Reviews

20 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Hairspray (2007)
7/10
Enjoyable, yet disappointing
5 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"Hairspray" is probably the most delightful new musical seen on Broadway this decade. While it is a light hearted evening, there is also a strong emotional pull and characters that one truly cares about. Transitioning Hairspray from stage to screen would not have been as difficult at other recent musicals like "The Producers" or "Rent". Yet, the resulting film was not wholly satisfying.

The biggest problem was the mistake of not sticking to the stage script, thus eliminating the jail scene (and the amusing number "In the Big Doll House"), and changing the circumstances under which "Without Love" is sung (making it much more difficult to sympathize with Link). Likewise "Mamma I'm a big Girl now" is greatly missed, and the two new songs "The Lady's Choice" and "New Girl in Town" are not especially happy additions to the story.

It was never likely that the younger generation from the original cast would get to repeat their roles on film, as all of them were in their mid to late twenties when they opened the show. So it was inevitable that actual teenagers would have to take these roles on screen. Newcomer Nikki Blonsky does quite well as Tracy. If she lacks the glow that Marissa Jaret Winokour had on stage, she's a cute and appealing presence with a sweet singing voice. Brittany Snow is appropriately icy and pretty as Amber. But Amanda Bynes disappoints as Penny (with unimpressive singing) and Zac Efron fights a loosing battle with the re conception of his character.

Its a bit more strange that none of the adult leads from he original Broadway cast were permitted to reprise their performances. If no one is superior to their stage predecessors, none of them disappoint. John Travolta's make up is less than flattering, but his Edna is a warm and likable character. Christopher Walken is also likable and charming as Wilbur. Queen Latifah isn't as brassy as Mary Bond Davis, but she is an apt choice for Mabel and has never been in better voice. Michelle Pfeiffer successfully plays up the sex in Velma to good effect, and the singing just strong enough for the role. Perhaps the happiest newcomer however is James Marsden, with a pleasant singing voice and broad toothy grin that's just perfect for Corny Collins.

Hairspray was pleasant summer fun, and is more than easy to sit through, but it is frustrating to see that it could very easily have been a flawless stage to screen transfer, which it wasn't
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Slings and Arrows (2003–2006)
10/10
Simply Wonderful!
18 September 2006
I don't have much to say about this series other than it is one of the best television series of all time! Anyone who has the slightest appreciation for Shakespeare or the theatre in general will get instantly hooked on this series, each season having one of Shakespeare's major tragedies at it's focus. Paul Gross proves himself to be one of the most underrated actors working to day as the brilliant Geoffrey Tennant, and his real life wife Martha Burns is wonderful as star actress Ellen Fanshaw. Stephen Ouimette Steals every scene he's in as the ghost of former Artistic Director Oliver Wells, and in season one there's excellent work from Luke Kirby and a pre-Notebook Rachel McAdams. If you haven't seen this series yet, go buy the DVD immediately!
17 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
On the Whole Disappointing
2 May 2006
"Once Upon a Mattress" is a delightful musical. It is, however not big enough to be made into a film, so a television version would be a perfect solution. In fact, it was the perfect solution in two earlier versions, both of which starred Carol Burnett, who created the role of Princess Winnifred in the original Off-Broadway and Broadway productions. however, both of those versions were abridged and differed from the script slightly, so the third version would have been the perfect opportunity to remain faithful to the stage script,

this is sadly one of the films shortcomings. A substantial amount of the score is dropped, not to mention some curious script alterations, such as lady larkin being sent to the dungeon, and the character of the minstrel is dropped.

On top of that, the cast is a mixed blessing. Carol Burnett is delightful, using her trademark comedy to the best of her abilities, beautifully hamming it up. taking on Burnett's role is Tracy Ullman ("Hairspray"'s Marissa Jaret Winokour was originally considered, but she turned it down). On the whole, Ullman is a good choice for the role, charming but still not an obvious bride for a prince. Ullman's comedy is adept and her singing is good, but on the whole one can't help but think she is a but mature for the role. The same goes for Dennis O'Hare as Prince Dauntless, his over the top performance somewhat schticky. Matthew Morrison is charming as sir harry, and Zooey Deschanel is appealing as Lady Larkin, even if she is a bit too contemporary for the role.

