@movie_nazi said:

I'm sorry but it looks ridiculous that have 30-35 year olds playing high schoolers. I am not saying that they had to be of high school age but at the very least LOOK like high school age. A group of 21 to 27 year old actors coulda pulled it off. It's so damn distracting to see crow's feet and laugh lines on friggin' high schoolers.

Grease (1978) - 3.5 outta 5 stars

John Travolta was 23 during filming in '77. ONJ - 28/29; JeffConaway - 26. ONJ still looked good at 60.

Shirley Temple may have been an appropriate cast age-wise but could she belt out Over the Rainbow like Garland? An iconic Hollywood moment would have been lost.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSZxmZmBfnU

Yeah I guess it was an iconic moment. I am a Garland fan so I'm not knocking her. While she did make the role work for her, I still think Shirley Temple was by far better for the role. I'm not the biggest fan of the song to be honest. But there would've been other great moments had Shirley been in the role. Obviously I can't deny the success of the movie since nearly 100 years later people are watching it and loving it. I still think Shirley was perfect for it

Right, sometimes ageless casting works, and sometimes you just have to take it with a grain of salt.

But sometimes it's even harder to suspend disbelief on television series, like "Room 222," where that gang of kids hold onto their seats in Karen Valentine's class for five years in a row...which could be a lot worse, like being stuck in "Fame" school for five seasons, and having teachers barking orders at you, instead of learning something from somebody nice like Lloyd Haines.

Does work in the movies sometimes, like "Blondie Goes to College," where Penny Singleton and Arthur Lake study alongside classmates like Janet Blair, Lloyd Bridges and Sid Melton because even today adults with maturity like that are forced to take college courses.

Other classic stars are very capable of holding onto their youth, like Ginger Rogers, who does a string of career lady roles, who, for one reason or another, have to masquerade as children. That youth appeal works so well for her that Ginger even turned down "To Each His Own," so that she wouldn't have to play the mother of John Lund's character when he's in the armed forces so that she could play 18 in "Heartbeat," and this is, like, twelve years after her husband-dumping character in "Gay Divorcee."

On the other hand, when you have a television series like "Head of the Class," what goes on with that ten-year-old genius girl in advanced High School? She really makes the other kids look as though somebody needs to check the mirror for fairness.

Even "Love Boat" holds those High School class reunions with graduates from the same year ranging in age from like 25 through like 60. What is that all about except that some stars really hold onto youth appeal well into their fifties and beyond.

So yeah, even great screen legends like Myrna Loy get into the act, where she plays the wife of Fredric March and mother of Teresa Wright one year and the sister of Shirley Temple the next year, in that triangle with Cary Grant and Rudy Vallie and Tommy Sands and Veda Ann Borg, or is that a six-sided thing or seven with that elderly guy who takes Veda Ann to the nightclub? She is very wonderful in that.

It's a lot more noticeable now with HD quality restorations. I never noticed a lot of these things watching these movies on VHS with an old CRT TV....

Actually Keneckie was supposed to be over 18. A teacher said in the film how he had Keneckie again for a student and how the hood had been at the school longer than teacher this implied the hood was at least 21. As for Marty she was played by what 19 year old beauty Dinah Manoff.

I saw this movie in a theatre when it first came out, was of the age bracket, at the time, the student characters are all supposed to be, and it didn't bother me at all that various in the "student" cast obviously were clearly (unlike myself) non-teens, in their mid or upper 20s, or a bit older, at the time.

The person who I think looks older (in general, the "essence" of her when you see her surrounded by the other supposed "student" cast) than everyone else is the woman who plays the Latina dancer "Cha Cha". I just watched this movie, anew, and again find myself thinking that very talented dancing lady looks more like around 35 than high school age. Stockard Channing's age never has bothered me regarding this movie, despite that she's obviously not a teenager (nonetheless, she does still look really good, and overall "young").

Hard to believe that Channing is today 76 (born Feb. 1944), Olivia Newton-John is 71 (born Sept. 1948), and John Travolta is 66 (born Feb. 1954). Meanwhile, Jeff Conaway (who died in 2011) was born in Oct. 1950, so if still alive would now be 69. At the time this movie was made, those performers' ages were something like Channing 34, Newton-John 29, Conaway 27, and Travolta 24. The actress, Annette Charles (who also died in 2011), meanwhile, who played dancer Cha Cha, was born in March 1948, therefore was about 30 when she made this movie.

Except for Stockard Channing, all the main supposed "student" performers were in their 20s, and Channing wasn't much older than Newton-John.

Incidentally, Didi Conn was born July 1951, and Dinah Manoff was born Jan. 1956. So, they were approx. 26 and 22, respectively, at the time of filming.

NOTE: All ages I indicated at time of filming, certain ones of the performers were possibly - depending on when filming concluded - one age younger (otherwise were the exact age I stated).

