Made in Paris (1966)

Why so much hype?

Absolutely the worst movie.

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Beautiful fashion model, salesgirl and assistant buyer Ann-Margret (as Maggie Scott) dates handsome boss' son Chad Everett (as Ted Barclay). When it's time to make out on the sofa, Ann-Margret hits Mr. Everett violently on the head with an "Objet d'art". Everett survives, but with a bandaged head. After the credits, Ann-Margret learns she is being transferred to Paris, where she'll work as a fashion consultant. It's a glamorous and exciting job. Ann-Margret is courted by famous fashion designer Louis Jourdan (as Marc Fontaine) and playboy reporter Richard Crenna (as Herb Stone). Everett also goes to Paris, probably because he regrets asking Mr. Crenna to look after Ann-Margret. Co-worker Edie Adams (as Irene Chase) tries to explain Mr. Jourdan needs sexual satisfaction, but Ann-Margret doesn't seem to understand...Ann-Margret is an amazing beautiful woman, and director Boris Sagal provides opportunities to see her underclothing. Dressing and undressing scenes are a highlight of "Made in Paris". One standout moment has the leading lady flashing a sexy glimpse of upper thighs while getting up and going to do something impossible to remember unless you're not looking up her short nightie. You could almost see France, but all of this story was done in the US. Of course, you see nothing, but it's Ann-Margret. The actual story is incredibly dull. There is a dreadful "fashion show" segment with stuff Mr. Jourdan's character admits no woman is going to wear. Ann-Margret has a lively dance segment, but this film otherwise wastes its star. The question, "Will her virginity remain intact until just after the closing credits?" is answered.*** Made in Paris (1966-02-09) Boris Sagal ~ Ann-Margret, Chad Everett, Louis Jourdan, Richard Crenna

TCM ran this tonight, and I had to wander why. There's plenty of talent here, but not in the script or the direction.Poor Ann-Margret, who was an accomplished dancer - and, of course, a very attractive woman - gets stuck in a role where her only dancing is a very bad knock-off of what made her famous in Bye, Bye Birdie. She plays someone so naive and puritanical that all her sex appeal fails to overcome the impression that she's one frigid, repressed basket case.The rest of the movie isn't much better. Good to very good actors get stuck in roles that barely have two dimensions.And don't let the "Paris" in the title fool you. Most of this movie was filmed not just on sets - after all, that was true of An American in Paris as well, and that is a stupendous movie - but uninteresting sets, hotel rooms that may have been left over from MGM's 1939 Ninotchka. The only atmospheric moment is an embarrassment. AM and Louis Jourdain appear on the set used for Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron in AAIP, the great Seine River scene where the two great dancers dance and fall in love. This time, however, that same set is shot without any of the poetry that has immortalized it in AAIP. The song is not great Gershwin, but an forgettable flop. And there is no dancing. Even though AM was a great dancer. Talk about wasting an opportunity! In short, there really is nothing to recommend this movie. Those in it all did better, much better, elsewhere. It's often embarrassing to watch them here.Skip it.

One of the series of mediocre films that saw Ann-Margret's film career stagnate until 'Carnal Knowledge', 'Made In Paris' looks great, has a decent cast and should be at the very least a harmless timewaster. But it's not even that.What really sinks it is (as other reviews here have noted) how badly written Ann-Margret's character is, going from prim and naive to a wildcat with no rhyme or reason.I think this is because the film was trying to have its cake and eat it too in trying to represent both the more permissive culture that was developing in mid-1960s America (even though this is mainly set in Paris), while dealing with the restrictions of the conservative Hays Code, then in its dying days. Unfortunately, the script and direction aren't good enough to overcome this contradiction and the film is a largely dreary mess.Ann-Margret is largely sunk by the horribly-written character she's saddled with. But she does display her skills during a fun dance number and provides some entertainment when briefly showing her 'wild side'.Of the rest of the cast, Crenna comes off best with a role that you wish had been more substantial. Everett is dull and Adams is wasted in a nothing role that is even more poorly-scripted than Ann-Margret's is.Only for die-hard Ann-Margret fans.

'Made in Paris' was just another flop (film-critical wise) in Ann-Margret's film career, which had started off extremely successful with 'Bye Bye Birdie' and Elvis' most entertaining movie 'Viva Las Vegas' and then kind of took a wrong turn with 'Kitten with a Whip', which she, or better her managers, took instead of 'Cat Ballou'. It was a good movie but a critical disaster. One could say the only really good movie of her early career was 'The Cincinnati Kid', although her presence makes everyone of her films quite a pleasure to watch, even 'The Swinger'.Yes, this 'romantic comedy' here is not bad. Unfortunately I would have to lie to say it was good. You'll not be harmed by watching it but don't expect The Godfather, though. Despite being a "comedy" the film is not very funny, except maybe for Richard Crenna, who gives the best acting performance here and has the best lines (relatively speaking, this is not Woody Allen quality). Jourdan does his usual French sophisticated charm routine and he and the other supporting players are all quite good.Of course the simple romantic story was nothing spectacular. The highlight is, as you probably expected, the No. 1 sex kitten of the Sixties, a woman I can easily call the quintessential American beauty and sex symbol of her time and perhaps even all: Ann's sexy dance numbers are energetic, she's a fine dancer and the outfits are well-chosen, showing just enough of cleavage and legs. And that's about it. No surprise: She looks absolutely stunning here and if you happen to be unmoved by her looks, you should NEVER watch it. If you're an Ann-Margret fan, you should definitely give this one a try. Her acting is quite fine (although there's not enough character in the screenplay that could allow a great performance), and her unbelievable charisma and screen presence make this a very watchable movie in the end. Watch it for her and nothing else.