My first review ever, if memory serves - I've been on this site for many years now, so I may have forgotten...
I saw A Touch of Class for the first time yesterday and it was definitely a very pleasant surprise for me, even though I suspected I was going to like it - otherwise I wouldn't have watched it at all. Anyway, it was even better than expected. It was really, really funny and the characters were very likable. How do you NOT fall in love with Glenda Jackson?! :) And he's pretty cool too, but I'm straight so I can't really speak for that side. Anyway, I think the way their affair plays out is completely natural and believable and that's the reason I don't get why one IMDb reviewer (one that I can recall - perhaps there are more) AND Roger Ebert both have a problem with the movie turning into a romance in its second half (and with the ending, which I address below). OK, so it's not as funny as it is in the first half, but so what? Does it HAVE to be a laugh-out-loud comedy all the way? I have no problem with the genre-mixing here, none whatsoever - I rarely do, actually. To me, the narrative structure is pretty much impeccable and makes sense throughout, with the ending being, of course, pretty much inevitable given the situation. Would the movie really have been better had they implausibly stayed together, despite his kids and all of the other obstacles? I don't know. Maybe! It was certainly hard to take, but it made perfect sense to me. Ebert on the ending: "it doesn't seem right" and "for two people, both still in love, to reach a sad but "rational" decision to end it: That's not only unfair, it's unlikely." Um... why? Isn't that how life is? Some good moments, some bad moments, a lot of fun (at least in my case - I'm sure there are others who are less fortunate) and then the occasional, inevitable really tough decision that most of us (or at least many of us) ultimately make with our brains instead of our hearts? Especially if we also happen to love our wife and kids - which is actually shown in the movie, if you pay attention, at least as far as the kids are concerned... And you can't even say it was rushed - they both got there gradually, as is shown in the movie's second half. I don't really get the logical basis for this opinion. Not yet, at least. So, then, I ask: what's not to like about this movie?!...
Like the title says - to me, this is the best movie of 1973, save for (but very, very close to) The Exorcist. Have no idea why this isn't considered a classic...
I saw A Touch of Class for the first time yesterday and it was definitely a very pleasant surprise for me, even though I suspected I was going to like it - otherwise I wouldn't have watched it at all. Anyway, it was even better than expected. It was really, really funny and the characters were very likable. How do you NOT fall in love with Glenda Jackson?! :) And he's pretty cool too, but I'm straight so I can't really speak for that side. Anyway, I think the way their affair plays out is completely natural and believable and that's the reason I don't get why one IMDb reviewer (one that I can recall - perhaps there are more) AND Roger Ebert both have a problem with the movie turning into a romance in its second half (and with the ending, which I address below). OK, so it's not as funny as it is in the first half, but so what? Does it HAVE to be a laugh-out-loud comedy all the way? I have no problem with the genre-mixing here, none whatsoever - I rarely do, actually. To me, the narrative structure is pretty much impeccable and makes sense throughout, with the ending being, of course, pretty much inevitable given the situation. Would the movie really have been better had they implausibly stayed together, despite his kids and all of the other obstacles? I don't know. Maybe! It was certainly hard to take, but it made perfect sense to me. Ebert on the ending: "it doesn't seem right" and "for two people, both still in love, to reach a sad but "rational" decision to end it: That's not only unfair, it's unlikely." Um... why? Isn't that how life is? Some good moments, some bad moments, a lot of fun (at least in my case - I'm sure there are others who are less fortunate) and then the occasional, inevitable really tough decision that most of us (or at least many of us) ultimately make with our brains instead of our hearts? Especially if we also happen to love our wife and kids - which is actually shown in the movie, if you pay attention, at least as far as the kids are concerned... And you can't even say it was rushed - they both got there gradually, as is shown in the movie's second half. I don't really get the logical basis for this opinion. Not yet, at least. So, then, I ask: what's not to like about this movie?!...
Like the title says - to me, this is the best movie of 1973, save for (but very, very close to) The Exorcist. Have no idea why this isn't considered a classic...
Tell Your Friends