Barefoot in the Park (1967) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
128 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
The Cast Sparkles In This Neil Simon Comedy
gftbiloxi2 May 2005
I'm no great fan of Neil Simon, but this neat adaption of his popular stage success BAREFOOT IN THE PARK brings a smile to my face--and it probably will yours too. The story is quite simple: newlyweds Robert Redford and Jane Fonda have moved into a New York apartment building peopled by eccentrics... and their own tiny apartment has hole in the skylight, no heat, and you have walk up five flights to get there. Redford, a rather stodgy conservative, takes a dim view of the whole thing; Fonda, who has an excessively happy-go-lucky disposition, thinks everything is great fun. Needless to say, they're soon going at it hammer and tongs.

This is a very contrived, sitcom-ish plot, but the cast carries it well. Although Redford has remained a great star for forty years, his films have been very hit or miss; here he is well cast, and he plays expertly. During this period of her career, Fonda was very much the perky girl-next-door with a slight sex-kitten spin, and she too is fun to watch. But the real winners here are Charles Boyer, as their eccentric neighbor, and particularly Mildred Natwick, as Fonda's mother. Natwick excelled at playing disconcerted matrons, and this is perhaps the best of the many fine, memorable variations of the type she offered during her long and very enjoyable career. BAREFOOT IN THE PARK won't go down in history as a great film, nor will change your point of view. But it is tremendously good fun, a film I've enjoyed every time time I've seen it--and that is a good many. Recommended; you'll enjoy it.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer
65 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
"If you do that, you'll have a happy and wonderful marriage – like two out of every ten couples"
pyrocitor15 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
"I've never seen a young couple so in love," Mildren Natwick fondly croons near the climax of Gene Saks' adaptation of Neil Simon's smash Broadway hit, but by that point in the film we're wary enough to know better. Of course, it's second nature that a drama about a couple happily in love sustaining a functional relationship would never make for thrilling viewing (more's the pity…), but Simon is canny enough to dig a notch deeper than the average relationship yarn, and interrogate why we invest so heavily in the wish fulfillment of successful resolutions to seemingly irreconcilable relationship drama. As such, Barefoot in the Park proves a lighthearted but provocatively probing two-hander, a less urbane Breakfast at Tiffany's or a less acerbic Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? if you will – less iconic than both, but sharp and sprightly enough to not be unworthy of the comparison.

Saks manages to keep his finger on the uniquely liminal state of late 1960s cinema, counterbalancing the more youth-driven, The Graduate-era risqué with a lighter, more Blake Edwards playfulness (I did a double-take at the Mickey Mouse-ing soundtrack on the recurring 'six flights of stairs' gag to ensure I wasn't watching The Party). It helps that Simon's airtight script keeps things ticking along at a jaunty pace, and the mischievous sitcom-esq scenarios which unfold are arguably more endearing and amusing than those of The Odd Couple. Interestingly, although Barefoot in the Park is billed as a comedy, in spite of in spite of Simon's plentiful zingers and the sparkling performances of Jane Fonda and Robert Redford, the proceedings become increasingly bittersweet, as hindsight lends the perspective of how incompatible their relationship is (it's poignant that Simon wrote the play retroactively based on the dissolution of his first marriage).

