Python Hyena The Way We Were (1973): Dir: Sydney Pollack / Cast: Barbra Streisand, Robert Redford, Bradford Dillman, Lois Chiles, Patrick O'Neal: An opposites attract romance where the male cannot commit himself yet he can sleep with the woman in question. Romance reflecting upon nicer times that grow into loveless empty worlds. Barbra Streisand plays a political activist and Robert Redford plays a Hollywood screenwriter whom she knew long ago. They get reacquainted and romance blooms but they share different views on political issues. Directed with insight by Sydney Pollack who previously made Jeremiah Johnson and They Shoot Horses Don't They? While his talent brings out the theme, the screenplay blemishes the theme with its formula driven romantic drivel. Streisand plays her role with zest and intelligence but when she becomes pregnant Redford is unable to be there thus concluding upon bypassed responsibility. Redford is a fine actor but here he plays a guy who is unlikable and unsympathetic. Supporting roles are also flat with Bradford Dillman and Lois Chiles among others basically filling space. This film isn't very romantic by any means but it does feature the inspiring vocals of Streisand within the film's signature song. Although its romantic themes diminish it does reflect upon missed opportunities and moving on with hidden regret. Score: 5 ½ / 10

disinterested_spectator This movie begins in 1944. Katie runs into Hubbell, a good-looking guy she met in college and whom she had a crush on. But as she is rather homely, her love for him was hopelessly unrequited. She invites him up to her place for a cup of coffee, but he is so drunk that without realizing what he is doing when he comes out of the bathroom, he gets undressed and falls asleep in her bed. She gets naked, slides into bed with him, and encourages him. Without really knowing what he is doing, he has sex with her, and she hopes he knows it is Katie he is making love to. But by the next morning, it is clear that he has no memory of what happened, and he merely thanks her for letting him sleep there.In evaluating this scene, we must do so from the vantage points of three different periods: the end of World War II, when the scene took place; the early 1970s, when the movie was made; and the twenty-first century, when we watch this movie today. In other words, each of these three different periods will tend to yield three different moral judgments about that sex scene.But first, let us reverse the sexes. By today's standards, if a man were to have sex with a woman while she was too drunk to know what she was doing, that would be rape, for she would be in no condition to consent. However, in accordance with twenty-first century egalitarianism, we would not limit it to just a man doing that to a woman. Rather, we would say that if one person had sex with a second person when that second person was too drunk to know what he or she was doing, then the first person has raped the second person. This allows for the possibility that a woman could rape a man, a man could rape a man, and a woman could rape a woman. In other words, by today's standards, Katie raped Hubbell.In 1944, when the scene took place, if it had come to light what Katie had done, no one would have called it rape. Katie's behavior would have been condemned, but not as an act of rape. Rather, she would have been regarded as a slut, in that she had sex without being married. And in no way would Hubbell have been thought of as victimized.In 1973, when the movie was made, the people who made this movie probably did not think of it as rape either. And given the fact that it was made after the sexual revolution, what Katie did would not have been condemned as slutty either. In other words, the audience of the early 1970s would not have been inclined to condemn Katie at all.In fact, the people who made the movie in 1973 probably had no idea that over forty years later this scene would challenge our willingness to apply a single standard to both men and women when it comes to rape. In other words, if a man who takes advantage of a drunk woman can be charged with rape and sentenced to a year in prison, should the same sentence be given to a woman who does that to a man? In particular, if "The Way We Were" were set in the twenty-first century, would we say that Katie should have gone to prison for what she did to Hubbell?Some people might argue that since she and Hubbell later fell in love and got married, that made it all right. But suppose a twenty-first-century Hubbell were to realize what happened when he woke up the next morning. And let us further assume that this twenty-first century Hubbell was outraged and felt disgusted by what happened. Under those circumstances, should Katie spend a year in prison?I confess that I have a double standard concerning rape in such a circumstance. First, I would find it hard to believe that even a twenty-first century Hubbell would be all that put out by what she did. And second, I would not want to see Katie go to prison in any event.But my views are not important. What is important is that this scene in the movie, imagined to take place today, tests our willingness to apply a single standard to both men and women in such cases. Most people I know, after some hesitation, will admit that they would not want to see Katie do hard time.

