... gave this anything less than a 9? (I gave it a "10", but I'll allow for some reasonable dispute...)
To any of you: You're morons with no taste, intelligence, or critical capacity.
(Edit: Added the smiley, because, on reading, the "To Any" seemed a lot more serious than I intended... I still think you're nuts, but don't think I think everyone must agree with me... ;-) ... )
I did. Peter O'Toole's performance is great, as are the too-brief appearances of
Lou Jacobi and Selma Diamond, and the look of the film is wonderful. But some of the other performances are somewhat broad and more suitable to ABC sitcoms of the '70s, and tend to make the movie a little grating at times. 7/10.
I'm not crying, you fool, I'm laughing!
Hewwo.
I also gave it a 7. To give it a 9 or 10, it would have to be up there with the greatest movies of all-time, one that stands the test of time, with all-time characters and performances. This movie only received one Academy Award nomination for example. It wasn't even considered one of the best movies that came out that year.
shareI agree with 7, although this is one of my favorite movies. Peter O'Toole was fantastic, but Mark-Linn Baker brings the film down as well as the problematic background screen in the night scene. Everyone has their own ideas of how a movie should be rated, and to me a 10 means perfection or close to it.
shareO'Toole is a 10+. The script is a 9.5. The rest of the production is a 7 to 8, BUT O'Toole and the script combine to drag this film, as a laugh-out-loud comedy that has charm, style, true wit and not a scintilla of either bathroom or frat boy humor, to a very solid 9. It's in the Comedy section of my video library, which is a very small section.
shareNever understood why this movie didn't take off like so many other late blooming cult classics did (My Cousin Vinny for example).
This film is all you say it is.
Thank you.
shareI think the lack of popularity may have to do with younger generations and the subject matter. Those of us of age in the 1980's had grown up with the TV variety show, and related to the storyline and characters. Succeeding generations don't have that frame of reference.
I also recall the film being showed extensively on the cable channels in the '80's. Viewers may have grown tired of it.
That's a good point; most of us at least knew about the great 50s comedy shows, even if we didn't actually watch them.
Still, I think the charm and humor of this film transcends the subject of Jewish comedy TV shows of the 1950s, hence my disappointment and surprise it has sort of faded away.
Not only is it hysterically funny, but the ending is truly heartwarming.
"Hey Jeanine - nice box!!"
I think you’re right about the generational disconnect. I doubt that many people today grasp how sardonic Hank’s introduction to The Larry Sanders show was: “LIIIIIVE, on tape . . . “ Except for crap like the Super Bowl and the Academy Awards, we have no live entertainment TV, and the “extemporaneous” moments in that crap (“We’ve had a wardrobe malfunction! Oh! Heavens to Betsy, tee-hee!” are clearly premeditated. Swan’s panic over having to perform in real time goes RIGHT over the heads of a modern audience—BUT, his subsequent proclamation should echo eternally in the halls of film: “I’m not an actor! I AM A MOVIE STAR!” Great stuff. We never get enough of this pleasure.
shareI'd give it a 7, asshole.
shareIt didn't make much of an impression on me. I'll watch it again sometime and see if I like it better than I did the first time. Maybe there was too much hype when it was released and my expectations were too high. I grew up watching 1950s and 1960s television, so no "generational disconnect" here.
shareI'd give it a 9 or 10, probably a 9 as the last act is a bit weaker than the first. But that's as close as I can come to finding a flaw in this wonderful, hilarious, beautifully made film!
O'Toole was the real deal as an actor, so often underrated and underemployed. But holy shit give him a chance and he'd deliver!