was perfect at ninety minutes, and I actually prefer that film to this one. Second, I don't like the resolution because there isn't one. After all of that squabbling at Higgins' mother's house, after Higgins realizing he has "grown accustomed to her face", the end is just a let down. Had it gone on any longer it would have become Season Four of Moonlighting.

My Fair Movie

[vox-sane · 10/10 · 25 October 2004]

Very few movies are letter-perfect. Not perfect in the sense that goofs and gaffes don't exist here and there, but perfect as in pure entertainment. Especially in long movies, the squirm element is always a threat. "My Fair Lady", bringing the most tuneful of Broadway scores to the big screen (really big, at the time) was as perfect as movie entertainment could be. The old furors over Audrey Hepburn seem silly in hindsight. Hepburn replaced Julie Andrews, a wonderful singer-actress who had created the role, not only on Broadway but in London. But Andrews was not a familiar face to movie-goers and no one knew if she'd hold an audience in the movies as in the live theaters. Too, Hepburn was an inspired choice, since her background probably would make Eliza Doolittle's transformation from flower-selling gutter-snipe into a lady of quality more believable (Hepburn's mother was a baroness). As far as her singing voice, the new DVDs of "MFL" have her acting to her own recordings of a few of the songs, and while it's not bad, at this level of film-making expense and prestige, "not bad" is no good.

Surrounding her are a magnificent cast. Stage and screen pros Rex Harrison (Henry Higgins) and Stanley Holloway (Doolittle) were carried over from Broadway (after some initial and rather foolish questions about both). Joining them were veteran droll actor Wilfred Hyde-White as Col. Pickering and an amazingly youthful Jeremy Brett ("Sherlock Holmes") as Freddy.

The book and lyrics were by Alan Jay Lerner and the music by Frederick Loewe ("Brigadoon", "Camelot", "Gigi", etc.) based on George B. Shaw's best play. A fully "integrated" musical where the songs advance the story or reveal character, the nonpareil line-up of songs include "I've Grown Accustomed to Her Face", "The Rain in Spain", "I Could Have Danced All Night" and "On the Street Where You Live".

Because of its theatrical origins there is an unavoidable stage-bound look to some scenes. But the designers have done their best to keep this from being a detriment. The interiors look like real houses, the Covent Garden set is a masterpiece of openness. Only the Ascot scene retains its staginess, but its black and white palate and stylized look adds variety to the movie.

The restored DVD version looks great. I saw a print of this movie in a revival theater in the early 1980s; it was blurry and broken and the colors were faded and inaccurate. Yet the designers used a rich tapestry of colors and wood tones, giving every corner of the movie's wide screen something worth seeing. "MFL" was a spectacle well worth the struggle and expense of restoration.

Everything about "MFL" was first-class, the cast, script, costuming, sets, music. For someone who enjoys musical there's not a dull moment.

The lackluster end of an era

[MissSimonetta · 6/10 · 29 June 2020]

MY FAIR LADY was among my first forays into Old Hollywood. I have seen it probably four or five times since high school. I've never been a big fan, but I remembered it with a fondness that gave way to disappointment when I rewatched it again recently and found it a letdown in just about every aspect. About all this film has going for it are good songs and great dialogue from the original George Bernard Shaw play, PYGMALION. It is every bit a victim of the time of its production: in the 50s and 60s, Hollywood panicked as it lost audiences to television, so they decided to make movies larger than life and dripping with spectacle.

Unfortunately, spectacle does not suit a witty satire like this: it just pads out the runtime unnecessarily. And besides, the spectacle we get isn't even that good. For some reason, I recall thinking this was a movie graced with beautiful art direction, but watching it again, I was shocked by how drab everything looks. The predominant colors are brown and green. Combined with the fussy sets and some truly garish costumes (with the exception of Eliza's ascot dress and ball gown), the movie's aesthetic appeal is nil, foreshadowing the predominantly beige look of the botched 1967 CAMELOT. Even worse, the sound mixing and dubbing are atrocious, going beyond just the obvious gulf between the movement of Hepburn's lips and Marni Nixon's singing. The sound is tinny and so obviously separate from the action on-screen that it becomes distracting.

The only actors who leave much of an impression are Rex Harrison and Stanley Holloway, both resuming roles they made famous during the show's original Broadway run. Audrey Hepburn's performance was and remains divisive, but-- and as much as it pains me to say it-- I have to agree with the naysayers, she is badly miscast. I just do not buy her as the squalid flower girl at all: her crassness feels labored, more like a parody than anything and often more annoying than I think it's supposed to come across. She coasts on her charm at least. Still, it shocks me that this is considered one of her signature performances: even if I didn't think the Oscars were a joke, I wouldn't say she was snubbed at all.

And to parrot a common complaint once again: that ending is awful. I don't think the movie is misogynist as others claim-- there are small hints in Harrison's performance that he has softened and his final line is delivered in a self-mocking manner that does not suggest Eliza will be a domestic slave. However, the characters and the actors both share zero romantic chemistry, no matter how much both the script and the actors try to hint at such feelings. The original play had it right: Eliza becomes her own woman and probably marries Freddy, a man that, while much less interesting to the audience than Higgins, at least respects Eliza. Whether or not the two last hardly matters-- Eliza's emancipation is the end goal, not the question of which man she may or may not marry.