Still, after ABC's wonderful remakes of "Bye Bye Birdie" and "Annie", one can't help but feel that they could have done better.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Chicago (2002)
8/10
Wonderful
28 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The saga of translating "Chicago" the musical to the screen began in the late 70's, with Bob Fosse reprising his role as director and Liza Minelli and Goldie Hawn in the lead roles. Then in the 80's Baz Luhrman was mentioned to direct a version with Wendy Wasserstein supplying a screenplay. Then, after the success of the 1996 Broadway revival of the piece, Nicholas Hytner was attached to direct a version which would hopefully star Goldie Hawn and Madonna. Both of the lead actresses dropped out, Charlize Theron was briefly announced as a replacement for Goldie Hawn in the role of Roxie Hart, but ultimately the production was scrapped.

That is until 2000, when Rob Marshall, who had recently directed an unprecedentedly acclaimed t.v remake of "Annie", brought in the idea, and the result was this, which proved for a time to resurrect film versions of Stage musicals and became the first musical to win best picture since "Oliver!" in 1968.

"Chicago" was not an easy show to adapt for the stage, The musical numbers are presentational and not naturalistic, not a problem on stage but posing a fairly big problem on screen. Marshall solved the problem brilliantly by having the musical numbers be extravagant dream sequences, and shifting back to realism for the spoken scenes.

The cast is all around superb, Catherine Zeta-Jones' Velma is especially excellent, with Renee Zellweger a convincing Roxie, and Richard Gere well cast as Billy Flynn, and superb supporting turns from Queen Latifah and John C. Reily.

"Chicago" is simply wonderful
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ragtime (1981)
4/10
Too much for one film
6 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
E.L Doctorow's novel "Ragtime" is an amazing achievement, blending real life an fictional characters into a thrilling and heartbreaking story. However, since there are many different story lines in the novel, making a film would be difficult. E.L Doctorow hoped that "Ragtime" would be made into a t.v miniseries which is really the only way i could ever see it working, even though the musical version in 1998 did an impressive job of adapting the novel.

Unfortunately, Milos Foreman's film version did not. While it would be difficult ton include every aspect of the novel into a film, many major parts of the novel were not included, for instance, Father (a fine performance from James Olson) does not go on his expedition with Admiral Perry, so therefore father doesn't return a changed man, and Mother (a miscast Mary Steenburgen in an unimpressive performance) cannot discover her independence, and her character is greatly diminished. Likewise, the story of the immigrant Tateh (a fine performance from Mandy Patinkin) is too briefly seen, even though they do include the episode of him kicking out his unfaithful wife (played by an unknown Fran Drescher), which was eliminated from the Musical.

On the opposite side, they pay an unusually large amount of attention to Evelyn Nesbit's story, which is only a minor thread to the overall plot. However, one can't complain about this too much, as Elizabeth McGovern gives a dazzling performance as Evelyn Nesbitt.

Not surprisingly, the most attention is spent on Coalhouse Walker's story, as it is the most compelling and dominant. However, changes make this story somewhat less compelling, such as him not bringing Sarah back to him through his music. not to mention underpowered performances from Howard Rollins as Coalhouse and Debbie Allen as Sarah.

It must be noted, that i can't really imagine a successful way to film the novel, i could really only imagine it working as a miniseries, which hopefully one day, it might.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bye Bye Birdie (1995 TV Movie)
7/10
Vastly superior to the first film
23 February 2006
"Bye Bye Birdie" isn't one of the best musicals of all time, but it's great fun, and accessible to many audiences. The original film could have been wonderful, with Dick Van Dyke reprising his signature Broadway role, but instead they tinkered with the plot, so the film is very unsatisfying. This re-make, which aired on ABC in 1995, is far more faithful to the original script, and includes some original songs as well that were used in a national tour which this film took off from which starred Tommy Tune and Ann Reinking (who choreographed this film.)

