Reviews

I just thought of this film after about forty years and remembered it as a real funny feature picture. So, naturally, I went on IMDb and looked it up.

I was surprised that the first(rotating?)review was bad and remembered how original and funny a story and movie it was.

So, I clicked on "More reviews" and was glad to see that I was right. Maybe the one reviewer was not about to get drafted at the time as I was, and I faced going straight (no pun intended) to Nam.

I saw it with friends most of whom I suppose were straight. Some were filmmakers and we just 'broke a gut' laughing. And the thing is, the entire audience was laughing just as hard in a major Hollywood theater, as they would have in a small art house.

The only (SPOILER)in this review is really not much of a spoiler; it's just describing a neat scene. I just did not want to spoil it for someone lucky enough to see the movie if it is ever brought back. The scene is that funny. So just in case this movie is not re-released for TV or rental, and if tomorrow, Televangilist Pat Robertson is made America's censor, here goes ...

It is the visual that is hilarious. Of course the straight boys have to invite their parents to see their one-bedroom apartment. In the boys deception they have had to leave it furnished just as it had been before their taking possession from the very gay prior tenants.

They were unable to change anything because they were being investigated by the draft board, who did not believe that they were gay, which of course they were not.

When the parents and younger brothers and sisters (I think) walked into the one bedroom, THAT THE BOYS WERE SHARING; I and everyone in the theater were laughing so hard, one could not hear the dialog; that is, if the actors were even talking.

Picture a bedroom decorated like a '30s or '40s musical, or as my late parents used to love .. operetta movies featuring women's themes, with titles like, "Up in Central Park" and "Naughty Marietta" with Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy. Oh, how I hated those films as a kid.

A bedroom decorated so strongly that it shouted-out, "Ths is a women's room."

But what got the most screams of laughter was THE BOY'S BIG RED VELVET BED THAT THEY SHARED ... SHAPED LIKE A HUGE HART!!! I remember that today, forty years later!

Great, funny film; I wish they would bring it back.

If this is the best that the film industry of Canada can do, Hollywood is in no danger.

I gave this made for TV effort a 3 out of 10 only because it was a mild OK effort that was a lot like the Disney films about the adventures of a young teen boy. At least in Canada film-making, they had this thirteen year old's friend a sister, I believe, and not the obligatory thirteen year old's girl friend that the recent year's Disney films mandate, I guess to keep girl's interest as viewers. Give girls the credit, that is not necessary.

It was the really stupid ending that made all the people that I watched it with laugh. I will not commit a spoiler here, suffice to ask why Harry was standing were he was .. and just in time? But the whole ending was a great big laugh, and was so bad that I considered a 1 rating. Maybe we should block our Northern Border, not to keep illegals out, but just movies.

I just saw this film on TV; it just ended moments ago. I was pleasantly surprised by the things brought out about people that exist everywhere.

The only fault that I found with this truly great motion picture was the ending. I am not saying that all great films should have a happy or sad ending or it is bad to have an ending that leaves the thought, "I wonder" ...

What I am saying is that playing fast and loose with so many, many constant flash backs and flash forwards, and then doing the same thing throughout the short, stark ending, can leave the viewer with no idea of what really happens or happened at the end. Is he back with the group session or is that another flash back in the last few seconds of the film?

If that was the purpose, as many films have had an ending that leaves one up in the air; I am not sure that doing it via flash forewords or flashbacks, up through and into the last frames, is really smart movie making. It is like having someone spend hours or days reading a novel, only to find out that the last three pages were not printed. That may tread on ... I hate to use the word here on a great film, but here at the end I felt cheated, by a gimmick.

Other than that I could not take my eyes off the screen.

CONTAINS SPOILERS.

If I had a time machine, I would go back in time and sit at the moveola to make two simple splices. I am convinced that those two splices would make a near classic, a classic.

After Oliver is left alive crouching on the beam, the Artful Dodger picks one more pocket and leaves the area. Great so far.

Then they cut to a wonderful sequence that one would expect was part of the ending, and should have been. Fagin comes down a gloomily lit London Alley.

He stops, facing toward the camera and begins to sing a beautiful and sad song that as I remember talks about how he is now alone and has no possessions left.

Then in a reverse angle we see in front of him the edges of the last buildings and in the gloom, the road wandering off in the distance toward a dreary England.

Fagin continues his song and contemplates his future alone. Then he pulls himself together and starts off. We expect as he just starts to recede down that road that this is truly the end

Then we find that there is a little more. The Artful Dodger steps out nearly blocking Fagin's way. In a delightful song number everything is pulled together, with some really cute business using that recently plucked wallet. Fagin and the Artful Dodger become fast friends again and together they start skipping down that road (singing), becoming smaller using a step that reminded me of Charlie Chaplin going off in the distance, getting smaller; a stutter step that the world all knows so well. Fagin and the Artful Dodger are holding on to each other and getting smaller and we sit back waiting for the end title or the end credits

And so, then what are we handed?

I suppose the director and/or editor thought that they had to show that Oliver was saved, and was not left crouched on the beam. I sure wouldn't have worried about it.

So, they cut to this horrible bright scene with blue sky and white puffy clouds; contrasting and clashing with the previous scene with Fagin and the Artful Dodger. A horse cart deposits Oliver in front of his new home; he gets out with his new father.

It seems that this scene was not only quickly added as an afterthought or maybe as they added it, the director wished they had not shot it; so, quickly they dissolve away from it to the end titles while Oliver is just starting up the steps … uhhhh!!

I have taken my two VCRs and I did two quick end dubs. With two cuts, I eliminated the coming home sequence on one dub, and on the second, I put it between the Artful Dodger's last pick-pocketing and the beautiful ending with Fagin and the Artful Dodger going off in the distance ala Chaplin. Both work well. I like the dropping of Oliver's useless coming home sequence completely, but both help make 'Oliver' a true classic motion picture. My tape now ends differently from yours, and I love it. Try it.