The Wonderful World of Disney (TV Series) Once Upon a Mattress (2005) User Reviews

It's a Question of Stack-Up

[Bilko-3 · 5/10 · 19 December 2005]

For me, any review of "Once Upon a Mattress" is a matter of how it stacks up to previous versions. "Mattress" was the second musical I ever saw performed on stage when I was a kid. In my twenties, I played Sextimus. I saw the 1972 version on TV (and recently acquired a copy; it doesn't age well) and found the 1964 TV version on eBay -- that is the best version, with an unexpected song and dance routine from Elliott Gould, who is light on his feet and sounds like an American Anthony Newley.

This new version, to use my wife's assessment, is too Disneyfied. It's just OK when it could have been fabulous. It's polite when it should be raucous. Too many gags are blown because they toned down the delivery for film. Also, the secondary parts have been reduced to almost nothing. The Jester's role is so slivered that I wonder why he's in the film.

Tracey Ullman: Very good as Winnifred, but held back. Her British accent in the part is fine, since it establishes her as a foreigner in the kingdom. And she IS supposed to come from a marshland swamp in a northern kingdom.

Dennis O'Hare: Good acting as Dauntless, sloppy diction when singing.

Carol Burnett: Here's the main problem -- she's excellent (especially with the new song written for this version), but restrained. Aggravain is written to be bombastic and overpowering.

Tom Smothers: Very good as the King, but again, this is a part that has been played by Buster Keaton. It was written as basically being a medieval Harpo Marx. All of the girl-chasing has been excised. He's very mellow and charming, but mellow doesn't do it for me with this part. He was fine for "Man to Man Talk". Smothers was as wonderful as he was allowed to be by the director.

Matthew Morrison: Again, a cartoon part played too realistically. But Morrison was very good, and sang very well.

Zooey Deschanel: I liked her. Her voice was beautiful (her diction was sloppy.) She acted rings around Bernadette Peters in the 1972 version. But the problem with a more down-to-earth Lady Larken is that what attracts Dauntless to Winnifred is the fact that WINNIFRED is the very first down-to-earth girl he's ever met.

Michael Boatman: As the Jester - probably a good actor, but who knows from this? The part was cut to a point where he was a glorified extra.

Edward Hibbert: Disneyfied in a politically correct way -- instead of obviously being the Queen's lover-on-the-side, here the Wizard is an old drag queen -- LITERALLY, when he's playing the Nightingale.

The director blew the end of the curse. It's a standard comedy Rule of Three: Jester: Look... the Queen can't talk! King: (struggling) I... (court is breathless) King: (struggling harder) I... (court is breathless) King: (smiling) I can! (court cheers!) Here, the director had Tom Smothers IN THE BACKGROUND saying (very quietly), "I... I can talk. I can talk." Completely killed the bit.

The pantomime with Winnifred trying to get to sleep was rushed into, then screwed up with bad camera cuts.

"The Spanish Panic" is a choreographer's Mount Everest. This choreographer fell off the mountain halfway up.

Much of the material holds up (when the director has the faith to let the cast deliver it properly) and the songs are still charming.

The nice thing will be if kids like it enough to seek out other, better movies of musicals, or to audition for this one when their local theater does it, just because they remember liking this one.

generally fun, with reservations

[cherold · 7/10 · 5 January 2006]

I barely remember the 1972 television version of this, so it's probably unfair to say that one was better. But my impression is it was better, simply because Burnette played Winnifred. This is not to say Tracey Ullman was bad. Ullman is tremendously talented and she does a good job, but she was too restrained in the part. Burnette perfectly captured the world's least appropriate princess, but Ullman actually comes across as fairly sweet and gentle, at most mildly eccentric and occasionally slightly loud. It doesn't help that Burnette cannot completely contain her inherent wackiness; the play feels as though it should be a contrast between a cold, imperious queen and a wild, tomboyish princess, but the distance between Ullman and Burnette doesn't seem that great.

Still, it's a fun musical with many amusing moments and a good cast. And who knows, maybe if I saw that 1972 version I'd say, this isn't nearly as good as I remember.

On the Whole Disappointing

[Jvbway · 6/10 · 2 May 2006]

"Once Upon a Mattress" is a delightful musical. It is, however not big enough to be made into a film, so a television version would be a perfect solution. In fact, it was the perfect solution in two earlier versions, both of which starred Carol Burnett, who created the role of Princess Winnifred in the original Off-Broadway and Broadway productions. however, both of those versions were abridged and differed from the script slightly, so the third version would have been the perfect opportunity to remain faithful to the stage script,

this is sadly one of the films shortcomings. A substantial amount of the score is dropped, not to mention some curious script alterations, such as lady larkin being sent to the dungeon, and the character of the minstrel is dropped.

