Sadly Over-hyped

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Based on the 1905 novel 'A Little Princess; being the whole story of Sara Crewe' by Frances Hodgson Burnett. The Little Princess was a pretty good adapted movie. I wouldn't say, it's the best adaption of the novel, because it's far from that. In my opinion, the film should had been title 'The Soldier's Daughter' because how different, it was with the novel. Directed by Walter Lang, the movie is about 12 year old, Sara Crewe (Shirley Temple) whom father, Captain Crewe (Ian Hunter) is called to fight in the Second Boer War. Sara is left behind in the care of Amanda Minchin (Mary Nash), the head of an exclusive private school for girls, where she lives in a princess like lifestyle due to her father's riches. Her life as a princess wasn't long, as Captain Crewe's money dry up, and her father is believe to be dead in the battlefield. Miss Minchin harshly force the young woman to serve under her making her life miserable. This doesn't stop Sara's will power and belief that her father isn't dead; and she do anything to find out if he's still alive. Although it maintained the novel's Victorian London setting, the film introduced several new characters like Richard Greene and Anita Louise as the young romantic couple, Sir Geoffrey Hamilton & Miss Rose. They're employees of the boarding school, whom go against the wishes of Miss Minchin. Then there is mean-spirited Lord Wickham (Miles Mander) who has Ram Dass (Cesar Romero) as an Indian servant under him. It isn't really explained why he has an Indian lascar for a servant, and there is no logical explanation for why he would want to redecorate Sara's garret room. I guess, having an Indian sailor next room seem too unrealistic in Victoria Era England to the filmmakers. Another character added is Hubert (Arthur Treacher) who became friends with Sara over music. One thing, way different than the novel is the musical number. I know a lot of Shirley Temple's previous films had this, but this movie lacks music and songs good enough to remember. Shirley Temple and Arthur Treacher had a musical number together, performing the song "Knocked 'Em in the Old Kent Road which was way too short. Temple also appeared in an extended ballet dream sequence that was a bit distracting from the main plot. The whole dream scene was just awful and felt like filler. Another big change is the storyline. The movie used the Second Boer War and the Siege of Mafeking as a backdrop. In the book, the father was just visiting India and got ill to the point, he got brain fever. It wasn't war. The film covers only a timeline of a year, while the book go nearly four years. One of the biggest change in the film is the ending. The film's ending was drastically different. Without spoiling too much of it; this adaptation changes the fate of Captain Crewe. In my opinion, it's a better ending than the book. Still, it's does kinda mess up the plot of a young adult learning how to deal with death and to better herself through the actions of her own well-being. I just didn't like the whole Queen Victoria cameo helping her find her father. It was just outlandish & unrealistic. I can do without all the over Patriotism oozes out of every scene of the film. The main film is about this girl trying to reunite with her father, not the Boer War. Second off, there is no Mr. Thomas Carrisford character in the film. The acting in the film were pretty alright, but nobody really stood out. Shirley looked a little old for the part, but she pulls it off. At the part when she was by the window crying to say goodbye to her daddy was emotional. It was nice to see her react in a film to things like loss and death in a story. The trouble is, she can't pull off the emotion of making herself cry. In the movie, Shirley portrays a child not only with steadfast hope but patience, manners, politeness and kindness in the face of appalling adversity that you rarely see in film today. Who would believe that a child under that pressure could be so gracious? I love when Shirley as Sarah does snap back against her bullies like taunting from Lavinia (Marcia Mae Jones). I have to say, if the film was little bit more dark, it would had work better. It remind me of a Charles Dicken's novel. The director did good on keeping his camera low down, at a child's eye-level. Also striking is his use of multiple angles which really gives dimension to the sets or highlighting a sudden change in mood. This movie was the first Shirley Temple movie to be filmed completely in Technicolor as before that, producers believe these incredibly bright lights produced so much heat that a child, Temple's age would be hurt working under such conditions. Sadly, this was her last major success as a child star. The film is easy to find since it's in the public domain due to the failure to renew its copyright registration. This means that virtually anyone could duplicate and sell a VHS/DVD copy of the film. Therefore, many of the versions of this film available on the market are either severely or usually badly edited. Some DVDs have really extremely poor quality, having been duped from second- or third-generation or more copies of the film. So watch out for that. There are countless remakes of the novel since then. In my opinion: 1995's A Little Princess directed by Alfonso Cuaron was a bit better one than this, but this Little Princess is widely considered to be one of Shirley Temple's best film and I have to agree. Enjoyable tale for children and adults alike. So check it out.

