Why Garfunkel?


I wonder why Art Garfunkel was chosen for the role instead of someone who was, you know, an actor? Mr. Garfunkel did a decent job in this film, but I think someone like Dustin Hoffman might have been a better choice.

reply

I believe Art Garfunkel did more than a decent job. I thought he was excellent, very natural. He gave his character a painfully repressed air, and a smarminess that was also powerful. He became good friends with director Mike Nichols after scoring "The Graduate" and he got a role in Nichols' "Catch-22". I guess Garfunkel impressed him enough to give him this larger role in "Carnal Knowledge". Plus Simon and Garfunkel had recently broken up and were at the their creative (and publicity) peak, so it would have been interesting for audiences to see him in this film in the context of the time.

I think the real question is, how did Garfunkel get the lead role in Nicholas Roeg's "Bad Timing".

reply

I agree that he was good in his role,...but I can't help think either that say
'Dusty' wouldn't have been the most obvious and (to me) perfect choice. Nice to know some others concur. Rock On!

The Smoker You Drink, The Player You Get!

reply

I think you are right-plus he was a real New Yorker. Can anyone explain how in the bio's-NIcholson is listed at 5 8 and 1/2 and Garfunkel is supposed to be 6 ft. Every scene where they are standing together, Nicholson looks slightly taller..Unless they told Garfunkel to hunch over a lot, there is no way that he is 6 ft!! I suppose it is possible-my older son is 6 ft and hunches over frequently, and looks a little shorter most of the time than my younger who is currently 5 10, because he stands up straight..

reply

On the height question, I don't agree at all. Actually, in one of the first scenes, I was surprised to see how much Garfunkel towers over Nicholson. I almost was surprised at either how short Nicholson was or how tall Garfunkel was. Check it out, very early, in the scene where they are talking about trying to meet Susan, (Candice Bergen), Garfunkel is many inches taller than Nicholson. I was surprised because I thought Nicholson was taller. Not that it matters anyway.

reply

Why was Beyonce in "Goldmember"? Why was Joan Jett in "Light of Day"? Why was Frank Sinatra in "The Man with the Golden Arm"? Same reason...

reply

Joan Jett outperformed Michael J. Fox, IMO

reply

As a non-actor, he really fits the character. Sandy is meant to be outshined by Jonathan. He is the follower in the friendship, and I think Garfunkel's lack of experience with acting really heightens the effect.

reply

Why not?

C'est vraiment dégueulasse.

reply

I think that Art Garfunkel was the introverted of the Simon and Garfunkel duo. He seemed perfect for the role - a visibly nice, and yet very shy man. He didn't even have to really act much to get his role in character.

reply

[deleted]

Aside from the fact that ART contributed quite a bit of music to MIKE NICHOLS' second film, I'd have to assume that they were friends as well as collaborators....

I think he's perfectly cast..... And so are the ANN-MARGRET twins!!!!

reply

Art Garfunkel was breaking into the movies and did pretty darn well. Also, he was a of a certain "type" which was appealing for the time period and suited this film. There have been numerous cross-over actor from various fields. Some are successful, some are not.

reply

I'm not sure why they used Art Garfunkel either but I thought he was damn good!
He seemed very natural in the role.

reply

I agree. His performance was pivotal to my enjoyment of the film.

reply