I'll Do Anything (1994)

It would be very interesting to see the original cut of this movie, which was a musical but had its songs cut out after a test audience indicated that the songs in the movie were terrible. (I'm surprised that not even a bootleg of this cut has leaked out.) I will entertain the possibility that the songs were indeed bad and that the movie was improved by the reworking. But as it is, the movie isn't particularly successful. It does have some interesting behind- the-scenes moments that show the working of the Hollywood machine behind the curtains, and the performances aren't that bad. However, the movie can't seem to make up its mind whether it is a comedy or a drama. It might have been possible to mix those two genres, but as it is here, the two extremes don't seem to fit together. Also, the key relationship in the movie - between the Nick Nolte character and his daughter - seems for the most part not very in-depth, so much so that the emotional ending doesn't seem deserved. The kind of slow pace of the movie as well as its length (almost two hours) doesn't help matters. It's not actively bad, but there's not much that will stick in your mind after watching it.

Not usually a fan of Nick Nolte, I thought he was great in this.Even more, Julie Kavner was GREAT in this. She was so charming, so eye- catching, so ear-catching, she would have been considered the movie- stealer if little Whittni Wright hadn't been there.That child was absolutely astonishing. With no previous movie experience, she carried out her role as if she had done it a hundred times. I hope she changes her (still young) mind and returns to film.Albert Brooks is one of my entertainment heroes, and his role here is different for him -- and he too is great.There is a sweetness -- and I don't mean sugariness -- in this film that could make it worth watching even with a lesser cast, but with such a strong and lovable bunch, it is an almost perfect movie.

When I watched this movie I had two questions in my head:1) Where have I seen her (Joely Richardson) before? 2) Why is Nick Nolte doing this part, and not Ted Danson?The answer to Q1) is not so very interesting, but it is 101 Dalmatians. The answer to Q2) is more interesting. It seemed like Nick Nolte was trying to look and act like Ted Danson, especially in the beginning (when the character was young). And normally the original is better than the copy.Besides those two questions I think the movie was OK entertainment, but not more than that. The film is not trying to tell us something. If they wanted they could have made much more out of the issue "How is it to be a child actor?", but they didn't. Fair enough.Don't spend your money buying this film, but watch it if it gets aired on a TV.

This is an excellent movie with interesting, well-drawn characters, especially that of complicated little girl. Nolte gives one of his great performances as the sensitive actor-father. This movie didn't get the attention it deserved when it came out, because it had become known that it was originally planned as a musical, but the musical numbers were cut out after audience testing -- which was ironic, since the movie had many references to audience-testing movies. They could have turned all that on its ear by having a closing-credits sequence with the producers audience testing the movie and deciding to PUT IN musical numbers, and then running excerpts of the excised musical numbers. The critics would have been confused as to whether it had really ever been planned to be a musical in the first place, and it would have brilliantly augmented the subject-matter of the movie.