Jason Alexander is a very different type from Dick Van Dyke, but he is well cast as Albert, (before his "Seinfeld" days, he started in Musical theater.) Vanessa Williams is a perfect fit for Rose. Their is also great work from Tyne Daly as Mae and Mark Kudisch as Conrad Birdie ( a role he played on the national tour).

This film is not without it's problems though. A major liability is Chynna Phillips, who, however appealing, simply looks and seems too old to be teenage Kim. And George Wendt is somewhat bland as her father, somewhat throwing the number "kids" away (a number original cast member Paul Lynde stole the show with.)

But all in all, this is a delightful, well-done film which the material deserved.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gypsy (1993 TV Movie)
7/10
A vast improvement from the first film
23 February 2006
"Gypsy" is possibly the greatest musical ever written, so it's too bad that it's film version was such a disappointment. To make up for that, we have this re-make which, if not flawless, is an enjoyable and well done adaption of the musical. The script is completely accurate, all the songs included, and the staging remains close to the original Jerome Robbins' staging. Bette Midler is a deft choice for Rose, her singing and personality Merman-esquire, and her acting splendid. Peter Reigert is a fine Herby, if not a great singer, and Cynthia Gibb is a straight forward, natural Louise. In truth, a live taping of the 1989 revival with Tyne Daly might have been a better idea, if only because "Gypsy" is simply more exciting on stage, But this film is a fine translation of a great musical.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Under Rated
19 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The film version what has recently become the longest running show in Broadway history was roundly dismissed by critics and did not thrive at the box office. But on the whole, this film was an under rated achievement and a very satisfying film.

true it was not flawless. The Phantom's lair was not as mysterious and haunting as it was on stage. And then there was the use of the flashbacks. The opening scene, used in the stage version, was well done, it was a good idea to do it in black and white and then see the theater come back to life in color, and the final scene with Raoul as an old man at the cemetery was a nice touch, but the flash back scene'd interspersed throughout the film were over kill.

Then there was Gerard Butler in the title role. Most of Butler's performance was excellent, he has a very expressive, compelling face, so it is almost heartbreaking when Christine pulls off his mask to reveal his deformation. But Butler's singing is not strong. His husky voice might have worked in another role, but he simply let his ballad's down. I think it was not a bad idea to use young, mostly unknown actors in the three leads, but it might have been beneficial to find ones who were strong singers.

That being said, Patrick Wilson does sing strongly as Raoul, and brings the charisma he carries on stage fairly seamlessly to the screen. Emmy Rossum is lovely as Christine, and it is interesting to hear the change her voice goes through as the film goes on. The entire supporting cast is faultless. Minnie Driver is a riot as opera diva Carlotta, if not a bit on the . broad side, and Miranda Richardson, although overqualified and underused, is excellent as the motherly madame giry.

What Joels Schumacher also succeeded in doing was keeping the look of the film similar to that of the stage production, but translating it so it works on film, so it is still a different experience than seeing the stage version.