On top of that, the cast is a mixed blessing. Carol Burnett is delightful, using her trademark comedy to the best of her abilities, beautifully hamming it up. taking on Burnett's role is Tracy Ullman ("Hairspray"'s Marissa Jaret Winokour was originally considered, but she turned it down). On the whole, Ullman is a good choice for the role, charming but still not an obvious bride for a prince. Ullman's comedy is adept and her singing is good, but on the whole one can't help but think she is a but mature for the role. The same goes for Dennis O'Hare as Prince Dauntless, his over the top performance somewhat schticky. Matthew Morrison is charming as sir harry, and Zooey Deschanel is appealing as Lady Larkin, even if she is a bit too contemporary for the role.

Still, after ABC's wonderful remakes of "Bye Bye Birdie" and "Annie", one can't help but feel that they could have done better.

an applause for "Once on a Mattress" 2005

[willardbrumbaugh · 19 December 2005]

Reqarding "Once on a Mattress" Maybe its because I am 64, yet still have a romantic heart, but I found nothing out of line in having the principal characters played by people in their 40s. Contextually, this was appropriate. And I thoroughly enjoyed Tracy Ulman as "Fred".

Tracy Ulman's performance in "I am shy" reminded me of the bold delivery of Ethel Merman.

Tom Smothers was perfect for the part of Sextemus, and Carol Burnett is her usual terrific self.

The young couple not only were well fit for their roles, but they also sang beautifully together.

I was pleased to learn that this is being made available on DVD. I see it as a keeper.

Good, not great

[katier-lang · 6/10 · 28 September 2008]

I have to agree with many other viewers... many things have been "Disney"fied. However, I want to point out that O'Hare needs a little more credit here. His character is somewhat weak, so his "sloppy diction" (which, all rabid Broadway fans knows he is known for) actually seems to endear him to the part.

Burnett shines especially, and Deschanel is charming. All in all, it's good fun to watch, but don't get your hopes up too high. This is obviously a kid-friendly, super colorful, bit of fun. No off-color humor here, so for those of us with a more wicked sense of humor, we'll have to wait a little longer!

Very endearing little musical with a mixed bag of results...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 7 February 2012]

While watching ONCE UPON A MATTRESS and seeing Carol Burnett as Queen Aggravain, I immediately realized that she must have played Princess Winnifred in the original version of the show in the '60s. This became all too clear when I saw that Tracey Ullman's daffy princess was lacking a certain spark that Burnett would have given to the part--plus she was a little too mature for the role to begin with.

Denis O'Hare seemed another case of miscasting as Prince Dauntless, a role could easily have been played by Matthew Morrison, who instead was saddled with a boring secondary role.

But despite these misgivings, there's much to like about this rowdy version of the tale, vibrant with colorful sets and costumes (particularly Burnett's jeweled outfits) and some witty lines that are tossed about by a capable cast.

But there's always the feeling that something isn't right--and not being able to compare this version with the original I can't say what it is but I see from other reviews that much of the original material was altered or deleted entirely. Perhaps this is why there's a feeling that it could have been so much better.

Summing up: For Carol Burnett fans, it's a delicious chance to watch her play broad comedy with such finesse. She never misses an opportunity to ham it up but keeps it from being too over-the-top to be enjoyable. And while the choreography could have been more inventive, Tracey Ullman gives all of her energy to some of the dance routines with some very funny results.

Unfortunately, Tom Smothers is wasted in the role of the mute King Sextimus. But all in all, it's a fun version of a fractured fairy-tale, based on "The Princess and the Pea."

To crs949

[bekayess · 7/10 · 19 December 2005]

Don't know what "innocent" version of ONCE UPON A MATTRESS you saw in your youth, but this version is even more sanitized than the Broadway show or either of the 2 TV versions.

Your problem with "Pre-marital sex": Larken and Harry in the B'way show and 1972 TV version were not married. In the 1964 TV version, they were secretly married to appease the censors.

"Emphasis on the wedding night sex": the "Man To Man Talk" song between the King and Dauntless also was in the B'way show, and the 1972 TV version.