Davalon-Davalon I was relatively young when this film first came out. I, like many others, thought it was great, and loved Streisand and Redford and the theme song. I recently saw TWWW again, nearly 40 years later, and my opinion has changed dramatically. I cannot deny that Redford and Streisand definitely seem to have some kind of chemistry. And, as I felt the first time, Barbra represented every ugly duckling, gay or straight, who somehow manages to capture the prize. Via Barbra's performance, we can easily imagine what it must have been like to lie down with a prince. This, I think, may be one reason why the film had a certain level of success. Barbra also had moments where she "spoke the truth" with passion and intensity. I think people related to this outspokenness, this gutsiness, this willingness to take chances and not apologize for one's opinions. Barbra was also the "outsider" -- she was the smart Jewish girl who knew she had to work harder, study more, and fight for what she wanted, because nothing would come to her easily. It is for these reasons why I think the movie resonated. But the reality is: The movie is not about anything, not really. What, exactly, is the plot? They meet in school, they meet years later, they fall in love, they get married, he has an affair, they divorce, they meet again... okay, so what? Barbra, who does have tons of talent, but in this film looked like she was performing her graduate project for Acting 101, spends a lot of time arguing and getting upset about things. But whatever those things are seem to be only tangentially connected/related to the rest of the story (if you can call it that). Bob, yes, stunning to look at, coasts through the film with little to do or say. He didn't want to do the film, and I can see why. Yeah, he looks great, but what is the emotional arc of his character? A lot was cut from this film and as a result, it seems disjointed. There is an inordinate amount of time spent on Bob's career as a screenwriter in Hollywood while a pregnant Barbra tends to their little beach house. And yet everyone seems miserable and unhappy. Voices were raised, but nothing really happens. Near the end when Barbra has apparently given birth to their child (after it's clear that their relationship is over), Bob shows up at the hospital. Barbra is perfectly coiffed and made-up as if she's just come back from a spa. He stands there, emotionless, ready to abandon her and their newborn child. We're supposed to like him? I couldn't stand him. In fact, James Wood, who we meet early on in the film, who seems to be Barbra's quasi-boyfriend in college and who seems to support everything she was trying to do, is clearly a better man for her--but he wasn't as handsome. Life is cruel, isn't it? Finally, the theme song: Yes, it is a beautiful song for what it is and Barbra sings it beautifully. Who knew that it would become an iconic song and help define her career? She didn't even want to sing the song--she felt it was too simple. She had to be talked into it. So, finally, in the end, what are we left with? A unique opportunity to see Barbra and Bob dressing in period costumes, lots of bad, bad lighting, a plot-less rambling "story" that does not stay any one place long enough for us to care about much of anything, lots of intense arguing and challenging others from Barbra, and lots of stoic looks from Bob. And yet, it was a big hit. Like I said at the beginning, it was Barbra's "ugly duckling" status and "landing the prince" that I think resonated with a large part of the audience. At least it did with me... back then. At this point in time, I just kind of stared at it in amazement and said, "What exactly is this all about?"

tavm When Marvin Hamlisch died several weeks ago, I suddenly found myself wanting to watch this movie, having never seen it before but reading and hearing about it over the years and what a classic it was. So I added it to my Netflix list of DVD's for delivery. The famous song that Hamlisch wrote with lyricists Alan and Marilyn Bergman with Barbra Streisand's vocals is here but in a different version than the one I heard on the radio over the years which had a more contemporary '70s vibe than the more orchestral version played here. Such a touching and memorable song that was and hearing it in the score quite frequently in the picture made the whole thing almost perfect. I said almost because, as many of you reading this probably know, director Sydney Pollack had cut a couple of pertinent scenes that, when I watched the accompanying short doc that was also on the disc that showed these sequences, made sense why things happened at the end when they did. I mean, watching the film without them made things a little confusing but still had a bittersweet romantic effect that still gave a somewhat touching climax due to the talents of Pollack, Streisand, Hamlisch, and especially leading man Robert Redford. The whole period from the late '30s to the '50s was so fascinating to look at and Arthur Laurents' screenplay was awash in dialogue that was to die for especially between Barbra and Robert. Really, all I'll say now is The Way We Were is still something worth seeing and thinking about afterwards...