Thoroughly Modern Millie: Film v. Musical

I was thinking about which is better, the film or the movie of THoroughly Modern Millie.

The film was produced by Ross Hunter after he was smitten with the British and American productions of The Boy Friend and Broadway's Polly, one Julie Andrews. After trying and failing to secure the rights to The Boy Friend, Hunter went to Richard Morris and asked for another 20's style farce as a vehicle for Ms. Andrews. The result was a 20's romp in which we watch the shenanigans of silly flapper Millie Dillmount. We are never to be emotinally involved in the story, it is sheer entertainment.

The show asks us to care for the characters while also enjoying that carefree fun. Millie is suddenly goingthrough a journey and becoming a "modern" and the story is now wrenched in sentimental emotions, yet still the authors are trying to maintain the 20's carefree musical.

Which do you prefer? Do you think the stage version was an improvement on the film? Do you think the film was more focused and specific than the show?

Updated On: 12/25/04 at 07:41 PM

I haven't seen the movie, but I would class the show as a romp. It was light and IMO not full with sentiment.

Don't we mean "film vs. MUSICAL," not film vs. movie?

---

Thanks bluewizard.

I just changed the title of the thread. Silly me!

Updated On: 12/25/04 at 10:37 AM

Personally, I hated the movie, but loved the show. Julie Andrews was wonderful, but the movie just didn't work for me and I wasn't a fan of the songs in the film.

The problem I have always had with the musical is that it really never decided what it wanted to be: a big-time Broadway monster or a delicate lampoon.

The movie was always a delicate lampoon, a fragile spoof of the twenties. Julie Andrews' wonderful performance with a large undercurrent of her performance in The Boy Friend was always a favorite. The musical's Millie is somewhat greener and tougher and somehow less fun, even if Sutton was perfection the way the character was written irked me.

Also, Muzzy was an eccentric and more fun than she is in the musical. I DO like the Mrs. Meers of the musical.

Another good thing about the movie: the four indominable divas at the center of the action: the delectable Julie Andrews, the precious Mary Tyler Moore, the zany Carol Channing, and the hilarious Bea Lillie, all at the peak of their powers.

The Jimmy of the movie is better as well. In the musical the whole playboy, man-about-town took away from the cute banter that the leading couple had in the film.

The Broadway musical was a million times better!
I just want to thank gherbert for clearing up a few facts. I was wondering how Julie Andrews ever got cast into that role, her British accent just dosen't make sence for a Mid-West, small town girl.
Never the less, I still got a kick out of seeing the movie after seeing the show.

Anytime Hank!

But in the film the origin of Millie's hometown is dubious.

It is only in the musical where they make the whole to-do about the "one-ghost-town" and stuff. The film picks up three months after Millie's arrival in New York.

As much as I love Julie Andrews... Sutton was a goddess in that part.