"Latent homosexuality": Not a part of the B'way show nor the TV versions, but, hey, what planet are you living on? "Will and Grace" airs in the so-called "family hour" on NBC. And Gay people have always been a part of the entertainment industry. Carol Burnett, on her classic TV variety show, often brought on guest stars who were suspected by the general public to be "known-homosexuals." (I can recall my rather naive mother telling me more than 35 years ago that Rock Hudson was gay.) Carol brought stars like Rock, Jim Nabors, Roddy McDowall, Nancy Walker, and many others onto her show. Carol was and is, in many ways, and honorary "friend of Dorothy." And don't let's talk about Bob Mackie. . .perhaps the greatest costumer designer ever!!!

I'm surprised you didn't mention the quasi-incestuous relationship between Agravain and Dauntless, something glossed over in this PC/2005 conservative version. In the original play and 1964 and 1972 TV version the Queen--after manhandling and promising Dauntless that she knows best--actually says (in an aside to the audience) "Oh, God, if I were only 20 years younger." (MY ASIDE: I once saw a production of BRIGADOON at a Christian High School where the 2nd act nightclub scene was changed to a COFFEE SHOP!!! My, how the times have regressed from enlightenment to close-mindedness.

BTW--I did like this version, but the earlier versions were better.

Disney: Hands off, please!

[bobwen · 1/10 · 20 December 2005]

Mattress is a great show... for those 16 or older. Like most Warner "Looney Tunes" it was never intended for children! Now, if you take that very premise, and try to make it palatable for the Christain set between our 2 mountain ranges, you kill the very premise for the show in the first place! The original plot revolves around, and is propelled by a pre-marital pregnancy, an Oedipal relationship, a woman-chasing father, and typical court intrigue. These are now, essentially all gone and with them went the engine that drives the show. That said, the actors here were all fine, and generally well cast (although I'd have gone with Marcel Marceau or the brilliant Bill Irwin for the King, even though Tommy Smothers was still great) and all the leads made the very wise choice of going with their own strengths as opposed to trying to out do the originals. Tracey Ullman was great as her own Winnifred, and Burnett created her own Queen, knowing that, like her own Winnifred of 1959, Jane White's original Queen is absolutely not copyable! The "dated" musical sound of the original was marvelously updated for today. All of which underscored the terrible rewriting of the book, and the stodgy direction accompanying it. Why take 5 minutes of droopy dialog to establish what "Opening For A Princess" did musically in 2? Where did that useless dungeon scene come from? "The Queen Has Ordered Quiet" and "Very Soft Shoes"" would have fit much better in the same amount of time. "Mattress" is a fully loaded freight train racing down a steep mountain grade, barely staying on the tracks, whistle and bells going all the way. Anything less (like the recent Broadway revival too) just falls flat. I wish they'd either re-release the 1964 B&W version, or someone please do a shot-by-shot remake, as it was written! No, Hollywood, you don't know better than the original Broadway writers and, no Disney, you don't know real comedy. You know "cute, innocent and humorous," but that's a long way from comedy! Please stop remaking Broadway musical comedies. Let someone else do it, please!

Carol Burnett Shines

[RodReels-2 · 8/10 · 19 December 2005]

I'm only writing because of my disagreement with one of the other reviewers. Carol Burnett shines in this rather uninspired remake of the Broadway musical. Having once seen her play Princess Winifred, it is a pleasure to see her take the older role of Queen Aggravaine. She always has a way of taking an ordinary line reading and making it funny with her unique delivery. She should garner a supporting actress nod from someone, (Emmies, Golden Globes, anyone?) Tommy Smothers was great as the mute king, and Matthew Morrison and Zoey Deschanel were serviceable in their roles. Mixed reviews, however, for the two leads. A younger Tracey Ullman would have been great in this role, but she does seem a little old for it now. All in all, she gave it her best shot; and she does have her moments. But I would have preferred to see Sarah Jessica Parker's take on it, and I would have much preferred if Disney had left the stage musical intact instead of omitting roles and songs. Now that this has aired, would someone please release the 1964 TV version that gave Carol Burnett to the world? I haven't seen it since childhood, and I would love for my own children to experience this musical as it should be experienced...not this bland Disney remix.

Average, except for Zooey

[dborden1-1 · 6/10 · 21 April 2006]

I just watched the DVD for the first time last night. Personally, I found most of the performances average at best, except for Zooey Deschanel. After seeing her in Elf, then Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy, I would love to be able to see her cabaret act in person. She has an awesome singing voice, gorgeous eyes, and a seductiveness that seems unmatched by any other actress/singer of her generation. She is a true breath of fresh air! There are so many plastic singers out there right now, as well as many young actresses that try so hard to make you like them that they come across as flighty. But Zooey has a relaxed attitude that just automatically makes you smile. I am really hoping that the many projects she is currently in filming for 2007 release give her the opportunity to display all of her talents.

