I Wanna Hold Your Hand

1978 "Some girls will do anything to meet their idols."
I Wanna Hold Your Hand
6.8| 1h39m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 21 April 1978 Released
Producted By: Universal Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

If they missed Beatles' first appearance in the U.S.A. they would hate themselves for the rest of their lives! So four young girls from New Jersey set off even though they don't have tickets for the show! The journey is full of surprises and misfortunes but the young ladies are determined to reach their idols.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Universal Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

SnoopyStyle The Beatles are coming to America to perform on Ed Sullivan's show. In New Jersey, engaged Pam Mitchell (Nancy Allen), Grace Corrigan (Theresa Saldana) and Rosie Petrofsky (Wendie Jo Sperber) are eager to go. Janis Goldman (Susan Kendall Newman) intends to protest their bad music. Grace recruits Larry Dubois (Marc McClure) for the limo from his family funeral business. They are joined by irreverent delinquent Tony Smerko (Bobby Di Cicco). They arrive at the hotel surrounded by a mob of young girls. The group scatters as they try to sneak into the hotel. Rosie finds Beatles collector Richard Klaus (Eddie Deezen).It's a wild wacky time as the teens try to get to the seminal cultural event. The problem starts with the fact that not all of the six characters are friends. This disparate group is itching to come apart and that's exactly what they do. In fact, they scatter into six single individuals. The missing aspect of this wacky misadventure is friendship. The movie concentrates on the crazy hijinx but without the friendship, I don't care. The story could split the group but it needs to keep some of the kids together. The movie fails to deliver the relationships.
Jason Forestein I don't love Robert Zemeckis; he always seemed a shadow of his sage and master, Steven Spielberg. Oscar wins or not, he's simply not as talented as his teacher. That being said, he's had some seriously, delirious high points (Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Contact, and Back to the Future), but the rest of his oeuvre is, well, cloying at best (Forrest Gump) and atrocious at worst (What Lies Beneath). He's a capable mid-level director who was rocketed to superstardom by his association with a true master of the cinematic artform (though, truth be told, Spielberg has missed the mark on numerous occasions).In any event, one could view I Wanna Hold Your Hand as a microcosm of Zemeckis's entire career--frequently excruciating with bouts of brilliance. Where are the lows? How about the saccharine reiterations of the three four central female characters. For the first 45 minutes, the women are defined by repeated phrases that beat into the audience's brain their too-flimsy characters. Rosie loves Paul, Janis loves folkies, Grace wants to take some photos, and Pam wants to get married.Ultimately, the arcs for the former three characters follow predictable patterns. With Pam's storyline, however, Zemeckis finds the heart of this film and creates a lasting tale that, more or less, makes this movie recommended (though not necessarily essential) viewing.Pam's conflict is fairly straightforward until she finds herself in the Beatles' suite. Then something interesting happens--she does something to a guitar that, well, I don't want to mention here for fear of having the post deleted. She cowers in front of that guitar and she shudders. Later, she clenches the hem of her dress in tightly wound fists between her thighs.What Zemeckis finds between Pam's legs is the nascent youth movement of the 1960s. Pam's running away from her betrothed at the end of the film to the Beatles and that funny feeling causing her to quiver, demonstrates the shift from the cleancut, conformist ideals of 1950s America to what would become a more liberating--sexually and emotionally--period in the late 1960s. The Beatles were at the forefront of that youth movement and, here, the rumblings of the movement are present.What Pam reveals in this movie is among the most emotionally and sexually truthful representations of that turbulent decade. I credit Zemeckis for his willingness to not ignore the sexuality inherent in Beatlemania, and I credit too Nancy Allen for an amazing performance. It's a real shame she's never received the recognition she deserves (for this movie, Blow Out, and Dressed to Kill).The rest of the movie, though, is hysterical, in the late-19th century definition of the word. Mostly, it's a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. Bobby Di Cicco turns in a performance that is worth seeing, as he's able to find, by movie's end some level of truth in Smerko's character. And then, of course, there's the overzealous Eddie Deezen's overacting, which is shrill beyond all reason. It's rare to find a performance that strident and, at the same time, ingratiating due to the actor's prowess for physical comedy (again, his physical shenanigans are, well, overblown, but I somehow found them riveting).All in all, this movie really isn't a seven--it's probably a six at best--but I cannot shake those scenes of Nancy Allen nor do I want to. They're probably the most wonderful moments Zemeckis ever contributed to celluloid. For that it gets an extra point.
