MovieChat Forums > The Jazz Singer (1980) Discussion > Why does everyone always slag this movie...

Why does everyone always slag this movie off?


I can't understand all the negative comments about this film. I thought it was an excellent version, Neil Diamond's soundtrack is fantastic. Sure, it has it's bad points - Neil Diamond and Laurence Olivier - the complete antithesis of each other. Neil Diamond isn't a great actor but he's a great musician. Laurence Olivier is a great actor and he hams his part up shamelessly in this film, but nonetheless I thought it was a pleasant two hours to spend.

I don't think it's fair on the movie to judge it so harshly. If nothing else, the music is worth the price of the rental.



"Hail to the King, baby!"

reply

I agree! Call me freaky, but I freakin loved this movie, and the soundtrack is AWESOME. Great plot? NO. Great Music? Yes. This is one of those movies where great music makes up for the not so great plot.

reply

I can think of a couple of reasons. 1.) The Acting. 2.) Neil Diamonds rubbish singing.

This film should have been called The Jizz Singer.

Looks like a spanner, acts like a spanner ... it's spanner boy

reply

the film sucked at times but Neil Diamonds soundtrack was great. 3/5

reply

Okay, so I'm chiming in. I was in junior high when this film came out and I loved it instantly! I still have a crush on Neil Diamond thanks to this movie! Bad acting? I thought Diamond was very believable in his role. The only part I disliked was the "hittin' the road, livin' like a cowboy" crap. I agree, that was lame. But other than that, snaps to Neil Diamond! He rocks and so does this movie!

reply

I love this film; the music is great, the story is very entertaining, and the acting isn't that bad at all. Neil Diamond gives a superb performance, and anybody that slags this film off is just plain wrong! I usually agree with the IMDB user ratings, but in this case I urge you to ignore the negative comments and just watch it - you won't regret it.

reply

One of the biggest (and more obvious) criticisms hasn't been brought up yet - Neil Diamond's character was going through an adolesent crisis kind of thing, even though he was like, 40.

reply

One of the biggest (and more obvious) criticisms hasn't been brought up yet - Neil Diamond's character was going through an adolesent crisis kind of thing, even though he was like, 40.

Precisely.

reply

When RCA instroduced their ill-fated CED player and discs, we bought one and rented this film. The sound was mono-only (the player - not the movie), but we loved the story and yes, it gets a little hokey when "Jess" goes off on his own, but get over it - he's having a mid-life crisis! He's trying to reconcile the loss of family and sees his relationship with Molly as the cause of it all (which, of course, it is). Since those days of the CED player, we went to tape and now to the DVD. The music and story are about opportunities and the rough times people have to go through and there's nothing better than the strong stereo soundtrack on a good home theater system.

The acting isn't as bad as the critics make it out and the same for the script. All you have to do is look at the lame action-adventure films produced from the same time period and you'll see some pretty bad scripting and acting (look at Sheena - I know, totally beyond comparison) with Tanya Roberts - the almost always excellent Gena Davis and Matthew Modine in Cutthroat Island - and I could go on about films that are just a notch below where they could have been, had the scripting (and acting) been better. I really have to wonder what folks are comparing the acting to, when they pan a story like this? Even Star Wars has dead and wooden acting in comparison!

Diamond's performance isn't wooden, but low-key and relaxed. Olivier's accent comes across almost Scottish, but is still acceptable. Jess's wife comes across as envious and almost dispicable, but given her willingness to marry a Cantor's son, knowing that her husband would also be a Cantor (G-d doesn't pay so good), is remarkable and Jess doesn't know what he's giving up. But, he has a dream and wants to share it with his wife and with his family. It is his relationship, which is growing out of frustration with his wife and father, that causes him to see Molly as the only hope he has for a _better_ future. What he failed to realize is that to realize that future, he must make some terrible sacrifices and when he's finally faced with them in the form of his father tearing the cloth of his clothing, he goes into a deep depression and runs to hide his shame.