As such, the closing inevitable romantic reconciliation and 'marriage means compromise' theme don't sit as well as the average happy ending, as it feels like we've been privy enough to the misfiring mechanics of the couple's relationship to let them get off that easy. If anything, this potentially unsatisfactory resolution, which likely played better on the page, may be testament to the leading actors being almost too good at their parts. The character of Paul, meant to play as dull and repressed, is made almost too likable through the luminescent charisma of Redford, perfectly deadpan snappy delivery and hysterical comedy drunk stylings and all, to not feel like the invariable 'good guy' in the scenario, which threatens to skew the relationship balance and defeat Simon's point. Likewise, Fonda embodies the fun-loving, carefree Corrie with such phenomenal gusto that it's difficult to not find her character quirks play as somewhat overwhelming rather than endearing, or for her second act hysterical drunken meltdown to not play as distressingly, wantonly self-absorbed. It's poignant that we, the audience, are given access to Corrie privately, at her most grounded, where her fears and neuroses are teased out in more sympathetic depth, whereas Redford's Paul only sees her at her most manic and performative – an essentially nuanced, clever ploy of characterization. Ultimately, in the end, Simon's objective is not celebrating Corrie and Paul's inevitable reunion (although Fonda and Redford play the heartwarming, troubled heart out of it) as much as understanding how such problematically imbalanced relationships can be and frequently are pushed to persist, sometimes at the detriment of those involved. Paul's "even when I didn't like you I loved you" quip is poignantly on the nose, and helps redirect audience expectations of fairy tale-style romantic closure to appreciating the moments of joy that come along the way, even if sadly foreshadowing future problems or an invariable eclipse. Will they make it in the end? It's hard to see, even hard to endorse. But, deep down, do we want them to? Yes, gosh darn it, we do, just as they do, warts and all. And maybe – hopefully – that's enough.

If anything, the film's most pleasant twist is its treatment of Mildred Natwick, Corrie's mother. Introduced as if the set up for a one-note nattery, conservative old crone of a character, Natwick defies stereotypical expectations, surprisingly as a dryly 'with it' woman with a world-weary sense of humour and adventure alike. Similarly, Charles Boyer, as Paul and Corrie's eccentric, mischievous, and ambiguously lusty squatting attic neighbour, wins many laughs, but equally surprises with a deceptively complex and human character amidst his wild antics. If anything, Saks' film is more sympathetic towards romance in the winter years, suggesting the surest way of guaranteeing a functioning relationship is to approach one with the hindsight of a lifetime of pain and mistakes. It's hard not to take to the madcap silliness yet odd dignity of their impromptu pairing, and Natwick and Boyer are both hilarious and lovable in embodying it.

Barefoot in the Park isn't perfect, and definitely loses some of its oompf with age, and the onset of other, equally or more nuanced romantic comedies and dramas alike. Nonetheless, Simon's classic remains a pleasantly twinkling, smartly scripted, and on-point dissection of a passionate yet fundamentally flawed relationship, and Fonda and Reford, amidst the stair gags, snowflakes through the skylight, and drunken, Albanian restaurant hijinx, are exceptionally human as its leading duo. Nearly 50 years on, it's still worth throwing caution to the winds and romping barefoot through the freezing grass with them – even if you've got court in the morning.

-8/10
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Romantic comedy as lightweight as they come.
jckruize18 October 2002
This film version of one of Neil Simon's early Broadway hits coasts on the likability of its cast and a lot of classic Simon banter. The gossamer-thin plot, about newlyweds who find out they don't know each other as well as they thought, is only a framework to hang a bunch of running gags about drafty New York flats, endless stairs, oddball neighbors and the like.

Laughs are plentiful, although as in the rest of Simon's work, one is acutely aware that nobody is so quick with the one-liners in real life.

Boy, were they young back then! Robert Redford underplays charmingly as Paul Bratter, up-and-coming lawyer and all-round stick-in-the-mud; Jane Fonda is his new bride Corie, sexy, fun-loving and relentlessly cute to the borderline of annoyance. When you find her schtick getting a little hard to take, concentrate instead on veteran character actors Charles Boyer and Mildred Natwick, who lend spirit and class to their comedic roles.

