Post by Brad Nelson on Aug 28, 2023 7:44:42 GMT -8
Klute
I should have known by the trite, one-word title. Besides "Casablanca," there are not a lot of great one-word movies. "Klute." Okay, there is Vertigo, Charade, Psycho, Goodfellas, Aliens, Elf, Patton, Predator, Beetlejuice, and Goldfinger. But "Klute"? It sounds like a bad movie starring either Paul Newman or Charles Bronson set in rural Mississippi.
And it was directed by some Paluka (sorry... Alan J. Pakula). Nevertheless, it has some big stars: Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland, and a horribly miscast Roy Scheider as a pimp. Fonda plays a prostitute (not for the Left...a "lady of the evening" in this case). Sutherland is a private detective who is hired to find a missing husband. The prostitute is the connection.
And actually this movie is quite engaging for the first half. But then – bingo – they make it obvious who the bad guy is (and what a trite outcome) and it plays out like a bad TV movie...including a lot of (too much of) psychobabble with Jane Fonda talking to her therapist). One or twice, it worked. But this movie very quickly had nothing else to show or say.
But you get to see Jane Fonda topless so it's not a totally lost cause. This could have been a good film noir with the themes of prostitution and sexual obsession, as well as the theme of a prostitute trying to escape that life. But then the wheels come off of it (all four wheels) as quickly and completely as I've ever seen in a movie.
I should have known by the trite, one-word title. Besides "Casablanca," there are not a lot of great one-word movies. "Klute." Okay, there is Vertigo, Charade, Psycho, Goodfellas, Aliens, Elf, Patton, Predator, Beetlejuice, and Goldfinger. But "Klute"? It sounds like a bad movie starring either Paul Newman or Charles Bronson set in rural Mississippi.
And it was directed by some Paluka (sorry... Alan J. Pakula). Nevertheless, it has some big stars: Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland, and a horribly miscast Roy Scheider as a pimp. Fonda plays a prostitute (not for the Left...a "lady of the evening" in this case). Sutherland is a private detective who is hired to find a missing husband. The prostitute is the connection.
And actually this movie is quite engaging for the first half. But then – bingo – they make it obvious who the bad guy is (and what a trite outcome) and it plays out like a bad TV movie...including a lot of (too much of) psychobabble with Jane Fonda talking to her therapist). One or twice, it worked. But this movie very quickly had nothing else to show or say.
But you get to see Jane Fonda topless so it's not a totally lost cause. This could have been a good film noir with the themes of prostitution and sexual obsession, as well as the theme of a prostitute trying to escape that life. But then the wheels come off of it (all four wheels) as quickly and completely as I've ever seen in a movie.
One reviewer sums it up as, "Some potential here, but mishandled." By all means, watch the first half of this. It really is pretty good...before it drops off a cliff. Fonda apparently got an Oscar for this. Was she that good? No, although she was passable. The Oscar was almost certainly for a "gentle" and "in-depth" handling of prostitution (that is...kinda-sorta normalizing it). You know: "Prostitutes are people too." Yet another cause won, not the acting, per se. But, yes, she's good in the first half before the train-wreck.
Sutherland's job is clearly to insert as little personality into the character as possible. And as sort of a strong, driven, incorruptible man, it works. To have a lead man who isn't bouncing all over the wall is a rarity in any movie and it does allow Fonda's performance to perhaps shine a bit more by contrast.