Watch My Sister Eileen For Free

Absolutely brilliant

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

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Even if we take the cynical approach and say that Alexander Hall's "My Sister Eileen" is another fish-out-of-water movie, you can't deny that it's one enjoyable piece of work. The Eileen of the title is a bubbly young woman played by Janet Blair, with Rosalind Russell (in an Academy Award-nominated performance) as her irascible sister Ruth. The two of them move to New York to seek their fortune, only to experience all manner of unpleasant things. Whether it's an apartment visited by practically everyone, or confrontations with a publisher, there's bound to be more than a few Marx Brothers-style occurrences!I understand that the movie is based on a play, which is itself based on Ruth McKenney's memoirs of moving to New York with her sister. I figure that their experiences probably weren't as funny as what the movie, but you know what they say: comedy is tragedy plus timing. This is the textbook definition of a comedy classic. True, a lot of the material will seem dated - Rosalind Russell's and Janet Blair's clothes and hairdos just scream 1940s - but we can overlook that. This is one that you gotta see!Watch for a young George Tobias (Abner Kravitz on "Bewitched") as the landlord.

It's hard to watch this without comparing it to the 1955 musical directed by Richard Quine (who happens to play Frank in this version) and starring Janet Leigh, Betty Garret, Bob Fosse, and Tommy Rall. The stories are fundamentally similar -- two cheerful and ambitious sisters from Columbus, Ohio, the level-headed Ruth (here, Rosalind Russell) and the gorgeous blond Eileen (here, Janet Blair) come to New York to seek careers. They rent a preposterous basement apartment in Greenwich Village where they are constantly finagled with by a sly landlord (here, George Tobias) who is an artist manque. Their days are punctuated by occasional blasts from the subway that is being built beneath the building. There are an abundance of kooky characters. Their upstairs neighbor is a dopey, unemployed football player supported by his wife. All the men fall under the spell of the would-be actress, Eileen. The less flamboyantly sugary Ruth, who is an aspiring writer, is disregarded by men until one of her editors learns to appreciate her.The story (or stories) must have great appeal. They first appeared in The New Yorker, I think. Then they were assembled into the play on which this film is based. Then there appeared the Leonard Bernstein musical, under a different name ("Wonderful Town"), then the 1955 musical. There have been several revivals.Compared to the 1955 musical version, this seems more stage bound, which is not necessarily bad. And without the musical numbers, there's more room for various gags, some funnier than others. This version is so OVERFLOWING with characters that must have seemed colorful to the folks back in Columbus, Ohio, that at times it's crowded with them, all doing and saying kooky things. A hooker or, pardon me, a young woman (June Havoc) who used to "hold séances" and "read fortunes" in the apartment drops in to leave a stack of her new business cards for any former clients who happen to stop by -- and stop, they do. The door lock is broken so people can come and go without warning. There are myriad incidents involving misunderstandings, situationally based wisecracks, mixed identities, drunks, cops, pratfalls, explosions, congas, and dogs chasing cats through the barred window of the basement.This film is amusing in its own right. It's as if the whole insane cast of "You Can't Take It With You" had been shoved into this little basement apartment. With the jokes abounding, they can't all miss.Yet, for a couple of reasons, I prefer the 1955 musical, the only other version of this story that I've seen. For one thing, the 1955 plot is less confused. Bob Fosse and Tommy Rall are both ga-ga over Eileen. (In fact, Janet Leigh looks a lot like Janet Blair.) Both Fosse and Rall get more screen time than the same two characters here -- plus, they performances have more charm. Fosse is not the ridiculous goof that his character is in this earlier version. And Tommy Rall gives a better performance as his rival, Chick Clark. Rall was nobody's idea of a great actor but he's splendid as the fast-talking, underhanded suitor. Here, Allyn Joslin seems fagged out and not particularly interested in Eileen. And that's not to mention the hilarious "Give Me a Band" number or a synapse-fusing, blistering "Competition Ballet" between Fosse and Rall. The 1955 version is also more carefully paced, less forced and frenetic. The romance angle is taken a bit more seriously. One has a chance to breathe between manic episodes.Not that this isn't very amusing, just that it was probably more so in 1942 than it might be today. We're less easily shocked. Odd characters living in Greenwich Village? Oh, yes -- much less easily shocked.

Ruth McKenney's series of autobiographical articles about siblings from Columbus, Ohio relocated to wacky Greenwich Village was initially turned into a play before this movie version (it later went back to the stage as the musical "Wonderful Town", winning a Tony award for Rosalind Russell), and in 1955 was filmed again as "My Sister Eileen" with the songs. Russell appears here as Ruth (the smart, savvy sister who longs to be a writer) and Janet Blair is sister Eileen (the pretty blonde with hopes of becoming an actress). They move into the noisiest hovel in New York, with a steady stream of foot-traffic and neighbors who barge in without knocking. Some of these characters are colorful, though the comic craziness is pitched a little high, and everyone overacts (cheerfully). Russell (who got an Oscar nomination for her dryly bemused performance) sports an awful potato-chip hairstyle which must have been all the rage in 1942; her double takes and facial exaggerations are often very funny, and she plays well off Blair (they take turns playing the jester and the straight-face). Is it ridiculous and over-the-top? Absolutely. But when the results are this friendly, it's useless to complain. **1/2 from ****

ROSALIND RUSSELL was always at her best in comedies and here she had a role that got her an Oscar nomination for Best Actress in 1942--and it's easy to see why. She's downright hilarious as the gal from Ohio with writing ambitions and a pretty blonde sister (JANET BLAIR) with a penchant for attracting men and trouble.All the wacky situations stem from their Greenwich Village basement apartment which seems to have more visitors than Grand Central Station. It's all exaggerated fluff, but it works, thanks to a fine cast and sterling performances.RICHARD QUINE and GORDON JONES do repeats of their Broadway roles, and DONALD MacBRIDE as a policeman who wants quiet on his route is hilarious. JUNE HAVOC makes a brief appearance as a medium who used to live in the girls' apartment. GEORGE TOBIAS, as the opportunistic landlord with the Greek accent, is at his funniest in a colorful supporting role.My favorite moment is the conga sequence with Russell and Blair trying to get rid of sailors who don't speak a word of English, creating a disturbance that lands Blair in jail. Janet Blair is pleasant as the blonde bombshell but it's Russell who milks the most out of her role and gets all the laughs. She's terrific.BRIAN AHERNE does what he can with the role of the talkative editor, but it's not much of a part. Still, he adds a certain debonair charm to the role.Summing up: Notable chiefly as a terrific vehicle for Russell's unique brand of comic talent.