Ambitious and Pretentious, but not half as complex as it seems to fancy itself

Rating: 5/10 (26 July 2008)

I really expected a lot from this film... I really did. I remember the jovial excitement popping the DVD in on Christmas Eve to view, from what I had heard, to be Rogers & Hammerstein's Crowning Achievement. And, why should I have been led to think otherwise, when surveying all the evidence to be seen before me? Its immense popularity and following, the seemingly countless honors bestowed upon the film by AFI & the Acadamy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, the endless use of the songs in every medium of entertainment (be it homage or parody), etc. And, I admit, I recall being mesmerized by the amazing shot zooming across the breathtaking Austrian Mountains swooping in on an enthusiastic and lovely Julie Andrews. Just as grand as what I had been told to expect. However, as the film progressed, I sensed more than a couple things wrong with it that made it more than difficult to watch all the way through.
Ultimately, "The Sound of Music" has difficulty asking itself the universal question that all great films do. Why does this story need to be told? Other alleged "great" musicals, such as "West Side Story", "Wizard of Oz", "King & I", "Mary Poppins", heck even "Grease" are chief conveyors of how this can be done right and effectively. They are actually "about" something, and they make the viewers know it. "Sound of Music" seems content to simply sit back and settle for the typical "follow your heart" message. Even then, that hardly holds any weight at all by the end of the film, considering the decisions made by the Von Trapp family on behalf of themselves and their own safety, and no one else's.
Everything wonderful about this film, it seems, stems from its success as a musical on Broadway and not from anything special in the film itself. The acting is wooden, the choreography unoriginal, the voice dubbing obvious and sloppy, the songs added for the film hardly memorable or containing the same kick as the ones written with Hammerstein's help (although, "I Have Confidence in Me" gets stuck in one's head quite easily). The cinematography is, admittedly, quite beautiful, but appearance isn't everything, you know. Looking under that thin layer of sparkling cinematography is nothing special or particularly complex, especially compared to "The King & I", which has often drawn comparasin and which usually ends up taking a backseat to "Sound" in the "greatness" department for some odd reason.
I would ultimately be content calling this a "good" film and accentuating all of its wonderful qualities if it did not already enjoy a massive following for those very reasons. It is not a horrible film, I am not calling it one. I am calling it overrated and certainly not one of the "greatest films" ever made.