User reviews

This movie is really really well made. A little long, but for all the production value that went into it, it's completely worth it. A message that is just as relevant as today. All the acting, dancing, costumes, and overall production value are all absolutely top notch.

Wonderful casting and Choreography brought the whole story alive absolute adored those scenes in the street with the colours used for the art direction.

Being a Spielberg fan and believing WSS is great music and a great film that I remember seeing as a teen when it came out, I felt I had a good appetite for this, and thought okay these people look good, though theyre not Wood/Beymer/Chakiris/Moreno, and it's got its feet on the ground not in the sky, no shots of NYC from above, and so much of the classic was filmed from above, but here we are earthbound; okay, and yes, the dancing is more balletic, the singing more authentic and full throated, but at the half way point I thought Spielberg had made a mistake, he had made a fair copy but why spaff all that money to make a poor substitute? However it's the last third of the film that departs into considerably more dramatic mode, and this is where the Kushner/Spielberg pairing shines. They've created something which made me think this could stand side by side with Shakespeare without shame. I think he might have approved and wept.

It's not a remake. This has absolutely nothing to do with the 1961 film. They are completely separate adaptations of the stage musical. This is not rocket science. New versions of West Side Story are made every year around the world. The 1961 film has literally zero ownership over this story and characters.

It's as simple as this.. anyone crying about this film being "woke" - has not seen it. The extremely short passages of Spanish dialogue are deliberately written to not need subtitles. The performances make the context of the speech obvious - and everything is repeated in English anyway. Anybodys is presented exactly the same as the 1961 film - no reference to "non-binary" is ever made. Ergo the people moaning about the casting have (again) not even seen the film. Nothing about the main plot is changed, but the backstory is developed with great success. Chino especially is a huge improvement from earlier adaptions. Tony's more genuine past is a big asset to the film as well. Rita Moreno's new role is wonderful.

It's an incredible ensemble performance. The dancing is amazing, and the singing is breath-taking. And there's no miming here - many of the songs were even recorded live on set! The work behind the camera is equally impressive. Stunning cinematography and direction. Tony & Maria didn't have perfect chemistry, but the rest of the performance more than makes up for that.

Why are people acting invested in how much money this film makes, as if that has anything to do with it's quality. For a reality check I will remind you Steven Spielberg is literally the richest film director is the history of cinema. The guy is a multi-billionaire. Some people make a success of their lives while internet trolls waste away. Make better choices. And I realise I'm shouting into the void here - this page has clearly been completely lost to those trolls. Or should just say "troll" - on the first page alone I count 6 users that are all literally the same person. That's the extent of my patience, but no doubt this bizarre person has dozens more fake accounts if I could be bothered to check. Why someone would waste their life trolling a film website 24/7 is beyond me - but whatever, it's a free country.

Just wanted to make that pun cuz no one else has. Great cast, great director, great movie. Also, if you don't wanna watch it cuz you don't like Ansel then dont. Hundreds of others worked on this, not just him. This is not the work of one, it is the work of many.

You don't get to bring down the whole building because you dislike 1 person inside.

To be honest, "West Side Story" remade by Steven Spielberg was more an object of curiosity than the kind of cinematic-offer-you-cant-refuse. I could accept the premise since the Best Picture winner of 1961 was already an adaptation of the stage musical by Stephen Sondheim and Leonard Bernstein, itself an umpteenth retelling of Romeo and Juliet (which wasn't even a novelty). Such material is likely to be retouched, revisited and readapted to a modern audience and baby-boomer Steven who was enamored with the play decided to make his own version for a 2020s audience. He did well but that's not saying much.

Now, it was Godard who said the best way to criticize a film is to make your own and Spielberg's remake seems to carry some criticism against the original, and while enjoying both versions isn't an impossibility, one should question whether the changes enhance the story or not. Well, first the film doesn't take as many liberties as I expected: all the catchy songs featured in the original (practically all of them) are there... yet a few minor changes speak volumes about our world's overly sensitive mindset.

I can already imagine screenwriter Tony Kushner torturing himself with an adjective rhyming with "any girl who's not me today" during the "I feel pretty" segment until Eureka-ing with "bright" and prompting Spielberg to switch the scene from morning to night. It sounded a bit off for the word 'gay' didn't have the same connotation in the late 50s when the film is supposed to take place, that Spielberg removes it shows that he's not as much a purist as his insistance to have the Sharks talk non-subtitled Spanish implies. Sorry but either you play the full-authenticity card or you don't. Now let's get to the controversial lack of subtitles in theaters.

I saw it on Disney+ with subtitles but I can imagine the frustration in the theaters. If there's a point not to reveal the content of some exchanges, I understand, but depriving viewers from clear understanding in order to give a symbolic edge to the Puerto Ricans seems more like a guilt-trip move from a white director sucking up to the minority and it's utterly irrational. The Puerto-Rican chant might not have needed subtitles or some idioms like "guapa" or "vamos" etc, but following the same logic, wouldn't they sing "America, America" (or any songs for that matter) in Spanish then? Should we dismiss any film with foreign-speakers speaking English? Should we re-dub "Scarface"? How zealous should we get? How about suspension of disbelief, the essence of movie-making? Seriously, Spielberg's so-called respect to Spanish culture can hardly hide his desperate attempt to be 'relevant' and make the buzz through a little controversy. Not that it helped the film.

Some good points though: Rachel Ziegler was as convincing as Natalie Wood in her portrayal of the sweet and delicate (but strong-willed) Maria and while Ansel Egort as Tony didn't bring much magnetism, neither did his predecessor Richard Beymer. But "WSS" is essentially a supporting cast film and the juiciest roles belong to Riff (Josh Andres a little less charming than Russ Tamblyn), Bernardo (David Alvarez reprising George Shakiris' role) and of course, Anita (Ariana DeBose taking the part of Rita Moreno). In fact, Anita is the central protagonist who displays the widest range of emotions, she has that big sister's supporting instinct with Maria, she's strong, naughty, saucy and sassy with men, using both her tongue, her moves and dresses as deadly weapons.

And now, she belongs to these characters that won two Oscars by different actor like the Joker (Heath Ledger and Joaquin Phoenix). De Bose would succeed to Moreno, who has a small but touching role as Tony's drugstore employer. A nice touch. On the other hand, Alvarez doesn't have Shakiris' magnetism and never strikes as a gang leader.

Now, the film features a good deal deal of well-choreographed scenes and some brilliant camera-work from Spielberg, but they lacked the colors and the genuine punch of the original. The "America, America" song is one of the most iconic musicals moments of history and that it was shot in dark intimacy brightened the beautiful girls' dresses and the interactions with the boys made it look a fun inside joke, but Spielberg treats it as a Disney ensemble song shot in broad daylight... as for the "Tonight" song, I was so turned on by Rita Moreno putting on her stockings and saying she would get her kicks (for her little private mix), that I couldn't forgive they made her whisper that line in a church. The joke relieved that moment from its hot sexual tension.

Speaking of DeBose, not saying she wasn't good, she nailed the part but her Oscar win confirmed a certain trajectory taken by the Oscars lately making the Best Supporting Actress the most predictable slot. It seems that all it takes is to have a female character a little more charismatic than the heroine, and that's it. De Bose seems to have fun being Anita, overplaying her accent and intonations and I wish there could be one silent scene that showcases her dramatic ability, there was such a moment, it lasted only three seconds.

Anyway, it's worth watching this version to realize how the original stood the test of time, this one is a bit weaker but to the degree that it remained faithful to the original I kind of appreciated it, to the degree it tried to insert some relevant issues (although the tomboy girl seemed forced and gratuitous), I understood it, but to the degree that I like to rewatch masterpieces, I'll stick with the original. If anything, this film made me want to rewatch the 1961 classic.