I enjoyed this movie. Actually, the part I liked least was Shirley Temple's acting. It seemed to consist mostly of tilting her cute little head one way, and looking coyly upwards the opposite way. Mild Spoiler: but, she pretty much made up for it in the scene where she finds her father - I got kind of teary-eyed. I thought Sybil Jason, who played Becky, the servant girl, was much more natural and believable - unlike Shirley, she didn't look like she was acting. Why does IMDb insist on ten lines of text? I said everything I wanted to say. That's one reason I enjoy short stories - unlike novels, they don't have to pad the story with unnecessary stuff to reach some arbitrary word count.

I loved the dancing. Arthur Treacher is totally fabulous, and so is Shirley, of course. I saw that the fantasy dancing was by Ernest Belcher, whom I knew was father of Marge Champion. I thought that the other dancing, choreographed by Nick Castle, was excellent.Shirley looked a little old for the part, especially the part snuggling up to her father before he went away -- this looked a little smarmy. She was a little too overblown by today's standards; I felt that if her father came back in a few years she would really be a teenager and very jealous if he decided to remarry. Pity the poor stepmother with a possessive/jealous Shirley/Sara on her hands. Alas, that was not to be, however. Don't get me wrong. I have always loved Shirley. She was a darling little child.I remembered that Ian Hunter and Anita Louise were in "A Midsummer Night's Dream," playing the Duke and Titania respectively. Of course my big crush was THE Richard Greene in "Robin Hood" (TV, 1950s). In "Princess" he was just dazzling and scrumptious. He was so cute in the fantasy scene.Miss Minchin. What can I say? Reminded me of nasty Miss Hannigan in "Annie". I loved it when Minchin got hers in the fantasy scene. She played a great villain. She was lovely as a young lady, but in "Princess" she did not have a sympathetic part.Beryl Mercer as Queen Victoria was so precious. I had seen her as Mrs. Dishart in "The Little Minister".Cesar Romero was just divine. I also liked his acrobatic scenes in the movie, "Julia Misbehaves". His character was very nice to Sara in "Princess". The macaw was divine, and beautiful.Loved the tap dancing and ballet scenes best of all. When you see my other reviews, you will notice that I am partial to this.I cried when Sara and her father found each other.

While American audiences loved this and all the other Shirley Temple vehicles, across the Pond this story of a young girl refusing to accept reports of her father's death in combat must have struck a responsive chord with war-weary Brits who could easily identify with her troubles. Although the Hollywood film industry has always come under some well-deserved criticism for twisting history and other literary sources in its screenplays, they do get it right at times. The largely British cast and English setting give the classic story the right look and feel, and the romance and song-and-dance numbers don't take anything away from the main storyline. Shirley is even reunited with some of her co-stars from other films. (This includes Cesar Romero as a servant here. 8 of his next 11 films were westerns, a genre he'd never tackled, including a pairing with Randolph Scott as Doc Holliday to Scott's Wyatt Earp and a starring role in a handful of Cisco Kid features. Much later would come famous movie and TV roles as Kurt Russell's nemesis A.J. Arno in several Disney comedies in the 70's, and his most famous part, the Joker, in BATMAN.) In a year when so many great films appeared that were taken from the pages of popular books (GONE WITH THE WIND, THE WIZARD OF OZ, THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN, THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME,GUNGA DIN, WUTHERING HEIGHTS, GOODBYE, MR. CHIPS,THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES, TARZAN FINDS A SON, THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK) you can add THE LITTLE PRINCESS. If you never get to read any or all of these books, at least watch the films derived from them. You won't regret it. Dale Roloff