One of my all time favorites.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

What price does Hollywood cost? Five years after Lowell Sherman and Constance Bennett asked that question, a new film, unofficially based upon that almost forgotten classic, came along, and created a legend which has (thus far) spawned two remakes, one even more famous than itself. Hollywood has always created dreams that turned into nightmares, not only for the young hopefuls who came out from the middle of nowhere and ended up jumping off the Hollywood sign, but for those who had made it and were branded "has-beens". Think of the fictional Norma Desmond and the Hudson Sisters. Think of the real life sign jumper Peg Entwistle, as well as dwindling stars like John Barrymore, Ramon Novarro, Montgomery Clift and others who couldn't handle the pressures that hit them for various reasons and ended up with somewhat tragic finales. Hollywood can present much beauty, but for those inside the business, it is a living hell.Esther Blodgett (Janet Gaynor) is a young hopeful from hundreds of miles from Hollywood who longs to come to "Tinseltown" and work with the legends like the fictional Norman Maine (Fredric March), an Oscar Winner slowly falling down the ranks thanks to bad publicity, bad films, and especially, way too much booze. She struggles for months even just to get the rent paid and is on the verge of quitting when a miracle happens. By chance, she meets Mr. Maine who takes a liking to her (having earlier "shusshed!" her at a concert) and presents her to movie mogul Oliver Niles (Adolph Menjou) as a potential new star. She's fresh and unique, likable and talented, perky and sober. In short, she's everything Norman Maine is not. Her rise will mark his downfall, and yet nobody knows other than a few people that it was his confidence in her which helped build her star even brighter than his own."Esther Victoria Blodgett!", press agent Lionel Stander shouts, aghast. Cutting out "Blodgett", Niles comes up with "Vicky Lester", telling everybody to shout out "Say Vicky Lester!", to which Stander cynically replies "Vicky Vicky". But a bit part isn't enough for her, and at Norman's request, she gets the female lead in his newest film which is a smash for her but a critical slap for him. His pictures continue to bomb, and hers are hits, winning her an Oscar which results in his public humiliation. By this time, Norman and Victoria are married (under their real names), the offended Stander is outraged, and the stage is set for a finale both tragic and triumphant.As much as we have been warned about Hollywood success, we haven't learned that only a few rise to the top and stay there without any type of scandal. Norman Maine, whether being Lowell Sherman's version in "What Price Hollywood" or March's or James Mason or even Kris Kristofferson, can't bear a morning shoot without a drink, and for each drink he takes marks another notch towards his downfall. Gaynor, pretty much a has-been herself after being replaced at 20th Century Fox with Shirley Temple taking over the "leading star" spot, needed a hit like "A Star is Born" and is outstanding. She's comical (imitating a variety of stars at a Hollywood party) and touching, while March is profound, even in Norman's most drunken state.Playing a film studio owner/lead producer much like Selznick or Goldwyn, Menjou is a gentle patriarchal figure, loyal to March's Norman but unable to help him get another leading role thanks to the proved failures of his past. Stander is gruff and even nasty, letting his vile towards Norman spill out so evilly that you know that even the strongest person fighting to stay sober would be tempted to break their pledge. Andy Devine is amusing as Gaynor's confidante, with May Robson authoritative as her beloved grandmother and an unbilled Clara Blandick dominating every moment of the opening scene as the movie-hating aunt.Everything about this film is outstanding, with excellent Technicolor photography and a structure which has the film open and end as if it were the visions inside the opening shot of the first page of the screenplay and its last as the film wraps up. William Wellman was a master of storytelling and utilized Dorothy Parker and Alan Campbell's screenplay to almost become a "Hollywood Bible" to indicate the ten commandments of becoming a star with "Hell" being big stars becoming has-beens for breaking these rules.

A Contrast in Styles tend to make this Overrated Film feel Uneasy and not Quite the Success that its Reputation would Imply. That is the Almost Slapstick Humor like the Screen Test and the Makeup Scenes and the Downer Side to the Story, that of a Fallen Star. It is Careers in Contrast and the Collision and the Result is an Uneven Mix of Satire and Melodrama.Fredrich March is by Far the Best Performance while Janet Garynor is Consistently Unconvincing both as a Starry Eyed Starlet and a Bonafide Star. She sounds like Minnie Mouse and Broods a lot. It is Heavy Handed, Dated Stuff and even in its Day was Probably as Over Praised as it is Today. Sure it was the First Version of this Thrice Filmed Tale and it is in Early Thirties Technicolor (very rare), but the Conflicting On Screen Styles of Humor and Tragedy are Over Baked and don't Blend Well in most Respects. The Side Characters, except for Adolphe Menjou as the Producer are Obnoxious, Cartoonish and Loud.Worth a Watch for its Place in Film History, the Classic Story, the Technicolor, the Awards, the Accolades, and Friedrich March's Restrained Role.

It struck me that the focus was a bit off in this movie - a focus established by the title, which seems to put the spotlight on Esther. Janet Gaynor was excellent in the part of Esther in what was basically a very good movie - but nothing (not even the title) should have implied that Esther was the focus of the movie. Esther as a character just really didn't make that much of a connection with me. I didn't care all that much about her.Esther was a naive and innocent country girl - dazzled by the movies; attending the "moving pictures" in town, and reading all the gossip magazines. She harbours a dream to go to Hollywood and become a star herself. Her family is either amused by her dream, or they're disdainful of it and even antagonistic toward it - except for her grandmother, who finally gives her the cash to travel to California. Once there, Esther doesn't have much luck finding acting jobs, and money is hard to come by. But one day, working as a waitress at a big Hollywood party, she meets movie star Harold Maine (Fredric March), who is smitten with her and arranges for her to star opposite him in his next movie. Renamed Vicki Lester, Esther becomes a huge star. It's a success story, a story of following your dreams. And that's fine - except that the focus of this really needed to be on Harold.First, March was absolutely superb in the part. But more than that, Harold was simply the more interesting character. His career was on the downswing by the time he met Esther. Parts were getting harder for him to find, the reviews were getting worse and he was starting to drink heavily. I was sympathetic to him, as I watched his entire life crumble around him. I was embarrassed for him as I watched him stumble from one drunken public escapade to another. He loved Esther, but even then he found himself overshadowed by her, to the point at which he was barely recognized, and referred to as "Mr. Lester." March's concluding scene (after he's heard Esther say that she's going to give up her career to help him) is powerful. There's a marvellous message sent by director William Wellman as, during that final scene, he has Harold staring out the window at the sun setting over the ocean, and you know what's coming: an act of self-sacrifice, so that Esther won't have to give up her career to care for him. March's performance and the character himself is powerful; at times riveting.There's also a lot of reflection on the idea of "stars" - the publicity machine that makes them but just as easily spits them out; there's an early look at a sort of paparazzi frenzy around Harold; there's the adoring fans who pester Esther for an autograph - while she's leaving the church after Harold's funeral!It's a very well done movie. I just thought that it was a mistake to have the title focus on Esther, when the power of the movie was Harold's fall and ultimate demise. (9/10)

i consider this one of the greatest films ever made.i watch it often for all of us who have ever dreamed of moving to Hollywood,its a great film,watching her in the movie makes me dream about being in the movies as i did as a boy,i often thought she played the part as best anyone could, and then i found out Judy garland was in a remake of it,haven't seen it yet, but gotta be one hell of a movie movie.well I've said what I've wanted to say and have to write four more lines before it will let me post it. cant wait to see the remake with Judy garland.i think ill find it on internet and watch it tonight. I've never taken 5the time to write a review before,but had to on this movie.