I took my 75 year old mother who detests change at all costs to see this production. (It wasn't easy getting her to go, and I was sneaky going about it too). I am talking about literal panic attacks over the thought of change. During the movie, I saw her smiling every time she heard her favorite songs, seeing the new interpretation. There was even the occasional toe tapping. Even after the tragedy of the final scenes (it is Romeo and Juliet based after all), she barely walked out the theater door and stopped. She grabbed my arm with a straight face of wonder and awe and said, "Jennifer, I think that was better than the first. Jennifer, it was perfect." I can think of no greater compliment and review. Steven Spielberg breathed new life into the story that unknowingly had become a treasured relic to me. This version reimagines the songs, the story, the choreography, the photography, the colors, the setting, the lighting, the costumes, the characters, giving them purpose and significance. The characters have depth and dimension, providing the viewer a more thoughtful perspective that did not exist before (my thoughts). This film is more than a regurgitation of the songs that we have heard a million times over with the same script. It is an actual film with singing direction, acting direction, and speaking direction, and in every aspect, there is a method to the proverbial madness. It is apparent that every single person that worked on this production, actors, actresses and crew, dedicated their whole heart and soul into making this the best version it can be. Each cast member has a personal connection to West Side Story, just like we do, and I promise you this is not a remake or a reboot. It is something different. What more can we ask?

Side note - It took me two years to come around to even entertaining the idea of a new movie because it is so personal to me (both the movie and the play), so I understand why a person might be annoyed or uninterested, it wasn't until I saw Steven Spielberg's interview where he explained why he decided to direct a new film because I could relate to his desire. His passion and excitement of this project is palpable. Steven Spielberg received Rita Moreno's blessing, Sondheim's blessing, and the Bernstein estate as well. Richard Beymer even went to the set.

To anyone who reads this review - I promise you that it is worth your time. The first time I saw it, I had to see past the original, nonetheless, falling in love with the characters all over again and feeling exhilarated by the new interpretation of the songs and choreography, and the second time, it was even more earth moving because there was so much to absorb and feel - the love, the conflict, and ultimately hope that came from the tragedy. Take the time to go. Try to be open to a new experience and ask yourself - do you honestly think that Steven Spielberg, one of the best directors and my personal favorite, would ever half-ass the Holy Grail of his bucket list? Absolutely not. I am descending from my soapbox now, but again, if my 75 year old mother, an art teacher of 50 years who is set in her ways, said that it is better than the first, it is absolutely worth your time. PS - Give yourself the opportunity or option to fall in love for the first time or again like I did (I'm 42 now but saw it for the first time at age 7).

Steven Spielberg remade the 10-time winner of the 1961 Academy Award and the musical known as "West Side Story." The film was definitely a remake, as it represents the conditions that were created in the 1960s, especially the social conditions and behavioral problems that existed in that decade. People waiting for a modern update will be really disappointed.

I must say right away that this is definitely my favorite piece of musical cinema. Based on Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet".

I really liked it, I advise everyone to watch it!!!

Really great journey in the theater. Performances were really great and it was just well made and a powerful and emotional journey. Recommended and a really great ride through good times and bad. Spielberg is a Master, no doubt.

Reviews often talk about a lack of chemistry between lead characters. Any version of a Romeo & Juliet story has to convince the viewer that these lead characters truly love each other whilst their families hate one another with deep intensity. In Zeffirelli's version these 2 criteria are met convincingly and also in the 1961 version of West Side Story to a lesser degree. On-screen chemistry must mean good acting since Natalie Wood disliked her co-star Richard Beymer but both managed to act like they were in love. The same can't be said about Rachel Ziegler & Ansel Elgort who can't seem to muster the chops to show real passion for each other. The new sequencing of the songs often weakened the excitement of the plot: I Feel Pretty - straight after climactic fight/murder scene and Crazy Boy - during Tony's lame attempt to take Riff's gun are a couple of examples. The Jets and Sharks didn't get each other in this version. In the older one their mutual loathing was fierce & obvious. In spite of the high standard of Tony, Maria & Anita's vocals this production is bland and unmemorable.

I saw both the stage version live and the 1961 movie in the past, and even though I always loved the music and dance numbers, I was never really sold or engaged by the storytelling. I would go as far as saying that the story almost bored me on both the movie and stage musical.

This adaptation from Spielberg however manages to turn the characters into real people, the situations get higher stakes, the emotion is palpable. The quality of the songs and musical numbers are impressive, but they always were, you can't do West Side Story without it. But those numbers are greatly enhanced by a really dynamic direction from Spielberg. A direction, that stays masterful throughout and that is really working with the score of the movie.

The acting is so much more real that the 61 movie, Ariana DeBose is simply incredible at both singing and dancing, but her acting chops are really shining here. She carried the movie for me, even though to be fair, all the cast did a great job.

The focus on giving an emotional story and emotional performances from the actors was the way to go, and it is what makes this adaptation a great one. I cried so much (mostly thanks to DeBose and Moreno's performances) throughout the second part of the movie, while I had never shed one tear on the stage musical nor the 61 movie that never managed to move me.

Overall this new adaptation is clearly a love letter to the source material, not trying to reinvent what was already working, but enhancing what wasn't to make it a movie that can move people from our generations.

I confess, I am shocked at the number of positive reviews, both user and critical, in connection with this remake. I almost don't know where to start with its glaring flaws. This version retains none of the charm of the original. It plays more like a straight drama in which the music is a superfluous add-on.

The rewritten screenplay is dull, and the staging sterile. The characters do not engage you emotionally the way they did in the original. I should point out that I do not place the blame for that on the actors, but, rather, on the direction and script. The actors themselves are talented and did the best they could in the face of these limitations (Maria and Anita in particular).

I would only say that, while the 1961 version is my favorite movie, I have seen amateur productions, as well as the Broadway remake with Debbie Allen as Anita. I have been touched by high school productions, so the mere fact that this was a remake is not the determinative factor in my views. This remake just fell flat.

I was skeptical into this knowing how great the orignal is. Yet, I was extremely impressed and dumbfounded by how good this new version is. It kept with the spirit of the origInal work and made a few changes but very appropriately.

Over the years I have rated hundreds of movies, but I have only given twenty five a 10 out of 10. One of these was the original WSS movie version of 1961. So how does the old one stand up to the latest Spielberg outing? Ok, the original had it's faults but it took itself seriously enough to be a fairly successful transfer from stage to screen. This new version, while still setting it in the 1950s, tried to bring it into the 21st century with flashy camera work, ginormous sound stages and hundreds of extras. Gone is the feel of a theatrical stage production. In fact, the editing of some of the dance sequences (e.g. Dance at the Gym) was so spit-second fast that it was impossible to concentrate on any one performer.

Now to make Romeo & Juliet/West Side Story work we rely heavily on the chemistry of the leads. I'm afraid Ansel and Rachel have no chemistry. They can sing well but as lovers...well? The original Dance at the Gym meeting was laughable. At least the '61 version treated it as a sort of dance fantasy. Which worked. If you can't feel some sympathy for the leads then who cares what happens to them later.

Rather than focusing on the negative side of the movie then let's mention the things that worked. There were several stand-out performers. Ariana DeBore (Anita), David Alvarez (Bernardo), and Mike Faist (Riff) stole the show with some great acting and amazing dancing. I did miss the Jerome Robbins' choreography but I am sure the Justin Peck version would have impressed me as much if the camera would stop darting all over the place. Two other actors deserve mention. Josh Andres Rivera (Chino) did so well in his slightly beefed up role, and, of course, Rita Moreno would have me even if she was promoting baby nappies!

The costume designs were great, especially the men. The women's were a bit loud and a little too perfect for Puerto Rican's who hang their washing on the fire escape to dry.

So this version does not replace the original '61. It may appeal to a younger generation who have never seen the other....although I wonder if they would really sit through a number like 'I feel pretty' without bursting out laughing.

Expectations were mixed for this remake of 'West Side Story'. The 1961 adaptation of Leonard Bernstein's classic is one of my favourite musicals and an all time favourite as well. Have always loved Steven Spielberg as a director, despite him being hit and miss for quite some time. Not to mention the awards attention. Remakes do not have the best of reputations, with many being pointless and bad on their own terms (i.e. 'Psycho', 'The Wicker Man', 'Rollerball').

Likewise with major directors directing one musicals, look to Sidney Lumet for 'The Wiz' and Richard Attenborough for 'A Chorus Line (actually found it hard to believe that they did those films). John Huston's 'Annie' also has a not so good reputation, have personally always loved that film while acknowledging that Huston was not the right director. While not loving it as much as the critics and understanding the division, 'West Side Story' does not disgrace the original and is one of Spielberg's better films in recent years, while also having a huge amount to love on its own terms.

There are issues. The weak link is the stiff, bland and one note performance of Ansel Elgort as Tony, who also overacts unintentionally humorously towards the end. Also would have liked a lot more romantic chemistry between him and Rachel Zegler, which is nowhere near as well developed or interesting as the gang rivalry.

What would have made it a little more believable would have been to have had "Tonight" more stripped back and straightforward and not have the amount of clambering there was. Did think too that it was misjudged to not have subtitles, which is likely to confuse those with limited or no knowledge of the language and the idea to give "Somewhere" to Rita Moreno's character and at the time it was placed made no sense.

However, so much is great. There are improvements here, the rivalry between the gangs is much grittier as is the portrayal of the Sharks (if the film did exactly how they were portrayed in the original it would be seen as problematic). Really appreciated that a backstory was given to Tony and Riff has a lot more depth too. The diversity did not bother me at all. It is beautifully made, with stunning photography and absolutely loved how they opened up the action with more authentic and uncompromising locations. Spielberg is far from out of his depth, directing it like a love letter to the genre and with affection while not being overblown.

Bernstein's music is still timeless and vibrantly arranged, especially "America". Many of the musical numbers are staged incredibly well, with "America" being a hugely colourful showstopper. "Officer Krupkee" is absolutely hilarious and the montage in the second rendition of "Tonight" was beautifully put together and sweet. And then there is the showdown, which is full of fierce brutality. The rest of the performances are terrific. Zegler is a revelation and it was like she had been doing film and musicals for years, she really charmed and moved me. Her one failure was Maria's indifferent reaction to Bernardo's death, but that was a directing issue rather than her. Ariana DeBose is amazing too as Anita, the fire and passion she shows sizzling. Mike Faist brings so much nuance and depth to Riff.

Concluding, really liked it while not loving it. 7/10.

Absolutely loved everything about the movie. Extremely entertaining. Singing by both main actors was incredible. Choreography well done. Set design, wardrobe, etc fabulous as well. I saw the original as a young teen and loved it then, but I have to say this is far superior. A must see.

I recently rewatched the original film version of "West Side Story" which I absolutely loved and was curious as to how Spielberg would approach taking on such a monument in film musical history. Personally, I felt it was a film which didn't need remaking and while the director may have felt some justification in so doing in the wake of the interracial strife in America in recent times, it seemed to me like he was really just hanging his movie on accidental topicality, certainly, nothing he did here stirred up any such-like socially-conscious feelings in me.

What I did get was an entertaining and invigorating movie which nevertheless fell some way short of the original. I was fine with the device of showing much of the dialogues by the Sharks in unsubtitled Spanish, as well as the voguish diversification in the casting, most obviously changing Doc's part to a women and of course, having Maria played by a young Latin American, if not authentically Puerto Rican actress. However I did think Rachel Zegler lacked the verve and appeal not to mention skill that the young Natalie Wood brought to the part 60 years ago. I somehow also felt that the rest of the young cast lacked the charisma of the younger Rita Moreno or George Chakiris I remember so vividly from Jerome Robbins' version. I also have to say that Spielberg didn't get close to replicating, far less surpassing that classic love-at-first-sight moment between the star-crossed lovers, Tony and Maria.