Perhaps the direction by Gene Saks is a tad stagebound (he directed the Broadway version), and the cinematography a bit muddy, but Neal Hefti contributes another sprightly score that does a lot to compensate. Overall, an undemanding, undeniable pleasure.
28 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I adore this movie
This is just one of those movies that can make you feel better if you've had a bad day. Honestly, it's charming, funny, light and I don't know, just the right amount of comedy and romance. Redford and Fonda are perfect together. This is a truly great comedic performance by Jane Fonda, she's amazing in this movie. Then again I am a stickler for her lighter, funnier work from the 60s. But this one stands out as being genuinely funny and well made. I love all the funny little details, like the tuna fish cans, Robert Redford's comment about "a big cat with a can opener", Jane Fonda's mother, Jane Fonda doing a "Cambodian fertility dance", etc. It is all just too classic for words. Buy this movie if you love 60s cinema and/or its two stars, it's too good.
50 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Agreeable entertainment
Boyo-222 August 2001
You won't roll on the floor laughing but you won't be sorry you spent 90 minutes with the characters on-screen. Very light and easy to take, brought to a nice level of fun by some very talented actors. Mildred Natwick earned her Oscar nomination; I wonder why Charles Boyer didn't get one, too. Fonda & Redford are both so young its hard to remember they were ever that age.

I lived in a walk-up apartment in Manhattan (fifth floor!)and had to quit smoking so I wouldn't have to have an oxygen tank installed on each floor in order to just make it home every night. I enjoyed reading the 'trivia' section about this movie and find it very interesting that the French version had to change the running joke to the 9th floor; since they are also infamous for smoking, one wonders why elevators were not more popular.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Conservatism and revolution
eabakkum30 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
The film Barefoot in the park interests me, because it describes a love affair, and because it has been recorded during the flourishing period of the counter culture movement. It is a time of rapid changes in the social position of women and in the (pre-)sexual habits. Lovers start calling Dr. Ruth. Indeed the film gives a sparking display of the new lifestyle, although the couple has just effected a traditional marriage. Apparently the institution still has a nice ring to it. The male character is rather boring, even in his profession (lawyer). He uses his personality for birth control. On the other hand, the female character certainly has the attitude of a hippie. And what else can you expect from Jane Fonda? Corie (Fonda) loves to break through conventions, rules and authority. Her favorite T-shirt is offensive in 19 states. Thus it is evident from the start that this marriage is forged in hell. Already in the second week Corie complains: "There are doers and watchers", and she is the doer of the two. She realizes her mistake, and wants a divorce. This would indeed have been the logical end, were it not that the narrative is supposed to be a comedy. Therefore her mother convinces her that in a good marriage both partners must give up some parts of their personality. They must support each other. Now Corie comes to the conclusion that she actually wants a sterling and caring husband, that is to say, a watcher. The marriage is saved. In its joyous end the film turns back to the spirit of the gay and conservative fifties, in the days before Doris Day was a virgin. The same can be said about the music, which is still classic. Electric guitar players are meant to deliver pizzas. The film is a recast of a theatrical play, and the melodrama is kept intact. The original theater script is also visible in the lack of dynamics in time and space, and the location of most scenes in just a few rooms. In conclusion, Barefoot is an amusing but not deep pastime (at least, I do not see it). It hovers somewhere between conservatism and revolution. If you ate pasta and antipasto, would you still be hungry?
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The Original 'Dharma & Greg'
frightwig7110 November 2003
As my girlfriend noted before I watched for the first time, this is like the original 'Dharma & Greg.' She's the free spirit, he's the button-down lawyer struggling to adjust to the new world into which he's just married. After six days of a honeymoon at the Plaza, where eyebrows are raised amongst the staff because the young lovers never leave the room, conflicts come to a boil at home when she realizes that her new husband isn't such an adventurous fella. Amongst the number of reasons she compiles to determine that they just can't make it after all: he declines an invitation to take off his shoes, in February, to walk barefoot in the park.

Of course, with your knowledge of romantic comedies about marital discord, you know generally how it all ends. How the conflict is resolved, beginning with some advice from Mother, may seem realistic and true to some. Others raised on self-empowered heroines may think it's a trite sell-out.

There's no question that young Redford fits the bill as Handsome & Charming, but it's a little hard to believe in him as a character who's supposed to be a stick in the mud. Fonda at this point had carved out a niche for herself in Wild, Untamed Belle roles, and she's fine again in that role here. But I must admit it was hard to watch without thinking about Holly Golightly, and imagining a sophisticated presence like Audrey Hepburn in the part, instead. The script also calls for the Mother to comment that she's never seen another couple who looked so much in love, but I really didn't see it. The couple seems at complete odds from their first evening at home. I can't think of a scene that illustrates why the two fell in love in the first place, except that they're both so young & sexy.

