BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

JasparLamarCrabb A frank, very adult look at a marriage on the verge of destruction. George Segal is a not so successful graphic artist married to very efficient homemaker Eva Marie Saint. He has his hands full with a wife, a girlfriend, two children, ambivalent clients, and very little money. Segal is exceptional in a role that is really perfect for his particular befuddled angst. Saint is every inch his equal, slowly realizing her husband's unhappiness, but not shy about letting him know the door is always open. Whether she actually will kick him out is debatable. The supporting cast includes David Doyle, Keenan Wynn, Roy Scheider and, briefly, Sterling Hayden. Directed with his usual sure hand by Irvin Kershner from a script by Don Devlin. The expert cinematography is by the great Gordon Willis.

RanchoTuVu Even George Segal himself acknowledged that he had a bland screen presence (Halliwell's Film Guide-1995). Most people wouldn't list him as one of their favorite actors. However, he was definitely okay for this film. Segal's character in this movie is quasi-tragic, a talented commercial artist and a family man, married to adequately attractive Eva Marie Saint and with two cute, wise-cracking daughters. Why he seems to want (or needs) to throw this away for drinking and women makes for somewhat compelling viewing, and leads to a great climax at a party for a lot of sophisticated art types on a very cold winter's night, in which first a lot of drinking and then temptation lead to one of the better conclusions you're likely to see.

lorelei3 I just finished watch this movie and it was one of the worst 1.5 hrs. I've spent in my life.Let me work backwards on this; when the final credits ran I was so confused by the abrupt ending that I had to rewind just to make sure that the movie didn't cut off the ending. It made no sense whatsoever. Immediately after the fight scene, the redhead just walks away. You'd think she would have said something and wouldn't it have been better if Brooks had seen her standing there?There is no relationship between the viewing audience and the actors, you end up not caring at all about the characters. Oh and don't let me forget the biggest mystery of them all, and this really kills me. The part where the guy goes into the room with the drunk girl -- you know he's going to take advantage of her but there are no repercussions and no one ever knows! Why did they put this in there if the hidden TV cam didn't even catch him?!?!?I beg of you all, don't watch this. The only reason I rated it a 4 rather than a 1 is because of the groovy 70's music and fashion.

wrongjohn I caught this film on late night cable (maybe even the 'romance' movie channel) and it left a deep impression. There is a gap between this type of melodrama in European cinema at the time and the 'revolution' that was happening in American cinema, particularly the suspension of moral judgment outside of epiphany. The main character is having a typical middle age, middle class crisis and we are allowed to see it unfold unencumbered by a personal transformation, a complete crash. This type of screen writing is having a revival in shows like 6 feet under on HBO. I would recommend it to anyone interested in that dark, muddy 1970's American cinema that seems to put the middle class of the 1960's to rest but doesn't become another 'desert road trip' film.