A disappointing version of a great show

[dowds-1 · 4/10 · 19 December 2005]

What a shame this is the only version available on DVD. The original 1964 TV production had all the verve and charm that this sanitized version lacks. Carol Burnett, Tommy Smothers and Tracy Ullman do their best, but not even they can give any life to this dead mackerel of a show. This is a prime example of the bland, sanitized havoc Disney can wreak on a good property. The theoretically pregnant and desperate Lady Larkin is slim as a whisper, making Aggravain's line about laying off the goodies nonsensical. Sir Harry's struggle between his conscience and his lady-love comes off more like a manicurist contemplating a hangnail. Tracy Ullman is a competent Winnifred, and turns in the best performance here. Carol Burnett, great comedic talent that she is, just doesn't have the delicious wickedness of Jane White, and Tommy Smothers' Sextimus can't quite get off the ground. Too bad...literally.

Loved it!

[awesomepossum · 10/10 · 27 December 2005]

Very cute! I absolutely loved this movie- well, then again, I love Tracy Ullman and Carol Burnett (who is, by the way, not looking the least bit of her 72 years). I couldn't believe Burnett was still going this strong - and after starting her career with the stage version of this movie as young Princess Winifred, to now come back so many years later and play Queen Aggravain is just amazing. She's such a great performer, and this was no exception. I'm absolutely kicking myself for not recording the second airing of the movie, though, and I was wondering if this movie is available on DVD or what-have-you? Wishing I could find the music for Princess Winifred's opening song, also. Anybody know where to get either one?

"Once Upon a Mattress" a delightful treat

[karinahooper · 7/10 · 21 December 2005]

Okay, I may have given this movie one too many stars, but the performances of Carol Burnett and Tracy Ullman deserve it. And I think previous criticisms may have been too harsh. The reason this movie deserves at least 7 stars is because despite that it has Disney Channel-like sets and was made for T.V., the story is a pleasant one. The movie could have catered to the 4 to 10 year old age range, but it doesn't, it has enough witty dialog and dry humor to appeal to adults alike. Dry humor is found in the quick dialog, for instance, when Sir Harry tells Lady Larken that her pregnancy was caused by "a moment of weakness," or any of Carol Burnett's countless facial expressions that make you just happy to be in the same room as the comical genius, even though she's only on T.V. I was sad to see it end so quickly.

I had never seen the story before and felt very justified in sitting in front of it for two hours. I bet watching it on DVD without commercials would be even more satisfying. If any of you were a fan of the Albert Finney "Annie" movie, you'll love this one. That's my two cents.

Mattress disappoints

[dibsen8075 · 1/10 · 19 December 2005]

A longtime fan of ONCE UPON A MATTRESS and Carol Burnett, I was anxiously awaiting the new version of the Mary Rogers musical. I was totally disappointed. It was difficult to sit through more than about the first fifteen minutes because it was slow, without sparkle, and very tedious( much like THE MUSIC MAN of a couple of years ago, that reduced the colorful musical to a tiresome bore with a totally "lacking" Harold Hill). I would assume that when a project like this is begun, the creative forces that be, would brainstorm to decide the pros and cons of the original work and then improve on them. This production blatantly amplifies the weaknesses of the original and eliminates everything that was charming and sweet. Eliminating the opening number gave us no interest in pursuing the story an further. And eliminating the purpose of the jester, wizard and King caused the best songs in the musical to disappear. Even Bob Mackie hit an all-time low with his wild "Queen" costumes that paid no attention to the time period or the concept of the rest of the show. Granted, the general costumes reflected an obvious lack of color, taste and design, but to match them with the Mackie creations was abysmal. Performances were average, mainly because of the missing script and clever lines. Dick Smothers was reduced to a minor plot ploy and the amazing mime antics int the original were completely missing. Miss Burnett was adequate, and with her major talent should have been stupendous. The rest of the cast looked eager to have something "happen" and it never did. I guess I would rather this production company NOT revive old musicals than produce lackluster shows like this.

A Disney movie that isn't shy!

[lauraeileen894 · 31 May 2007]

In the vein of the classic, 1997 version of "Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella", Disney released another delightful piece of eye candy, "Once Upon a Mattress", the musical twist on "The Princess and the Pea". "Once Upon a Mattress" is actually quite risqué for a Disney film. Oh, it's hardly HBO-worthy stuff, but not many ABC family movies lightheartedly deal with premarital sex, latent homosexuality, and the most shocking Oedipal relationship since Angela Lansbury and Laurence Harvey in "The Manchurian Candidate".

Hypersensitive/conservative parents better beware. For everyone else, it'd be a shame to miss the incomparable Carol Burnett (who originated the role of "Princess Fred" in the 1959 production of "OUaM") as the domineering Queen Aggravain, mother of meek Prince Dauntless (Denis O'Hare). When Prince Dauntless falls hard for robust, vivacious tomboy Princess Winnifred(Tracey Ullman), or "Fred" as she likes to be called, Queen Aggravain determines to sabotage the relationship by giving Fred a test she's convinced she'll fail. It's up to the mute King Sextimus (Tom Smothers), and dewy-eyed, pure hearted lovers Sir Harry (Matthew Morrison) and Lady Larken (Zooey Deschanael) to stop Queen Aggravain.

The costumes nearly steal the show, rich with explosive colors and sumptuous designs (Burnett's jewel-drenched costumes are designed by none other than Bob Mackie). Ullman gets wears yummy gowns of red and gold velvet, and Deschanael looks every bit the fair maiden in delicate, candy-colored silk dresses and rosy cheeks. The songs are also catchy and hummable, ranging from bombastic to ironic. I was surprised at what an incredible belter and game dancer Ullman was! In the show stopping number "Shy", she slides down poles and gets tossed about, Eleanor Powell-style, without missing a beat. Burnett shows that, even in her '70s, she's still a performer to be reckoned with, delivering the rather disturbing number "That Baby of Mine" with the hip-swiveling conviction of a burlesque dancer. All the couples have just the right amount of chemistry and a hell of a good time is had by all. Join the fun and don't be shy!

Have never heard of this movie till now

[lisafordeay · 6/10 · 18 July 2020]

Once Upon A Matress is a 2005 musical TV movie starring Carol Brunett,Denis O Hare,Zooey Deshanail and Matthew Morrison and tells the story of a prince played by Denis O Hare who wants to get married. So his scheming mother comes up with a scheme so that whatever maiden comes will sleep on a mattress but there is a pea inside under the matress. Who ever feels the pea will be the prince's bride.

Also starring Zooey Deschanel and Matthew Morrison it was an enjoyable flick mixed with a Rodger and Hamiliton vibe to it.

A fun version of the fairy tale "The Princess and the Pea"

[theduke28 · 6/10 · 26 August 2012]

What can you say when the Broadway version and the DVD seem to present differing plots, songs, and lines? Some of re-arranging of scenes and songs "seem" to fit but, when watching in one run, the differences are glaring. The Broadway show is tighter and flows along. The DVD seems a bit sloppy at times with some bits not even coming to a satisfying tie. The play does leave out how they discover the test, which the DVD clarifies, and if you were to present this, I recommend you try to find a way to put it in the play. I do not think you can fault the cast of the DVD because of the material they were given with which to work. As a whole the cast over comes the age, songs, and all to present a fun one-Time viewing. As to multiple viewings, once really is enough. Carol Burnett, as always, is great as well as Zooey Deschanel, the fun Tommy Smothers as King, but the rest seem to walk through a lack luster script, trying just to get to the end.

A fun family musical that they don't make film versions of anymore!

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 22 October 2010]

Of the TV versions of Broadway musicals they've made since 1992's "Gypsy", only "Once Upon a Mattress" had never been done as a film before, only as two television specials. Both starred Carol Burnet as Princess Winifred (nickname, "Fred"), Here (still top billed), she's cast as the domineering queen who is scheming to keep her son from getting married. Along comes swamp princess Winifred who is so determined to get into the castle that she swims the moat. The queen instantly is determined to prevent Prince Dauntless from marrying her so she schemes to come up with the ultimate way for Winifred to fail the test which determines if she is worthy or not.

If you have been lucky enough to have seen the TV versions or any stage production of it (including a 1996 Broadway revival), you are already familiar with the many fractured fairy tale elements of the narrative. This is not your typical classic Disney tale, nor is it thought-provoking like Stephen Sondheim's "Into the Woods". Burnett is deliciously wicked, dressed out in gowns and head dresses designed by her old pal Bob Mackie. This feels like a full-length version of one of her TV show's musical spoofs, minus her cast of regulars. As Winifred, Tracy Ullman is very funny although she may not have been my first choice because of her age, but she is musically pleasant, and blasts "Shy" to the gills.

Denis O'Hare as Prince Dauntless is appropriately shy and geeky, while Tom Smothers as the silent king does what he can with a rather thankless part. He lacks the facial expressions that Jack Gilford hysterically brought to the role that requires a lot of pantomime. Zooey Deschanel and Matthew Morrison are fine as the secondary romantic couple, but they are overshadowed by the more comical leads. Michael Boatman is amusing as the court jester, while Edward Hibbert is appropriately nebbish as the Wizard, who acts as the Queen's "Yes Man".

The score is a lot of fun, most remembered for "Shy", but also contains such delights as "I'm in love with a girl named Fred", and "Happily Ever After", a great showcase for Ullman. While this production isn't technically as lavish as the most recent TV "Cinderella", or as memorable as "Gypsy" and "Annie" (also remade for TV), it still holds up as one of the better recent TV musicals. With Burnett having been crowned Queen here after having swam the moat two previous times, it's an important record of a show that might not be one of the all-time great shows, but it's a true crowd pleaser. Now if someone would get the other two versions out on DVD, as well as the early Julie & Carol specials.

What a disappointment in a wonderful show

[BestOfAllPossible · 1/10 · 20 December 2005]

I was very much looking forward to this new TV "Mattress," especially to see Carol Burnett playing the role she played opposite in the original Broadway production. I was a little skeptical about Tracy Ullman, but willing to see what this new version would be like.

Well, my fears about Tracy Ullman were fulfilled, and then some. She was simply miscast in the role of Princess Winnifred. Though, even worse was the actress playing Lady Larkin as though she were in a bad '80s teeny-bopper movie. Her voice was not good enough to sing Larkin, so her harmonies with the marvelous Matthew Morrison were mucked with to the point that some of the songs were almost unrecognizable.

And even the good performers (Carol Burnett, Denis O'Hare, Matthew Morrison) could not save it, due to poor direction. The choreography was pedestrian at best. The majority of the jokes were given away before the punchline was anywhere in sight.

The highlight was the new song written for Carol Burnett as Queen Aggravaine. Still, the whole thing stayed very "safe," which you cannot do with musical theatre. Safe musical theatre is boring musical theatre.

The whole thing, I'm sad to say, is a disappointment and an embarrassment.

Carol Burnett And Tracey Ullman. Pure Wonderful World Of Disney Magic.

[johnstonjames · 10/10 · 20 May 2010]

i just love Disney musicals. i know this didn't start out "Disneyized", it, of course, started out on stage in the early 60's with Burnett in the Princess Winnifred role. i even saw the televised version with Burnett as a kid ( i loved that too), but now that i've seen this wonderfully "Disneyish" and light-hearted version i find it impossible now to think of 'Mattress' as anything but pure Disney.

i first saw this version on the 'Wonderful World of Disney' when it premiered several years ago. i was lucky enough to see a short intro. scene with Carol Burnett, a little girl, and the Disney princesses looking around Disneyland,Ca for Princess Winnifred. it was great.

everything about this production is so romantic and sweet it's hard to imagine anyone not warming to it's pleasing congeniality. but there are always a few hard-butts in the crowd. also anyone not understanding why this version stands out or why it should have been made is being a little obtuse and silly. this production stands above simply because it has the involvement and blessing of Carol Burnett herself. the original Winnifred. so those fans that don't understand this,"HELLO".

people should stop sharpening their knives so much and stop attacking things that are nice and good for you. it doesn't make you sound like a professional critic by always being too cynical. lighten up please.

i find it interesting to note that when this first came out and i was so sure this was a great adaptation, but others were not convinced, i think it's my vindication to point out how big it's two young stars, Matthew Morrison and Zooey Deschanel, have become since then. Deschanel even has her own pop/rock band. i told everybody so.

i find it interesting how a little off-Broadway sex comedy could become so perfect for Disney. i think it's because Disney turns it from an adult music comedy into a full out fairy tale. it's about time Disney did the 'Princess and the pea' fairy story and 'Mattress' is the best way for Disney to tell it. it turned out so right for them.

i hope someday that Disney has the sense to release a version of 'Mattress' with the Carol Burnett intro at Disneyland, ca that i saw on the 'Wonderful World of Disney'. maybe then would some people get it through their thickness that this is 'Disney' music magic at it's finest.

The Reason To Watch Is Burnett

[DANEMOD · 7/10 · 18 December 2005]

After far, far too long, Carol Burnett returns to television in a remake of the musical that made her a star- "Once Upon a Mattress". It is a pleasure and a relief to see that the lady still has a handle on hilarity; her performance as control-freak Queen Aggravaine is one for the ages, with all her comedic powers still honed to a razor edge.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the rest of the cast, and they do try. Tracey Ullman tries on Burnett's star-making role of Princess Winifred the Woebegone on for size, and promptly gets swamped, mainly because she doesn't have Burnett's lightning timing and relies on her winsomeness instead. She's competent, but that's not what you want from a Winifred- you need comic magic. She's also a bit old for the role, a problem that someone tried to tackle by scaling up the ages of other players. Denis O'Hare is more or less okay as Prince Dauntless, but the "birds and bees" song that is charmingly innocent when sung by a 21-year-old actor is a bit grating when it comes from a man in his forties. And as Lady Larkin and Prince Harry, Zooey Deschanel and Matthew Morrison are in way over their heads, unable to sing with the personality and energy required. Their song together, "Normandy", was musical mush that cried out for Barbara Cook to straighten them out in a master class at Juilliard.

Edward Hibbert was fine as the Wizard, more than able to stand up to Burnett's energy and panache, and Michael Boatman managed to make the Jester interesting, even though the role had been stripped of its show-stopping soft-shoe number, "Very Soft Shoes". Tom Smothers is perfect as the henpecked and mute King Sextimus; we don't see half enough of him nowadays, so it's great to have him on hand here.

The most disappointing part of the proceeding was the limp, leaden direction, design and cutting; it's as if no one involved in the project had ever seen a musical comedy on film before. The pace was too stately, the sets too underlit, the gags too rehearsed- and with the magnificent exception of Queen Aggravaine's costumes, the show is underdesigned, with a sepia look that is supposed to evoke the Middle Ages, and just looks murkily depressing and uncomedic.

No matter. Even for all these flaws- and they're pretty glaring- Carol Burnett saves the day, with a Queen Aggravaine every bit as fine, inventive and funny as her Princess Winifred turn of yore. It's too bad that Burnett's 1964 or 1972 versions couldn't be electronically combined with her performance here; it would be a hoot to see Burnett-as-Winifred up against Burnett-as-Aggravaine. Whatever the faults of this "Mattress", it's well worth watching for Burnett; TV has been the poorer ever since she left prime-time.

More Mis-directed than Mis-cast

[oreoking · 4/10 · 16 January 2006]

When I first read of this production, with Carol Burnett as the Queen, I was very excited! I thought it would be fabulous. I was wrong.

In the first 5 minutes I knew my popcorn would go unfinished, having lost my appetite when "Many Moons Ago" was chopped to but a few phrases. But when the cast started throwing away every good line with total disregard to the well-written tempo intended, I needed to get my Cast Recording ready and fire up the phonograph to get this director's bad taste out of my ears. Another reviewer mentioned the "rule of threes" - threes are everywhere in the script, but I don't think the delivery of ANY one was correct in this version. From the dismissing of Princess #12 ("Goodbye, good luck, now get out") to the discussion of Winnifred's test before "Sensitivity" ("Sounds fair (beat), seems fair, (beat), but isn't fair.") every opportunity to spin verbal straw into gold (I know, wrong fairy tale) was wasted. Larkin's revelation of pregnancy to Harry was real let-down. No build-up at all. She might as well have passed him a note.

I didn't have a problem with any of the casting based on age or appearance - both can be overcome & overlooked with a good performance. But the writers/director didn't give the cast any help, so the weaker performers fell flat and the veterans just collected a paycheck.

Where was the Minstrel? For that matter, where were the Jester and the King? Oh, the roles were there, but reduced to bit parts. The knights in "Shy" got to do more just by saying "Hey, Nonny nonny nonny, NO." Maybe Meatloaf thinks two-out-of-three ain't bad, but in this case, it IS bad. And I bet the writers thought they were clever switching the impetus for "Normandy" from "where can a pregnant Larkin go to hide" offered by the Minstrel to "where can Larkin go on a honeymoon" offered by Harry. Lame. And the Wizard as the Nightingale was just stupid. Hibbert's contract must have insisted on a minimum of screen time and since they eliminated the scene where the Minstrel schmoozes the Wizard, they made up for it with a chicken costume.