It's worth watching for the snappy dialogue, the work by Charles Boyer & Mildred Natwick as Mr. Velasco & the Mother, the chance to admire Redford & Fonda in their youth, and as a nice Neil Simon period piece. But it would be no crime for someone to attempt a better, updated remake. It could be done, and you probably can already picture it.
23 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Mildrid Natwick steals the film
petersj-227 July 2008
This is a superb comedy with a perfect dream of a script and the comedy is genuinely funny. It's one of those rare movies where you can get a real belly laugh. The plot has been very well described by others. Fonda is great and its a pity she did not do more farce because she is perfect and she gives it all shes got. Redford never looked sexier and its impossible not to fall head over heals in love with him. Charles Boyer is superb and the scene when he takes the young lovers and the mother to that incredible restaurant is hilarious. The real scene stealer is Mildred Natwick who is unforgettable. She will have you in stitches. Her under play is brilliant and its a performance I have never forgotten. Why she never got an Oscar for this is beyond me because its the most perfect performance. Natwick was one of America's finest actors and she is deeply missed. Whatever she did she did with distinction. Proof there are no small parts.What a classy lady! You will love this movie but you will never forget Natwick.
44 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Standard Simon
August19916 November 2004
I happen to prefer 'The Odd Couple' and 'The Out-of-Towners' but 'Barefoot in the Park' is good too. Surprisingly, I didn't find it as dated as 'The Goodbye Girl' which I saw recently.

As in all Neil Simon scripts, you'll get the weird situations, the quirky characters and the good lines. (My favourite: "Who lives in 4D?" "A big cat with a can opener.")

True, the movie appears staged, and the 1960s sets are, well, 1960s sets. But who cares. Robert Redford and Jane Fonda were young and attractive. And Charles Boyer steals the show, if that's possible with a Neil Simon script.
30 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Comically entertaining
Sanou_san4 November 2009
I got so excited that Robert Redford did a romantic comedy film with Jane Fonda. Barefoot in the Park was indeed very funny and very entertaining. The story was simple. All the matters with the characters slowly rise. We can see that Corie Bratter (Jane Fonda), from being lovely and cheerful goes arguing and hating his conservative, spoilsport husband Paul Bratter. It was really funny. Robert Redford amuses me the most. He had that accentuated aura that reminded me of "The Sting" and his role in "Butch Cassidy and Sudance Kid". Jane Fonda was particularly witty too in her character. The latest humorous movie I watched about her was "Monster in Law". It took me a little time recognize her character in Barefoot in the Park, because honestly I haven't watch too much yet of her old movies. I must admit however that the first part of the film wasn't too much captivating. It got me bored a little. But when I saw finally Corie arguing with Paul because of their differences and incompatible attitudes, it got me the extreme laughs ever. Truly this is one cute, comically entertaining film of the old times I've ever seen. Highly recommend it.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Great acting and hilarity
barryrd29 November 2009
Barefoot in the Park is one funny movie from director Neil Simon and highlights the comedic talents of two people on the verge of stardom, Jane Fonda and Robert Redford as Corie and Paul Bratter. They are ably supported by Charles Boyer as Victor Velasko, the neighbor, and Mildred Natwick, as Corie's mother Ethel. Herb Edelman is a repairman, whose forays to the apartment bring some hilarious lines delivered with his fine brand of Jewish humor.

The story is dated but the acting more than makes up for it and the repartee between the two major characters is exceptional. Taking place in New York City, a newly-married couple take up residence in a leaky, drafty, walk-up apartment (five storeys up). There is a running gag every time visitors climb the stairway, since they collapse from exhaustion on arrival.