As it is, MY FAIR LADY is one of the last true Old Hollywood productions. In a few short years, New Hollywood would burst onto the scene with its violence, moral ambiguity, and cinematic boldness, eclipsing the stately mega productions the old-time moguls kept trying to foist onto audiences even after the appeal of such films cooled at the box office. In that sense, there is a poignancy to MY FAIR LADY that makes me unable to outright dislike it, despite its many shortcomings. After all, it does have some good songs and some moments of charm, even if one is left wishing it could have had more life pumped into it.

I could have danced all night!

[jotix100 · 10/10 · 16 May 2005]

"My Fair Lady" made theater history when it opened on Broadway. The waiting for tickets to see the show was something unheard of for a sellout musical. Lerner and Loewe, its creators, probably never thought they had the tremendous hit it became, at all. The film version of "My Fair Lady" came to the screen via George Cukor, a man who knew about the movie business well.

The film resonated with audiences because of the immensely elegant finished product Mr. Cukor offered the world. Of course, the film is helped by the genius of Cecil Beaton, who had the eye for the right style. Mr. Beaton served as art director and had a thing to say about the fabulous costumes assembled for the movie. The Ascot race sequence is a tribute to his sense of elegance.

Rex Harrison, repeating the role of Professor Higgins that he originated on Broadway, gives a stellar performance. Not having seen him on stage, at least one can imagine how he amazed audiences that flocked to see the show. In the film he makes an absolutely delightful Higgins, a man of science who can't see what's in front of him. The transformation he achieves in turning the Cockney flower girl into a lady of elegance, is perhaps, something he didn't even think he would be able to pull. In Mr. Harrison's performance one can see how Eliza warms this confirmed bachelor into accepting her in a romantic way.

Audrey Hepburn was chosen over Julie Andrews, the original Eliza on Broadway, in a move that puzzled everyone in the theatrical world. How could Eliza be played by anyone else, let alone that someone else would be that charming actress Audrey Hepburn? Ms. Hepburn's Eliza is a delicious characterization; her take on the poor flower girl starts slowly, taking us with her all the way. We fall in love with Eliza, the character, as played brilliantly by Ms. Hepburn, who knew how to charm us with her beauty and easy elegance in everything she did.

The English cast was wonderful. Stanley Holloway, a veteran of the English cinema played Alfred P. Doolitlle, Eliza's father. Mr. Holloway is charming every time one sees him. Gladys Cooper, one of the first ladies of the English stage, is seen as Mrs. Higgins, a grande dame of society, who is charmed by Eliza and knows her son will end up loving the girl of his experiment. Wilfred Hyde-White, another distinguished actor plays Col. Pickering, Higgins' ally and friend. Jeremy Brett plays the playboy Freddy, the man that loves the street where Eliza lives!

Of course, what makes "My Fair Lady" special is the great musical score by Mr. Loewe with lyrics by Mr. Lerner. Most of the songs are by now, standards that have delighted us since they were written and have been sung by practically all the best singers of the world.

Mr. Cukor deserves credit for directing this film with his usual flair as he feasts our eyes with a stunning film that will always be loved by whoever watches it.

A classic that ages horribly

[syldt1 · 6/10 · 21 April 2021]

I saw this movie many years ago, probably forty or more...and as a child I was stunned by its magnificence and captivated by Hepburn's, and especially Harrison's, charm. I saw it again last night and I was (predictably) dissapointed. Just to put things in perspective, I love clasics, although not much musicals, but "The King and I" is one of my favorite classic movies, so, there you have it. For starters, it is unfair for a 35 years old actress to pretend to be 21. Rex Harrison, who I like quite much, looks also somewhat old for the role, but compensates by the fact that his singing and comedic skills are strong and he is the only reason why Professor Higgins is not completely hateful. He delivers, by far, the best performance of the movie. Hepburn makes an effort to look ragged and dirty, but she is not believable as a street florist. Enter the first act and I start to feel uncomfortable. Eliza yells and her cockney accent is horrid. They sing a few horrible songs too, among cabbages and garbage and I can't find the charm to it. Eliza's father is a drunkard and a dirty far too old philanderer that I don't find charming at all (bless poor Stanley Holloway's soul!). Professor Higgins is obnoxious and pedantic and completely devoid of redeeming qualities (not Harrison's fault). The movie goes on with more forgettable musical numbers. Even the celebrated "I could have danced all night" is dissapointing, mostly because the lipsync is atrocious. Proud bachelor Professor Higgings delights us with his (well singed) misogynistic and pedantic songs. Hepburn and Harrison have zero chemistry. Eliza becomes a lady overnight by the sheer force of better diction and nicer clothes. Near the end, the level of misogyny and sexism is repulsive, and I am not one to be offended by these things easily, especially when watching a movie 57 years old. As I stated before, I absolutely love "The King and I" (released almost 10 years earlier than MFL) and there can't be a more obnoxious and stubborn character than that of Yul Brynner. But the pedantic King Mongkut of Siam is charming, funny, and deliciously cheeky. Prof. Higgings has no redeeming qualities, nor has he any visible arc and his unabashed low opinion of women in general, which he keeps repeating in his charming songs, at first accepted as funny and quirky, becomes simply bad taste. The romance is ridiculous; not once does he as much as glance at her with anything but indifference. Towards the end, he seems to consider Eliza more as a pet or maid than a woman worth of his respect and his love, and Eliza, seems to be pleased with this arrangement... off she goes to fetch his slippers...How can anyone consider this romantic, is beyond me.

