Funny Face (1957) User Reviews (178)

Think pink!

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 6 September 2005]

Stanley Donen's "Funny Face" was one of the best musicals that came out of Paramount, a studio not known for that genre. The DVD format we watched recently seems to have been transferred with great care as the colors have a vibrant look, something that wasn't the case with the technique used during that era that made colors fade.

The film owes its appeal to Audrey Hepburn, an actress not known for being a singer, or a dancer, but who had enough charm to make the movie her own. The pairing with the great Fred Astaire pays off well because Mr. Astaire was always an actor who had enough chemistry with his leading ladies. Ms. Hepburn's costumes by Givenchy and the way she carries herself in them is one of the best assets about "Funny Face".

The other surprise of the movie is Kay Thompson, who plays the magazine editor Maggie Prescott. Ms. Thompson makes an excellent contribution to the film as the no nonsense woman who ruled what the fashions of the day should be as shown in the pages of the magazine.

The songs of George Gershwin are complimented by the original music composed for the musical by Roger Edens, Adolph Deutsch and Leonard Gershe. The great cinematography of Ray June shows Paris at its best. Thanks to Stanley Donen all the elements feel into place and we were left with this musical that will delight audiences forever.

Still a fun musical

[harry-76 · 8/10 · 2 April 2000]

"Funny Face" was great fun during its first runs and is still a most enjoyable musical. A top notch cast headed by Audrey Hepburn and Fred Astaire make this a winner. Kaye Thompson is on hand for songs, dances and laughs, and George Gershwin's score sparkles. Filmed in part on location in Paris, "Funny Face" beautifully conveys its story of romance with elegance and charm. Smart fashion costumes, photography and choreography combine to make this a hit.

Gershwin, Paris, Astaire, Audrey Hepburn, Richard Avedon, and John-Paul Sartre

[theowinthrop · 7/10 · 23 July 2005]

This 1957 musical is a little odd. It has a title based on an original 1920s Gershwin musical (that included the title song) which starred Fred and Adele Astaire. It was a musical and scenic valentine to France (but only one tune in it deals with France - "Bonjour Paris!". It is a spoof on the modern fashion magazines, fashions in general, and advertising - but the spoof while sharp at times is never pushed. The opening sequence, "Think Pink," describes how Kay Thompson plans a campaign to make the American woman go for "pink" clothes, accessories, toothpaste, etc., only to admit to her assistant she personally loathes the color. It takes full advantage of the attractive face and features of Hepburn, who is convinced to be a model and help push a new line of fashions in Paris. And it makes two characters into imitations of Richard Avedon the photographer (Astaire as Dick Avory) and Jean-Paul Sartre (Michel Auclair as Prof. Emile Flostre).

Avedon was a rarity - a fashion photographer who became a great artistic portrait photographer. Astaire never is shown taking pictures of great or famous people in the film but several times he demonstrates a refinement that separates him from the rest of Kay Thompson's entourage (most of whom don't care what havoc they cause, as long as they get their jobs done). He also has enough sense to question Hepburn's accepting of "empathicalism", and it's viability. Witness his moment in the bistro pouring wine to the two old codgers who are quite pleasant to him while he insults them in English. Hepburn, of course, is so insistent on the validity of her philosophical beliefs that she rejects Astaire's warnings, and jeopardizes the fashion show.

The final blow (seemingly) to the Astaire - Hepburn relationship is when he confronts Flostre at the author's home. He knocks out the Professor, and his brutality demolishes the relationship with Hepburn. But within minutes Hepburn sees another side to Flostre which is unexpected, and suddenly realizes that Astaire may be right after all.

The character of Flostre is obviously based on that of Jean-Paul Sartre, the founder of "existentialism". Based on in some details, but not in theory. "Empathicalism" has to do with trying to empathize with others so as to have a proper response to their needs and aspirations. "Existentialism" has to do with: "An introspective humanism or theory of man which expresses the individual's intense awareness of his contingency and freedom; a theory which states that the existence of the individual precedes his essence." This is from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Sartre has a more complex view of man and society, and one can plow through BEING AND NOTHINGNESS to try to understand it. In fact some critics have wondered if the Nobel Prize Winner eventually got very wrong headed about his theory. But he certainly seems a meatier philosopher than his celluloid copy.

But Flostre does have the trappings of Sartre on him. He is revered by his followers world wide (such as Hepburn). He is a man with sexual appetite (as Sartre was with his long time companion and fellow writer Simone Beauvoir). And there is some traces of an anti-capitalist, even anti-American attitude in him. It is not definitely pushed, but when Astaire and Thompson break into his house during a party, they pretend they are American share cropper singers whom Flostre had brought to France to perform for his guests. Now, we never hear what this actual pair actually would sing, but judging from their background they would have to throw in some protest songs. Sartre was very critical of the U.S.A. and capitalism (today his fans have to explain Sartre's willingness to accept Russian imperialist moves under Communism in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s - they find it very hard to do so).

On the whole the parts of the film work well, so I give it seven stars. Kay Thompson is best recalled for being the creator of the little girl at the Plaza "Eloise", but she shows here a highly entertaining performance as Maggie Prescott, the editor who pushes and loathes pink. The film would have been better if somehow Avedon's portrait photography had been brought into the story, possibly in a final scene with Flostre as his subject. However, even without such a sequence the film is rewarding to watch, especially in the musical numbers. Astaire does equally well with Thompson and with Hepburn as his partners here.

Plot, Schmot!

[eye3 · 6 July 1999]

You have Audrey Hepburn, you have Fred Astaire, you have Gershwin songs. Who needs a plot?

Okay, there was something of a plot, something about a Greenwich Village girl who wants to go to Paris, talk b.s. philosophy on the Left Bank, wear black clothes and no make-up. It reads like something out of one of Woody Allen's early stories - before he wrote it!

Audrey Hepburn never knew how to look bad nor act bad. But in this she looks light-years more beautiful as the proverbial Greenwich Village used-book-store Plain Jane than any Paris fashion model - then or now.

that age-gap romance

[didi-5 · 7/10 · 4 May 2004]

This snappy musical teams an ageing Fred Astaire with the young and lively Audrey Hepburn, puts them in Paris with a lovely Gershwin score, and piles on the slush to create romantic confection that really is irresistible.

Audrey is at her best here, whether singing (in her own voice) ‘How Long Has This Been Going On?', dancing wildly around a café, or looking like a mannequin in the fabulous frocks. Kay Thompson is on hand too, with her own fabulous number, ‘Think Pink' about the trials and tribulations of being a fashion magazine editor.

It probably works best with the misty filters and the dreamy sequences, though. And Audrey is serenaded by Fred dancing beneath her window, like the dashing prince who comes to rescue Rapunzel. Musical corn perhaps, but addictive nonetheless.

Enjoyable Musical

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 25 December 2006]

The bookshop salesgirl Jo Stockton (Audrey Hepburn) is accidentally found by the photograph Dick Avery (Fred Astaire), who convinces the owner of the fashion magazine Quality, the powerful Maggie Prescott (Kay Thompson), that she could be the new model she wants for the magazine. Jo dreams on going to Paris to meet her guru, the philosopher Prof. Emile Flostre (Michel Auclair), but she cannot afford to pay for the travel; therefore she sees in the invitation, the chance to visit Paris. Once there, Dick falls in love for her.

"Funny Face" has a great cinematography, art direction, set decoration, costume design and most important, a charming and delightful Audrey Hepburn. Kay Thompson is also excellent. The problem is the silly screenplay that shows at least two great mistakes. The first one is the inconsistent and contradictory character Jo Stockton, presented as an intelligent and clever woman in the beginning, but later becoming absolutely shallow, acting like an irresponsible spoiled child. The second big mistake is Fred Astaire (58), thirty years old older than Audrey Hepburn (28), therefore more than twice her age, as her romantic pair. This great actor looks like her father, and there is no romantic chemistry between them. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Cinderela em Paris" ("Cinderella in Paris")

Good-natured musical

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 26 February 2014]

FUNNY FACE is notable as a colourful '50s-era music teaming the talents of two of the best-known stars of all time, Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn. In this film, whose story feels like an earlier version of THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA, Astaire and Hepburn consummate a May-December relationship when they're brought together by chance.

Hepburn stars as one of those unbelievable mousy characters - here a bookshop assistant - who's transformed into an ultra-glamorous model when she goes to Paris for a photo shoot. Astaire is the top-of-his-game photographer, and much of the film gets by on their easy charm.

Of course, there are there requisite song-and-dance numbers to enjoy, and a storyline that's never too heavy or too much. In all, it's just right, and old hand Stanley Donen brings plenty to the production with his assured direction. A very good-natured and pleasing effort.

Great 1950s Fun with a Paris Background

[LeonardKniffel · 9/10 · 28 April 2020]

A pleasure it is to see Audrey Hepburn romp through this film with style AND her own voice. A witty spoof of the fashion industry, with Broadway legend Kay Thompson hamming it up as a magazine executive singing "Think Pink" as she plans a marketing promotion. "I wouldn't attempt to tell a woman what a woman ought to think, but tell her if she's gotta think, think pink!" Alive with the fashions of the 1950s, the film pairs Hepburn with Fred Astaire, 30 years her senior, and you can almost buy it, especially when they dance, largely because of Astaire's charming screen presence. Other numbers to look for: Hepburn, after the fashion magazine staff invades her bookstore, singing "How Long Has This Been Going On?" Astaire singing the title song in his photographer's dark room, and the upbeat, romantic, and undeniably charming "Bonjour Paris" as the bookstore clerk begins transforming into a fashion model. Music and lyrics are by the unbeatable George and Ira Gershwin, culminating with "'s Wonderful." Main drawbacks: the movie spends an inordinate amount of time satirizing the existentialist philosophers and artists of the day and fusses excessively over the deep meaning of Astaire's true love for this young girl. ---from Musicals on the Silver Screen, American Library Association, 2013

Colorful and energetic, but with a hackneyed script...

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 4 September 2005]

Although she gets to use her own singing voice on her song numbers, Audrey Hepburn's natural gamine appeal is nearly swallowed up in the fake-happy surroundings of "Funny Face", a stylish Stanley Donen musical saddled with a leadweight (though Oscar-nominated!) script by Leonard Gershe. Fred Astaire plays a famous photographer based in New York City who discovers the beauty in a mousy Greenwich Village book-clerk. So far, so good. But from these promising beginnings comes nothing more pressing than a complicated-romance plot which holds no weight, no substance, and delivers nary a flicker of chemistry between Fred and Audrey. There's also a dire subplot about a philosopher in Paris, with the film laughably comparing a beatnik lecture to a spiritual. Hepburn is used as a model--and she's a great model--but where's all that enchanting feistiness we know she's capable of? Donen is only interested in flash and fluttery-gay nonsense. The Gershwin songs are often lovely, the film's color schemes and fashions are terrific, but the movie's kick is all a fabrication--and its romance is rote. Other Oscar noms included: art direction, Ray June for his cinematography and Edith Head for her costumes (shared with Audrey's designer, Hubert de Givenchy, who received his only recognition from the Academy here). **1/2 from ****

In the Pink

[richardchatten · 9/10 · 26 July 2020]

The first of two films released in 1957 in which Fred Astaire effectively bade farewell to the genre he had bestrode like a colossus for nearly a quarter of a century is the cinematic equivalent of gorging yourself on a box of chocolates without the calories.

The title photographs by Richard Avedon (on whom the character played by Astaire was based) establish the iconic fifties cool that never lets up for the rest of the film. Had they shot the whole thing in the studio, the Gershwin score, Technicolor, VistaVision and Edith Head creations worn by all the cast but Audrey Hepburn would already have induced pleasure overload. But producer Roger Edens also shipped the crew to Paris and whipped that into the brew.

It shows how spoiled they were in those days that it didn't collect a single Oscar!

Rather Disappointing

[gavin6942 · 6/10 · 2 July 2012]

Fashion photographer Dick Avery (Fred Astaire), in search for an intellectual backdrop for an air-headed model, expropriates a Greenwich Village bookstore. When the photo session is over the store is left in a shambles, much to the dismay of salesgirl Jo Stockton (Audrey Hepburn). After seeing her in a photo's background, Jo is offered a modeling contract, which she reluctantly accepts only because it includes a trip to Paris.

As much as I enjoy Hepburn and generally enjoy Astaire, I found this film very lacking. It was rather boring, the romance seemed forced, and the extended dance scene in the bohemian café did nothing for me. It seemed more like talent wasted than anything else. I did like Astaire's matador dance, but that was about it.

Of the Hepburn movies I have seen (approximately eight), this ranks as the lowest so far. I hate to say it, but it is so... a second viewing may change my mind, but it is not a viewing I am eager to have.

The Bird of Paradise

[krorie · 10/10 · 4 December 2005]

This is a rare bird indeed, a Hollywood musical that succeeds as parody as well as musical entertainment, featuring the best song and dance man of all time, Fred Astaire, and the Hollywood establishment darling, Audrey Hepburn, who was always magnificent despite being pampered and fawned over by the media moguls. Unlike Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire's dancing seemed natural. Astaire spent as much time learning his steps as Kelly, but the viewer always got the idea that Kelly had learned the steps whereas Astaire appeared to be inventing as he shuffled along. Astaire's early movies were made during the age of the crooner, yet his singing could not be pigeonholed into that category. Like his dancing, his singing flowed naturally and freely.

The story to "Funny Face" is a simple one, a musical variation on Shaw's Pigmalion which was already a hit musical "My Fair Lady," turned into another Audrey Hepburn vehicle a few years after "Funny Face." What makes this movie stand out is the spellbinding choreography by Astaire, Et.Al., Ray June's cinematography, George Gershwin music, such as the title song, the direction of Stanley Donen, and the Paris fashions by Hubert de Givenchy. The colors are breathtaking. Note the incredible images of the opening dance "Pink." The sights of Paris have never appeared more intriguing. And who would have thought a song and dance in a photographer's dark room could be so delightful?

One of my favorite numbers from "Funny Face" is the hilarious yet imaginative parody of modern dance performed by Audrey Hepburn in a Paris cabaret. The parody can also be interpreted as poking harmless fun at Gene Kelly's ballet-style dancing in "An American in Paris." This scene shows the versatility of the multi-talented Hepburn. Teaming her with the also multi-talented Astaire makes for a winning combination. Why the hoopla about their age differences? Do film reviewers not live in the real world anymore?

This is a much better musical than many of the more touted ones of the 1950's. If you're not careful, this little screen gem may slip past you.

Funny Face

[jboothmillard · 7/10 · 19 February 2011]

From director Stanley Donen (Singin' in the Rain, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, Charade), I certainly recognised the title, but other than that I wasn't aware of any other details, but it sounded like a film that should be seen. Basically Dick Avery (Fred Astaire) works as a photographer for fashion magazine Quality, and suggests to publisher and editor Maggie Prescott (Kay Thompson) finding a backdrop both beautiful, and intellectual. They choose a Manhattan neighbourhood bookstore in Greenwich Village, and despite the clerk and amateur philosopher Jo Stockton (Audrey Hepburn) protesting, they go ahead, and Dick has her in a photo too. Dick stays behind for a little to help clear up the terrible mess the magazine crew have left behind, and he gives her a little kiss that makes her feel special for that small amount of time. Having developed the photo Dick thinks that Jo has a very intriguing, funny face that has potential, so they lure her to the studio to offer her a modelling contract, and eventually she accepts. She may have accepted because of the idea of travelling to Paris, but she soon gets used to and enjoys the posing that comes with it, especially when it is with Dick, they are falling in love. One night Jo hears that the philosopher she has always wanted to see, Prof. Emile Flostre (Michel Auclair) is giving a lecture at a café near the fashion gala she is set for, so she goes, forgets the gala, and ends up in an argument with Dick. She goes back to the Professor, and Maggie and Dick after a song and dance manage to get in to get Jo back, and when he comes round from being knocked out he tries to make a pass at her she whacks her "idol" with a vase. Before the crew of Quality magazine leave Paris, there is one final fashion show, but Maggie and Jo find out that Dick has plans to leave on a plane, but Jo agrees to do the runway show/catwalk before running out to go and find him. In the end, after it looks like she's too late, but in fact Dick hasn't left at all, he goes to the one place he can think of that she would be alone, and they reunite for the loving end of the film. Also starring Robert Flemyng as Paul Duval, Dovima as Marion and Virginia Gibson as Babs. Hepburn is beautiful and lovable as the knowledgeable new to fashion model, and a good singer too (her voice was dubbed for My Fair Lady due to it not being the sort required, i.e. powerful), Astaire is a nice guy with plenty of moves and witty dialogue, they make a good couple on screen, and Thompson is pretty good too. The music and songs are catchy in their own ways, the dance and choreography is well done by the two lead stars, and the Paris locations are good viewing, all in all, a good old-fashioned musical comedy. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design and Best Writing, Story and Screenplay - Written Directly for the Screen. Fred Astaire was number 81, and Audrey Hepburn number 13 on The Greatest Movie Stars, and Hepburn was number 31 on The 100 Greatest Pop Culture Icons, and Astaire was number 5 on 100 Years, 100 Stars - Men. Very good!

Beautiful, but boring

[gg2507 · 5/10 · 22 November 2020]

Audrey Hepburn, the costumes and the photography are all beautiful but they simply can't make up for the lack of plot, the forgettable songs and the weird age gap between the protagonist couple (it's just impossible to believe that a young, beautiful and intelectual girl would instantly fall in love with a stranger 30 years older than her).

S'wonderful indeed!

[lauraeileen894 · 20 May 2002]

I recently saw "Funny Face" and I was just enchanted from start to finish. This beautiful, sublime, light-hearted musical pairs the incomparable Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn. It was the perfect vehicle for Hepburn, and in my humble opinion, "Funny Face" ties with "The Band Wagon" as the best Fred Astaire musical of the 50's.

"Funny Face" tells the story of Jo Stockton (Hepburn) a deep and outspoken Beatnik bookseller, and Dick Avery (Astaire), a raffish but compassionate photographer for "Quality" magazine. "Quality" is run by its hilariously vapid editor, Maggie Presscott (Kay Thompson, a real scene stealer). After some unusual circumstances, Dick convinces the waifish Jo that she has model potential and should go to Paris with him. The plot is sometimes a moot point as soon as they get there, but what happens after that is song, dance, great clothes, and a beautiful romantic song and dance with Audrey and Fred on a grassy knoll. There's also a rather famous scene with Audrey descending a flight of stairs in a gorgeous red strapless dress with white gloves.

I've seen a lot of criticism for "Funny Face", and I disagree that it's shallow and anti-intellectual. What separates this movie from, say, "She's All That" is that Jo only goes to Paris as a "means to an end" for modelling, which Jo is vehemently against. She never compromises who she is, and doesn't officially fall for Dick until much later, so romance is never a motive for anything. Also, Dick admires Jo's inner beauty, even before she becomes a stunner. They are much more likable and romantic leads than in most "makeover" movies. Please don't over-analyze "Funny Face", just sit back and let yourself be spellbound. Trust me, "s'wonderful"!!

Why can't they just leave my man Gershwin alone....

[funkyfry · 7/10 · 10 October 2002]

Entertaining but thin musical -- Stanley Donen's take on "American in Paris." Astaire is a bit too old to be plausibly linked with Hepburn (who we're supposed to believe is unattractive in wool dresses and glasses. This woman would look good in a trash bag). The movie seems to take place in a universe where Fred Astaire never ages, because the difference in their ages is never even an issue as I recall. the dances are pretty disappointing, except Audrey Hepburn's "Basil Metabolism" beatnik sequence. Beautifully photographed with style, everyone does well but there is no real substance. Good Gershwin songs culled from a handful of plays (including the original "Funny Face", which was a better show starring Fred and Adele Astaire), mostly inferior versions of often-done standards. No plot is taken from the original musical at all. This movie just seems so out of place at its time -- making fun of beatniks just points up how much time had already passed Donen, Astaire, and certainly Gershwin by. Must have felt like a relic to audiences in the 50s: seems like it could be a cherished relic to fans today.

Audrey is Everything!

[kfhomeu-58497 · 6/10 · 12 May 2022]

Beautiful film, very deserving of all the artistic awards. Audrey Hepburn is fabulous and carries the film. Fred Astaire is terribly miscast as he looks like he could be her grandfather. Their kissing scenes are cringeworthy and his singing is meh.

Pretty face (and the old man)

[kosmasp · 7/10 · 27 December 2020]

In recent years some people have come out and critisized how Hollywood is using young(er) women with old(er) men. If you didn't know any better you'd think this was a new trend in movies - especially the romantic comedies. Not all of them mind you. But you had quite a few cases that were used as examples. Like Will Smith and Margot Robbie to name one (of course there was also Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta Jones in the late 90s) ... but this isn't anything new ... as this movie clearly shows us.

I mention this for anyone who has issues with that .. issue. Because the age gap here is quite significant. That is one of the things that may throw you off ... the other one being the musical nature (and dance included obviously, I mean it's Fred Astaire for Petes sake) of the movie. If you can deal with that, this is quite the decent if overly predictable effort. It is fun to watch though and it is light enough. Nothing more and nothing less

The ideal musical

[clanciai · 10/10 · 29 January 2021]

It's a flimsy intrigue, but the main characters make it a dream of perfect entertainment, beauty and romanticism. Fred Astaire was well advanced in his 50s when he made this film, and Audrey Hepburn was twenty years younger, and yet their peculiar romance works, although they make diametrically contrary characters, he a fast photographer for a fashion magazine and she a very intellectual librarian. But the question is if it is not Kay Thompson that makes this film. She was in very few films, and this one was her third and last major performance (in her 40s), and although she was not a real film star at all, she absolutely dominates the film. Although it's a very flimsy and superficial intrigue, the dialog is brilliant throughout, especially as Audrey all the time keeps spicing it with her philosophical conversation, which actually gets Kay Thompson intrigued in it was well, and it all turns out into some psychological education, as they all learn something about empathy - Audrey is the teacher, or rather the informer and awakener, while Fred and Kay never heard of such a thing before, but they do learn. To all this comes the marvellous old music of George Gershwin and the absolutely splendid direction by Stanley Donen. Every time I have seen this film (since 1958, the first time,) I have loved it even more, for its charm will keep growing with you and within you. It is all too obvious, and you can't miss it in the film, that Audrey Hepburn loved making this film with Fred Astaire, and she admitted that herself on TV decades afterwards. The imagination, the innovations, the variation of the performances and playacting, the intoxicatingly beautiful settings - everything combines in making this film one of the most precious jewels in all film musical history, and it will keep growing in its invaluable preciousness.

Flawed, but still superior

[jiw2 · 7/10 · 28 April 2011]

I'd seen this film once before, back in the days when videotapes on a CRT television screen were the only home theater. Doesn't really seem that long ago, does it? Well, I picked up the DVD in the bargain bin of a local store recently, and watched it tonight on the widescreen monitor attached to my computer.

What a difference! The framing of all the shots suddenly makes sense, as does the absolutely amazing cinematography. It's a film built around photography, and that concept is reflected in the photography itself. Set design, choreography, camera angles -- it's all there. Having once been a professional photographer myself, I could really appreciate all the care that went into photographing this film.

I was also very pleasantly surprised at how well Audrey Hepburn acquitted herself here. The role doesn't require much in the way of acting ability, but she gives it all she's got and makes Jo not only believable but sympathetic. She's not really a singer, but she handles her singing parts creditably. And though she isn't really a dancer, either, her dance numbers are outstanding. Ginger Rogers she ain't, but even next to Fred Astaire, her footwork is way above average. And how *graceful* she is! She carries off even her solo dance number with a balletic poise and flexibility that astonished me.

As for Fred Astaire himself, he never at any point made a convincing romantic lead to me. Though a magnificent dancer, his screen persona was too much the cold fish to really play a passionate lover (as Gene Kelly certainly could). And his moment of "Gosh, I never realized it before, but I must really be in love with this girl" is just too much of an eye-roller. Even Laurence Olivier couldn't have pulled *that* one off.

The multi-talented Kay Thompson, it need hardly be said, more than holds her own in the acting, singing and dancing categories.

The script is by turns funny, banal, emotional and weak. Funny when it's gently skewering the fashion industry and self-righteous pseudo-intellectualism; banal in its clichéd and predictable love story; emotional when Audrey Hepburn gets to hint at the powerful emotions she can't reveal and weak in its rapturous "Oui, oui, it's gay Paree!" swoonfest over arriving in Paris.

So, no, it's not one of the great classical musicals (even the chosen Gershwin songs were far from the best selections from that vast repertoire). But you've got to take the bad with the good, and the good is very good indeed. Recommended.

PS: Oh, and for God's sake, folks -- *puh-leeze* get off that "age difference" high horse. If that's the sort of thing upsets you so much, maybe you shouldn't be watching movies at all.

Romantic, stylish and witty- just great fun

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 17 February 2011]

I was surprised at how much I loved Funny Face. It looks beautiful, with stunning locations(Paris especially looks gorgeous), splendid costumes and sets and ravishing photography. George and Ira Gershwin's songs are superb, I especially loved Funny Face and How Long Has This Been Going On?, and the incidental music is suitably mellow, while the story is wonderfully romantic if very simple and the script sparkles with wit.

Stanley Donen's direction is credible, and the choreography fits each musical sequence very nicely, especially that of He Loves, She Loves which is beautifully filmed and Audrey Hepburn is so elegant in this scene. The performances add a lot to this film. Fred Astaire is charming and debonair and acts, sings and dances very well. Audrey Hepburn is beautiful and very beguiling, while Kay Thompson also stands out which is no easy feat considering she is up against two greats. In regards to the chemistry and the age difference between Astaire and Hepburn, I had no problem with the age difference and I thought the two worked really well together.

However, Funny Face does have a few scenes that I am not all that fond of. One is the Clap Yo' Hands routine, it's well performed and choreographed but to me it was also very dated and humourless. The main ones are the ones with the ridicule of Emile Flostre, which came across as very anti-intellectual and very atypical of Donen.

Overall though, it is a very nice film and great fun. 8/10 Bethany Cox

I think the word for this is 'surreal'...

[gaityr · 7/10 · 20 April 2003]

So you've got two of the most famous, most classic film stars of ANY generation in one film--that would, of course, be Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn. You've also got the whole Gershwin songbook to pick from for your soundtrack. You even have the studio agreeing to ferry the whole company to Paris for location filming. Sounds promising?

Yeah, it did to me too. Quite frankly, it's the script and basic plotline that let the rest of the enterprise down. Hepburn plays Jo Stockton, an intellectual (and we know this because of her less-than-gleaming pageboy cut and the drab shapeless grey potato sack she wears... and still looks fabulous in) who works in a bookstore. She tries very hard to get her shelves back in shape after Dick Avery (Astaire) and his entourage from Quality magazine (including a manic Kay Thompson as lady-in-charge Maggie Prescott) descend upon the store for a photoshoot... only for Dick to leave her floundering and singing "How Long Has This Been Going On?" when he surprises her with a kiss. Still, she clings to her empathicalism ideals and agrees to go to Paris for a Quality fashion shoot so that she can meet the father of empathicalism (her philosophy of choice, of course), Professor Emile Flostre (Michel Auclair). Dick's charming of Jo continues through the fashion shoot, and to the tune of "He Loves And She Loves", he finally realises he loves her back. But as in all romantic comedies, the course of true love never did run smooth, and Jo gets upset when Dick tries to warn her off Professor Flostre ("He's about as interested in your intellect as I am"). The inevitable misunderstanding happens between two lovers when Jo refuses to turn up for the final unveiling, and Dick is set to take a plane back to New York alone.

It's all pretty run-of-the-mill, sentimental pablum, with an attempt to pass poor writing off as profound themes. I never knew Hepburn was a dancer, and she acquits herself rather well in her solo prance through the (literally) underground French cafe. But really--the only word for moments like this is 'surreal'. The impetus for the dance doesn't ring true; the dance itself is technically accomplished but bewilderingly weird... and well, Hepburn may entrance her audience when she's acting, but she's not a magnetic dancer (not the way, say, Cyd Charisse is). That apart, Thompson and Astaire also suffer in their seriously eccentric duet to "Clap Yo' Hands". Partly because Thompson's presence in the film is, to me, utterly mysterious. Of course she's *meant* to be the typical musical sidekick (see O'Connor, Donald, SINGIN' IN THE RAIN), but she falls far short of the mark. A successful sidekick would light the screen up during his or her solo--her "Think Pink" was, frankly, frightening, and she just wasn't very good in the rest of her numbers. (Even her duet with Hepburn, "How To Be Lovely", was running on empty when it started.) As for Astaire--what a shame. His talent was put to waste in this film, even though he still looks pretty spry and his sense of rhythm is as impeccable as ever. But in "Clap Yo' Hands", his dancing passes only for mugging (and sadly, not even intentionally so). Another one for the 'surreal' label--it's evidently TRYING to be witty and avant-garde. And failing miserably. Astaire's own solo number is perfectly executed as usual, and he pulls off his coat-swirling with great style, but one still feels as if some spark in him is still missing. Of all the good material the film had to work with, it's really a shame that it never used any of its three principals well.

That's not to say the film was beyond all hope: It's hard to come out of such a poorly-scripted and thought-out film on your feet, but it's also hard for Astaire and Hepburn to be truly horrifyingly bad... so they're just bland. They do go some way in lending their trademark class to the film, for example in the extremely poorly-lit darkroom courtship dance. It *seems* very good, from what little I can make out through all the murky black and red... it's a scene just crying out for digital re-enhancement so that we can actually see what's going on. But it's still quite nicely-executed. There's also a flash of the magic that this film could have had the two times Jo and Dick walk together behind the little Parisian church, with her in all her wedding finery. When he realises that she's fallen for him, for real, he sweetly serenades her with the song "He Loves And She Loves", and the raft across the river is a very sweet, pretty touch.

Given the pedigree of this film, I really had been expecting a lot more than I actually got. It's not horrible, but nor is it fantastic. Probably one to watch if you're a fan of Astaire's or Hepburn's, but I doubt I'll be pulling this one out for a re-viewing any time soon. 6.5/10

awesome movie

[prettyone95747 · 10/10 · 27 February 2006]

I love everything about this movie. It was written by Leonard Gershe about my mother (Doe Siegel) and her love (and then husband), Richard Avedon. It depicts Mom's brilliant intellect. Her compassionate, youthful energy. Forget about reading too many nuances into this movie. Art is a departure from reality and Leonard uses his creative license well. It seems I am to include more lines before this can be submitted...what more to say. Fun. Spontaneous. Flirtacious. Romantic. I hope people enjoy the very heart of this movie. Mom continues to be a gracious, caring, and inspirationally bright woman. She gave up her career to raise her family. We love her dearly.

Charming fluff, very easy on the eyes and brain. But, considering the talent, it could have been even better.

[barnabyrudge · 7/10 · 30 May 2011]

Funny Face has the credentials to be an absolute classic – we're talking great actors, a great director and the perennially popular background of Paris. It certainly emerges an entertaining, exuberant musical as one would expect. But there's just something missing, a little sprinkling of magic or some overlooked ingredient, that would have sealed its place in the echelons of truly amazing movie musicals. When giving any other movie a 7-out-of-10 rating, I'd normally be listing all the things the movie has done right to earn itself 7 marks; with Funny Face it's almost a case of listing what the film has done wrong to lose 3 marks.

Maggie Prescott (Kay Thompson), bulldozing head honcho at Quality magazine, wants to find the next "thing" in the trend-setting world of fashion. She and ace photographer Dick Avery (Fred Astaire) invade a quaint antiquarian book shop in Greenwich Village to carry out an "intellectual" photo shoot with their bimbo-ish models. During the shoot, Dick accidentally catches a shot of the book shop worker Jo Stockton (Audrey Hepburn), and later realises that her funny face might actually be the perfect profile to launch the magazine in a new direction. Dick and Maggie persuade Jo to come to Paris with them for a fashion shoot and show. She is reluctant to get involved in the industry, but accepts anyway as she is keen to meet her idol, philosopher Emile Flostre (Michel Auclair), who is giving lectures in Paris. By travelling to France she sniffs an opportunity to meet the man she admires so much. But, unexpectedly, Jo soon finds herself falling for the charm of her photographer Dick. Loves course never runs smooth, as Jo, Dick and Emile are soon to discover…

Loosely based on a 1927 Broadway musical, this film is a lot of fun to watch. The noticeable age gap between Astaire and Hepburn makes their romance unconvincing, but watching the two of them own the screen in their inimitable way remains a joy. Overall the film's musical numbers are very well done – Think Pink, Bonjour Paris, He Loves And She Loves and Let's Kiss And Make Up being just a few of the highlights. There are occasional longueurs in the story (it has, after all, the thinnest of plots, flimsily stretched to a 100+ minute running time), but there's always a lively scene or song just round the corner to liven things up whenever tedium looms. Overall, Funny Face is a classy show. As mentioned, though, it could have been an absolute classic. It's reminiscent of a damn good golf player who can hit the green every time, but cannot seem to sink the putts that would make him a world beater. Funny Face gives itself a glorious shot at perfection, then lets it drift away on a wave of lightweight feathery fluffiness.

Didn't Connect With Me

[gbheron · 5/10 · 26 December 1999]

I've read all the glowing reviews and posts hailing Funny Face as a tour de force 1950s musical. It didn't connect with me for a couple of reasons.

Reason One: The disturbing use of Audrey Hepburn as a geezer magnet, not just in this movie, but a number of others. What's going on here? It's almost obscene, and is totally unbelievable that a young lady in her 20s will fall hopelessly in love with someone obviously old enough to be her father (or even grandfather).

Reason Two: The songs didn't stick with me. I know I sound superficial but I do like musicals that keep me humming tunes days after I've first heard them. That didn't happen here, I can't even remember single tune. I did like the New York-ness of the movie, and the clothing and slang of the 1950s. But this can't salvage what I found to be a boring movie.