Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Bella As an animal lover, I very much enjoyed Dr. Doolitle (1967). It's an enjoyable Comedy/Adventure/Musical/Fantasy movie about Dr. Doolitle, the animal doctor, and his journey to find the Great Pink Sea Snail in order to improve on his skills in animal languages. I gave this film a 6/10 because the vintage settings are authentic and beautiful, the overall message of the film, and the cinematography is excellent. The criticisms that I have are that some of the characters were boring, some songs were dull and there are some very corny and unfunny moments. The movie begins on a fishing deck in the middle of a town where the houses are yellow-brown brick and conjoined together with triangular rooftops, chimneys, and a sign reading "Fundlesy Clay". Dr. Doolite's home is not how you would expect an average veterinarian's home to look. Across the bridge and past, a small garden is Dr. Doolitle's brick house. There is a large doorbell and an engraved wooden and brass sign with his name on it on the wooden door. Inside his home, you will find all kinds of animals, such as pigs, monkeys, parrots, roosters, horses, donkeys, owls, sheep, ducks, rabbits, hedgehogs, cats, and dogs walking and sitting inside and outside.The message of the film is about why we treat animals different from humans even though humans are animals as well. Dr. Doolite is a proud vegetarian who speaks to animals. When he was in court and presented his case in an attempt to prove that he is able to speak to animals, the judge decided to sentence Dr. Doolite to an insane asylum. He claims the reason in that he treats animals like humans and then Dr. Doolite goes into a song explaining why we should not kill and eat animals, and rather treat them like people.The cinematography of the film is great. The director cuts to the new actors very smoothly when a new person is speaking or when something new has been introduced. The camera pans slowly onto Dr. Doolitle while he speaks the most important parts. While reading this book in the library after he is released from jail, the camera switches back and forth between Dr. Doolitle and Emma while they are conversing in a very smooth and professional manner. The film is 152 minutes long. Adults may find some parts to be very immature humour or very corny. For example, there is a scene where Dr. Doolitle is singing what appears to be a love song to a baby seal in a stroller. Also, although some of the songs are humorous, short, sweet, and catchy, others are not. There are some songs in the film that I think should have been taken out completely. The characters, other than Dr. Doolitle, are boring and uninteresting. Their motives, strengths, and weakness are unclear as most characters in the film are not very dynamic.I would recommend this movie to people who enjoy musicals. The film definitely gets better after the 1-hour mark. It is a good film to watch when you had a long day and just want to shut off your brain and enjoy a film with your family. The comedy is light and easy but there are definitely some funny moments. The animals are enjoyable, especially the two-headed llama.I gave this film 6/10 stars because it was not nearly as good as I was hoping that it would be. The areas that I think that could be improved would definitely be that Tommy, Lady Petherington, and Matthew were all very boring characters. Some more detail could have been added to bring them to life. There were only 1 or 2 songs that I really enjoyed and found catchy in the film and some of the jokes made in the film seemed a tad lazy. The parts that made the film good were the cinematography, the settings, and the overall message of the film.

TheBlueHairedLawyer I think one of the things leaving a bad rep on this movie is that most of the reviewers are adults. Well sure, watching it as an adult I found this movie to be cheesy, lame and weird, not at all like the books I fell in love with as a little kid, but when I was a kid I remember seeing this on VHS and I loved it. I found the acting to be excellent, the stories were funny and exciting and I still remember the lyrics to songs like, "My Friend The Doctor" right out of the movie. I do agree with most reviewers that Dr. Dolittle is pretty bad by most standards, but it's a movie for children, and it was very effective for me as a child. I recommend watching this for nostalgic value or for fun, don't watch it expecting something amazing, but just watch it to laugh at it and you might be surprised.

kevinewest Loved it as a kid and still do and so do my kids. It is no doubt part of the reason for me becoming a vegetarian. "I make it a policy not to eat my friends." This had bad reviews because most people do not want to be reminded that the food in their plate was an animal and had a mother or father or was a mother or father or baby.I am sure this is why it was hated. I have seen very badly done children's movies with very bad acting and scripts that got better reviews than this, but they did not offend the Meat growers or cow and pig killers.The effects were very good for the day and even now. The story was good thought not what a meat eater and animal killer would like.I was a children's movie. I have it on DVD and still enjoy it. The remake had no guts. If you could understand and talk to animals like the new movies would you eat "your friends". No but that was not mentioned in the new movies. No guts they did not want to offend the beef industry!

Kenneth Anderson The thing about getting older is that nostalgia begins to rear its head and one looks at films from one's youth through a haze of sentimentality. Back in 1967 when I was ten years old, "Doctor Dolittle" was all over the place. Toys, dolls, games and posters were everywhere, and the radio and TV variety shows were full of Sammy Davis Jr. singing "If I Could Talk to the Animals." Even with all of this, "Doctor Dolittle" seemed just the kind of family entertainment that I tended to avoid. Now, more than 40 years later, I've finally got around to seeing the film, but I'm no closer to knowing if I would have liked it any better at age ten.The problem with the film seems to be one of mistaken premises. Studios looked at "The Sound of Music," "Mary Poppins" and "My Fair Lady" and tried to duplicate their success, but they seemed to have paid attention to all the wrong things.The adaptation of a popular children's book (like "Mary Poppins") was a good idea, but rather than attempt to recreate the rather dumpy doctor described in the books ("Mary Popping"s David Tomlinson would have been great, but he lacked marquee value, likewise "Dolittle"s, circus-owner, Richard Attenborough would have made a great Dolittle…certainly a livelier one) they opted for the stiff and starchy Rex Harrison. The actor's lack of warmth may have fit the character's unease with humans, but his clear disinterest in anyone else in the film comes across as merely distant and bored. The apathetic Harrison doesn't even try to make Dolittle even a little bit different from "My Fair Lady"s Professor Higgins. Coming across solidly as a misanthrope, he fails also to demonstrate any real rapport with the menagerie of animals on display.The charmless Harrison was greatly helped by the winning softness of Audrey Hepburn in "My Fair Lady." Here Harrison has zero chemistry with Anthony Newly (whom it's reported he disliked for being Jewish) nor the requisite veddy-British female love interest, Samantha Eggar who is not only waaaay to young for him, but, despite her stunning looks, adds absolutely nothing to the film because she seems even more distracted and bored than Harrison. Lastly, there is a mush-mouthed little boy thrown in for no apparent reason (William Dix) beyond giving Newly someone remotely human to give plot exposition to.The songs from "Mary Poppins" and, to a somewhat lesser extent, "The Sound of Music" had the quality of being witty and smart while having a sing-song, nursery-rhyme quality that made it easy for kids to remember and want to sing along. The undistinguished collection of songs in "Doctor Dolittle" sound more like they were written with hopes of becoming standards or Oscar contenders than on being anything that kids might find fun to listen to.From beginning to end "Doctor Dolittle" is a clumsy musical almost on par with "Lost Horizon" in its inability to entertain on even the simplest levels. I think fans of Rex Harrison may like the movie, for it is what he does film after film, and it is a pretty good showcase for the phenomenon that was Anthony Newly (an oddly fascinating actor/singer whose unconventional looks and singing style could only have made it in the 60s), but "Doctor Dolittle" is dreary when it should be cheerful, lumbering when it should be light-hearted, and long-long-long. If the filmmakers were less cynical about tapping into the "The Sound of Music" money-making zeitgeist and more concerned with actually making a fun children's classic, there's no telling how much could have been done musically with the "Doctor Dolittle" books.