While few had anything good to say about this film when it was in the theaters, after the disappointing film versions of "Rent" and "The Producers", this film deserves a better reputation
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Producers (2005)
5/10
A recording of the stage version would have been better
19 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
"The Producers" is one of the first film versions of the recent musicals based on a popular film. Because of that, the piece would have lent itself to film very easily, but this film did not succeed in translating from stage to screen. Director/Choreographer Susan Stroman has taken most of the blame for that, and most of that is justified. The film is virtually identical to the stage version in physical appearance,giving the whole film a stagey, artificial atmosphere. What's more, the performances seem to be playing to the back row, making them seem over the top. Nathan Lane does the best of the actors recreating their stage roles. Matthew Broderick, on the other hand, seems to be impersonating Gene Wilder, who played his role in the basis film. Gary Beach and Roger Bart are both fairly over the top in their stage roles. New to the film are Will Ferrell, amusing but over the top as the Nazi playwright Franz Leipkind, and Uma Thurman, who is sadly something of an embarrassment, neither a singer nor a dancer and lacking in the warmth that Cady Huffman brought to the role on stage. Since the film is so similar to the stage version, it seems to me that it would have made more sense to have filmed the stage version and broadcast it either on PBS or HBO, where it would have seemed more lively and less artificial
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
By far, the best film of 2005
19 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
There really is not much to say other than this is a stunning film. Ralph Feinnes and Rachel Weisz both give haunting, unforgettable performances as the good hearted diplomat and his brave, outspoken wife.The footage of Africa is stunning and heartbreaking, and the plot twists will leave everyone on the edge of their seats. The film also holds up superbly on second viewings, where you will pick up on things you might have missed on the first time. even though one shouldn't judge a film based on a wards, if there is any justice in the world, this is the film which deserves to win Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress over all other films this year
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A vast improvement over the stage show
14 December 2005
Whether or not "The Sound of Music" is in fact a good musical has been something of an ongoing debate. It did in fact open to mixed reviews in it's original Broadway run and was panned in it's original London run. When it comes down to it, the score is mostly excellent, even if the songs don't flow in quite as naturally as they do in other R&H shows. But where the show ultimately fails is by not joining together the three stories that go on in the show; Maria winning over the children; Maria and the Captain falling in love; and the Von Trapps Escaping from the Nazi takeover of Austria. The three stories pretty much just happen, rather than flow in.