Much in love, Corie and Paul must deal with the fact that they are two totally different personalities. She is a bubbly extrovert and talking machine and he is a rather staid, young lawyer, who must suffer the butt of her jokes. Charles Boyer, a free spirit like Corie, gives Ethel a new lease on life. Following a side-splitting double date with Victor and Ethel,Corie and Paul face a shakeup in their relationship that reaches a finale when Paul becomes drunk and goes barefoot in the park. In this scene, Robert Redford shows his talent, trading roles with Jane Fonda, as he staggers and hops around Washington Square.

It is great to see Fonda and Redford in action just before they made the leap to stardom, not to mention the superb supporting cast. Great fun...recommend.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A brilliant, near perfect comedy
mls418222 March 2021
The writing is superb, the cast is impeccable. As good as Boyer, Fonda and even Redford are, the wonderful Mildred Natwick steals the show.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
If you've already started watching this then I know you're already smiling
1930s_Time_Machine9 October 2023
Although made in the sixties, you could easily mistake this for one of those lovely warm and cosy comedies of the 1930s. Blink and you could see Joan Blondell or Ginger Rogers in that exact role Jane Fonda plays so perfectly here. Her character, the bubbly, feisty excitement-seeking wife of a fuddy duddy was done hundreds of times in countless films in the 30s. And just like in those 1930s movies, we've even got the obligatory sexy girl in her underwear scene! What makes this stand out from the crowd is the complete and utter likeability of its cast.

The massively popular play which this film was based on had been running for four years when this was filmed. You get a feeling that on stage this would have been brilliant and some of that sparkle has been lost a little on its transition from stage to screen. In compensation you do get a lot of scenes in the streets in the park and on the river which add to the nineteen sixtiesness of this. The film is virtually lifted scene by scene from what would have been seen on stage which is usually a recipe for disaster but not here. Unlike some of those atrocious very early 30s and late 20s pictures where they seemed to just stick a camera in front of a stage and hope for the best, this looks great. But like a play, everything mainly happens in one set - the small apartment but that apartment room eventually becomes as familiar to you as to the room you're actually in now - it feels like home! It virtually becomes a character itself. The inclusion of quite a few exterior shots of a very cold looking 1960s New York adds a sense of reality to this and genuinely when everyone is outside you do actually feel cold whereas when they're all back inside...back in what eventually seems like YOUR home..... you are warm and comfortable again.

The humour is witty and amusing rather than hilarious. The story is unoriginal and clichéd and the plot is non-existent but it is still hugely enjoyable. The reason for that is the same as it was in the 30s equivalents when Joan Blondell or Jessie Matthews would be trying to figure out how to make their relationship with some fuddy duddy banker like Warren William work. It's having nice people whom you can relate to. This film must have one of the nicest most likeable bunch of people ever: Jane Fonda, Robert Redford, Charles Boyer and Mildred Natwick are all just so great! And that's really all that this film is about. OK, it's also proving the old 'opposites attract' aphorism, it's a witty and entertaining comedy but if that were all this was it would be a bit lame. This makes you feel for an hour and a half that these charming, attractive and slightly eccentric people might be friends of yours.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Annoying
rioplaydrum20 November 2015
I'm 54 years old. I first saw this movie as a boy and found it amusing. I recently just saw it again. Ugh.

Jane Fonda's character is over the top, insatiable, whiny, out-of- control, illogical, and emotional.

Meanwhile, Redford's character is just trying to go work and get a good nights sleep which is impossible.

And after a mere six days of marriage, she wants a divorce. Please.

It was an absolute pain to watch this movie. Had I bought popcorn, I would have asked for my money back.

This ridiculous story while light-hearted in it's original release has proved on film over time to be an embarrassment to intelligent women everywhere and forever.

You couldn't pay me to watch this ever again. Well actually you could.

