|
|
Charade
Pardon me, darling, but could you take all that witty repartee and just shove it up your ass?
1963
Review: November 11, 2008
Director: Stanley Donen
Starring: Cary Grant, Audrey Hepburn, Walter Matthau, James Coburn, George Kennedy
Not really.
THE SETUP:
Woman's dead husband gave her a lot of money—and she has to find it before three killers do.
DISCUSSION:
I had bought this a while ago on a 2-movies-for-$1 DVD from the dollar store. Apparently this movie fell into the public domain after someone forgot to add the copyright symbol on the final print! Gotta be careful with that stuff. The result of getting this disc from the dollar bin, however, is that I have surely located the very worst print in all existence, looking like it is being projected on the bottom of a scum-filled lake, the audio emanating from underwater, too.
Anyway, we open with a guy being thrown off a train, then a passable credit sequence by Maurice Binder, who is best known for doing most of the James Bond opening credits, as well as those of Barbarella. It is directed by Stanley Donen, who directed all the non-music parts of Singin' in the Rain. We join Audrey Hepburn as Regina Lampert at a French ski resort, confiding in her friend that she's going to ask her husband Charles for a divorce. She meets Cary Grant as Peter Joshua, and they flirt. She returns to Paris to find everything in her apartment gone. Her husband sold everything at auction and took off—and was killed. That was him we saw getting chucked off the train. All he left her was a small bag, the contents of which are small and unremarkable, but include several passports from different countries. At Charles' funeral, three men, each unknown to Regina, come in and, in various ways, test to make sure that he's dead. And who should also be lurking around her in Paris? Why, it's Cary Grant again. Wrinkly, 61-year-old Cary Grant.
The next day she is summoned to the American Embassy, where she meets Walter Matthau. He tells her that her husband stole a quarter of a million dollars with the help of three men—which are the three men Reggie saw at the funeral. Anyway, they're all convinced that she has the money, and are going to try to kill her. She doesn't really take this seriously until, during a date with Peter, two of the thugs come after her. The thugs are played by George Kennedy [of the Airport series], James Coburn, and Ned Glass. She's trusting Peter with all this information and the whole story—although you at home may be thinking "But she just met this guy"—and then it turns out his name isn't Peter, and he's after the money, too! Trust me, I haven't given that much away.
It goes on, adding numerous twists and growing intrigue. One thing that is a constant until the final quarter, in which things start turning more toward full suspense, is this light comedy tone alternating with the scenes of peril or intrigue, and those are jam-packed with cutesy 60s repartee that you either just adore or find unbearably tedious. More twists, more turns, more murders, many reveals, hidden identities, a long subway chase, and we finally find out where the money was, who everyone really is, and what's going on. It all comes to the expected suspenseful climax.
Many people love this movie, and I suspect if you are a Grant or Hepburn fan, you'll probably like it as well. Me, not so much. I'm not that into either of the two major actors, and I just can't get into that whole urbane ironic 60s comedy/thriller vibe, so every time Grant and Hepburn would divert from saying anything with content to toss off their witty repartee, it just stopped the movie dead for me. I was trying to get into the suspense aspect, but found all the comedy and debonair romance stuff distracting from that. Ultimately it turns out to be a fairly decent suspense story with a reasonably clever twist, but you have to get through [what feels to me like] a lot of runaround to get to it, and by that time it might not even be worth watching. I was wondering if I would have turned it off if my friend hadn't been present—there certainly would have but extensive fast-forwarding.
This movie was remade by Jonathan Demme as The Truth About Charlie, with Mark Whalberg and Thandie Newton. I have to say I'm somewhat curious to see it now—Whalberg seems all wrong to step into Grant's shoes—but, you know, not THAT curious. Anyway, if you're into that whole 60s glamour thing with the romantic repartee—sort of Hitchcock crossed with a romantic comedy—go for it. If you'd be happier with the real suspense of straight Hitchcock—go for straight Hitchcock.
SHOULD YOU WATCH IT?
If you dig that whole 60s romantic repartee, and even if not, I don't suppose it can hurt too much.
