I started watching this film for the first time today, and right off the bat I can see that Walter Matthau is miscast. I really like him in many other films, but definitely not here. Who would you suggest should have been cast in his place?
scroll down for my choice
(Off the top of my head I think I'd first nominate Rod Taylor.)
that's easy...............
...........absolutely no one :)
"I'm right where I wanna be....."
Well, thanks for the reply, although I would have appreciated a response made in the same adventurous spirit as my original post. Recasting existing film roles is a fun idea that is not unknown in cinema circles & on film boards such as the IMDb.
Anyway, as I said, although I appreciate and enjoy Walter Matthau's work in many other films, even I could see that he seemed uncomfortable and a bit uncertain as to how to play this character. It's arguably not written to capitalize on his well-known talents and strengths.
I think his being miscast in Hello Dolly is one of the many reasons that such a sure-fire hit (on paper) has long been regarded as a disappointment by many who really expected to like it.
Hi and thanx also for the reply. Let me try to take 2 :)
I just saw last Sunday Hello Dolly again for the first time in many years (maybe 6 or7) and it was exactly like I remembered it to be: amazing. The musical numbers seemed a little bit longer but other than that I have no complaints. I'm very sorry you cannot fully enjoy the presence of big Walter in this movie. You said: 'he seemed uncomfortable and a bit uncertain as to how to play this character.' As I see it he was not 'uncomfortable and a bit uncertain', but his character was like that regarding Dolly and his rocky relationship with her, meaning she terrorized him so of course he was uncomfortable, who wouldn't be? And also, who wouldn't like it? Like we saw in the end.
And you also said: 'I think his being miscast in Hello Dolly is one of the many reasons that such a sure-fire hit (on paper) has long been regarded as a disappointment by many who really expected to like it.' I beg to differ again and say that was not one of the reasons why the film sort of flopped (because it was number 5 in 1969 - overall so that's hardly a disappointment) but because musicals were dying, giving their last breath while people wanted to see something completely different like Midnight Cowboy and On Her Majesty's Secret Service.
So I'm standing by Mr. Matthaw and say there wasn't a single actor that could have given a better performance than him.
Maybe you can see it my way a number of years from now on.
So come back again then and give me your feedback.
PS: what is your age if you don't mind? I am 25 at the moment.
Thanx, have a good 1.
"I'm right where I wanna be....."
As a matter of fact - it's interesting that Walter also played Oscar in THE ODD COUPLE - Vandergelder is "sort-of" like an Oscar - sloppy (recall that he mentions how messy his house is, and Dolly rolls her eyes and says "Certainly is!")
shareWell, nobiggie, I'll try to be very nice since you like this movie so much
(ps. I really like your username)
I kind of mis-spoke in my first post; this was the third time that I have tried to watch it, but the first time that I expected to see it all of the way through. Well, sorry, but I didn't make it that far again!
Most aspects of H,D! just seem forced and unconvincing to me. (Some of that banter and the acting of the two young brothers is perfectly excruciating!) Still: please believe me when I say that I really wanted to like it!
I am an enthusiastic fan of all types of movies, including the entire range of musicals from early Busby Berkeley, thru all of the Astaire & Rogers, Judy Garland, Judy Holliday, up to and including the most bizarre and avant garde of today and tomorrow. (American Astronaut anyone?)
For me Hello, Dolly! just never hits its necessary stride. This is coming from someone who practically worships Gene Kelly; sadly, though, I have to admit that he apparently just wasn't a great director. His two major classics were both co-directed by Stanley Donen, and I strongly suspect that SD is the missing ingredient that would have put H,D! on the right track to being regarded as a timeless musical classic, just like their other two earlier projects.
So far in my experience Barbra Striesand can do no wrong onscreen, and IMHO she shoulders not a shred of blame for the relative failure of H,D!. And yes, although it was #5 in 1969, that was far below expectations, and far below where it should have been given the roster of amazing talent involved.
You are correct in that it failed at that time partially due to changing moviegoers' tastes, but it still has not earned a place on the roster of classic musicals, no matter how well-staged some of the individual numbers may be. It simply pales in comparison to many of its contemporaries, such as Funny Girl, Oliver!, Sweet Charity, Jesus Christ Superstar or even Yellow Submarine.
