Some Notes Toward a Review:
Virtues of the Film
1. Plays it straight 2. Genuinely funny 3. Ken Nordine's earnest narration 4. Voight's good-natured performance-sweet (the rube) but also sour 5. Darden's funny dual performance, particularly his Yiddish accent 6. Chicago in glorious technicolor 7. Making the movie at all was bold 8. The two songs create a dream-like atmosphere-one sounds like Nico 9. A little bit of everything-comedy, drama, mood piece 10. Every performance is good 11. Where else can you see Nelson Algren in a movie? 12. Some of it seems like it was being made up on the fly 13. The freedom of creation shown by Kaufman 14. Quirky henchmen-Rat, Cat, Needles (an allusion to "The Man with the Golden Arm"?), and, of course, Screwnose, who is obviously based on Richard Nixon
Some reviewers take it WAY too seriously, missing the oddness that makes it unique.
Added over a year after the initial review: I just watched this movie again and didn't like it nearly as much as I had, proving that our mood while watching a movie has a lot to do with how we experience that movie. Upon a second viewing, I found the movie more tedious than I had remembered it, and what I had found hilarious-or, at least, amusing-the first time around, had tended to fall flat the second time. Its slipshod nature, which had been a virtue to me was now a vice. I do know that at least once or twice, this second time around, I had laughed so hard that tears had come to my eyes so it still had the power to amuse. I think so, anyway, unless it was something else that I had watched recently, and I'm confusing that with this movie.
Why am I adding these comments to my initial review? Because my integrity wouldn't allow me to do otherwise. One's assessment of everything should always be changing. If not, one is stagnating, which isn't too far removed from being dead.
Virtues of the Film
1. Plays it straight 2. Genuinely funny 3. Ken Nordine's earnest narration 4. Voight's good-natured performance-sweet (the rube) but also sour 5. Darden's funny dual performance, particularly his Yiddish accent 6. Chicago in glorious technicolor 7. Making the movie at all was bold 8. The two songs create a dream-like atmosphere-one sounds like Nico 9. A little bit of everything-comedy, drama, mood piece 10. Every performance is good 11. Where else can you see Nelson Algren in a movie? 12. Some of it seems like it was being made up on the fly 13. The freedom of creation shown by Kaufman 14. Quirky henchmen-Rat, Cat, Needles (an allusion to "The Man with the Golden Arm"?), and, of course, Screwnose, who is obviously based on Richard Nixon
Some reviewers take it WAY too seriously, missing the oddness that makes it unique.
Added over a year after the initial review: I just watched this movie again and didn't like it nearly as much as I had, proving that our mood while watching a movie has a lot to do with how we experience that movie. Upon a second viewing, I found the movie more tedious than I had remembered it, and what I had found hilarious-or, at least, amusing-the first time around, had tended to fall flat the second time. Its slipshod nature, which had been a virtue to me was now a vice. I do know that at least once or twice, this second time around, I had laughed so hard that tears had come to my eyes so it still had the power to amuse. I think so, anyway, unless it was something else that I had watched recently, and I'm confusing that with this movie.
Why am I adding these comments to my initial review? Because my integrity wouldn't allow me to do otherwise. One's assessment of everything should always be changing. If not, one is stagnating, which isn't too far removed from being dead.