Lee Eisenberg As someone who never experienced Beatlmania when it first started, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" helps me experience it as best as possible. The plot centers on some teenage girls who want to see the Fab Four on "The Ed Sullivan Show" in 1964. But the movie's highlight is geeky Eddie Deezen as Richard "Ringo" Klaus. His performance alone pretty much carries the movie. Of course, the movie's real star is the music. With all of the Beatles' songs, there's never a dull moment in the movie. Also really funny is Bobby DiCicco as Beatle-hating Tony Smerko; he has some great scenes. It's hard to believe that Robert Zemeckis started here.As an extra note, many of the cast members appeared in "1941" the next year. Needless to say, Eddie Deezen played the same sort of character.
Lucretia (Cosmic_Cre) I have always been a massive Beatles fan for as long as I could remember, but I have to admit that after seeing this film, my love for them went to an even higher level.Let me explain... now, I'm what you would call a late generation fan. I wasn't even THOUGHT of in 1964 because at the time, my mom was only 10 and my father was 12. So, with that said, I don't know anything personally about Beatlemania or what this performance meant to the nation at that time or what it was like just being a teenager during this time. That is, until I watched this movie. Watching this film and the antics of these characters is possibly the closest I will ever come to experiencing first hand what Beatlemania was like. It was like I was an unofficial member of this group of kids as they are trying desperately to get tickets to see the Beatles live on the Ed Sullivan show, all this starting by them trying to sneak into the Beatles' hotel.I loved that Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale made a wonderful dynamic by NOT making all the characters involved Beatles fans which made the film that much more believable. Let's face it... as popular as the band was then(and now), they did have a great number of detractors and they were brilliantly represented in this movie by Susan Kendall Newman as politically driven, Janis who feels the Beatles are nothing but meaningless drivel and Bobby Di Cicco as macho greaser, Tony who thinks they just suck, period. Their presence was a great contrast to the rest of the cast, especially Wendie Jo Sperber as the sweet, cherubic Rosie, the most fanatical of the bunch that at one point of the film, she literally throws herself from a moving car just so she can get to a phone booth to win Beatles tickets on a radio call-in contest. The rest of the cast is rounded out by Nancy Allen as Pam, a bride-to-be roped into this adventure against her will and ends up having fortunate luck of accidentally ending up in the Beatles' hotel suite; Theresa Saldana as Grace, the career minded, future reporter who wants exclusive pictures of the band and will do anything(literally) to get them; Marc McClure as Larry, who has a crush on Grace and is willing to do anything to help her achieve her goal and Eddie Deezen as Richard who is Rosie's equally fanatical partner in crime as they reek havoc throughout the hotel.Another thing I thought was a great direction taken by Zemeckis and Gale was to use Beatle sound-a-likes, not look-a-likes and to have the guys' faces hidden. This decision was terrific for this reason: the casting director could have auditioned actors until the cows came home and NONE of them would have been good enough to play the Fab Four. None. Thank goodness Robert and Bob realized that the power just in the Beatles' voices and music was enough not only to be the soundtrack of the film, but allowed we the audience to imagine the real Beatles instead of insulting us by making us accept four actors that would have most definitely paled in comparison to the real thing. I feel that even attempting this would have seriously cheapened the film and wouldn't have given it the impact that it has. It almost has the feel of it being a sort of time capsule and most certainly shows us the difference between hearing about what happened from someone else and being there. The film made me feel like the latter, like I was actually there.So, long story short, the movie is a must-see for any Beatles fan. It'll make you relive the energy and excitement of Beatlemania or if you're like me, who was not around during this time, will show you first hand exactly what it was like.