Harry Berlin (the one and only Jack Lemmon) is taken home by his college pal, Milt (the inimitable Peter Falk) to meet his wife (comedienne Elaine May, who was too rarely seen). But what are Milt's ulterior motives? In New York everything is on quid pro quo basis.
I love wackiness. I love the bizarre. I love movies that are weird with characters who are off the wall (in a nice way) and who spout lines that are so deliciously odd they might've been beamed in from outer space. So why don't I love "Luv"?
Lemmon's character grows so increasingly peculiar and unpleasant one wonders how he ever got voted "Most Likely to Succeed." With the internal dating it would've been in the late 1940s to 1950. After World War II, with serious-minded young draftees returning from having their lives disrupted by Hitler? He'd have just missed the war but I can't see him achieving anything.
In the years before I graduated high school a fellow at my prospective University ran as student body president with a bag over his head. Calling himself "The Unknown Candidate" his sole platform was abolishing student government as a sham. He won in a landslide. That was in the bizarro 1970s. I can't envision a man with this many hagups (many seemingly related to his childhood) being thought likely to succeed by anyone. He should have a net thrown over him. Affectations that work on the stage often are dumped for movies as being downright dumb. Why not this time?
I never saw the play, but apparently Alan Arkin was Harry. They should've used him. He might've brought insights Lemmon missed. And it maybe feel some sort of early "In-Laws" vibe between Arkin and Falk. Alas.
Peter Falk, on the other hand, is great. Weird, yes, but with the sort of weirdness we've come to expect from his characters. He's the best thing in the picture.
Frankly, all the characters are too unpleasant (as in the Monty-Pythonesque one-upsmanship they pull about who had it harder growing up: how did such unstable people get into college at all in the post World War II era)?
Then there are the shots of New York. I'm a country boy, born and bred. New York means nothing to me. If I hadn't had friends I trust who had been there I might not even believe in the place. The shots of Niagara Falls are impressive, though.
I'd be lying if I said "Luv" didn't have good ideas and some really great lines. I laughed a few times. But--!
I love black olives. I know a guy who can't stand them. It's a matter of taste. And I find "Luv" distasteful.
I love wackiness. I love the bizarre. I love movies that are weird with characters who are off the wall (in a nice way) and who spout lines that are so deliciously odd they might've been beamed in from outer space. So why don't I love "Luv"?
Lemmon's character grows so increasingly peculiar and unpleasant one wonders how he ever got voted "Most Likely to Succeed." With the internal dating it would've been in the late 1940s to 1950. After World War II, with serious-minded young draftees returning from having their lives disrupted by Hitler? He'd have just missed the war but I can't see him achieving anything.
In the years before I graduated high school a fellow at my prospective University ran as student body president with a bag over his head. Calling himself "The Unknown Candidate" his sole platform was abolishing student government as a sham. He won in a landslide. That was in the bizarro 1970s. I can't envision a man with this many hagups (many seemingly related to his childhood) being thought likely to succeed by anyone. He should have a net thrown over him. Affectations that work on the stage often are dumped for movies as being downright dumb. Why not this time?
I never saw the play, but apparently Alan Arkin was Harry. They should've used him. He might've brought insights Lemmon missed. And it maybe feel some sort of early "In-Laws" vibe between Arkin and Falk. Alas.
Peter Falk, on the other hand, is great. Weird, yes, but with the sort of weirdness we've come to expect from his characters. He's the best thing in the picture.
Frankly, all the characters are too unpleasant (as in the Monty-Pythonesque one-upsmanship they pull about who had it harder growing up: how did such unstable people get into college at all in the post World War II era)?
Then there are the shots of New York. I'm a country boy, born and bred. New York means nothing to me. If I hadn't had friends I trust who had been there I might not even believe in the place. The shots of Niagara Falls are impressive, though.
I'd be lying if I said "Luv" didn't have good ideas and some really great lines. I laughed a few times. But--!
I love black olives. I know a guy who can't stand them. It's a matter of taste. And I find "Luv" distasteful.