Why is this movie liked?

Why does anyone like Machete Kills, Despicable Me, Curse of Chucky? Because not everyone likes the same things.

A Streetcar Named Desire was originally a play and there was no reason to change the set. There are a few lines changed for language and the ending was changed due to Hollywood standards and practices of the era. Future versions of this will be true to the script, per the playwright's will (with the exception of productions with a predominantly black cast, which Williams approved in his lifetime).

This film is noteworthy for Marlon Brando's performance, as his career was made by being cast in the stage version in the first place. It swept the Oscars that year, and continues to be the definitive version despite changes required to suit the moral climate of the era. It depicts human conflict, both within and without in each character. That the characters aren't likable is not important; what is important is that they are real.

You don't have to like it, but you do need to realize that others will and will have valid reasons.


The Fabio Principle: Puffy shirts look best on men who look even better without them.

While it admittedly can't compare with SMURFS 7: THE BLUE REVENGE, many consider STREETCAR one of the best film adaptations of a stage play ever (largely because it retains much of the cast and the same director).

--

Non-sequiturs are delicious.

Tennesee Williams' writing has an almost cult-like following. His plays are an English major's dream because they're chock-a-block with meaning. To me the movie is intense and I will watch it but not because it's such a fun movie.

It's a story of the brutal triumph of reality over dreams and fantasy.

I think it reads better than it plays on film. A stage production could show it better.

The movie was filmed in the 1950's - a time when censorship was still rampant, and the fact that Blanche's young husband was homosexual could not be broached, although it's clear enough in the written play. That is also the reason that the ending of the play is different, having Stella leave Stanley. In the actual play, she stays with him. She is in effect, his prisoner of war. The loss of Belle Reve, is actually the destruction of the Dubois sisters' "beautiful dreams."

I think that in a way it's deliberately overacted. You had the powerhouse Brando and the powerhouse Leigh. It's unfortunate that Leigh unraveled almost point for point as Blanche did, but she conveys the embodiment of loss.

It is difficult to like the characters. I think that Williams did this deliberately because it forces the viewer to look past it to motivations.

I didn't see it as poorly written. I think he conveys a great deal with few words. The "deliberate cruelty is not forgivable" has served me well at various times in my life.

I think the point of this was to illuminate the brutality of deliberate cruelty as embodied by Stanley. He is the least attractive character and Stella is the epitome of a spouse who's beaten emotionally and verbally and we even see him strike her. He has conquered her. Blanche is a bit harder to break, but he eventually does. He is a brute, a vicious gossip and a merciless conqueror.

English MA: Symbolism/my life. Truth vs the world - Boudicca of the Iceni

I Agree With The Original Poster.I'm Watching It Now With My Wife ; 40 Minutes Into The Movie,An We're Considering Using The DVD As Coaster.

I just watched this movie yesterday for the first time.

I had watched Blue Jasmine before, and while I loved Cate Blanchett's performance, the movie as a whole was meh.

Other than that I had no prior knowledge of the play, had only seen Brando in The Godfather, and had only seen Leigh in Gone with the Wind.

Already 30 minutes into the movie, I was in love with it. It was the tension between Blanche and Stanley that got me. I got literal goosebumps in one scene. Throughout the movie, I was convinced that one of them will kill the other, so I was not surprised by the rape scene.

I also found Blanche rather intriguing. I figured out early on that the script and characters are not the same as Blue Jasmine, so I was very curious to find out what made her what she is. What made her even more fascinating is, when she finally told her story to Mitch, I had no idea if she was telling the truth or making it up.

But like you said, Classics are a hit or miss deal. I, for one, never got the fuss over Casablanca. I was bored watching it, and I don't understand how Bogart got that Oscar when Brando was in the competition with this performance.

[deleted]

ritamilo pretty much hits the nail on the head, its a true classic.

Just watched this movie for the first time today. Here are my guesses for why people watch it so much:

1) This movie was born from a highly rated Broadway play. Success on Broadway does not equal success in Hollywood, but no matter how well this film was shot, it was guaranteed to get a huge audience of play enthusiasts checking out the movie adaptation.

2) Several big name and future big name actors/actresses were in the movie. Many people watch this to see Brando's origins. Many people at the time watched it to see Leigh because of the big name appeal.

3) Hollywood continues to put out remakes and Broadway continues to produce it. People watch those and then go back to the original.

4) Some of the elements have gotten more intense as time goes on. Brando beating women and acting violent was more common 50 years ago, but now it is very unacceptable.

Here are my reasons for why it is well regarded:

1) Brando and Leigh both played very dislikeable characters, but they played them spectacularly. There was really only one set, and this film was primarily driven by their acting.

2) The personalities are very complex. There are no clear villains and heroes in this movie. It is very easy for the audience to both hate and love Stanley and Blanche at different points in the story.