That being said, the film of the sound of music does manage to do just that, making it quite possibly the only film version of a stage musical that actually improves on it's source material. The film wisely rearranges songs to go in more sensible places, even though dropping both of Elsa and Max's songs is more questionable. The shots of Ausrtia are simply breathtaking, often disguising the weaknesses of the material. True, the two new songs written by Richard Rodgers (music and Lyrics) are not as sophisticated as those he wrote with Oscar Hammerstein, who died in 1960, but they are enjoyable none the less and do move the story along. Julie Andrews is perfect as Maria, having the youthfulness which Mary Martin lacked on stage, which allows Andrews to mature during her performance. Even though he has stated his dislike of the film, Christopher Plummer is excellent as the Captain. While "The Sound of Music" does not rank as one of the best musicals ever written, it's film incarnation certainly ranks as one of the best (if not the best) of it's kind.
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One of the Better R&H movies
14 December 2005
"Flower Drum Song" ran just over 600 performances on Broadway, not bad at all, but nothing compared to the runs of the other major R&H shows. Still it was a financial success, after the mild failure of "Me and Juliet" and the flop "Pipe Dream", so for that reason alone, it deserved a film version. While the material is in no way the strongest, "Flower Drum Song" is a total charmer, and the film version keeps all the charm in tact. Keeping most of the original cast was a smart move, Myoshi Umeki is perfect as the timid young Mei Li. It's too bad Pat Suzuki couldn't also recreate her role of nightclub singer Linda Low, but Nancy Kwan is very amusing in the role. So far, this is the only R&H film not to have a DVD release, (the abysmal remake of "State Fair" was just released) which is somewhat surprising, since the film is actually considerably stronger than the films of "Oklahoma!", "Carousel", and "South Pacific".
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
South Pacific (1958)
3/10
The Weakest of the R&H Films
14 December 2005
"South Pacific" is regarded as one of the all time great musicals, making it very curious that Broadway had never had a full scale revival (London has had two major revivals). A possible reason for that is that "South Pacific" was made into two fairly disappointing film versions (the second a t.v version with Glenn Close). One would think that original stage director Joshua Logan would have been the best man for the job when transferring the piece from stage to screen. However, he mad some unusual choices, such as the pretentious color filters spread throughout the film. Casting is also problematic. Mitzi Gaynor lacks the spunk Mary Martin had on stage, (it's a shame Logan couldn't get Doris Day as he had hoped), Rossano Brazzi is handsome and dashing as Emile de Beque, but somewhat bland, (Giorgio Tozzi does a good job as his voice double). The one bonus is that we get Juanita Hall recreating her Bloody Mary (even though her singing is dubbed by Muriel Smith, who played the role in London), and Ray Walston, who played Luthur Bills in London. The t.v remake was not much of an improvement, but is still superior to this all around disappointing film
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
On the Whole Excellent
14 December 2005
"The King and I" is probably Rodger's and Hammerstein's best musical after "Carousel". The brilliance of the piece is that it is a love story that is not romantic, but still a love story. Walter Lang translated the piece beautifully to the screen, remaining mostly faithful to the stage version, dropping some songs and adding some scenes of dialog, but keeping the brilliance of the piece, possibly improving it. original stage Anna Gertrude Lawrence died shortly after she ended her run on Broadway, making reprising her apparently dazzling performance on screen an impossibility. But Deborah Kerr is excellent in the role, even if her singing is dubbed (Marni Nixon is excellent on the vocals). And then of course there's Yul Brynner. Brynner is one of those performer's who has truly made the role his own, and he is in even better form in the film than he was in the original stage version, ( he was a little to young when he opened on Broadway). The journey he undergoes through his relationship with Anna is truly magnificent. After "The Sound of Music", this is probably the next best film version of an R&H show.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Carousel (1956)
Brilliant musical; Disappointing film
13 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
"Carousel" is probably the best musical Rodgers and Hammerstein wrote, it was their favorite. A testament to how shaking the material was for it's audiences in the 1940s was it's run of just under 900 performances on Broadway, by all means respectable, but no where close to the lengthy runs of "Oklahoma", "South Pacific", "The King and I" or "The Sound of Music". The mentioned titles are darker than most audiences take them for, but "Carousel" is more blatantly dark and sophisticated than those, which would make a film version tricky. Indeed, the film is fairly sugar coated, mistakenly deciding to have it be a flashback from heaven, and to not have Billy commit suicide are both mistakes, taking away from the heartbreaking effect found in the stage version. Gordon Macrae and Shirly Jones are in decent form, but one does wonder how the film might have turned out if the originally fought after leads Frank Sinatra (who quit on the first day of filming) and Judy Garland had madethe film. One also might have wished that Nicholas Hytner's breathtaking revival was filmed and released (as Trevor Nunn's 1999 "Oklahoma!" was) or if the excellent 2002 Carnegie Hall Concert of the show (with Hugh Jackman and Audra McDonald) was televised. Since neither of them were, this film is worth viewing, even if it is on the whole disappointing.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rent (2005)
7/10
A worthy attempt, but on the whole disappointing
13 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Audiences have been waiting for a film version of "Rent" since the show opened on Broadway in 1995, so when the film would finally arrive, it would have high expectations to meet. And while there are moments of this film that are extremely satisfying, it doesn't achieve the potential level of excellence it could have. What director Chris Columbus succeeded in doing was making sure that this was a period piece, not a modern statement, since, in truth, the show now seems dated on Broadway because of just that. It is also beneficial to see the performances of most of the original cast, with a wonderful addition of Tracie Thoms. However, the film greatly suffers by changing the piece from being a rock opera, to a conventional musical, eliminating nearly all of the recitative and adding a significant amount of dialog, which ranges from bland to laughable. And while the film is set in alphabet city 1989, one can't help but feel that they seem to be living in the present day, especially by adding the unnecessary commitment ceremony of Maureen and Joanne. Other elements of the story seem sugar coated, such as not mentioning the fact that Rodger's girlfriend slit her wrists, in the film we are left to believe she simply died of HIV. And with the addition of Tracie Thom, we get Rosario Dawson's Mimi. Dawson is an adept actress, but she does not succeed in finding the emotional vulnerability that is vital in order to make Mimi work. Since Thom was not in the original cast, but played Joanne in a replacement cast on Broadway, This writer believes that Marcy Harriell should have been chosen to play Mimi, as she was the only Mimi i saw on stage who truly broke my heart.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Oklahoma! (1955)
5/10
Acceptable at Best
13 December 2005
Not enough people appreciate the true genius of "Oklahoma!", mostly because too many associate Rodgers and Hammerstein to be overly sweet and happy ever after. But if one were to truly look at the material, as Trevor Nunn did in his superb 1999 London revival, they would see how dark and complex their musicals really are. Unfortunately, most of the R&H films don't uncover that, "Oklahoma!" especially, but as far as musical films go, their all enjoyable, even if "Oklahoma!" is one of the less enjoyable.

