writers_reign Because life's a bitch and then you die Jim Goldman enjoyed a significantly lower profile than his kid brother Bill, despite being his equal as a writer. I write as a huge admirer of both brothers and the fact remains that excellent as were Robin and Marian, Myself As Witness, The Lion In Winter and They Might Be Giants they somehow lacked the ooomph of Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid, Marathon Man, The Princess Bride and inevitably existed in the shadow of the younger sibling. It's a pity but there you go and so long as we can check out stuff like Robin and Marian, Lion In Winter and this one on DVD it could be worse. George C. Scott can be mannered on occasion but here he lucks into a part that fits him like a glove whilst Joanne Woodward is a consummate actress who can turn her acting chops to anything. The plot is a nice blend of off- the-wall and sound psychology and a good time will be had by all discerning viewers.

calvinnme This is a quirky, oddly affecting comedy about a judge, gone psychotic after the death of his wife, who believes that he is Sherlock Holmes. His brother wants him committed to an asylum, not for reasons of concern, but so that he can become executor of the would be Holmes's considerable estate.A female psychiatrist is asked to interview him for the formality of the commitment but becomes fascinated by the "Holmes" she meets because of his truly extraordinary deductive reasoning. It's apparent that, delusional or not, he may be a genius of some kind, and far more fascinating than most ordinary mortals.The psychiatrist, whose name just happens to be Watson, joins this Sherlock Holmes in his quest to search the streets of New York City for his nemesis, Professor Moriarty. On the way they meet various other people, also largely spurned by society, but, somehow, kindred souls in an otherwise pretty cold world.This strange but intelligent, utterly charming film died a quick death at the 1971 box office, but has found a cult following of sorts over the years. George C. Scott, with briar pipe and deerstalker hat, is virtual perfection in the role of the man who believes he is Holmes, while Joanne Woodward, devoid of her usual glamour, playing the socially awkward psychiatrist who starts to gradually believe in his cause, brings a warmth and touching vulnerability to her role.The film has a few wonderful scenes with lovely little touches. Holmes takes his Watson to a little movie theatre, almost empty but for a few street people, and a makeout couple in the top balcony. Yet the street people there all know him, greeting him with smiles as "Mr. Holmes" at this theatre where he likes to come for comfort and watch westerns.At another unexpected moment a police officer suddenly comes around the corner, spots "Holmes" and a large smile spreads across his face as he says, "Why, Mr. Rathbone, it's an honor, sir," as he reaches over to shake his hand.And, towards the film's beginning, there is a marvelous scene in which Scott, dressed as Holmes, arrives at a seedy asylum where an inmate is being abused by an orderly. There's a low angle camera shot of a towering Scott/Holmes as he struts through the hallway unruffled, dispassionately disarming orderlies who try to grab him, then proceeds to analyze the mind of the abused patient in a manner that has the patient's doctor (Watson in her first encounter of him) in almost open mouthed admiration.The film's final scene will undoubtedly baffle many viewers because of its ambiguity. It's a moment that is clearly open to interpretation. But I think that scene, and this film, are about the soaring human spirit, and a belief in one's self even though logic and all around you may tell you that you are wrong.

Charles Herold (cherold) I love this movie. I'm not sure I can claim that, objectively, this is a great movie. It's a very good movie, with an interesting story, terrific performances by George C. Scott and Joanne Woodward, excellent, witty dialogue with some wonderful lines ("I think if God is dead he laughed himself to death.") But still, it's a rather slight movie, parts of it (mostly what I'd call the "reality parts" are under drawn and some might not care for the way the tone floats from very slapstick to thoughtful and back again. And it is an absurd portrait of psychiatry.But so what? This movie is exactly the kind of movie I like. The idea of being able to wander randomly and find a series of fantastic characters and situations is terrific (and very New York, where it takes place, although I didn't know that the first time I saw the film, before I'd ever been there). I love the way Scott's version of reality dove tails with actual reality (although as I say this is not always fully developed). I love the good hearted-ness of this movie and it's suggestion that sometimes there really is more than the brain can imagine. I love the ending, which is thoughtful, and the score, which has a quiet melancholy. I love the Sherlock Holmes deductions and the quirky characters.I love this movie.

readinglips Just because there are big names in front of the camera (Joanne Woodward, George C. Scott) and big names behind it (Anthony Harvey, directing his first film since LION IN WINTER; written by James Goldman, author of LION IN WINTER; exec produced by Paul Newman/John Foreman Co.) does not make this film any less of an amateurish effort. If it had been made as an indie production, critics and audiences would treat it with derision. As it is, audiences must have laughed it off the screen when it first came out.The actors do their best and the production values (photography, sets, etc.) are fine. But as a film – or even as a story – there's nothing there. Cervantes tilted at windmills because "they might be giants." He was an idealist and also a looney. So is Justin Playfair (the George C. Scott character), who thinks he is Sherlock Holmes. There are some scenes of utter embarrassment: Ms. Woodward preparing for dinner; the parade of people walking through midtown New York in the dark of night; and especially the ending (in a Pathmark Supermarket), among others, that leave you asking, "WHAT were they thinking?" In the end, we hear nothing except that idealism should be contagious. And that parable has been told many times before and in far more interesting (and entertaining) ways.