We were TERRIBLY disappointed in this awful remake of one of the best movies ever made. Its sole redeeming feature was the performance of Peter O'Toole as Chips. He deserved the Oscar (as much as Robert Donat did in the 1939 film), but even he could not feel bad about the nod going to John Wayne in True Grit. In fact, O'Toole's performance makes us want to look into more of his work. He was great in this film.
First, the G rating is way off. It should have been R for nudity and language. Why they ever thought that swearing and gratuitous nudity of young boys was worthy of inclusion in this wonderful story entirely escapes us. It is strange that the inclusion of nude children was acceptable in films of that time. It certainly would land filmmakers in prison today. This is child porn. Oddly, another film of that era which included the full frontal nudity of a young teenage girl also got a G rating. We won't mention the name of that film for we do not desire to promote child porn. Petula Clarke was a very strange choice of an "actress" to play Katherine. Audrey Hepburn would have been a natural in the role, but NOT in the rewritten part that was butchered in this dismal rewrite. Why they ever rewrote the part of Katherine as a floozy is also immensely puzzling. In the James Hilton book and in the 1939 film which was very true to the book, Katherine was EXACTLY the match for Chips, a perfect pairing. She was classy and elegant. She NEVER embarrassed Mr. Chips. He would NEVER be attracted to such a cockney, low class woman of loose morals as he was shown to do in this terribly rewritten piece of garbage. If you like good, clean movies, by all means, watch the original film from 30 years earlier. The 1969 movie really could have been great had the writers stuck to the book's story. With a script true to the book, a classy actress like Audrey Hepburn as Katherine, the totally unnecessary nudity and the horrible language removed, this film could have been a worthy remake that we could lovingly embrace as we do the 1939 film. We have come to the conclusion that we shall never watch a remake again. They are nearly always worse than the original. We do not wish to give the impression that we don't like Petula Clarke. We do like her. "Downtown" or "Don't Sleep in the Subway Darlin", THAT is vintage Pet Clarke. She is just not a convincing Katherine. Imagine Ethel Merman or Carol Channing as Maria instead of Julie Andrews in the great film, "The Sound of Music". It doesn't work, does it? Pet Clarke does not work as Katherine in "Good Bye Mr. Chips" either. This film is useful only as a study on Peter O' Toole. He was great, this film otherwise rates as a dismal stinker.
First, the G rating is way off. It should have been R for nudity and language. Why they ever thought that swearing and gratuitous nudity of young boys was worthy of inclusion in this wonderful story entirely escapes us. It is strange that the inclusion of nude children was acceptable in films of that time. It certainly would land filmmakers in prison today. This is child porn. Oddly, another film of that era which included the full frontal nudity of a young teenage girl also got a G rating. We won't mention the name of that film for we do not desire to promote child porn. Petula Clarke was a very strange choice of an "actress" to play Katherine. Audrey Hepburn would have been a natural in the role, but NOT in the rewritten part that was butchered in this dismal rewrite. Why they ever rewrote the part of Katherine as a floozy is also immensely puzzling. In the James Hilton book and in the 1939 film which was very true to the book, Katherine was EXACTLY the match for Chips, a perfect pairing. She was classy and elegant. She NEVER embarrassed Mr. Chips. He would NEVER be attracted to such a cockney, low class woman of loose morals as he was shown to do in this terribly rewritten piece of garbage. If you like good, clean movies, by all means, watch the original film from 30 years earlier. The 1969 movie really could have been great had the writers stuck to the book's story. With a script true to the book, a classy actress like Audrey Hepburn as Katherine, the totally unnecessary nudity and the horrible language removed, this film could have been a worthy remake that we could lovingly embrace as we do the 1939 film. We have come to the conclusion that we shall never watch a remake again. They are nearly always worse than the original. We do not wish to give the impression that we don't like Petula Clarke. We do like her. "Downtown" or "Don't Sleep in the Subway Darlin", THAT is vintage Pet Clarke. She is just not a convincing Katherine. Imagine Ethel Merman or Carol Channing as Maria instead of Julie Andrews in the great film, "The Sound of Music". It doesn't work, does it? Pet Clarke does not work as Katherine in "Good Bye Mr. Chips" either. This film is useful only as a study on Peter O' Toole. He was great, this film otherwise rates as a dismal stinker.