But it would have to be a lot.
38 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
remarkable piece of work for anyone looking for simplicity in today's complicated world.
drama_mama207 December 2004
I would recommend this movie to anyone for its simplicity. Though simple and quiet, this movie is stunning. The situation of a young married couple played out almost entirely in their one bedroom apartment adds to this movies basic plot. The nonchalant attitude of a newly married man and his very emotionally free wife is quite exciting. I would normally ask for a lot more from a movie, but in "Barefoot in the Park" it is not needed. The superb acting of both Robert Redford and Jane Fonda leave you stoked for the thrilling dialogs that take place between the couple. There is an abundance of humor. The movie simply leaves you feeling casual in a very glamorous world.
38 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Light but spirited.
gridoon17 November 2000
Featherweight, thin comedy is nonetheless enjoyable and extremely watchable. Predictable, to be sure, with often juvenile jokes and some simplistic "dramatic" moments, but the stars are very appealing and the general feel-good spirit of the film may actually cheer you up. Excellent underplaying by Redford. (**1/2)
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Enjoyable Comedy
whpratt12 December 2007
Enjoyed the great acting by the entire cast in this very enjoyable comedy about two newly weds who are living in New York City and the film starts with this couple riding in a horse and carriage through Central Park where they are staying at the Plaza Hotel. Paul Pratter, (Robert Redford) plays the husband who is a lawyer and his bride is Corie Pratter, (Jane Fonda) who stay six days at the hotel and then they both go to their apartment which is on the fifth floor and there is no elevator in this rather old brownstone building. Charles Boyer,(Victor Velasco) gives a great supporting role as an older man who has been married four times and becomes friends with Corie Pratter. Mildred Natwick, (Ethel Banks)who plays the role as the mother to Cori and she gets involved with Victor Velasco in a romantic relationship. Neil Simon produced a great film and I could watch it over and over again.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
great laughs from Neil Simon
SnoopyStyle24 December 2014
Corie (Jane Fonda) is a flighty and flustered newly married wife to button-down lawyer Paul Bratter (Robert Redford). The newlyweds are deeply in love. They move into their tiny 5th floor walk up NYC flat. Corie's mother Ethel Banks (Mildred Natwick) surprises them with a visit while the place is still empty. Their upstairs neighbor is the quirky Victor Velasco (Charles Boyer). Corie invites him over secretly setting him up with her mother on a blind date a couple days later. It's a wild night of unfamiliar foods and too much drink. Corie loves it but Paul and Ethel can't stand it.

I love the first hour. It is hilarious and filled with gut-busting laughs. The Neil Simon script is fun frivolity. It lost me a little when Corie starts screaming divorce. It's a really sharp turn and it threw me off. It's opportunity for a hilarious fight. The D word is a step too far. I actually love the silent fight while the telephone guy is fixing the phone. The other thing is that the characters indicate more white bread actors. Corie seems to be a princess while Paul really does need to be a stuff shirt. Neither is a description of Fonda or Redford. However it's still early enough in their careers that they could play these supposed bland characters. Both Natwick and Boyer are delightful.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Just married--tin cans not attached.
copper196326 October 2009
A frantic 1960's romantic comedy that is still a vibrant look at a New York City that has all but vanished; however, the movie HAS shown signs of wear and tear of late. I like Redford but I don't get Fonda. She's all over the place; her nervousness bothers me. She handles the dramatic parts in the script fine, but displays a shrill, manic nature in performing the comedic elements. She's, ultimately, too over-the-top for my tastes. I wish the director would've simply yelled "CUT!" once or twice. Charles Boyer, on the other hand, is a godsend from above. Literally. He lives in the building's attic, one flight above the newlyweds. Boyer is fit--looking much younger than his stated age at the time--and his acting chops are sharpened to a razor-thin cut. The small, quirky (the radiator is skyward) N.Y.C. apartment set serves an important purpose: It's the unofficial arena for our trio of thespians to do battle. Joined (later) by Fonda's understanding mother and an agitated telephone repairman, Neil Simon's sly narrative is finally completed. Numerous public conveyances are used to provide color in this movie. The old cars, Checker Cabs, N.Y.C. buses and even the Staten Island Ferry, make classic appearances before the film's final fade out. The ferry takes the two couples--minus the phone guy--to sleepy Staten Island, so they can experience an authentic Albanian restaurant, complete with belly dancing and homemade brew. It's the highlight of the film.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A mixed blessing!
JohnHowardReid6 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
A wonderful film – gay, warm, witty, amusing, lively, delightfully original – right up to the halfway mark. Then the scenario starts to fall apart. Writer, Neil Simon, runs out of ideas, so he stages an unconvincing quarrel. As a result, Jane Fonda – and the audience – lose interest in the proceedings and the whole movie simply goes to pot. There are over a hundred good jokes in the first seventy-five minutes, but there hardy any at all in the last forty-five! Director Gene Saks is of no help. He is obviously one of those directors who believe that direction should be inconspicuous – which it sure is! Fortunately, Joseph La Shelle's Technicolor photography is always pleasing. Much of the film – including the scene at the Plaza Hotel – was obviously shot on location, and that at least is a plus!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
My favorite Neil Simon film
planktonrules31 March 2021
Paul and Corie (Robert Redford and Jane Fonda) are newlyweds who remind me a lot of Felix and Oscar from "The Odd Couple". This is because although they are in love, their personalities are so very different. He's very conservative and rational and she's very much a bohemian. Not surprisingly, once they are married and the honeymoon is over, the reality of how different they are becomes all the more obvious and the marriage suffers a huge hit. Can they manage to work out their differences and find a middle ground or are they destined for divorce?