It's hard to say why that is. It remains mostly faithful to the stage show, and the cast is mostly fine, but something about the film seems tired and bland. It is wonderful that Trevor Nunn's production was recorded and released on DVD, since that is an excellent example of finding new light on a classic piece when it seemed impossible. While Nunn's "Oklahoma!" is preferable, the original film is still worth viewing, especially since Gordon Macrae and Shirly Jones are in much better form here than they would be in the eventual film version of "Carousel"
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A missed opportunity
13 December 2005
Sandy Wilson's stage musical is a total charmer. There's really not much to it, but the music is delightful and the story quite sweet. It would have lent itself to film quite well, as something of a throwback to early movie musicals. Unfortuneatly, this is where Ken Russel failed in transferring it from stage to screen, by trying to make it one. Russel also unwisely chose to make the film a show within a show, so the original stage show is the play that is being performed by a struggling regional theater company in England, with Russell adding unnecessary backstage drama, and having the heroine (Twiggy), be the last minute understudy going on in the main role. This decision drowned all the charm out of the musical, making it something of a labored affair to watch. It is also frustrating to know that an earlier film was to be made of "The Boy Friend" by Universal with original Broadway stage star, Julie Andrews, starring. However they were unable to get rights, so instead we got "Thoroughly Modern Millie". Still, This film is somewhat fascinating t to watch, if only because the score is delightful, and it's so bizarre, that it's worth seeing.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Deserves a DVD release
13 December 2005
This is probably one of the most maligned film versions of a stage musical ever made. And a while some of it's criticisms are well deserved, this film certainly has it's benefits. Among the better parts of the film there is, above all, Diana Rigg's Charlotte. Rigg ranks as one of the most under-appreciated actresses of all time, and her performance is simply pitch-perfect. It is also fortunate to have Len Cariou, Laurence Guittard and Hermoine Gringold re-create their stage roles, and Lesley Ann Down is a lovely addition, well cast as Anne, even if she doesn't do her own singing.

On the downside, the setting of the film is unwisely moved to Vienna, where there is . no midnight sun, and much of the score is eliminated. And then there is the controversial casting of Elizabeth Taylor as Desiree. Taylor is a very gifted actress, but in this role Taylor is simply a black hole, overly dramatic and lacking the warmth and joy Glyinis Johns brought to the stage role. Still, since it is based on one of the finest musicals of all time, this film deserves a DVD release
17 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Rosie O'Donnell Show (1996–2002)
Controversial, but greatly missed
13 December 2005
This show was on while I was in middle school, and for me, it was the biggest advantage of staying home sick. Rosiewas surprisingly good at giving interviews, and i have to admit, she really paved the way for Ellen's show right now. If I were to choose who i prefer as a comedienne and a person, i would say Ellen, but Rosie's show did have some benefits which Ellen's does not. For one thing, Rosie did give a somewhat more interesting interview than Ellen does, and most of all, for me anyway, Rosie's support to Broadway. Rosie's exposure of Broadway plays and musicals to T.V audiences helped keep Broadway alive and well, and one can't help but notice how the state of Broadway has changed without Rosie. With Rosie's show, serious Musicals like "Ragtime" could thrive, today musicals seem to have to either star Hugh Jackman or be based on a popular film or be marketable to thirteen year old girls to at all survive. Yes, by the end, when Rosie let her politics get the better of her, the show lost steam, and i agree with most of the criticism she received surrounding that, but for me anyway, her show will be missed.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed