The Last Time I Saw Paris (1954)

Perfect cast and a good story

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Snoozy melodrama has two redeeming values -- The director repeatedly found a way to show Elizabeth Taylor barely dressed. Liz in full Technicolor negligees is probably worth 5 stars all on its own, frankly. At one point she looks in a full-length mirror and moans, ''I'll never be a size 10 again.'' Sadly, she was right. There's a bonus for fans of Young Frankenstein. About half way through The Last Time I Slept In Paris, who shows up but Eva Gabor with her turned-up nose, breathy lisp and - yes, after she changes for dinner - a blue taffeta dress. RIP Madeleine Kahn. Problem is shortly thereafter Liz and the inexplicably popular Van Johnson discover they're rich thanks to some oil wells and -- Liz hacks off her beautiful hair to resemble pixie Shirley MacLaine. Not that there's anything wrong with that when you're Shirley MacLaine, but why would Liz Taylor do so? So the producers could show the passage of time? Bad idea. Hack Van Johnson - filthy rich and married to Elixabeth Taylor - whines b/c publishers hate his writing. What an insufferable loser. Watch for Liz tearing a sheet of paper from Van's typewriter and seeing the nonsense he's written - shades of Jacko in The Shining. And lastly - holy smokes - Roger Moore was ridiculously good looking. Van Johnson might as well have just walked off the movie set right then and there.

The DVD was in a 10-pack Drama special, so I watched to see the celebrated Elizabeth Taylor. But if I'd known that the film was based on a story by F Scott Fitzgerald, I probably wouldn't have bothered.Fitzgerald's writing reflects his own pointless, selfish, self-centred, shallow and decadent life-style, and the film follows that throughout. It's an autobiography about nothing.The film is saved from getting a 1 rating by the generally good acting, and especially that of Donna Reed and Walter Pidgeon.When Charles (Johnson) meets the two daughters of another useless wastrel, (Pidgeon) he obviously like Marion (Reed) but then falls for the flashy Helen (Taylor). Perhaps later, much later, he regrets that choice.The film is set over a time span of eight or more years, but Van Johnson looks exactly the same from the first to the last scenes. Not one hair out of place in spite of once spending the whole night on the town with a broad, and later getting soaking wet! That is poor directing/producing. At least Taylor gets a new hair-style later.

The story is not so in depth to allow it to come to life as a novel or a feature length movie.It is interesting to read the reviews after seeing the movie. No 2 reviews are alike. This speaks volumes as to how the film actually affects those who see it. The viewers take away vastly different aspects of the film to discuss.The opinion this reviewer has is that the film is not as drudgingly long as some reviewers have noted. Also, while Van Johnson is always a bit wooden in his roles, he is not as awful as he is made out to be in some other reviews. The film boasts a fine cast and had some money behind it and there are some nice aspects to the story. This reviewer did not particularly mind watching the film.The problem is that the story is not fully fleshed to be a full length movie. There is no central point to the story to carry it to the length of a feature film. There is little purpose or philosophy that comes through as an overriding thematic. Van and Elizabeth play self destructive characters who suffer tragedy via doing some dumb things but...so what? Who really cares about dumb people doing dumb things? The emotional draw of the story never comes out. The emotion is stifled by the story; not by Van Johnson's acting. But...that is why this remained a short story that delved into the mind of the character pining for his lost daughter. There's just no emotional payoff with the characters that warrants nearly 2 hours of screen time.Still, compared to most of what passes for drama these days the film is far superior to what is released today. That's a sad commentary on film making and story writing today.One other note: For a story that is set in Paris there is little sense that any of the action occurs in Paris. This ties into the script. Rather than using known aspects of Paris to enhance the flavor of the story there is little to utilize the location. The title of the film could be The Last Time I Saw New York City and nothing would materially change in the film.If you are interested in film and story telling and the history of cinema I recommend giving the movie a viewing to familiarize yourself with it. Some parts work well (Elizabeth Taylor as the woman in the fountain immortalized in a full wall mural in a bar) but some parts...notably the father\daughter\aunt relationship at the end...just comes off flat. The film is a mix of good and not so good and the mix of good and not so good reviews is a good reflection of the movie.

In my humble opinion, Van Johnson was a vastly underestimated actor. He excelled at playing everyman and was as good playing sardonic characters who fall into the trap of self-loathing as in this movie as he was in playing guys who could take whatever life dished out and come back bloodied but unbowed.He and Taylor have marvelous chemistry in this movie. Pidgeon is marvelous playing Taylor's wry scoundrel of a father. The seductiveness of the bohemian life is well portrayed. Peter Leeds, John Doucette, Kurt Kasznar and Celia Lovsky are also excellent in their supporting roles - and young Roger Moore is a lot of fun as a tennis bum. Also, a standout is George Dolenz as Johnson & Taylor's silently suffering and devoted brother-in-law married to self-righteous Donna Reed - perhaps the one supporting role that seemed miscast or a bit flat to me.If you want to wallow in tears at a well-done schmaltzy love story, this one's for you.