Finally, realizing that life must go on, he looks for the only kind of work he knows - singing out in the desert. Ah, the symbolism - something that people just plain miss. Ironically, there is more present than most people see - and it is the infant child which brings salvation and reconciliation to the family. I'm not sure the writers were aware of the implications of that one.

Is the film great? Well, I'm not about to give it five (of five) stars, but we liked it well enough that we bought the Artisan DVD. While not quite a musical, in the traditional sense, this one comes close. I like the music and the story. If you stop to look beyond the here and now, it is a very good story and movie. A solid four stars in my book.

reply

I agree! I've been a fan of Neil Diamond all my life and have always loved this movie. Don't forget - it was made over 25 years ago, when we were all different and so were the times. Neil did a great job for his first acting and some of it was tough, I'm sure, such as the love scene. I never go by what the critics say, and still don't! People criticize everything, and don't forget, some of the harshest critics slam people today for anything and everything, such as David Caruso, for not looking at peoples' eyes, etc. My point is that I thought it was great and still do, and am tired of all the negativity in the world - just enjoy and not analyze! FYI, I did think Laurence Olivier did ham it up a lot - lol. Just enjoy the movie for itself and the wonderful music.

reply

In all honesty what critics say about this movie tends to be laughable and questionably accurate. After all critics provide criticism which tends to be subjective and opinionated.

Over the years I've heard people describe this movie as "too Jewish". Personally I'm suspecting that these same critics, however, would never describe "The Passion of the Christ" as "too Christian".

Others have said this movie was simply a showcase for Diamond's music. Well folks in a sense you're right... it was. The Jazz singer was a story about the son of a Jewish cantor walking away from his life as a cantor in a Synogague to become a musician. In 1927 the movie featured the music of Al Jolson. In 1957 the movie featured the Music of Danny Thomas. And in 1980 the movie featured the music of Neil Diamond.

And for those nay-sayers who simply complain that Diamond cannot act, please let me remind you that the three major players in this movie were a singer-songwriter (not an actor), a very ill 73 year old classically trained English actor who played a cantor that did not sing, and a former child actor who has never truly done much serious acting (something that was likely difficult for her since she was forced to live in the shadow of her mother's mega-stardom).

This movie was never intended to compete with Academy Award winning movies like 1980's best film, Kramer vs. Kramer... or 1981's best film Ordinary People. Enjoy it for what it is folks... Aside from a few bits of silliness its a pretty cool movie.

reply

I just saw this movie for the first times in years and the music was great but I felt that Neil Diamond was just too old for the character. How many artists break into the music industry at that age? He should've made the movie 15-20 years earlier.

reply

I once heard someone say that they went to a Neil Diamond concert and said it was the closest thing they ever had to a spiritual experience at a rock concert. I thought, "Yeah, right! Neil Diamond is good, but that's going a little too far." A few years later I had an opportunity to see Neil Diamond at his very first show in Las Vegas at the Aladdin Theater for the Performing Arts. (Neil Diamond had never done Las Vegas before because he didn't want to appear in the show rooms.) I had a fifth row seat. When I walked out of there, I turned to my friend and said, "That was the closest thing I have ever had to a spiritual experience at a rock concert!" Yeah. It was.

reply

Well, I'll say this for him, Neil Diamond gave an incredibly great concert at the Greek Theatre, back in August of 1972. He was at his peak, then, and although -in my opinion- his music and performances have become increasingly schmaltzy it must be conceded that he still maintains a very strong and loyal fan base. I did not like this film, perhaps largely because of Olivier's shameless overacting when he disowned his son. However, in truth, the overall concept did not resonate with me and I happen to be Jewish, so go figure. I guess it was just a bit too corny, formula and frankly simply boring to me. Apart from the Love on the Rocks and finale America anthem the music was altogether forgettable, as well. I did however enjoy Paul Nicholas' brief bit, as he was quite good in the role of an egocentric rocker. Bottom line to all this is that when I’m in the mood for a taste of Neil Diamond I'll just listen to his -Hot August Night- double concert album and dance up a storm to "Cherry, Cherry."

reply

Couldn't agree more.
The music is incorporated very well into the story. The characters are developed quite well too.

reply