secondtake Picnic (1955) A big reputation for a stiff film with some terrific parts. If you start, do stick it out to the night party at the end of the picnic, and to the final emotional scenes. The filming, and even the slightly outrageous Midwest customs (the entire town of people raising their arms in praise at one point), are both great. James Wong Howe knocked himself out making this movie really gorgeous. If the women (and William Holden) are only as good as they are beautiful, you might say the same with the movie, which is mostly about appearances. Maybe that's part of its brilliance, intended or not. It also might reflect a superficial but partly true version of 1950s America. Or Kansas, for starters. The real intentions here are terrific, and there are elements that begin to draw you in. That is: innocence, striving for happiness, failure (and acceptance of that), and good old carnal lust. I find both Holden and Kim Novak relatively stiff actors, and so maybe they contribute to the feeling in the film. Or maybe they are perfectly cast in a film that doesn't try for honest depth. It also doesn't try for something truly steamy and emotionally sweeping like a Douglas Sirk film (see his "All that Heaven Allows" from the same year). Director Joshua Logan might actually be striving for something that stays restrained, like the people in the film. Except maybe Rosalind Russell, by the way, who is a genuine hoot. The famous dance scene on the dock under colored lights makes you nostalgic for some great old times, not quite innocent but certainly pure in their simplicity and beauty. Both leading actors were famously bad dancers, so the camera zooms in to their shoulders on up, letting the ambiance of the night take over, with fifty Chinese lanterns in different colors hovering. Novak plays the "beautiful" one, but her younger sister (Betty Field) has all the pure beauty here, and the conflict lets Holden get confused and torn in two, almost literally (once Russell gets involved). It's all a bit superficial-spotlights (probably some standard studio Kliegs) make it almost absurdly dramatic. But then, we sometimes say that about Sirk, too, and other widescreen dramas of the time. Maybe we'll gradually come not just to enjoy them but to revere them. For now, there is a bit too much artifice, and bit too little genuine rich depth and human exploration. The material is ripe, for sure. And I have to say I enjoyed it all, without ever quite being convinced or affected.

Armand more than a film, a kind of experience. dramatic, not original but good tool for remember the force of great stories about self definition, love and fundamental choices, with few traces from Tennessee Williams and Steinbeck. William Holden does a great role. Kim Novak has the science to use her classic tricks for create the unpredictable blonde. Rosalind Russell is pure Blanche du Bois and Verna Felton is herself at all. a film who remains, for me, a kind of revelation. because it is , against mistakes, a convincing fresco of South. because it gives more than a drama but a drama well made. because it has the rare gift to be sentimental and realistic in same measure, with same brilliance.

rixrex Many fine scenes in this film make it one to see. Many fine performances as well. However, there are some scenes that are weak and performances in such scenes that aren't as strong as others. Some dialog that doesn't ring true, meaning that it doesn't seem as if it would actually be said that way in reality, but instead is merely a way to get to a point being made.So there are a few stodgy scenes that bring the film in whole down from greatness, to being very good. That doesn't mean it isn't a good film, as it is, just a few missteps along the way.This isn't due to the emotional yet illogical behavior of the leads. Of course, logically we know that the relationship for Hal and Maddie is pretty well doomed to fail just as her mother's did, but such is the nature of people in love, even with a love based upon first impression physical attraction. So the ending of the two lovers going to meet in Tulsa on separate transports is quite telling and foreboding. That in itself nearly wipes away all of the weak scenes.

horsedreamer-486-936009 Top rating of the film with one major flaw. This film was originally released in anamorphic (widescreen) and 4 track stereo. All of the DVD releases use pan-scan, which in today's world is ludicrous. You can view the widescreen on Netflix watch instantly when it is available, but if you buy or rent it in it's currently available versions, you get only half of the incredible cinematography. Why would they destroy such a wonderful film? I believe that in order to experience a film of this stature, one should at least be able to see all of what Joshua Logan intended. Aspect ratios aside, this film is a remarkable experience, especially the soundtrack by George Duning. Novak is perfect for the role, and to be realistic William Holden is a bit old for the role of Hal. The subplot romance between Rosalind Russell and Arthur O'Connell just about steals the show. James Wong Howe's spectacular cinematography is the final touch to a really great Hollywood version of the Broadway play. Dated, yes, but still beautiful.