Don't listen to the negative reviews

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Hollywood Revue of 1929, The (1929) ** (out of 4) Film buffs might eat up the chance at seeing some of MGM's biggest stars but even lovers of cinema will have a hard time taking this film in one long (116-minutes) dose. What we basically have here is a major studio wanting to show off their major talent and in some cases having this major talent look extremely bad by doing stuff we normally wouldn't expect to see them doing. Case in point, Joan Crawford who has to sing and let's just be kind and say that this wasn't her calling in life or at least one the day this scene was filmed. Jack Benny, John Gilbert, Conrad Nagel, Buster Keaton, Laurel and Hardy, Bessie Love, Marion Davies, Marie Dressler, Norma Shearer and Lionel Barrymore are among the A-list talent that show up here and the end results are mixed at best. A prime example of this would be Gilbert and Shearer doing a scene from Romeo and Juliet, which is followed by them talking and having fun "out of character" when Barrymore comes up to them with a few comments. On one hand, the acting in the R&J scene is pretty bad as neither actor appears to be taking it too seriously. The "out of character" stuff is mildly entertaining but what really makes this scene special is the fact that it was shot in 2-strip Technicolor. Most of the vaudeville like acts are poorly directed and executed and this includes the Laurel and Hardy bit, which comes off pretty badly without a single laugh to be found. The majority of the stars just show up for brief bits and none of them are all that memorable unless they're of the embarrassing kid (like Crawford). The biggest problem is that the film has a very slow pacing and it doesn't help that the thing runs nearly two hours and apparently it was even longer but many of these segments are now lost. So, on one hand it's rather nice seeing all of these legends but one can only wish that the film was better than it is. It's very hard to get through the entire thing and in the end this here is certainly for film buffs only.

MGM's stupendously batty all star early talkie extravaganza from 1929 is a gloriously overproduced jamboree of jumping about, vaudeville comedy, tap-dancing, Minstrel antics, embarrassing and tedious comedy, and best of all - some two-color technicolor spotlights allowing for some standout moments. It is all so mad, a complete variety show more than a Follies with an endless parade of the 20s big names trying to be themselves and allow us into their glamorous lives for a few minutes. With wonderfully tinny sound, yelling, reprises galore of terrible songs - YOUR MOTHER AND MINE in particular... an underwater goddess grotto, harem aerobics, Buster Keaton being a caterpillar, people waving their arms about, annoying Ukulele Ike trilling and a finale on Noah's Ark...well yes it is The Hollywood Revue. If you love The Dawn Of Sound era and are fascinated with the Art Deco of the Vaudeville 20s then this film is a major treat. The jewel box and pearls sequence is Erte heaven. Many scenes are introduced by Jack Benny who often appears before some of the most beautiful glittering diamanté and velvet stage curtains you could imagine. Like a toy-box of musical madness, THE Hollywood REVUE OF 1929 is hilarious and annoying by turns but well worth the effort to sit through. A companion piece to GLORIFYING THE American GIRL of 1929 and KING OF JAZZ of 1930. My best tip to get friends to watch it is to play it at your next party as musical wallpaper. No sound, just the imagery playing to your own DVD collection....This is the sort of wonderful visual confection that nightclubs should play on a big wall screen. It is completely insane and unstoppable in its desire to pelt the viewer with musical silliness.. especially towards the end with trios of singing (yelling) stars leaping across the stage yowling at the camera in fantastic costumes. Marie Dressler must have nearly killed herself competing for facial contortion rights against younger and more agile stars.

This was a nice introduction to sound film put together by MGM with most of their biggest stars. Conrad Nagle starts as the master of ceremonies, but he disappears part way through the film and is replaced by Jack Benny. We never see Nagle again, and I've no idea why.The highlights are many, including a young Joan Crawford, splendid "gams" and all, singing a song. Buster Keaton is as fantastic as we'd expect. Some of the choral numbers in between the real performances tend to drag, but they were gunning for the two-hour mark.One part was somewhat troubling. Lon Chaney does not appear in the review, but there is a scene where an actor sings a warning to actresses portraying little girls, warning them that Lon Chaney, the actor, is going to sneak up at any moment and kill them all. I had read he was a gentleman in real life, but you go figure.If you enjoy old cinema, its studios, and most especially its stars, you should enjoy this as a step back in time.

This film will not get a good reception from most modern audiences, and certainly much of the film shows its seventy plus years, but this is a delight for some of us who see the '20s as a golden age, and this movie as a small window into it. It is also a humble reminder that in seventy-five years or so, what we consider entertainment will hold little or no interest to mass audiences. If you are familiar at all with who the people are (Jack Benny, Joan Crawford, Cliff Edwards, Buster Keaton, etc.), the film is worth seeing. All of these people were one of a kind, not to be replicated by big name performers of today (great stars in their own right, but sorry, folks, they just don't have the class!). Just to see Joan Crawford as a young and beautiful woman is worth watching the film!Technically, of course, the movie is what it says it is--a revue--intended to show audiences that their favorite silent stars can function in the new medium of sound. That purpose fulfilled (more or less), the film now might seem to have no point. The passage of time and the loss of context have made some of the humor corny (a term, by the way, from that period). The editing is clumsy (we have learned from their mistakes), but the personages themselves, and some of the song and dance, are better than anything we have today, and could not be duplicated. I'd rather watch this than anything on the screen now.