Audrey Hepburn is the only good thing here

[elliottaact · 4/10 · 25 September 2021]

I love musicals as much as the next girl, and Audrey Hepburn is enchanting in this, as she always was. This movie is beautiful to look at: the set, costumes, & choreo are all very nice. The issue is the characters: not a single one is interesting, nor ever garnered any of my empathy. - and I'm very easy to please! Higgins is simply a raging misogynist, through and through, and never learns a single lesson. Hard to watch at times for how utterly insufferable he was. Also I could only bear how obnoxious Eliza was because Audrey is so delightful to watch. There were moments of charm, but for the most part she made my eyes glaze over. Additionally, this movie could cover the same ground and be less horrible if it was half the length. This film is the textbook example for aging badly.

MFL will always be one of my favorite movies..

[lauriebeth · 4 November 2001]

I first saw this film when I was eight years old, after receiving it as a first communion present from my mother. For months I watched the movie on an almost daily basis, and it was quickly a favorite. I thought it was absolute perfection.

Now that I am a bit older.. I notice that is does have quite a few flaws. It doesn't really capture the essence of Shaw's Pygmalion, but I don't think that should really take away from the movie; they should be treated as separate entities. Some of the sets are a little, well, cramped, but consider what they had to work with, they did a pretty good job.

And then there is the dubbing issue. I recently special on MFL on AMC, and they showed "Wouldn't It Be Loverly" and "Show Me" with Audrey's voice, and though Audrey may not have the perfect melodic voice of Marni Nixon, her voice was much more "Eliza". I really do think they should have just used her voice. If you watch "Funny Face", you get a good feel for voice, which I think is beautiful in a unconventional way.

Then, there is the question of whether Julie Andrews should have played Eliza in the film version of MFL. I've gone back and forth on this issue. Now, Audrey Hepburn is my favorite actress of all time, and Julie Andrews is a close runner-up, so it really is hard to "choose". Of course Julie's voice is much better than even Marni Nixon's... but like I said before, I don't think a perfect singing voice really would suit Eliza. And as for which would play a better Eliza overall.. I really don't know. I wasn't alive to see MFL on Broadway, so I really can't compare the two. What I do know is that Audrey gave an amazing performance. Anyway, as someone else said, if Julie had played Eliza, who would have played Mary Poppins? ;)

A legendary exquisite musical...

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 10/10 · 22 August 2002]

Audrey Hepburn is radiant and touching as the poor flower seller Eliza Doolittle who challenges her mentor's makeover powers, before eventually passing for a lady in London society... She is skillfully transformed into an elegant lady by a speech professor Henry Higgins (Rex Harrison) and taught to speak properly... From first frame to last, the film is slick, graceful, gorgeous to behold, with costumes and sets richly evoking the Edwardian era...

'My Fair Lady' begins in London, on a rainy evening outside Covent Garden, where a 'respectable girl' is selling bouquets of violets... Professor Henry Higgins, a phonetics and linguistics expert, confronts the 'deliciously low so horribly dirty' Eliza Doolittle for the first time...

In the best tradition, their first songs reveal their characters: 'Wouldn't It Be Loverly?' expresses Eliza's own ideas of what she dreams, while in 'Why Can't the English Learn to Speak' Higgins sings his despair over the deterioration of the English language, and displays his hard, irritable, intolerant, and elegantly arrogant nature...

Lerner and Loewe's songs are shear delight as the story moves from Higgins's wager with sympathetic Colonel Pickering (Wilfrid Hyde-White) that he can change the street girl with a strong cockney accent into a different human being by teaching her 'to speak beautifully' and pass her off in an upper class lady within six months... Higgins and Pickering are both single men, and the housekeeper, Mrs. Pearce, has misgivings about the way in which they are proposing to amuse themselves without caring about the consequences for the "common ignorant girl."

The songs are extraordinary in their ability to enrich our knowledge of the characters... Higgins' early song 'I'm an Ordinary Man' confirms that he is a 'quiet living man' without the need for a woman... Alfred Doolittle's 'With a Little Bit of Luck ' not only states his general philosophy of life, but exposes the perfect portrait of a friendly scoundrel... Eliza's father, who calls himself one of "the undeserving poor" is one of Shaw's best comedy creations... When he arrives to protest at the immorality of Higgins and Pickering treatment of his daughter, it soon becomes clear that he just wants to gain something for himself out of the situation... Eliza, becoming subject to Higgins' intimidation, belts out her discomfort at the rude, selfish Higgins, imagining a king ordering his death, in "Just You Wait, 'Enry 'Iggins."

The music is also a logical extension of the characters' feelings... When Eliza finally pronounces impeccably: 'The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain,' Higgins can hardly believe what he has heard: ('By George, she's got it. Now once again, where does it rain?'), and Eliza ('On the plain! On the plain!') and Higgins simply cannot be contained ('And where's that soggy plain? ') Eliza responding: In Spain! In Spain! They sing a duet together to celebrate their success... The scene leads to one of the most triumphant sequences in musical history...

Further, the stunning scene in which Eliza Doolittle appears in high society when she meets Higgins's mother (the impeccable Gladys Cooper), and attends the Ascot races... She instantly charms a young admirer Jeremy Brett (Freddy) by her slightly odd manner of speaking, who later haunts Higgins' house ("On the Street Where you Live").

The climax comes at the Embassy Ball, where Higgins' protégé, now "an enchanting young lady" charms everyone with her beauty... Her exercise is an unqualified success... Her waltz with the Queen's son, and other dance partners, spreads throughout the audience about her identity...

Henry and Pickering are ecstatic... They congratulate each other for their "glorious victory," ('You Did It'), but Eliza is hurt and angry at being ignored... They barely acknowledge her presence... She is no longer a part of any world... When Higgins returns for his slippers, which he has forgotten, Eliza flings them angrily at him, and voices her feelings: 'Oh, what's to become of me? What am I fit for?'

In an attempt to find her true identity a frustrated Eliza encounters Freddy who declares his love for her, but she returns to the populated flower market outside Covent Garden, where no one recognizes her... Her own 'miserable' father - tuxedo-dressed - gives her the cheerful news that he is about to get married...

In the closing scenes, Higgins is upset to discover Liza has left him and is led to wonder why 'can't a woman be more like a man? Men are so honest, so thoroughly square.' Eliza surprises Higgings with her decision to marry Freddie, and claims: 'I shall not feel alone without you. I can stand on my own without you. I can do bloody well 'Without you!'

At his home, at dusk, Higgins ultimately recognizes Liza's quality... He recalls Liza and realizes how much she has come to mean to him... Without her, he is lost and lonely...

The climax is a great ending to a great musical...

'My Fair Lady' has great style and beauty... The film describes what is common in many societies... That accent determines the superficiality of class distinctions... The motion picture is humorous, notably the wonderfully steamy bath in which Prof. Higgens' female staff cleanses the accumulated dirt of the street off Eliza Doolittle...

With the dazzling splendor that director George Cukor offers: the designer's eye for detail, the painter's flair for color, the artist's imagination, and the delicacy of handling, the film garnered no less than twelve Oscar nominations, and took home eight statuettes including Best Picture of the year, Best Actor- Harrison, Best Director- Cukor, as well as Best Art Decoration, Sound, Scoring, Costume Design, and color Cinematography...

Wonderful, but I missed Julie Andrews

[DennisLittrell · 9/10 · 8 July 2002]

I thought the music was wonderful. I thought Audrey Hepburn was just adorable and so full of energy and grace and just fascinating to watch. Rex Harrison was an absolutely perfect Professor Higgins and never wavered or changed character. My problem (a minor one) is with the ending and with the dubbing.

The story is brilliant of course, taken from George Bernard Shaw's acclaimed play Pygmalion, although materially altered to fit the requirements of a musical comedy. The contrast of the unschooled street urchin Liza Doolittle and the stuffy, self-possessed confirmed bachelor, a kind of nineteenth century British man of science, wonderfully accomplished in his profession, but blind to himself when it comes to relationships with other people, made for a most interesting match. And the delusive dream of a man forming his own perfect woman (which is the basis of the Pygmalion legend) works so very well with a conceited linguist tutoring a cockney girl. The entire concept is a work of genius with the drunken father and the objectifying Col. Pickering and the very right Mrs. Pierce.

But there are some problems. Freddy is needed of course as another "objectifying" character to make it clear just how desirable Eliza really is and how foolish and blind Professor Higgins is in not seeing this--in theory, of course, because in practice with Audrey Hepburn or Julie Andrews as Eliza, this would seem entirely unnecessary. And indeed without Freddy we do not have the beautiful "On the Street Where You Live." But even with him Prof. Higgins does not see, and indeed even at the resolution of the story, he still does not see, as he asks for his slippers. If this were presented to current London and Broadway audiences it would never play the way it was written. Professor Higgins would need to see the light and he would have to get his own slippers!

The dubbing and the need for it is curious. There is no doubt that Marni Nixon, who did the singing, has a beautiful and commanding voice, and we are the better for having heard her, but why is the dubbing so obvious? It's almost as if Miss Hepburn is saying to the audience: they said it would be better if Miss Nixon sings instead of me because her voice is stronger and so very well trained. And so Hepburn does not completely lip-sync some of the opening words of songs as though to remind us that she is not singing. And the contrast between her delicate voice and then the sudden power of Marni Nixon's is obvious. Beyond this is the question of why Julie Andrews, who has a voice to match that of Miss Nixon, and charisma and charm at least in the same ballpark as Miss Hepburn, wasn't asked to play the part that she knew so very well from her experience on the stage. Still, as another reviewer has so acutely noted, if she had been asked, we would have missed her in Mary Poppins, which was made the same year. I should also note that Hepburn was 33 or 34 years old when this was made (although she looked almost ten years younger). Nonetheless she was playing the part of "a good girl, I am," whom Pickering identifies in his call to Scotland Yard as being 21 years old.

Curious. But all is forgiven because Audrey Hepburn is just so beautiful, so elegant and so delightful in the part. I especially loved her in the opening scene in her soiled clothes and hat and her sour voice. By the way, I have heard Julie Andrews sing the part, although I never saw her on the stage, and the way she "meow's" Eliza's accent, like a cat's claw on a chalk board, is really amazing. (Get the CD.)

This is one of the best movie musicals ever made, a sheer delight highlighted not only by Rex Harrison and Audrey Hepburn, but by Stanley Holloway as the Liza's lovable rascal father and Wilfrid Hyde-White as the very understanding and very properly British Col. Pickering with opulent direction by the great George Cukor. The sets and production numbers are gorgeous. But see it for Audrey Hepburn, one of the great stars of the silver screen in one of her most memorable roles.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

Old-fashioned musical comedy has never been so wonderful.

[mark.waltz · 10/10 · 21 October 2013]

Some straight plays cry for music. "Green Grows the Lilacs", "The Matchmaker", "Auntie Mame". And for George Bernard Shaw's "Pygmallion", all it took was the ingenuity of Moss Hart to get together with Alan Jay Lerner and Frederick Lowe to create a classic Broadway musical that not only ran for years but began several long-running touring companies and created a legendary film that is absolutely perfect in structure even if slightly overlong and featuring a leading lady some say was not right for the ingénue role.

I disagree when it comes to the presence of Audrey Hepburn in this part. Yes, Julie Andrews had what it took on Broadway not to only be the messy looking flower girl but the great lady in beautiful gowns as well. She also had the windpipes to belt out such classics as "Wouldn't It Be Loverly?" and "I Could Have Danced All Night". Jack Warner obviously didn't want to take the chance on an unknown (even though she really wasn't unknown; She was popular for TV and theater, having played Guenevere in "Camelot") so Audrey Hepburn was cast. Envisioned by audiences and critics as too glamorous for the rags she wore while selling flowers, she didn't get the praise she deserved, even if those same audiences and critics did go "ooh" and "ah!" when she stepped down the stairs in her glamorous outfits for the Ascot Gavotte and the later ball sequence.

Rex Harrison does repeat his role as the very ego-maniacal Henry Higgins, the eternal teacher of language who bets his pal Colonel Pickering (Wilfred Hyde White) that he can turn a flower girl into a duchess. It takes lots of chocolates and marbles being swallowed before Eliza (Hepburn) can be presented to London society where she meets Higgins' aristocratic but kind mother (Gladys Cooper). Eliza bedazzles society with her earthiness, especially Freddie Eynsford Hill (Jeremy Brett) who of sings his love for her in the breathtaking "On the Street Where You Live". But can Eliza escape from her past, especially when she keeps running into her blaggard father Alfred (the wonderful Stanley Holloway) who first sings of "With a Little Bit of Luck" as he avoids work, cops, and getting married.

That last part of course, changes when he announces he's "Getting Married in the Morning". The extremely heavy set woman Holloway dances with in this big production number is none other than Ayllene Gibbons, the bed-ridden mother who devours a whole turkey in the cult classic "The Loved One". This film is jam-packed with moments of greatness, from the rose-filled opening credits and that fabulous overture, the delightfully campy "Ascot Gavotte" (two wealthy matrons eying each other when each of them shows up in the same "original"), the presence of Higgins' former student (Theodore Bikel) who "exposes" Eliza as a "fraud", and finally the show-down between Higgins and Eliza after he has exploited her and the venomous "Without You" that leads to her declaring to him that "you shall never see me again".

Yes, there's something about Higgins that makes him a male chauvinist pig, but there's also something very gentle and tender about him, even if he is adverse to showing it. You can see men like this existing in this time and sure in their ego of who they are and how they lived their life. All Eliza wanted was the chance to become a lady and work in a real flower shop rather than sell them on the street, so no gold digger is she. Mona Washbourne plays housekeeper Mrs. Pearce with a loving yet imperious character who finally stands up for Eliza, and Gladys Cooper is noble yet not without spunk as Higgins' moral but outspoken mother. Sharp-eyed classic film fans will recognize Isobel Elsom as Freddie's mother, remembering her with glee as the matron murdered by Ida Lupino and her sisters in "Ladies in Retirement" 23 years before.

Artistically, musically and technically speaking, this is outstanding on every level. It is one of those films one must try to see on a big screen during one's lifetime, and with its 50th anniversary coming up, a big-screen re-release is certainly not a bad idea. Director George Cukor finally won his long-awaited Oscar for this, and while Audrey Hepburn failed to be nominated (in a year where Julie Andrews won for "Mary Poppins"), her contributions to the film cannot be ignored, either. Some may quibble that Marni Nixon's dubbing of Hepburn too quickly looses its cockney accent when, after declaring "The Rain in Spain Stays Mainly in the Plain" she begins to sing of "Dancing All Night" with narry an "aye" or "garn" in earshot, but when you've got all this other brilliance, why care?

Brilliant and bah humbug to those that would say different.

[brendan-88740 · 10/10 · 28 December 2021]

Now 53 I watched this for the first time in 40 years. I had seen it several times as a child but not since. What a masterpiece it is. My daughter wanted to watch it and I reluctantly complied. Damn it, I was surprised when I enjoyed it more than any other film in recent memory.

I note the recent resurgence of musicals. Probably induced by the pandemic, Trump and the general state of things. Well the makers of these new productions could learn much from the masters of the craft that made this film and its ilk. This was the end of a golden period in entertainment. A time when Hollywood acknowledged its function was to entertain and uplift the populace. A time prior to great sections of society taking political cues from celebrity entertainers.

To those pointing out the misogyny of many of the characters, let's not waste anymore of your time on this site and whip you straight down to Scotland Yard where your powers of detection will be undoubtedly embraced and put to good use. This film is set in pre WW1 England you pontificating Pratt's. Of course much of the dynamics between characters are abhorrent by modern standards. The unfairness of Eliza's lot is the whole point. Be it at the hands of Henry her father or her general station. She rises above it showing her worth is no less than that of the royalty she enchants. The fact that her happy ending is still one lacking in true acknowledgment of her as a whole and competent person is commentary on that time and also a nod to our own Eliza story as a society. That we have come so far as a society but yet have so far to go. Nonetheless like Eliza we should still rejoice in that which we have achieved. To miss this is to miss the whole point of the film. Do you really think these social matters were misunderstood by the creators and cast of this film? If you do, then you suffer from a grandiose assessment of your own capacity to appraise life and are probably either an arts student or an idiot.

Many Flaws, But Enjoyable Anyway

[evanston_dad · 7/10 · 13 March 2006]

Not so much a film as a taped version of the stage play, "My Fair Lady" is about as cinematic as a community theatre production, yet it has much to recommend it anyway.

For one, the Lerner and Loewe score is timeless, and it sounds great in the film. It's also nice that it's captured in its entirety---no songs from the stage version were dropped, not even superfluous numbers like Freddie's reprise of "On the Street Where You Live." The film also captures the performance of Rex Harrison in the role of Henry Higgins, a role he created on stage. Like Yul Brynner in "The King and I," Rex Harrison so perfectly embodied Higgins that any actor who's ever attempted to play him since has to pretty much impersonate Harrison or risk the disappointed wrath of audiences. And there are also some colorful character actors who do much with smaller roles, notably Wilfred Hyde-White as Col. Pickering, Stanley Holloway, who gets a couple of showstoppers as Alfred Dolittle, and Gladys Cooper, with maybe five minutes of screen time and no songs, but who nevertheless runs away with a couple of scenes of her own as Higgins' acerbic mother.

The weakest link in this cast, it pains me to say, is Audrey Hepburn. As much as I've liked her in other things, she simply isn't convincing as Eliza Dolittle. And her lip synching is atrocious--I've never seen such a bad job of pretending to sing in a movie musical. But no one could show off Cecil Beaton's outrageous fashion concoctions to better effect, especially the scene-stealing dress and towering hat Hepburn wears in the Ascot sequence.

There are actually many problems with the material itself. It's dramatically inert, for one. The plot is paper thin yet the movie continues on and on for three hours long past the point where the main conflict has been resolved. Everything feels padded; scenes seem longer than they need to be. The character of Eliza's father, which seems like a very important one on paper, could actually, when you think about it, be excised from the film entirely without in the least affecting the plot. And the musical numbers are lacking a certain vitality--the blocking consists of people just sort of walking around on sets singing or talking their way through songs, and one craves a rollicking production number here and there. George Cukor doesn't show much imagination in his directing; however, true to form, the Academy gave Cukor his sole Oscar for this, one of his most anonymous directorial efforts.

But despite all of these faults, I still very much like this movie. It's fun, it's mindless, it puts me in mind of spring. It appeals to the Anglophile in me. It's a never less than respectable adaptation of one of the greatest stage musicals of all time.

Grade: A-

Almost Brilliant

[dxia · 8/10 · 14 March 2004]

During the first two hours of this movie, I had thought that it was the greatest musical ever brought to film. It's only during the last hour that it begins to languish and plod. If the first two hours are a solid 10/10, then the last hour is about a 4/10. It brings the average to about 8/10, which is exactly what I gave the movie, but it's fun to think about how great the movie could have been had the producers decided to find a better ending to an otherwise superb story.

It goes to show that film is a tricky medium, and regardless of how great musicals can be, live action simply isn't as interesting when it's recorded. 'My Fair Lady' could have used a bit of trimming, especially in Stanley Holloway's pieces, WITH A BIT OF LUCK and GET ME TO THE CHURCH ON TIME. Although they may have been spectacular to see on stage, movie audiences will yearn to see more about Eliza and wonder why the director spends so much time on her father.