This film works so very well because the characters are so well written and fun. In particular, Mildred Natwick and Charles Boyer were joys in the film...lots of fun and quite nice support for Fonda and Redford. Overall, a truly fun and very well written picture...one that is simply hard to dislike.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Am I the only one to see this version SECOND?
Chazzzzz29 April 2000
I did not see the original stage play. What I saw, a few years before I managed to catch up with this movie, was telecast on HBO: Barefoot In The Park, starring Richard Thomas and Bess Armstrong. That version was a riot! This one, while having a few outdoor scenes, lost its luster. Both Fonda & Redford seem flat... certainly not up to the energy of Thomas & Armstrong. I haven't found the HBO version in the IMDb, but hopefully somebody with the particulars of the film will be kind enough to add it. I rated this Fonda-Redford version a 7.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the greatest romantic comedies I've had the pleasure of watching.
jv00712 July 2002
Robert Redford and Jane Fonda are both outstanding actors and compensate each other very nicely in this romantic comedy. This movie has all the quality ingredients needed to make it a classic comedy. Redford, as usual, displays great talent enhanced by the school-girl charisma of Jane Fonda. I love it.
16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
My brief review of the film
sol-21 July 2005
Some appropriately highly spirited supporting performances, in particular from Charles Boyer, are the highlight of this pleasant but otherwise quite run-of-the-mill comedy. Jane Fonda tends to go a bit over-the-top, the jokes and puns are often rather obvious and too repetitive to be entertaining, and to top it all off, the end few minutes are awfully silly without being at all amusing. It certainly is not a bad film, though. Some witty dialogue, a few notable performances and some great music bring the film some salvation for what problems it arguably has. Still, it is nothing really special or highly recommended. Nice, not great.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Failed to deliver
audiate3 May 2007
I was surprised to read all the positive reviews above because... I thought this movie really failed to deliver. This film might have made more sense in the 60's when the idea of an independent, free-spirited woman was seen as more 'madcap' (not to mention 'new'), but to a 21st century audience, Jane Fonda's character will appear whiny, clingy, and co-dependent. (When a neighbour asks her what she does for a living, she replies 'I'm a wife'). There are one or two good lines, and of all the performances I thought Charles Boyer's was the best, but it seemed truly surprising that Jane Fonda was nominated for awards for this; at times, her delivery of Neil Simon's lines felt stiff and awkward. Again, this movie may have made a lot more sense in context; 'couple' sit-coms were new. Now, we've seen so many of them, that the bickering between Fonda and Redford seems not funny but tiresome. There are many better films from this period.
23 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed