Petulia | | Cast : | Julie Christie, George C. Scott, Richard Chamberlain | | Director : | Richard Lester | | Studio : | | | Format : | | | Released Date : | June 10, 1968 | | DVD Released Date : | | | Language : | | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON | Customer Reviews
| Rating |      | | Date | July 16, 2004 | | Summary | THE WILD....WANTON....WONDERFUL....PETULIA | Content
 | PETULIA is a heart-breaking drama about disillusionment, confusion, and emptiness, found within relationships during the personal and cultural upheaval of the l960's. George C. Scott plays Dr. Archie Bollen, a responsible physician, who abandons his marriage in pursuit of personal pleasure and freedom. Julie Christie, plays PETULIA, a fascinating, highly-spirited woman, bored in a miserable marriage, who heads out in hot pursuit of some excitement. Richard Chamberlain plays David, PETULIA'S rich, physically gorgeous husband, who is shallow, angry, and physically abusive. These pitiable, unhappy, people find each other, but are so disillusioned and full of pain, they are unable to connect on a meaningful level.
The decade of "FLOWER POWER," defined by Janis Joplin, The Grateful Dead, communes, free-love, pot-smoking, and personal rebellion, seduced it's free-spirited young with promises of intense psychedelic pleasures, but to their dismay, it delivered only more disillusionment, confusion, and meaningless relationships.
George C. Scott and Julie Christie were magnificent, but this film is in my library, because it stars my favorite actor, Richard Chamberlain. This was a crucial film in the talented actor's career, as he had just suffered some disillusionment himself, with the premature demise of BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S, a play in which he had been cast with the fabulous Mary Tyler Moore. Though it's problems were not caused by the young actor, tragedies of this sort can seriously affect a career. Richard Lester, the film's director, had seen some of Richard Chamberlain's earlier work, and knew he was perfect for the role of David. The powers that be at Warner Brothers were apprehensive, but Lester believed in Richard Chamberlain, fought for him, and defiantly cast him in this movie. The talented, and ever professional Chamberlain, did not disappoint. Richard was sensational, as the shallow, self-absorbed David, and Lester was very pleased with his performance. It gave the promising young actor's career renewed credibility, in a highly regarded, successful movie. This film was another stretch, another profile, another challenge for Richard Chamberlain, but to his fans, it was an amazingly, sensational performance, that would lead the way for three more decades of extraordinary, unforgettable work, and beloved, cherished characters who live on in our hearts. |
| Rating |      | | Date | January 09, 2004 | | Summary | Barbara Turner's Break-Thru Screenplay | Content
 | I saw PETULIA years ago & although I remembered liking it very much, I don't really think I "got it" before. But I recently saw it again & this time it really hit home. I got it for background research because I just wrote up an interview with screenwriter Barbara Turner about her new film THE COMPANY. (For all the talk about Richard Lester in this thread, no one's mentioned Turner's contribution as if, what -- it wrote itself?) It's no wonder Pauline Kael didn't like it. Great as she was in many ways, Kael was not particularly sympathetic to women's issues (or women filmmakers for that matter), so her review seems to miss the central point: Petulia is a battered woman trapped for economic & social reasons in a brutal marriage. Amazing stuff for 1968! You can read my interview with Turner on www.films42.com if you're interested. Among other things you'll learn that Robert Altman was originally supposed to direct PETULIA. Imagine that! |
| Rating |      | | Date | January 21, 2003 | | Summary | A masterpiece film on several levels. | Content
 | Richard Lester's hazy "Petulia" is Top Ten list material, in my opinion. More the prototype for Soderberg's "The Limey" than even "Point Blank" was, this film is a masterpiece of fractured time, subjective narration, and non-linear editing. "Petulia" tells the story of two very different people whose lives irrevocably intersect in a vague search for place and self in the 1960s. Lester claims to have shaped "Petulia"'s characters as symbols of 1960s America, and yet rarely has the cinema offered such complex and three-dimensional characters. The title character in particular, played by Julie Christie, is a young "kook" recently married into comfortable wealth, and whose behavior is not only unpredicatable, but erratic to the point of schizophrenia. George C. Scott's Archie is a rather serious doctor in the midst of a divorce (he terminated his marriage, he says, because he'd tired of being "a handsome couple") and making a rather forced effort to enjoy new bachelorhood. In the opening scene, Petulia tells Archie, "I've been married six months and I've never had an affair." After much discussion, but no kissing, Archie and Petulia decide, almost out of resignation, to have an affair. What these characters take from each other is a very complicated thing, which I can only describe as brief protection from what seems inevitable loneliness. Certainly they're an interesting pair. Über-critic Pauline Kael describes Julie Christie's portrayal of Petulia as "lewd and anxious, expressive and empty, brilliantly faceted but with something central missing, almost as if there's no woman inside." I couldn't say it better myself. George C. Scott's Archie is a brilliantly understated masculine foil to this Petulia. Richard Combs wrote of him in Film Comment as representative of a type "reduced to inertia, impotence, terminal ambivalence by the fact that they see too clearly and feel too keenly the compromises that society demands." Kael is quite hard on this film. I'd characterize most of her criticisms of "Petulia" as reactionary, but because she's Pauline Kael, they're worth hearing out. Kael writes of "Petulia" as a "come-dressed-as-the-sick-soul-of-America-party." Though certainly there's a heavy dose of 60s existential angst, I'd say one of the most striking things about "Petulia" is its characters' refusal to fit neatly *as characters,* much less as archetypes, or even to operate at the service of the narrative (as you'd expect of people who are, frankly, figments of that narrative). This works brilliantly with the film's themes of disillusionment and confused identity in a time of both personal and cultural upheaval. "Petulia" was filmed in San Francisco at the tail end of the Summer of Love and released in the wake of youth movements that exploded throughout the west in `68. Rather than showcasing the socio-historical import of the era, Lester soaks up all the disillusionment of a major letdown. (Kael calls "Petulia" Lester's "hate letter to America.") In "Petulia," free-spiritedness reveals itself as irresponsibility, passion gives way to rage, and self-preservation is confused for selfishness. Consequences loom large over Archie and Petulia. Antony Gibbs' editing is key here. Flashes backward and forward in time and memory weave throughout "Petulia." Brief ellipses of violence, guilt, and regret interrupt and even haunt the narrative like irrepressible thoughts and compulsive memories. Again, Archie and Petulia cannot confrom to the narrative - their very thoughts disrupt it. Gibbs' editing almost dictates the film's style more than Lester's direction does. Its also one of the things Kael most strongly attacked. "The images of `Petulia' don't make valid connections, they're joined together for shock and excitement," she said. The rant goes on, saying Gibbs' editing was "the most insanely obvious method of cutting film ever devised; keep the audience jumping with cuts, juxtapose startling images, anything for effectiveness." On paper, this is a valid criticism of fractured, cubist editing. But in the particular case of this film I think the editing's value skyrockets as a means of getting deep inside our two main characters. But moving on, "Petulia" is above all a film about people *within a time and place.* "Petulia" is cluttered with electric razors, remote-controlled fireplaces, elevators, and other gadgets of better living. Archie in particular is given real depth by his consistent placement in mininal steel-and-glass interiors. (Nicolas Roeg's photography is very much in line with what he did once he began directing.) Archie's apartment is both grand and modern with high ceilings and walls that glow with white sleekness. Occasional pieces of abstract art decorate the space, pieces one can imagine Archie hand-picking with conviction but little interest. Archie's presence sits somewhere between strong, understated strength and classical refinement. Archie's time with Petulia is clearly the most significant of his forays into bachelorhood and into the zeitgeist of the day. Richard Combs correctly notes that Petulia becomes "the measure by which everything else falls short." It's difficult to speak on how well the two personalities get along, except perhaps to say that each is certainly changed for its time with the other. There is true and painful awkwardness in every interaction in "Petulia," due largely to the obligations attached to each character's role in each relationship. The reality of each character's unique responsibilities to each other character in the film becomes downright oppressive - fascinating in the context of what was to be remembered as the height of glorious irresponsibility. Petulia, in part a representation of the carefree lifestyle associated with San Francisco in 1968, is no more free of these roles and their responsibilities than Archie is. The great accomplishment of Petulia and Archie's relationship is its attempt to transcend these roles. When the two decide at the film's opening to have an affair, it seems as though they've gravitated to one another partly for the total lack of context for their relationship. As such a pair, they could be, and certainly try to be, heroes of a modern landscape that separately, and ultimately, they are confined by. |
| Rating |      | | Date | August 21, 2002 | | Summary | IMPETUOUSNESS | Content
 | This film is unbelieveably great both stylistically and in its story of how "The Pepsi Generation" of the late-1960s put reckless impetuousness at a premium- which can lead to throwing away one's marriage one instant, and then changing your mind about it the next. This is Richard Lester's greatest flick. "Hard Day's Night" was great, of course, but here you get a jump-cut style that includes both flashbacks and premonitions- it seems a very hip style and is suited to the subject matter of the film. And the shots are brilliantly composed- very dramatic visuals. Also, you get about a minute and a half of the Dead playing "Viola Lee Blues", in their psychedelic heyday- complete multi-media experience. And, in one scene Garcia and Weir appear amongst what are supposed to be the "neighbors", who are rubbernecking a denizen of their turf being carted off on a gurney. The neighborhood is Telegraph Hill, San Fran.- thought to myself: "why aren't these guys in the Haight-Ashbury?"- brcause they wanted to be in the movie! Also, it has George C. Scott giving his usual great performance. And Julie Christie is believeably kooky. Buy this one, man- one of the greatest all-time of celluloid creations. For real. |
|