Since you discussed the ending, I assume that Matthau's and Streisand's characters were romantically paired off. That's most of the reason that I stopped watching this time; they had no chemistry between them, and their characters simply did not seem to have a realistic relationship on any level.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree; I recently saw Rod Taylor starring in Young Cassidy, in which he's excellent; his portrayal of the rowdy title character is immensely likable, warm, and funny. I think that the character of Horace Vandergelder should have been portrayed as far more charismatic and virile than Matthau is capable of, and Taylor would have easily provided those attributes and more.
As the other poster mikwalen hinted at above, Matthau still seemed to be giving us Oscar Madison to a large degree: no doubt a wonderful and immortal character whom I love, but who is also wholly unworthy of Streisand's Dolly Levi!
BTW, I'm 48; the first time I tried to watch Hello, Dolly! was actually during its network debut in the early 1970s; I had forgotten about that until I started thinking about how to respond to your question. Anyway, I hope I don't seem argumentative; I'm glad that you like it, and I sincerely wish that I did!
This is really a matter of individual taste. I know some people loathe Walter Matthau in this film, but others enjoy his performance tremendously. I'm sure nobiggie has further observations to make, but I just wanted to say a few words in support of Matthau.
HELLO, DOLLY! isn't a romantic musical in the style of, say, FUNNY GIRL; it's essentially a farce with people jumping into closets, hiding under tables and getting whipped cream dumped on their heads. The relationship between Dolly and Horace is combative throughout much of the film - when Horace talks about getting married and comments "Besides, I need someone to take out the garbage," it's clear he's not looking for burning passion. Since they spend much of DOLLY's running time throwing barbs and quips at each other, what's needed for Dolly and Horace are two actors who have unflagging comic energy - and this is where Streisand and Matthau excel. I think their dinner table scene at Harmonia Gardens is a classic, and Matthau manages to find humor in the most unexpected places - his reactions to both Ernestina Simple (when he first lays eyes on her) and Dolly (when she vamps him in "So Long Dearie") are priceless & received huge laughs when I saw the film at Grauman's Chinese Theater. And yet Matthau was also able to convey Horace's dawning realization that Dolly could be good for him - that she's actually a "wonderful woman" who would be a "credit" to him. As Pauline Kael pointed out in her DOLLY review, the scene where Horace reprises the title number and quietly dances with Dolly is one of the film's strongest moments - and a surprisingly touching one. Their relationship is not one of "shooting stars" or "the sound of bells" - it's about two individuals emerging from a state of emotional isolation who just want to find someone to love. And this intimate dancing scene suggests they've found what they're looking for.
I agree Stanley Donen is an excellent director (his TWO FOR THE ROAD is my favorite movie of all time), but I think DOLLY is a better-directed film than it's generally given credit for. Gene Kelly sets the tone & style beautifully in the opening sequence (establishing character through feet) and keeps the action moving at a nice clip. And if you haven't seen DOLLY in 70mm (the way it was meant to be seen), then you have no idea how visually spectacular the movie is. People tend to forget Kelly received a Directors Guild nomination for DOLLY, and I think he deserved it (for coordinating this immense production & managing the strong personalities involved, he probably deserved a Purple Heart).
There's no question that DOLLY, despite its number 5 ranking for the year, didn't make back its production costs in its initial release. But that wouldn't have happened unless the film pulled in SOUND OF MUSIC-like numbers, and that's an unrealistic expectation for just about any film. Still, there was a feeling that with worldwide box office, TV sales and earings from the video (and later DVD) market, DOLLY would eventually creep into the black. And at this point, since DOLLY continues to make money, I wouldn't be surprised to learn it has.
But I have to say I'm a little confused by one of your comments - "the acting of the two young brothers is perfectly excruciating." What "brothers" are you talking about? If you're referring to Cornelius Hackl and Barnaby Tucker - well, they're friends and coworkers, but not brothers.
The only further observation I have to make is just to say that Rivieran should be executed. On the spot!!! LOL
Well, nobiggie ;)
"I'm right where I wanna be....."
by nobiggie (Thu Apr 3 2008 01:55:34)So that's what I get for being mature and nice to you and not stooping to personal insults, unlike so many people on internet boards who do so when they disagree with the slightest opinion?
The only further observation I have to make is just to say that Rivieran should be executed. On the spot!!! LOL
Well, nobiggie ;)
Oh my Gosh, you couldn't take a joke, now THAT'S sad. No wonder you didn't like the movie, you gotta get yourself a sense of humour first.
And that post of mine or those posts of mine were telegraphic because I have little spare time because I work a lot and unlike other people I can't post from work although I would have liked that. I was however gonna come up with a longer version but now I don't think I'm gonna bother anymore.
To each his own.
