zh34945 Opera Ghost Page2Another point that nsouthern51 made was that David Fowler 'drowns in isolation.' This in fact a bit of a complex statement and somewhat contradictory from the films point of view. This statement seems to suggest, or hint at, that David is either cutoff from the world or is completely unknown to the world or both. Perhaps, both statements are true. Perhaps, both statements are false. Or perhaps, one is true and the other false, or vise versa.Let's return to the film for a minute. David Fowler has known hundreds and HUNDREDS of women and is always looking for more. How can he be so lonely? If he was in-between women, he had the semilive-in girlfriend Courtney Wade. So he always, or almost always, had someone around him at home. If he was lonely, by knowing hundreds and HUNDREDS of women, he surely had telephone numbers to call and surely one would respond. Or reverse it, they could be calling him. With all thoughs women around, he would have to fight them off with a fly swatter or girl swatter. In the work place, we see that he had several assistants. So how can he be so lonely and cutoff? David Fowler wasn't a hermit like Howard Hughes nor an oddity like Glen Gould. From the film, we see that his work was well-known. He lived in L.A. but has a commission in Houston, Tx. So we see that he wasn't just a local artist, but someone who is well-respected on a national level.(This might be debatable.) From Sue the baby sitter, we learn that he is known in academia circles, 'Lipschitz, Henry Moore, and me.' We also see from the film that he wrote a book. I'm sure the book was meant for a national audience and not just one or two copies made for a private edition nor several hundred printed for a local audience. This again proves or demonstrates that he was well-known or was wanting more name recognition and wasn't trying to cut himself off from the world.In summary, do these contradictory statements mean anything? There might be something more going on at a much, much deeper level.When we get into the actual review, we will have to return to these statements. There is a lot to these statements. Like I said folks, this is one of most complex motion pictures ever filmed. This complexity that I speak of is not the complexity of cameras, film, lights, etc., of a "Lord of The Rings" type epic but of an quiet inner complexity ideas the likes of which this film "The Man Who Loved Women" has no equal. There are things going on in this movie that have never been done before and will never be done again. Ever.O.G.

ijonesiii In the style of STARTING OVER, Burt took on another romantic lead in 1983's THE MAN WHO LOVED WOMEN, which starred Reynolds as a confirmed bachelor whose obsession with the opposite sex has driven him into therapy with a female shrink of course (Julie Andrews in a low-key performance). Though not as good as his performance in STARTING OVER, Reynolds does exude a great deal of charm in this film and get solid support from Andrews, Marilu Henner, and in an early and very amusing role, Kim Basinger as the undersexed trophy wife of a wealthy Texan (Barry Corbin)who likes her sex with an element of danger. This comedy that was co-written by Blake Edwards and his own psychiatrist is worth a look.

SolidSnake86XX I just saw The Man Who Loved Women, and I found it to be a rather delightful movie. It's a plot you don't see to often; it's focused on one man and his love of women. The movie may seem pointless, but you'll get it once you see the ending. I won't ruin it here, but it was kind of depressing and unexpected, and looking back on the movie, I enjoyed it much more afterwards than during. It's not the most exciting movie. You won't see any amazing or dynamic cinematography or camera angles that are all to creative. In fact, it seems more like a movie from the '70's than 1983 in the way it was filmed, but if you like the kind of movies that you enjoy much more after having looked back on everything, I think you'll find this a rather enjoyable work.

Henryk von Babenberg It is true that this re-make does not measure up to the French original, but it is still not half as bad as some reviewers make it out to be. In fact it is quite good if you try to disregard the more "American" details. It starts out with a funeral and works its way back from there. Reynolds is enough of a hunk to make the story plausible and Julie Andrews was never more beautiful. All thruout the film, Blake Edwards succeeds in maintaining an infinitely "sad" note, which works excellently and undoubtedly adds to the quality of the film. 6 out of 10 points.