I didn't like this when I first saw it but I was too young and the film was on TV and had been censored so I was unclear about some things, like how Julie Christie shocked the guests at the part and what Warren Beatty did with Carrie Fisher (did he take a dump?) but as time has passed I appreciate more and can see how good it is.
I don't think it reinvented the wheel - it took a very very old restoration comedy (the rooster in the henhouse) and gave it a new sheen, with Hal Ashby's low key direction, Robert Towne's witty script (I know Beatty is credited as co writer, I just feel he's more an editor and credit hog), perfect cast, fresh set up (male hairdresser in Beverly Hills), and Warren Beatty in the most perfectly cast role of his career. By the late 80s he would be too old for these roles but he is utterly at home in the mid 70s and it has an added tang knowing he co starred against so many ex-girlfriends.
Beatty plays a super stud who drives around Beverly Hills on a motorbike, sleeps with all these women, is great at his job... but it's also reassuring because he's a mess at business (he can't get a loan to start his own shop), he is longing for Julie Christie who he can get but not permanently, and his life is a mess. The women have sexual drive for him - Beatty was most effective as a hapless lust object pursued by strong women and in over his head amongst the world.
Goldie Hawn is charming as is actress girlfriend, Julie Christie is fascinating as his true love (no great catch in a way, with a drinking problem, and a disdain for hard work, but very charismatic), Jack Warden is imposing as the affable but tough businessman, Lee Grant is electric as Warden's wife, Jay Robinson effective as the salon owner, and Carrie Fisher makes a smash debut as the precocious teen (smart beyond her years but not as smart as she thinks she is). The only really dud one is Tony Bill in what is admittedly a thankless part as the director keen on Hawn.
The music is excellent, as is Ashby's direction. It lost a little pace in between parties for some reason - I'm sure it's structural.
No comments:
Post a Comment