I have to go with Judy here. She is the movie. Shirley took the star role in the mostly forgotten The Blue Bird.

Funny Judy gets brought up. She and Mickey Rooney practically invented the hollywood teenager.

As for Grease, it is as much a fantasy as a musical. Besides no genuine teen actor would have the ticket selling draw as Johnny and Olive. Also if you dont know the original Chicago stage production was way dirtier and sexual. Funny that Travolta would record the schmaltzy Let her in song while sweetheart ONJ had Physical .

And since I'm babbling here for the reverse age situation check out Bugsy Malone where a cast of youngsters play adult style gangsters.

Regarding TWoO, I, too, cast my vote for Judy. She is absolutely the heart and soul of that film, and utter perfection. While I'm also a Shirley Temple fan, it would have seemed like a quite different movie had she been the star - and that movie feels like it's exactly as it should be (even though Judy was a teenager, rather than a child). As scripted, a teenaged Dorothy works entirely well for the film, as all that necessarily matters is that the character is an orphan living with her aunt and uncle.

@genplant29 said:

Regarding TWoO, I, too, cast my vote for Judy. She is absolutely the heart and soul of that film, and utter perfection. While I'm also a Shirley Temple fan, it would have seemed like a quite different movie had she been the star - and that movie feels like it's exactly as it should be (even though Judy was a teenager, rather than a child). As scripted, a teenaged Dorothy works entirely well for the film, as all that necessarily matters is that the character is an orphan living with her aunt and uncle.

I have no problem with Judy being a teenager in The Wizard of Oz and I don't think it would have taken away from the story at all. But she is portrayed as a prepubescent adolescent (like in the book). I heard they even went as far as taping her boobs flat. Hollywood did a lot of weird shit back then and I won't even get into how they practically murdered Garland with those drugs to squeeze as many movies out of her as possible.

Indeed, very sad the lasting negative impact Judy's teenaged career (the mandated taking of diet pills during it) took on her overall subsequent life - ultimately bringing on the early death of her.

I didn't realize that Dorothy, in the film, is supposed to be literally a little girl (I've always perceived her as being somewhere in the ballpark of 14-15). In the movie, I think I remember Professor Marvil (and maybe also another character or two - perhaps Auntie Em, Uncle Henry, or/and Elmira Gulch?) referring to Dorothy, once or twice, as a "little girl", though I always have taken it as simply a much-older character viewing her that way (like how some parents will say about their young adult daughter, "she's just a little girl"). I knew about the binding of Judy's breasts for the portrayal of Dorothy, but thought that was just to attempt to shave off 2-3 years from Judy's current age of around 16-1/2 at time of filming, seeking to make her look as young (and non-voluptuous) in her teens as credibly possible.

In the books, Dorothy is described as 11, and that's a few books along, so she may well have been younger in the first book

@genplant29 said:

I didn't realize that Dorothy, in the film, is supposed to be literally a little girl (I've always perceived her as being somewhere in the ballpark of 14-15). In the movie, I think I remember Professor Marvil (and maybe also another character or two - perhaps Auntie Em, Uncle Henry, or/and Elmira Gulch?) referring to Dorothy, once or twice, as a "little girl", though I always have taken it as simply a much-older character viewing her that way (like how some parents will say about their young adult daughter, "she's just a little girl"). I knew about the binding of Judy's breasts for the portrayal of Dorothy, but thought that was just to attempt to shave off 2-3 years from Judy's current age of around 16-1/2 at time of filming, seeking to make her look as young (and non-voluptuous) in her teens as credibly possible.

Absolutely she was supposed to be a little girl and as Joe pointed out, in the book Dorothy is, in fact, a child. As a child, I didn't notice either. But as I watched the film as an adult I kinda got a creepy vibe from it like some pervy dude having his old lady dress up as a little girl for kicks. I know that totally was not their intention ( I hope) as I think they were just trying to get as close to the book character as possible and Garland was just a wee bit too old for it. Either way, the film is damn near Hollywood perfection and although Temple would have indeed been much closer to the appropriate age I just don't think the film would have been the icon it is today.

Deanna Durbin would have made a good Dorothy. However Faruzia Balk in Return to Oz is still my favorite Dorothy.

As for Grease it was made for an adult audience as well as a teenage one. A teenage cast would not be able to put across the singing and dancing as well.

@znexyish said:

Deanna Durbin would have made a good Dorothy. However Faruzia Balk in Return to Oz is still my favorite Dorothy.

As for Grease it was made for an adult audience as well as a teenage one. A teenage cast would not be able to put across the singing and dancing as well.

And I never really expected a complete teenage cast but they could have at least looked teenage. I previously pointed out West Side Story as an example where the players at least looked younger. Grease is just over the top with how they are using players in their early to mid 30s.