On the brighter side, I believe that I have never seen Audrey Hepburn in a more perfect role. Eliza Doolittle is a lot like she, in their rise from poverty. And watching Audrey is like being invited to see a person shine in their most perfect niche. She isn't gorgeous in a modern sense, but even a decade after her death, her image still carries that immortal appeal. Some critics call it the "it" factor. We don't know what "it" is but we know it's there.

Billy Wilder once said, "God kissed her face, and there she was." For me, I just like her smile, and my smile when I watch her exuberance in one of the defining roles in her career.

Lavish production marred by misogyny

[gbill-74877 · 6/10 · 2 June 2023]

High production value, great cast, catchy tunes - there's a reason this musical was so popular and is considered by many to be a classic today. The power of the music is undeniable, with songs like "I Could Have Danced All Night" leading the way. Audrey Hepburn is wonderful, even if she does lean in to that Cockney accent a wee heavily, and had her singing voiced dubbed (a mistake if you ask me). The costumes are a lot of fun to behold, and the supporting cast, including the visiting colonel (Wilfrid Hyde-White) and Liza's father (Stanley Holloway), provide necessary distraction from the main story, which is a little simple for 170 minutes. In fact, the father has two of my favorite songs in "With a Little Bit of Luck" and "Get Me to the Church on Time."

Unfortunately, the film is dominated by Professor Henry Higgins (Rex Harrison), a snobby elitist with a host of misogynistic feelings. Oh, he's admonished at times for his comments, but it's not nearly enough, and unclear he ever transforms. Among other things, he calls Liza a "presumptuous insect," "heartless guttersnipe," and "impudent hussy," but the misogyny perhaps peaks in "A Hymn to Him (Why Can't A Woman Be More Like a Man?)", with lyrics like "Why is thinking something women never do?" He gets some comeuppance but not a lot. In fact, he gets the girl. The ending is not only horrible and an affront, but it's counter to George Bernard Shaw's vision for Pygmalion and what he fought against decades after it debuted.

Meanwhile, we see the favorite view the wealthy have of class on display here: themselves as erudite, morally superior, and having worked hard to arrive at their station, and the poor as uneducated (Liza), immoral and/or lazy (Liza's father). The film might score its most points when Liza says "The difference between a lady and a flower girl isn't how she behaves, but how she is treated," but Liza's strength is muted and any intended satire of the rich lacks teeth. The dominant concept is how someone from the street could (and should) be "elevated" by becoming a society lady. And in listening to Higgins wax on about the English language and how it has conveyed "The noblest thoughts that ever flowed through the hearts of men," it's pretty certain he's an elitist relative to England as well.

As much as I liked watching this early on and readied myself to defend it against modern sensibilities, my opinion steadily declined, and dropped further with the ending. It certainly didn't help that it was so long and dragged either. I can see why some people adore it and why other people hate it, but for me it's somewhere in the middle.

Quote: "You mean, you'd sell your daughter for fifty pounds?" "Have you no morals, man?" "No, I can't afford 'em, Governor. Neither could you, if you was as poor as me."

The quintessential musical with a staggering pedigree.

[budmassey · 10/10 · 10 September 2003]

The classic case of an embarrassment of riches.

The infrastructure of this jewel reads like a Who's Who of American Cinema. Take the play by George Bernard Shaw. It's in the Western Canon of Literature, for heaven's sake. Then add lyrics by Jay Lerner and his longtime collaborator composer Frederick Loewe who gave us everything from An American in Paris, to Gigi, to Brigadoon, among many others.

Directed by George Cuckor, whose credits include not only Gone With the Wind, but also a string of Katherine Hepburn films, My Fair Lady bears Cuckor's brilliant touch in directing leading women. And what a leading woman he had to work with this time. Audrey is breathtaking in every move and every syllable she utters.

But that's not all. Those stunning costumes designed by Cecil Beaton are without peer in modern cinema, especially the Ball Gown. Audrey was so exquisite that she looked unreal, perhaps of another species, as she descended the stairs and donned her velvet cape.

With music direction by Andre Previn, the baton behind Gigi, Porgy and Bess, Kiss Me Kate and even Jesus Christ Superstar, My Fair Lady's musical pedigree is complete. From this perspective, My Fair Lady is the culmination of a generation of America musicals, and the greatest one of them all even before the first frame was filmed.

Ironically, Audrey was denied a well-deserved Oscar. She didn't even get nominated, which from an historical perspective boggles the mind. The Oscar that year went to Julie Andrews for Mary Poppins. Andrews, who had popularized the role of Eliza Doolittle on Broadway before the movie was made, passed on My Fair Lady to do Mary Poppins. Andrews, a gifted singer, was reportedly miffed at the casting of Hepburn, whose singing was dubbed by an uncredited Marne Nixon, and Hepburn's exuberant performance was completely ignored by the SAG.

But there were enough Oscars to go around. Beaton, Harrison and Previn all collected statuettes, and My Fair Lady collected eight total and was nominated for four more.

This immense achievement was almost lost to deterioration, but the newly restored version is stunning. If you don't have this one in your collection, you can't call it a collection.

