bkoganbing Leading roles for senior citizens are hard to come by so when Melvyn Douglas was cast in I Never Sang For My Father of course he grabbed it up. Douglas was enjoying a rejuvenated career on the big screen since 1962 when he got a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Hud. For the 50s he concentrated on the stage and the small screen.The picture we get of Douglas is he came from a hardscrabble background with little place for any kind of charm or social grace. He worked hard his whole life, but all work and no play leave Jack rather arrogant. His wife Dorothy Stickney has put up with him, but love has not been returned evenly to say the least.It was difficult growing up for kids Gene Hackman and Estelle Parsons. Hackman is now a widower and Parsons has her own family. Parsons got out as soon as she could. Hackman who is a university professor never got any encouragement whatsoever. Douglas is really quite ignorant, he does not know what a jungle academia is and what it takes to survive.Then Stickney dies and Douglas gets more cantankerous than ever. Where will they put him, who will get stuck with him. A man who prided himself on always doing for himself won't concede that soon enough he will need help just for day to day living.Robert Anderson's play on Broadway ran 124 performances in 1968 and starred British actor Alan Webb as the father, Lillian Gish as mom, and Hal Holbrook as the son. Anderson got an Oscar nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay for his own work.The Garrison family dynamic is something to see. I Never Sang For My Father got two other Oscar nominations for Melvyn Douglas as Best Actor and Gene Hackman as Best Supporting Actor. Their scenes together fairly crackle, the crackling on Douglas's part with Hackman for the most part going into his defensive shell, but the worm does turn.Next year Gene Hackman would win his first Best Actor Oscar with The French Connection. You couldn't find two more different characters than Popeye Doyle in that film and Professor Garrison here. Hackman never played characters like Garrison for most of his career, they were usually bluff and expansive like Popeye.Old age ain't no fun for yourself and those around you as I Never Sang For My Father shows.

Rindiana Watchable character study in the O'Neill vein though lacking a deeper resonance.The screenplay offers some emotionally captivating moments, though the plot development is much too telegraphed throughout. The dramatic situations work in themselves, but they're slightly too easy, too fabricated. The marvellous acting rings true and elevates the whole scenario.What a shame, then, that the heavy-handed direction tends to over-emphasize the characters' inner turmoils by way of obtrusive scoring, freeze frames, camera movements and the likes.Still worth a look for the Douglas-Hackman sparring alone.6 out of 10 gruesome nursing homes

Psalm 52 What an honest, thought-provoking surprise to view this film after learning it stars Gene Hackman whom I know of through the 70's/early-mid 80's "Superman" franchise. Aside from the knowing writing, and the nuanced performances (Hackman's mother and sister are excellent) the main factor that makes me enjoy this gem is that I strongly relate to the story's main issue: how do adult-children best care for elderly parents AND keep their lives intact? In my real-world version, my mother survived my father and is now, almost three years, living in a "home", but since summer 2000, I've wrestled with the question of how is she-to-be 'best-cared for' while I am in control of my own life. I recommend viewing this as a companion to "Where's Poppa?" which deals with the same topic (adult-children caring for elderly parents) but in a hilarious, upside-down, "Is this happening?" style (both films released in 1970).

tfbrown4 This is one film that has stayed with me since I first saw it; in spring, 1971; in a time before I had to shave everyday. The movie theater in which I saw it has long-since been turned into a touring-company playhouse...and the name of my date has long-since slipped my mind. Not really...but my wife might read this.A friend of mine who is a physician told me that no one ages gracefully. As much as I value his friendship and judgment, Melvyn Douglas must be held as an exception to that dictum. Though his role here is little different from that of Paul Newman's father in "Hud," he plays it magnificently. One can scarcely imagine him as a romantic leading man, although he was...and opposite Greta Garbo, at that. His scene with Gene Hackman at the funeral home is too real and too devastating to pass off as "schmaltz." Gene Hackman has never given a bad performance, and his role here, as the dutiful, though semi-distant son, is (arguably) one of his best. He realizes he must live his own life...though, being a widower himself, he knows on an adult level what his father--suddenly all-too-human and frail--is suffering. He must choose between fealty to the man who gave him life and the woman who now gives his life meaning and passion. The bedroom scene, in which he discusses his doubts with her, is very real. Not every middle-aged adult has faced such choices.I saw this film when I was 17 and have not seen it since. But as I grow older its meaning and significance grows ever-increasingly important. We, all of us, want to gain the approval of our father. Yet, our passions, those things that give meaning to our life, might not be what our father values...and so we share them with others and not with the one whose approval, love, and affirmation we most desire and most need.Is it schmaltzy, as some have said?....Is life?