In the Good Old Summertime (1949)

Wonderful Movie

Absolutely Fantastic

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.

The acting in this movie is really good.

Excellent remake of Jimmy Stewart's 1940 The Shop Around the Corner - they could have changed he script a little more, a majority of the scenes are nearly work for word of the original. Not as good as the original - but the acting was phenomenal and the storyline just can't die. I fully enjoyed this musical (and was grateful they didn't try to put too many songs, but instead keep the story flowing). Judy Garland is wonderful, charming and hilarious in this role.

This affable film is a musical remake of Ernst Lubitsch's 1940 classic "The Shop Around the Corner." Though actually it's not so much a musical as it is a movie with some songs added, nearly all of them performed by Judy Garland, who happens to be the best reason for seeing this movie at all.Lubitsch's film is, of course, perfect in every way and needed no remaking, but if someone had to remake it, they could have done a worse job than this. Garland is delightful in the role originated by Margaret Sullavan, and Van Johnson makes a surprisingly strong stand-in for James Stewart (and even sounds remarkably like him at times). Instead of a curio shop, the action takes place in a music store, which provides more opportunities for spontaneous singing. This film is nowhere near as dark as the original, and one of the best parts of the Lubitsch version, the subplot involving the store's owner, is pretty much written right out of this version.The title doesn't make a lick of sense, since nearly the entire film is set during Christmas. I guess "In the Good Old Wintertime" didn't have the same ring to it.Grade: A-

One can only assume that Robert Osborne is contractually obligated to express delight at even the least appealing films in the TCM library as this would explain him extolling the 'virtues' of this "charming" film during his introduction when I saw this on cable TV. Seeing as any old film on IMDb receives 'classic' status from a number of fawning amateur reviewers, I thought there was a dire need for a more honest review of this film.This is not your father's 'Shop Around the Corner'. For all my quibbles with 'You've Got Mail', it still outshines this as a remake in just about every way imaginable. For those who have seen the original, the flaws will only be all the more obvious.From one of the lamest Meet Cute sequences I can recall seeing (a sad slapstick attempt at 'humor'), this film gets off on the wrong foot and it never really gets back in step. This 'musical' only qualifies as one in the sparsest sense of the term. There are a sprinkling of instantly forgettable musical numbers and then there's Judy singing "I Don't Care" while flailing her arms around as if in a seizure. The Christmas song she sings in the store is probably one of her better numbers here. Miss Garland was wonderful in a number of musical films, but here she seems horribly miscast. The role was originally to have been filled by June Allyson and Judy is definitely unable to fill the shoes of Margaret Sullavan's old part. Van Johnson also turns in a rather bland performance as a second rate Jimmy Stewart type. The leads never achieve the chemistry of Stewart/Sullavan or even that of Hanks/Ryan.This is a film that knows (some of) the notes, but not the music. It doesn't really seem to understand why the original worked and even feels the need to add another possible love interest for Van Johnson's character to complicate things unnecessarily. The remake's substitution for the original's infidelity subplot is a hackneyed plot device involving a priceless violin. It is almost embarrassing to watch and feels as if it had perhaps been lifted from an episode of Three's Company by someone with a DeLorean and a flux capacitor. It's really just an excuse for a Keaton pratfall. Even the big resolution scene between the romantic leads is mishandled. After seeing both films, you'll understand why they called it 'the Lubitsch Touch' and NOT the 'Robert Z. Leonard Touch'.Avoid this and rewatch either the original film or one of Judy Garland's earlier films unless you're an iconoclast who enjoys seeing a once great star falling down to earth.

As has been noted, this formula has been filmed several times, most recently as "You've Got Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"Trout Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my least favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars charisma, which doesn't quite cut it here.The chemistry betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no real sparks. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the leads are boring the rest of the movie can only follow. Judy in particular is disappointing. She looks like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks like a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was getting so hot about. I would have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great either. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood leading man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that image here.If you're a fan of the stars or the early 1900's then you might like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining romantic comedies out there, and they offer you much more than a mouthful of stale confection.