"I'm right where I wanna be....."
by nobiggie 1 hour ago (Thu Apr 3 2008 16:22:37)
Oh my Gosh, you couldn't take a joke, now THAT'S sad. No wonder you didn't like the movie, you gotta get yourself a sense of humour first.
And that post of mine or those posts of mine were telegraphic because I have little spare time because I work a lot and unlike other people I can't post from work although I would have liked that. I was however gonna come up with a longer version but now I don't think I'm gonna bother anymore.
To each his own.
"I'm right where I wanna be....."
Chill out, rivieran
shareI too like musicals a lot but I can never maintain interest in Hello Dolly! The musical numbers are ok especially Sunday Clothes but a lot of the movie just falls flat. The female supports are very bland and stagey they need to look as though they are singing and they just don't. Streisand does a good job and the costumes are stunning. I think it may well have been dated when it was released.Crawfords accent wavers quite a lot (not as awful as Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins) but he is appealing enough.The brilliant Matthau just does not belong in a movie like this.
shareThanks murph24 for your great response. (Although I'm not one of those who "loathes" Matthau in H,D!, I merely feel that he was miscast and there are others who could've performed his role better in it. I suspect Matthau was cast here partially due to his increased "bankability" after coming off of The Odd Couple.)
When I next get a chance to see H,D! I will keep your words in mind and really try to get into it. (Although I'm afraid someone will have to tie me to the chair and hide the remote!)
I don't know why I find it so off-putting - due to the sensitivity of others here I won't type any of the adjectives that come to my mind when I try to watch it (tho they are similar to those I've seen in many existing reviews)...all I can say is that it just never comes together for me; I still see everything onscreen as being too obviously staged and filmed, and I just can't seem to get past it. That doesn't happen very often for me with most other movies.
As for the "brothers" comment, I abandoned this film after about twenty minutes; when I came back to it I saw a scene with the two young men. They must've said something that sounded like they were brothers, because even at the time I thought that they didn't look like they were related.
And to those who may respond (maturely, I hope) that I can't judge a movie that I haven't seen all of the way through, I point out that I haven't written anything condemning the entire movie itself (other than oft-published opinions from existing professional reviews); all I was originally talking about was the casting of the actors involved, and its effect on the film's watchability to me.
It's hard for me to fully describe how open-minded I truly am when it comes to appreciating movies of all genres, but I guess everyone has to have at least one blind spot when it comes to general film popularity, and apparently H,D! is mine.
Whenever someone vehemently expresses hatred for a film that I love, I generally feel that it's because they just didn't get it (people don't respond well to this theory, but I really do think it's true) and I will be the first to admit that apparently I don't get Hello, Dolly!, which is surprising to me because I like such a wide range of movies, good, bad and terrible! (Although I certainly don't hate H,D!.)
I'm actually enjoying all the comments from rivieran and murph24. I absolutely ***love love love*** the movie of DOLLY, though I know that many don't.It's just so dazzling and exciting, energetic, and beautiful to watch. I too saw it on tv in 1973 when it was first on TV (on CBS) - I was 9 - and to this day the film is like a dear friend. This film, together with CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG, SOUND OF MUSIC, FIDDLER, and FUNNY GIRL is what got me started doing musical theater!
Mikwalen, thanks for realizing that I am not attacking Hello, Dolly! nor its fans nor anything else about it. All I originally asked for was some alternate casting ideas!
As I said earlier, I wish I liked H,D!; I expected to, and at least I'm glad that many people do.
I love the others you mentioned, too (have not yet seen Fiddler on the Roof, but of course I love the music.) Heck, I even enjoyed Yentl, and almost everyone else ripped it to shreds!! Some of its music is mesmerizing...
And as much as I love most of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, I have no problem acknowledging its many and sometimes eye-gouging faults. (That is one near-classic that could certainly use a good, expensive, remake!) So much is so good about it that its problems are easy to ignore.
I do wish I could see Hello, Dolly! as you see it.
Anyway, I hope you're having fun and success in musical theater - I'm rather jealous of that, too!!
To Rivieran -
Hey, even if you get the opportunity to watch all of HELLO, DOLLY!, there's no guarantee you'll like it - one either responds to a film or one doesn't. And to be perfectly honest, I do think the movie has schlocky moments & musical numbers that try one's patience (like "It Only Takes A Moment" or Matthau's "It Takes A Woman"). But I still remember the elation of seeing it as a 14-year-old on December 29, 1969, and the way it connected with the audience at Grauman's Chinese Theater. The 70mm film unspooled on that huge screen and that music poured out of that incredible sound system and, well, you thought you were in movie musical heaven. I remember my sister coming back from the ladies room at intermission and telling me about a conversation she'd overheard between two women -
"This is the BEST movie I've ever seen in my life!"