I've gone on far too long, but better you spend a few extra minutes here than waste a few hours on this production. Now if you watch it anyway, you look for the things all these reviews have warned you about and make up your own mind.

Just good, but still worth watching...Lady Larkin as terrific.

[broadwayboy35 · 8/10 · 29 December 2005]

Musicals are always fun to see. This made for TV musical, although was mildly disappointing, was extremely addicting! Rising to the top of the charts was Zooey Deschanel as Lady Larkin. Zooey although was not the best singer, had a very unique voice that some may find bad but others may find terrific. She played the art tremendously and her and Matthew Morrison had great chemistry on screen. Tracey Ullman as Fred, the Princess from the swamps was much to old to play the part and you don't seem to care for the part as much as if a young innocent girl was playing the part.

Carol Burnette was disappointing as the Queen, but still played the part well. Over all I thought the entire movie was just good. There was nothing special but I still enjoyed it a lot!

The Return of Princess Fred

[daisybtoes · 7/10 · 9 January 2006]

I fell in love with this cute musical back in the 1960's when it was originally aired on TV in black & white, and loved it again ten years later when it was re-aired in color with only minor cast changes. To the many fans of this beloved play, it is impossible not to compare this new Disney version with the originals.

There is much to like. The look of it is wonderful, complete with a Disneyesque rose-framed window at the end, and a castle full of beautiful, anachronistic rooms, and stained-glass windows with a slightly sinister edge to them. Prince Dauntless and the King are likable, sympathetic, engaging people who you root for, and Sir Harry (the knight) and his Lady Larken are both charming and pretty.

Inevitably, though, as in all previous made-for-TV versions, certain changes in dialog and action have been made, and several songs are absent. I was a little sorry to see the jester's role so reduced (he had a fine song in the original play and the earliest TV version), but I did find it amusing that the Wizard, usually played as the Queen's lover,is this time only an effeminate court sycophant. The G-rating might have been more appropriate had Harry and Larken been secretly married as they were in the 1960's version, which actually makes more sense considering they have defied a marriage law. Otherwise, Larken's pregnancy would simply be an embarrassment instead of a crime. It would also be more suitable for the children watching this film, which after all is a prime-time Christmas offering.

But I saved for last the two starring ladies. Carol Burnett should have been brilliant as the Queen, and in moments her brilliance does come through. But she needed the outrageous brassiness that Jane White once gave the role, and it wasn't quite there. Still, no one else today should play the Queen, if only for the legacy. Carol Burnett forever!

I am not at all sure about Tracy Ullman as Princess Fred, though. She was not bad, she just wasn't great. Fred needs to be so much larger than life. She's not just another princess, she's the kind of princess children love because she's a princess they can hope to be like - not the perfect and pretty ladies like Snow White, Aurora, or Cinderella. Ullman is fun, she's cute, but she does not dominate the screen in the same ways that once made Carol Burnett a star. In those days, the bedroom scene was a broadly hilarious climax to a charmingly funny musical. In this production it is amusing, but little more. And for that alone,I was greatly disappointed.

Yet in spite of these problems, it was a most enjoyable film. I am surprised that Disney has not tried to market it in their "princess series", but time will tell. It is a nice film that looks good and feels good, and to the generations who do not know the older versions, this one should be very satisfying.

So Unfortunate about the Leads

[pktechgirl · 1/10 · 18 December 2005]

I actually like this musical, I was in it once. This adaptation is worse than my high school production and that is genuinely sad. Both Tracy Ullman (whom I do sort of like) and David O'Hare (who I am sure was good in something) are far to old for the parts of Winnefred and Dauntless and they were both so boring in fun roles. The really disappointing character is Aggrivaine played by Carol Burnett. She could have done so many more interesting things with the role but her delivery was as flat as her emotions. She is supposed to be evil, but is instead so bland and dull, despite her costumes, that you never actually dislike her. Aggrivaine is played like a female drag queen who has discovered the Bob Mackie outfits Cher discarded in the late 80's. The character would be a mannequin if she didn't have the costumes. Oddly enough the best castings are for the minor parts. Zooey Deschanel, Matthew Morrison and Michael Boatman are all really good. As is Tom Smothers who I thought was dead but evidently he's alive and kicking and doing a pretty decent job at playing Sextemus. These four were the only ones who seemed to have any really understanding that this musical is supposed to be light and happy. The three leads just didn't get it and most of the film is about them. The production values were decent and it could have been a worthwhile project if they had gotten anyone else in the main roles. If you find yourself forced to watch it, fast forward until you see anyone who isn't them.