The musical numbers were handled well enough if again not outstandingly so, making good use of modern technology in overhead drone shots and CGI cinematography for backgrounds (I especially liked the overhead shot of the two gangs shadows converging for the final rumble) but I still know which staging of, say "America" I prefer, and it wasn't this one. I too noticed some differences in the song lyrics (and did I hear right, was the word "gay" really excised from Maria's "I Feel Pretty"?) as well as their placement in the narrative and occasionally who was singing what, compared to the earlier film.

Anyway, in the end, it didn't feel to me like Spielberg brought much that was new to this wonderful old musical and I strongly feel that the 1961 original still sets the benchmark in terms of colour, vibrancy, energy and musicality. In the end, I was glad I watched the original first but am pretty sure I'd have arrived at the same conclusion as to the respective merits of both versions, no matter the order in which I watched them. I hope in years to come that the original will remain the go-to movie production of Robbins, Bernstein and Sondheim's theatrical masterwork and not this high-profile but not so high-achieving remake.

Choreography proves that, while it is easy to be different than Robbins, its very difficult to be as good as Robbins. Filming and editing of dance sequences are often cliched and no less often overly sentimental...not surprising from Spielberg. "America" is an exception to most of these comments although the editing is still choppy and interrupts the flow the choreography itself is hot. Again the slow dolly down at the end is cliched to the max (perhaps trying to pay tribute to the end of American in Paris.) Mostly this number is great because Ariana DeBose is fantastic here, and throughout....a well-deserved Oscar winner in an otherwise 2nd rate production.

Most of the vocal performances are lifeless and never more-so than when Ansel Elgort's Tony is singing. Most of the numbers were recorded off set contributing to the lack of emotion. One Hand One Heart was apparently recorded on set and had much more feeling than most of the other songs but I still find Ansel 's Tony lacking in passion here.

Much of the orchestrations are modified from the original, not sure if driven by the choreography but they often result in the diminishing of a great score.

The non-lead characters of the Sharks and Jets, women and men, are excellent .

Rachel Zegler's Maria nicely acted, well sung, and believable. I found little honesty in Ansel's portrayal, your mileage may differ.

I've seen the original more times than I can count, and I'd heard this was good, and worth seeing, but I was skeptical. O. M. G. Only Steve could have done it. This is incredible. It is utterly gobsmackingly mindblowingly good. The sets, the cinematography, the lighting, the ambience, and then of course, cast and songs, all done with that slightly newish tangibility yet giving the all pervasive sense of an era that was with what happened then sadly still happening now. The sets were incredible, as I said, from the old brownstones to the chenille bedspread on the double bed, and the acting, I have never seen anything like that in a musical. It does surpass the original for naturality there, and these "unknowns", brilliant. My fav was Riff, Mike Faist, doesn't have to look you in the eye to talk to you a nuance rarely rarely used as he used it - which shows the dominance of the leader of the pack, yet with a demeanor slightly lessening when Tony is around, deferring to his best friend and he that's done time. The girls were incredible, the costumes - look, this should take all awards at every damned prize event. It is just that good!

How many remakes have you seen that does justice to the original? This one does.

West Side Story IMO is the hands down best musical of all time

In some areas it is stronger, others weaker.

Less stagey, choreography not quite as good Maria and Tony were weak, same as the 61 version.

Anita and Bernado were excellent But, what possible reason for having Spanish dialogue without subtitles.

That takes my score down from nine to an eight.

I will never like this. I know many like it but I would guess they weren't indelibly imprinted with the original film.

I cringe at this move, because I loved the original so much . This one seems hastily slapped together and sterile.

If you haven't already seen the original a hundred times, do so and then this will be forgotten.

I recognize the talent of the stars and am not criticizing the cast itself. Steven Spielberg never should have made this film.

I can't imagine what he was thinking to come up with this hollow non-musical slap in the face to the original film and make it so sloppily.

SO I will never watch this film again.