Mansplaining: The Musical

[pyrocitor · 6/10 · 21 August 2016]

"Your ending is damnable; you ought to be shot!"

So boomed George Bernard Shaw, upon witnessing the ending of Pygmalion, his slashing satire of class and gender disparities, changed from its original intent. In Shaw's words, leading lady Eliza Doolittle ended the play by proudly walking out on Professor Henry Higgins, her sneering tutor. To Shaw's chagrin, subsequent performances had twisted the climax into a more populist, albeit disingenuously romantic, 'happy ending.' Flash-forward forty years, by the time My Fair Lady, the filmic revival of the now beloved Broadway musical, was released, audiences would have expected nothing less. And yet, for a show heralded as "the perfect musical," it's startling how, nostalgic haze aside, how many of the film's attributes have aged poorly to the point of being resoundingly un-fair - none the least, that 'damnable' ending itself.

This isn't to say that the film is worthy of the kind of lambasting Higgins bestows upon Eliza, upon first glimpsing her in her unrefined, working class inelegance (ahh, romance). Granted, for one of the defining directors of the Classical Hollywood screwball era, George Cukor's work here is thoroughly sleepy, with the skeletal plot lumbering along with such an unhurried dopiness that an hour could easily have been shaved off the running time without batting an eye. Even the songs, unforgettably catchy as they are, are staged with an oddly docile tentativeness. Even the most iconic tunes come across as shy and tentative rather than the lively vivaciousness they warrant.

Where Cukor really perks up is in mischievously digging into the show's social critique, lambasting English high society's priggish, disinterested disdain for the less fortunate with gleeful abandon. Sure, the endless montages of Higgins' antiquated speech language pathology turned sadistic psychological torture bring their share of comedic relief, but the film's brightest, most engaging moment is its central horse race scene, where droves of virtually sleepwalking society men and women raise and lower their opera glasses in synch like cows chewing their cuds, just waiting to be shaken up by Eliza Doolittle's feisty bull in a china shop. Similarly, Cukor spares no expense in costume and set design, as the two diametrically opposed social stations - the grungy London ghetto and prim society balls - look gorgeously, spectacularly vivid in their own respects. Tranquilized execution or not, there's no denying the film's 'loverlyness,' and it carries enough charm to keep afloat, especially when punctuated by welcome moments of acrid, Shawsian wit.

Ah yes - but then there's that romance, boldly paving the way for decades of romanticized unhealthy relationships in a way that even Grease's 'change everything for your man!' climax would shudder at. It's certainly no fault of the performers. Hepburn herself is an absolute effervescent delight, as Eliza's course roots allow her to gleefully cast off her tried and true airs of consummate elegance with a hysterical, sparky firebrand of a performance, Monty Python cockney accent and all (it's a shame she wasn't allowed to contribute her own singing, as the unnecessary dubbing during musical numbers is detrimentally distracting). Similarly, Rex Harrison's nimble elocution and pristinely condescending eyebrows light up Henry Higgins' monolithic misogyny with a sneering charisma that makes him distressingly hard to hate, even at his most loathsome.

In fact, therein lies the film's most unshakeable concern: Higgins is so farcically abhorrent to Eliza throughout that it's impossible for his third act romantic about-face not to play as just as grotesque, abusive and controlling. Different direction or actor interpretation could have teased out nuances of redemptive shame in Higgins' transformation (there's even an arguable undercurrent of Higgins as a closeted homosexual fighting for societal or matriarchal validation through heteronormative normalcy - "Why can't a woman be more like a man," anyone?). Instead, Harrison plays him as so deliciously, unrelentingly despicably throughout that we're eager for him to get a colossal comeuppance, not a simperingly happy ending. Seldom has so sharp and sweet a film ended on such an uncomfortably false note - even Hepburn's face and body language are saturated with this uneasiness in her purportedly cute final appearance - and it can't help but taint the entire film as consequence. Loverly 'dis ain't. Guaarrn.

This isn't all to say that your childhood is ruined, and My Fair Lady is an unredeemable write-off - it's fun, frilly, and peppered with moments both delightful and dastardly witty. Still, contemporary gender politics haven't been kind to this one, and it's important to contextualize how uneasy and unsatisfying a watch the film is amidst its many delights. We've grown accustomed to its face, but that shouldn't excuse the scowl it works hard to hide under its prettiness.

-6/10

A Sow's Ear out of a Silk Purse...

[Xstal · 5/10 · 18 October 2020]

A Professor of Misogyny takes advantage of a young woman and turns her into something she isn't. It's similar to the treatment forced on those whose sexual orientation didn't conform to the views of the 'holier than thou', and therein lies the paradox, with the prof and his colonel chum. Weighing in at an almighty 170 minutes, you can remove Eliza's father from the scene as he adds nothing to the story, excepting a song about the imminent demise of an individuals freedom. Nothing wrong with Eliza's aspirations and Audrey Hepburn is delightful, although it was education not enunciation she needed and, after twenty years without a bath, delicing, steroids and some powerful antibiotics. How about - My Equality Lady, now wouldn't that be luverly.