"But it's only half over."
"I don't care - it's the BEST movie I've ever seen!"
And in the insulated world of Hollywood, this kind of enthusiasm didn't seem out of line. Variety liked HELLO, DOLLY! and so did the Los Angeles Times. Darryl F. Zanuck wept tears of joy at the premiere and David Merrick said the filmmakers had "improved on a masterpiece." One heard mixed reports from New York - the Daily News raved, but the NY Times didn't. Time Magazine was fairly negative, but then, they'd been fairly negative about FUNNY GIRL, too - and FUNNY GIRL was a big hit. In the New Yorker, Pauline Kael faulted the film for an excess of everything but said it was all worth sitting through in order to watch Barbra Streisand - "She opens up such abundance of emotion that it dissolves the coarseness of the role. There's no telling what she CAN'T do. Almost unbelievably, she turns this star role back into a woman, so that the show seems to be about something." Compared to her review of THE SOUND OF MUSIC, this was a rave.
I'm not as dazzled now by DOLLY as I was back then, but I still find myself enjoying its high spirits and sunny optimism. I'll watch the way Gene Kelly films Marianne McAndrew through a sheer scarf at the climax of "Ribbons Down My Back" and think "Hmmm - nice touch." I'm still a huge fan of Danny Lockin's (RIP), and I think it's a kick to watch Michael Crawford and Tommy Tune at such early stages in their careers. And what a pleasure to see Streisand in a role where she isn't constantly fretting about "not being attractive enough." Fact is, throughout the film but ESPECIALLY when she descends the Harmonia Gardens staircase in that gold/topaz gown, she looks like a million bucks.
It's true that Walter Matthau was cast because he was a hot property at the time, coming off the box office success of THE ODD COUPLE and an Oscar win for FORTUNE COOKIE. But just as Streisand was seen as a new & improved Dolly, Matthau was seen as a new and improved Horace - especially when compared to Paul Ford and David Burns, who'd previously essayed the role. And the fact that they were both New Yorkers (she from Brooklyn, he from the Lower East Side) put them on a curious but unmistakable wavelength. OK, maybe they weren't too crazy about each between takes, but when the cameras were rolling they were at the top of their game.
I'm actually a big Rod Taylor fan (I just got finished watching a helluva fight scene he & William Smith filmed for DARKER THAN AMBER), but given the choice between him and Matthau as Horace, I'd still go with Matthau - I like both the comic & human dimensions he brought to the role.
But that's just the way I see it.
That's so cool that you have those great memories, murph24. I have similar ones for widescreen showings of It's a Mad...Mad World, 2001:ASO and The Sting.
Other than those (which we saw in the "big city"), all of my other youthful movie memories are from a small town theater with monophonic sound. Still nice simple nostalgia, though.
Actually Kael's words that you quoted pretty much sum up my feelings about Striesand's work here (the part that I saw, at least!)
I think that perhaps it is the character of Horace that I can't get past; I can't seem to relate to him as a real person. I did not know that Paul Ford had played him earlier. If the character was written for that type of actor, then Taylor would not fit, and Matthau was no doubt an improvement. So I guess it is the basic character that I don't enjoy. I still can't get my head around Streisand's Dolly Levi 'setting her sights' on Matthau's (or Ford's) Vandergelder. Hmm. Is she supposed to have originally been after his money? Other than that possibility I just don't see the attraction!
Thanks for not wishing any curses upon me. Since I do not appreciate people who post on the specific IMDb movie boards merely to say how much they hate the specific film and/or to insult its fans, I was very careful not to be one of those inconsiderate people. I guess my careful approach was lost on "no biggie".
There is nothing wrong with objective criticism of even the best artistic works, and in my experience a film's truest fans are often also aware of most of its relevant shortcomings, if any.
The reason that it seems hard for me to see the attraction between Dolly and Horace in the film is mostly due to the fact that Streisand was mis-cast-not Mathau. He was actually a perfect fit for the part of widowed business man Horace Vandergelder as he was portrayed in the original play (the Matchmaker) and also in the film of the same name played (very well I might add) by Paul Ford.
Dolly is SUPPOSED to be a mature woman in her late 40`s early 50`s who was closer to Vandegelders age. Streisand was in her early to mid TWENTIES and even in her period dress and hairstyles still reflected a much more youthful version of the character than was right for the part.
