MovieChat Forums > Seconds (1966) Discussion > was this Hudson's last decent movie role...

was this Hudson's last decent movie role ??


any opinions ??

reply

tHAT seems to be the modern narrative but at the time the film was not successful and I did get to see it years ago and I didn't think it was good.

reply

I saw it last week for the first time - I thought it was sublime

reply

why?

reply

The fact that Arthur Hamilton realized that his previous life was pretty good - the love of a good woman was priceless.
The whole counterculture was nonsense and the fact that the movie was out before the Summer of Love made it prescient. There are also hints at the darker side of the 1960s such as the Manson Killings and Altamont.



reply

Interesting. Maybe I'll see it again.

reply

Going over to his IMDb page, I can confirm that it is his last decent role and movie.

reply

Howard Hughes made his local Las Vegas tv station play Ice Station Zebra over and over again...no matter other viewers were looking for something different. So Ice Station Zebra. The Undefeated with John Wayne has its fans.

reply

The guy was a recluse and that's what he chose to do with his time? The dude was rich enough to buy his own reel of it and project it at home.

reply

Certainly it's his only good dramatic performance!

He was very good in light material, comedies and "MacMillan and Wife" and duch. But this was the dramatic role that really.resonated with him, for obvious reasons.

reply

*I ported my response over from another thread from 3 year ago, entitled (quote) "Godawful Movie" (which this certainly isn't)*

Regarding the casting, I think that may have been a deliberate ploy by John Frankenheimer (in the full knowledge of Hudson's actual limitations as an actor) Given the unwritten (then-taboo) 'secret' that Hudson had to keep throughout his career, I think it was the a deft touch, casting-wise. Plus, as it stands, Rock Hudson wasn't meant to totally 'convince' (hence the characters plight and ultimate predicament)

I 'dug' the movie (and it's concept completely) which meant that (as a engrossed viewer) I saw only John Randolph throughout the movie (and if you apply that 'mindset' whilst watching 'Seconds', then both the casting and performances take second place to it's core central theme)

Whilst I love this movie (and trust me, it gets better with repeated viewings) I can see why audiences in the 60's (or even present day one-time viewers) are left cold by it. To be fair, it actually plays better today than in 1966 (in this new century of mass social media whitewashing, photo filters, plastic surgery, extreme tattoos/body piercings, gender fluidity and identity politics, etc) More and more people (it would seem) are unhappy with their 'lot' these days, than ever before?

When I see some 'older' celebrities resorting to grotesque botox procedures (or even worse) in a fruitless attempt to stay younger or relevant...I often think of the themes of human dissatisfaction in this movie.
Perhaps, some older burnout deceased celebrities from yesteryear are (in fact) selling out arenas today, as either Justin Beiber or Taylor Swift (or both?)

reply