JohnHowardReid
Photographed in CinemaScope. Lenses by Bausch & Lomb. Westrex Sound System. Producer: Mark Robson.Copyright 1960 by Linebrook Corp. Released by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening at the Paramount and the Murray Hill: 15 July 1960. U.S. release: July 1960. U.K. release: 14 August 1960. Australian release: 22 September 1960. 12,948 feet. 144 minutes.SYNOPSIS: Paul Newman plays Alfred Eaton, a young Philadelphian of good family who returns from World War I to find his mother, Martha Eaton (Myrna Loy) bogged down in alcohol and his father, Samuel Eaton (Leon Ames) a wealthy businessman, as unfeeling and autocratic as ever. Alfred is uptight with his father because the elder Eaton continues to idolize his dead older brother, to whose memory Alfred is still playing second fiddle. Alfred scorns employment in the family business to take off for New York, where he joins his friend Lex Porter (George Grizzard) in an aeronautics venture. NOTES: With the initial gross domestic rentals topping a hefty $5.2 million, the film came in number 8 at the U.S./Canadian box-office for 1960. (The movie didn't take anything like this sort of money in England or Australia).COMMENT: Boring. You either like long-winded John O'Hara novels or you don't. I don't. You either like Paul Newman as a rich kid or you don't. I don't. You either like Joanne Woodward or you don't. I can either take her or leave her, preferably the latter. (The other players are of little interest, either because of their own innate lack of personality or because their roles are too small to make any impression. The one exception is Myrna Loy whose gauche performance here is best passed over in silence). Admittedly, I am way in the minority. Most people love Newman, Woodward, O'Hara (in that order). As for Robson and Lehman, despite their prominence in the advertising, most people couldn't care less. My sentiments exactly.
HotToastyRag
I wonder if Paul Newman ever got tired of playing "Paul Newman". It seems like he's always cast in the same role: rebellious but still seeking approval, parents don't like him, bad boy, a ladies' man, and a bit of an unlikable edge. However, unlike other Paul Newman movies where this type of character actually captures the audience's attention, From the Terrace is lousy.Paul Newman comes from an unrespectable family, but he wants to make something of himself. He wants to become a member of high society, so he can see the view "from the terrace". In his quest, he pursues high-class Joanne Woodward. In his overwhelming ambition, he works too much and leaves his wife alone too often. She turns to alcohol and humiliates him by having an affair. But why are we supposed to be surprised? When he met her, she was engaged to someone else. She cheated on her fiancé and left him for Paul Newman. Once a floozy, always a floozy! The plot is disjointed and boring, and despite Hollywood's repeated casting of Joanne Woodward in sexy roles, her aura reeked like she didn't know where the bedroom was, not like she spent all her time there. The costars were married by the time they made this movie, but if you really want to see their chemistry, you have nine other films to choose from.The only good scene in this movie is in the beginning. Paul Newman returns home from the war and witnesses an argument between his parents, drunken floozy Myrna Loy and stern Leon Ames. Go ahead and watch the first twenty minutes of the movie, then do yourself a favor and turn it off.
gavin6942
An ambitious young executive (Paul Newman) chooses a loveless marriage and an unfulfilling personal life in exchange for a successful Wall Street career.What a strange yet apt story of generational rejection, and sons becoming their fathers. We have Paul Newman's character striking out on his own against the wishes of his father, and then he slowly begins to make the same choices -- good or bad -- that his parents did.What is the message? Is there a message? Maybe this just says something about the importance of love rather than a life filled strictly with business. I am not sure.
Lee Eisenberg
First of all, until I'd seen "From the Terrace" I'd never heard of John O'Hara, let alone read any of his novels. So, as a totally unbiased observer, I was unsure what to think of the movie by the end. The first 20-30 minutes made it seem as though the movie was about rich people being nasty to each other. Once the main story became apparent, it still seemed as though there was no truly redeeming character anywhere in the movie. I could understand that the marriage was a loveless one and so of course the characters were going to do what they did, but it still seemed hard to justify any of it.If the movie was intended as an indictment of the unbridled pursuit of wealth and prestige, then in my opinion it succeeded in that regard. Otherwise, the movie seemed off-putting. Not a bad movie by any stretch, but I would've liked to see a redeeming character. Still, I did like what he did in the board meeting at the end. I sure would've done the same.
AD
