In 1932 a movie called What Price Hollywood? told the story of an unknown waitress (Constance Bennett) working at The Brown Derby who gets discovered by a boozing but famous director and soon becomes a star. George Cukor directed it. A few years later in 1937 the story was revived but with a few minor plot adjustments. Renamed A Star is Born, it starred Janet Gaynor as the female lead. Seventeen years later Cukor made a third version – this time as a musical. Judy Garland - in her first screen role since being fired by M-G-M four years earlier – plays struggling singer Esther Blodgett who gets discovered by the drunken and soon-to-be washed-up Norman Maine. The story didn't end there. It was revived yet again by Barbra Streisand in 1976's 'rock' version and in 2001 pop diva Mariah Carey used a slight variation of the storyline in her famous flop Glitter.

This 1954 Judy Garland version is easily the most celebrated of the five movies. She was famously passed over at the annual Academy Awards ceremony in favor of Grace Kelly in (the nearly forgotten) The Country Girl. Judy gives such an incredibly moving performance it really is a shame that she lost. She quivers with vulnerability and bursts with rage and when she sings forget about it. She was quite simply the most talented singer/dancer in movie history and 'The Man that Got Away' and the 'Born in a Trunk' medley are two of the most dazzling musical numbers ever put on film.

James Mason is also genuinely moving as the doomed Norman Maine. He plays the drunk without resorting to the predictable slurred speech and clumsy mugging. He is also completely believable as a once great star. From the moment he staggers out onto the stage in the middle of Esther's number to his final sunset swim in the Pacific he is never less than stellar. Unfortunately the chemistry between him and Garland never gets beyond the fond stage. His love for her seems next door to platonic and hers for him seems just plain desperate. Perhaps this is the effect Cukor wanted but the passion in the Streisand/Kristofferson version makes their ending more romantically tragic.

Shortly after the premier in September of 1954 the executives at Warner Bros. made the decision to trim (some say butcher) the movie by removing 27 minutes of film. They did this for financial - not artistic - reasons. They could fit in more screenings of a shorter movie.

The DVD has a nearly complete restored version. Although several scenes are still missing they are filled in using still photos accompanied by the original audio. I personally think that the movie plays better in the shorter version. Most of what was put back in deals with the early relationship of Esther and Norman. In the edited version it cuts directly from the night they meet to Esther's first day at the movie studio. At the risk of invoking the wrath of hard-core Judy fans, this is the better way to tell the story.

On the plus side A Star Is Born has great performances, great songs and great cinematography. On the minus side it suffers from a slow pace and lack of sexual tension between the leads and I've always hated the fact that she doesn't sing at the end.

The bottom line: Judy performing at the peak of her powers outweighs every flaw.

Did you enjoy Patrick's review? +2 -1

There is a reason why most movie stars are goodlooking. If you have to stare at someone on screen for two hours wouldn't you prefer that they be attractive. In fact, there are many movie stars who got to where they are, or were, simply because of their looks. Rare is the actor or actress that is so talented that their ugliness can be over looked. Bette Davis is a good example, but Judy Garland is the best.

A Star Is Born is a veritable tour de force of film talent. If ever someone was robbed of an award it was Garland getting passed over for the attractive, but far less talented, Grace Kelly.

In A Star Is Born Garland runs the entire scale of emotions. She starts as an unassuming ingenue and ends up a saddened but wiser diva. She acts her ass off. The scene in her dressing room where she discusses her husbands failings is dramatically perfect. The film also has comedy, such as where Garland is playing the role of an arm waving out of a train window. A director says 'We can still see her face.' The punchline kind of plays into her looks. There is also the classic scene where she thinks someone just told her to 'go to hell.'

The best Garland has to offer though is in the musical numbers. Her version of 'The Man that got Away' is the quintessential torch song. She really brings emotion to her singing. With the 'Born in a Trunk' number you find a performance that matches the best work of Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly.

The weakness of this movie is James Mason. As Patrick wrote, he and Garland have no chemistry to speak of. It is almost as if his Norman wants to be her. He admires her talent in an almost creepy way. His accent doesn't help. He sounds almost threatening in some scenes. Almost any other leading actor of the time could have made this movie better.

Did you enjoy Eric's review? +1 -2