Tommy

Great music, average movie.

While there's no denying that Ken Russel knows how to orchestrate these kind of popular operas, I found this one to kind of loose some of it's steam towards the end. Still: I have a soft spot for Ann Margret and seeing her mud wrestling 400 pounds of baked beans...I don't know how to end that sentence.

This movie gets me fucking pumped. The cast is perfect; Ann-Margret and Oliver Reed are nuts. The songs are catchy, the arrangements are miles better than the meek album versions, and the music blares constantly, to my delight. Russell's messy, exciting camerawork and brilliant visual devices make the image a vital part of the story, and his wise tweaks to the plot fully justify much weirdness; if any one person's to thank for this film's unstoppable greatness, it's him.

Weird fun and not much else. Stylistically as Russel as it gets. The continuous run of musical score gets suffocating after a while. Oliver Reed shines.

Ken Russell has a visual acuity for the words of The Who

I have never been a fan of The Who, and none of the music did anything for me whatsoever (except "I'm Free", which was good). The plot is weak, and the pacing is ridiculous. I've always liked Ann-Margret, and the cast is alright with some pleasant cameos. A few good scenes and pleasant cast couldn't make me like it though. If you like The Who and can stand psychedelic musicals then give it a shot, but I'm not sure you'd like it even then. It's just not very good. The end really pissed me off.

Outstanding and outrageous adaptation of the famed Who rock opera. Only Ken Russell could have made this come off so well

Top badass moment? I prefer my baked beans on toast or baked potatoes, but for those who include them in their list of kinks, this must be their “Shawshank Redemption”. Just admit it, it’s pretentious bollocks isn’t it? Thank goodness punk came along a year later and swept all this sort of nonsense aside. (And I’ve got a box set of all The Who’s singles and I really like pinball too, so I’m not just being mean.) False idols making a film about false idols. No cats, chainsaws or decapitations.

This is a perfect example of 1970's opulence and excess. This is a movie musical of a rock album. The cast is interesting, the visual film is a trip. Can't take it seriously and it's definitely a product of it's time. It's fun though.

Basically, an almost-2-hour-long, utterly exhausting music video. Undeniably imaginative, but I don't really get it. Yet, every time Oliver Reed's brooding countenance hits the screen, one is totally riveted.

Ken Russell's bombastic version of The Who's epic about a deaf, dumb, blind boy. Both nightmarish and ridiculous, it mixes the hippie mysticism of the original with the loud aesthetics of the glitter rock era. Russell's Tommy is an assault on the senses - both visually and sonically (in 70's Quinphonic surround sound) via the campy singing of Reed and effective performances of Elton John and The Who. It's gaudy, kitsch, over the top - everything you either love or hate about the mid-1970's.

see me, feel me, touch me, heal me...

The Who's album simply does not work as a story.

The Who's Tommy is a first-rate album in its own right, and it translates well to the big screen in its intended rock opera format. Russell's adaptation features some excellently realised surreal visuals and great versions of Townsend's songs, with Daltrey and Ann-Margret offering fine performances on top. The final third does drag though, as the inevitable religious angle ends up overshadowing some of the more creative, more outrageous fun.

I love the way symbolism underpins the set design and the abstractions used to drive the plot. As a Who fan I love several (but not all) of the music. But for a rock opera, Tommy has incredibly sluggish pacing and a surfeit of filler over a mind-numbingly facile allegory. Everything feels 30% too long and poor pacing makes the film feel like an eternity.

A very fun rock and/or roll musical, featuring some very audaciously coloured and kaleidoscopic sets, costumes, and effects. Throw in a scene or two of utter madness and you got a quintessential Ken Russell film that you can (possibly) watch with the kids.

The entire narrative expressed through a series of songs along with some pantomime acting, mixed in with a relatively restrained version of Russell's usual extravagant style makes for a very unique film that takes a bit to get into and left me a little detached at times, but was generally a lot of fun to watch. Reed knows exactly how to mug for the camera and have fun with the material while still remaining true to the character and Ann-Margret is just a notch below.

Dated and weird. It's held up by its music, but has little else going for it.

At the risk of being declared uncultured I must honestly admit that the music did nothing for me here, but there were some creative visuals that might be enjoyable, especially with sufficient ironic distance.

Even if you're only vaguely familiar with The Who (like I am), you'll find something to enjoy here. Some of Ken Russell's best visuals and a few really great musical moments.

The filmmaker throws everything he can at the screen. Some of it sticks.

Poorly done adaptation of one of my favorite albums. The only saving grace is the fact that The Who is in it.

An hour after the movie began, I quit. An hour after the top. Saddly enough, the pick of the film was the expectation to see it. But it is no match to the classic record. The movie is a complete disaster, incredibly boring and slow, nothing you'd expect the who to be in. Not even the glam king Elton John maneged to save it.

Take out the religious themes and this is just about my favorite movie. The problem is there's so much of it, just about every bit of the last act, and it's eye-rollingly overdone in a way that I can't find any sort of interest or value in.

On the big screen, it was fantastic.

Almost as garish and campy a mindfuck as The Apple but underneath that actually really, really well directed. Russell here actually reminds me a lot of Roeg (if even more extravagant), and this really makes me want to watch more of his work. I'm sure i'd find him even more impressive given more to work with than the pretentious, cheesy songs by The Who. Even so, if nothing else this film gives me a greater appreciation of Velvet Goldmine, which i now can see was an obvious Russell homage.

Much like most of the individual scenes, the movie itself doesn't really go anyway.

What is it Roger Daltrey, are you deaf, dumb, and blind, or can you see for miles? Jeeze, make up your mind!

The movie is nothing to look twice at , in fact at times it is terrible but I am a huge Who fan so the soundtrack brings it back up to snuff for me.

Cool movie, shame the cover versions suck so badly.

Ridiculously bad

The Who is one of my all-time favorite bands, but this film is way too out of control and flamboyant for me. Also, I have a hard time trying to figure out just what kind of message or criticism they're trying to envoke.

The visuals in this one are simply unforgettable. Plus, Ann-Margret gives a legitimately excellent performance, while Jack Nicholson and Keith Moon are good in their small roles. I don't know, I think it's pretty much must-see. (two times)

Has a lot of good things going for it, but I guess I'm still too attached to the original album to fully embrace this.

Who wouldn't want to roll around in baked beans? Oh yeah, me.

I had to turn it off halfway through. There's just way too much of the psychedelic stuff that goes on and on and on and on and not enough of the actual music. Maybe I have to be stoned to get this.

It's been thirty years since I saw this movie, but I can't imagine it's aged very well . . . and it wasn't very good in its day! The rock opera was perfectly suited to Ken Russell's style, though, and I remember some effective sequences. Oliver Reed trying to sing is rather a hoot.

if you ever want to see the musical on stage, DON'T see this movie - it will ruin it

Great soundtrack.