Carol Channing had portrayed her on stage and was closer to the right age and if she was not right for film than Mary Martin should have played the part as she had done on the national tour. She could have done great justice to the character and the film probably would have been-at least-a bit more realistic in it`s romantic plausibility.
[deleted]
Hedwig or Shrek
Acting, Matthau was on his mark. His singing ruined the film. It was just too unbelieveable that Dolly would fall for him. He had no redeeming qualities.
Chris Plummer (Sound of music) who was also under contract/obligation with 20 Century Fox at the time but ios not good with comedy
Robert Preston would have been my choice.
One Note - Walter Matthau would have worked if Carol Channing had the role ... with a little vocal training.
Macklin Crew
[deleted]
The problem with Matthau is you don't want him to change. He had no charisma (in this film). I really liked both characters and I love them both as actors (Streisand & Matthau) but at the end, I could really care less if they got together or not. I saw no love between them but I did enjoy there arguments. Maybe it's the script, or the director but frankly, they should have remained single. In the end it looked like Dolly only married him for his money. Cornilious (Crawford) was a bit over played ... real it in a bit.
Streisand needed a good looking man that reluctanly accepts her advice and starts to grow emotionally from the experience. And there should have been at least a hint that Matthau liked her. That's the scripts fault or the director.
Again, it would have worked if Carol Channing played the role. Channing was less aggressive and they seem more suited together.
Interesting Ideas:
Rock Hudson
Yul Brennor
Gene Wilder
Dustin Hoffman (Meet the Fockers)
All very different but they would have added something to the film.
Matthau and Crawford were to much like characatures .... too two dimesntional.
Sorry! All said and done ... I still enjoy the film and do have a copy on DVD.
Also remember, Kelly was under a lot of pressure and Streisand just had a baby and according to Matthau he got a lot of punishment from both.
Macklin Crew
Jerry Orbach, Alan King (he'd been in "Hit the Deck"), Oscar Levant was always a good grouch. Maybe Van Johnson--he was awfully grouchy in Brigadoon. Jason Robards.
The only reason I'd want to replace him is that I know he disliked Streisand so much, he must have had an awful time during the shoot.
The film of "Dolly" has often been thought of as a series of misfires: The miscasting of the leads, the choice of Gene Kelly as director, the timing of the release (the late 60's being considered the end of the big budget Hollywood musical heyday).
It's obvious that the leads disdain for one another erases any chemistry they may be trying to conjure by pure acting skill.
Streisand's voice was amazing and she sings the score gloriously. Matthau was obviously not a singer and was not an attractive leading man.
Since Streisand wasn't going to be recast, the only choice would have been to recast Horace. There were plenty of actors in Hollywood at the time who were age appropriate and attractive:
Rock Hudson: Maybe too pretty
Burt Lancaster: Big enough personality. Could he sing?
Robert Preston: Personality to spare! A musical stalwart!
Gene Kelly himself!: Might have worked.
Perhaps they could have gone with an unknown and just let Streisand be the one and only star of the show. No one remembers who played Horace opposite Channing!
I don't know what movie you watched, but your opinion SUCKS!!!!!! He is the ultimate crumugen! Perfect for that role.
shareWow! Subtle much?
Matthau was an effective curmudgeon (my opinion doesn't suck as much as your spelling!).
I was referring to the lack of chemistry that he and Streisand had on-screen. Their romance is not believable for an instant!
If you thought they had any romantic spark, then you should ask yourself what movie you watched!
Who could replace Walter Matthau in Hello, Dolly?
Nobody.
Oh sure, SOMEBODY else could have taken the role, but he was the right star at exactly the right time in his career...and well-matched with Streisand despite their difference in ages.
Walter Matthau had strugggled through the end of the fifties as a character actor climbing the ladder; spent the first half of the sixties as a "movie-stealing" character man who stole movies from Kirk Douglas(Lonely Are the Brave), Cary Grant(Charade), and Gregory Peck(Mirage) -- well, Matthau didn't steal them as so much as show "co-equal star quality."
"The Fortune Cookie" in 1966 brought him a Best Supporting Actor Oscar(for what was really a leading role, Matthau noted) and full stardom, but in minor Fox films like "A Guide for the Married Man" and "The Secret Life of an American Wife" before "The Odd Couple" in 1968 made him a Real Major Movie Star(Jack Lemmon was paid more than Matthau, but Matthau would now be on the way up as Lemmon headed down...not to obscurity, but to a lower star power than Matthau.)
Thus, as "Hello, Dolly!" came along, Walter Matthau was Fully Prepped for Stardom and he charged Fox One Million Dollars for his services(a big deal for Walter Matthau.)
---
Given How Hollywood Works, when Hello, Dolly came out, Walter Matthau(in his late FORTIES) was a hotter and more contemporary star than guys like Rock Hudson and Rod Taylor(now on the fade from their superstar and second tier careers,respectively.)
With the exception of his "special" recreation of his lead in the movie of The Music Man(1962), Robert Preston had not been a real movie star since the forties, and he certainly wasn't one in 1969.
Perhaps Matthau's only competition for Horace Vandergelder in '69, ironically enough, might have been...Jack Lemmon. But of course Lemmon would have played Vandergelder more neurotic and with less curmdudgeon flair than Matthau.
---
Yes, Matthau and Streisand hated each other and yes, they don't have much romantic(or sexual) spark in "Hello, Dolly."
But they don't have to. Matthau and Streisand ARE wonderfully matched as "hot new stars of 1969"(his took over a decade to reach, hers, one movie: Funny Girl.) They are wonderfully matched as fast-talking comics(see: their dinner scene together just after the "Hello, Dolly" dance number, or even the musical number "So Long Dearie," in which Babs sings comically and Walter just reacts in dismay.) And they are PROPERLY matched as...New York Jewish Personalities. Doris Day and Matthau wouldn't have worked as well; Streisand and Rock Hudson wouldn't have worked as well.
As Charlie Matthau(Walter's son) said of the "Hello, Dolly" conflicts between Streisand and Matthau: "They clashed because they were too much alike."
---
The idea of a leading man heartthrob type like Rock Hudson or Rod Taylor as Vandergelder doesn't "track" for me because in the movie The Matchmaker, Vandergelder was played by...Paul Ford(the mayor in "The Music Man" movie), and thus I never really saw Horace as much of a heartthrob.
Though, in his own way in 1969, Walter Matthau WAS a heartthrob. The same Xmas of 1969 that he romanced Streisand in "Hello, Dolly," he romanced Ingrid "Notorious" Bergman in "Cactus Flower." Of course, Bergman was now handsome and matronly rather than "Notorious" sexy, but she and Matthau made sparks -- and Goldie Hawn played Matthau's younger girlfriend. ("Cactus Flower" was recently remade as "Just Go With It" with Adam Sandler, Jennifer Aniston, and some bikini blondeshell in for Matthau, Bergman, and Hawn.)
In an early seventies poll of women, Walter Matthau made the Top Five of Sexiest Male Stars, right below Newman, Redford, and McQueen. Women were comfortable with the tall, amiable Joe Sixpack kind of star Matthau was.
---
Perhaps by final way of comparison, Matthau and Streisand picked up where Tracy and Hepburn left off: a purely cerebral-comfortable kind of mature romance. Streisand was very young when she made "Dolly" but she PLAYED older.. .and reached Matthau's age-maturity.
For his part, Walter Matthau found later Tracy-and-Hepburn romantic pairings with such unglamourous female leads as Carol Burnett("Pete n' Tille") and, most famously, Glenda Jackson(in the hit "House Calls" and the lesser known "Hopscotch.")
Just about ANYBODY else! I totally agree that he was miscast!! Her "Dolly" flattering him as "handsome", makes me laugh!!!
shareJack Lemon.
shareWalter Matthau is NOT miscast. He was absolutely right for the role of Horace Vandergelder at the time. The trouble is that he was tired. He was churning out movie after movie. The same year he had the privilege of working with Ingrid Bergman in Cactus Flower, and he looks tired in that as well.
Streisand is far too young for the role of Dolly Levi, but she does her best. As I get older, I find this one of the most entertaining movie musicals I've ever seen, key word: Entertaining! However, Streisand was the right star for the part at the time! She was the biggest musical star besides Julie Andrews, and Andrews would have been too ladylike. My first stage Dolly was Dorothy Lamour, who is still the best Dolly I've ever seen, even though since then, I've seen Channing (who walked it) and Sally Struthers, who could have used a couple more weeks' rehearsal, especially since her Horace was terrible.
This is a marvelous movie! It makes me happy!
Nobody's better suited than Matthau to play the unlikeable character and still come off charming.
Save for maybe a young Mitchum, or a young Cagney, but they were both too old then.
- A point in every direction is the same as no point at all.