Customer Reviews

A Fine Madness

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Sean Connery sinks his teeth into a full-blooded comic role as a nonconformist poet suffering from writer's block and alimony collectors in mid-1960s New York. The film's madcap style is a bit dated but there are many gems of scenes in this satire of the misunderstood artist in cultureless society. Watching Connery drink and snarl through a poetry 'recital' at a ladies' tea is hysterical, and his little dance on the Brooklyn Bridge is among the revelations. It's interesting that 'A Fine Madness' makes a point of being a NYC movie, and an offbeat one at that, with its bawdiness hinting at the coming sexual revolution and featuring an international superstar who had the energy to stretch himself in something risky--which is more than we can say for most of today's typecast stars.

Sean Connery plays a poet suffering from writer's block (incapacity to write something one feels is a finished creation, sort of; or not being able to write at all). He's the (supposedly) unrecognized genius and is as a by-product also totally different than most other people: he sees the world through different eyes, or so to speak. This is, alas, not portrayed as I would have liked to see; it's only more or less stated/presumed.

Next to this he does not pay his bills, is unemployed and not seeking for work, or, if he has a job, losing it easily. And he goes from one woman to the next ... they flock to him, he thinks, so they're not his problem. Samson Shillitoe (Connery) is, in short, sexist and insensitive. He also has the habit of almost-hitting his wife whenever he feels like doing that.

He only wants to work on his poem, and he needs, above all, time and rest. Neither seem to be available in considerable quantities, especially not if the past keeps getting in the way.

Lots of problems, but they're in the case of A Fine Madness tackled with comedy. While I thought the film was at all times amusing, certain scenes stood out. One other reviewer (there are at this time only 3 or so; you'll find him/her) mentioned the poetry recital. Good material!

I just hope you like the style of this film. Somewhat dated, yes, but what do you want? This is how old? From the sixties? I forgot.

Sean Connery sinks his teeth into a full-blooded comic role as a nonconformist poet suffering from writer's block and alimony collectors in mid-60s New York. The film's madcap style is a bit dated but there are many gems of scenes in this satire of the misunderstood artist in modern society. Watching Connery snarl through a poetry 'recital' at a society tea is hysterical, and his little dance step on the Brooklyn Bridge is among the revelations. It's interesting that 'A Fine Madness' is very much a New York City movie, and an offbeat one at that, with hints of the coming sexual revolution and starring an international sensation who had the energy to stretch himself against typecasting--which is more than we can say for most of today's action stars.

Connery was sort of the Johnny Depp of the Sixties/Seventies in that he was a handsome leading-man type who always was trying to break loose from the "Bond" straightjacket by choosing offbeat, interesting, "challenging" roles when he wasn't saving the world as 007. (The only place Connery wouldn't DARE go back then are the fey, semi-gay characters Depp will occasionally take on. Sean had/has WAY too much "Scottish Macho" flowing through his veins to "go gay"! It would be like John Wayne or Clint Eastwood playing gay!) Anyway, he tackled this against-type role of rollicking, blue-collar poet Sampson Shillitoe. (Albeit, Gawd knows, Shillitoe is a strutting, bristlingly macho, overloaded-with-testosterone, thoroughly HETEROSEXUAL poet---sort of what Norman Mailer would be if he was a poet & not a prose writer.) When the role was somewhat customized in this way to suit Connery's screen persona, he succeeded in pulling off a bravura comic performance. As previous posters have mentioned, highlights are his hilariously disastrous, drunken recital at some high-society Ladies' Social Club & his explosive display of feeling-the-touch-of-God creative joy on the (Brooklyn?) Bridge. The macho/near abusive attitudes toward women are now very dated (as they now are in the early "Bond" films), but the movie is definitely a keeper, a nearly-forgotten, flawed gem.

There was a type of movie character in the mid to late 60's--particularly in British films--the egotistical, sexist charmer--the British cad, if you will. He appeared in comedies as well as comedy-dramas. Peter O'Toole in WHAT'S NEW, PUSSYCAT? (1965), Michael Caine in ALFIE (1966) and Albert Finney in CHARLIE BUBBLES come quickly to mind. 1966's A FINE MADNESS is an attempt to cash in on this trend as Sean Connery made another attempt to branch out from his Bond role. The idea, however, is rarely, successful, as Connery was already too well identified as an agent of Her Majesty's Secret Service, to make his aggressive, boorish poet, believable, let alone sympathetic. And having a loud-mouth though innocous wife in Joanne Woodward by his side, doesn't help. That is the main problem with the movie. He is unsympathetic and WE DON'T CARE--not even for the Woodward character who should have left him a long time ago. Certainly with the domestic violence done for comic-effect, this film would not be remade today. What director Irvan Kershner was trying to say exactly with this screen adaptation is anyone's guess. There are are number of good moments and I like the cast, but in the end it is too long, ill-paced and just not funny enough.

The DVD includes a very short documentary of Connery behind-the-scenes in downtown Manhattan. Thers is a shot of a place called "Fascination" which was to reappear in a quick shot as Robert De Niro drove his cab in TAXI DRIVER. I have been "fascinated" ever since as to what this business establishment is.

I saw this film in the 70s on TV and didn't really think much of it then and still don't today. This was Sean's first major break from the Bond typecast, and although well intentioned, it just doesn't quite work. The film is really not all that funny.

Based on Elliott Baker's novel, Connery plays frustrated New York poet Samson Shillitoe who's is suffering from writer's block. Unfortunately, Samson feels it's his duty to make everybody around him suffer as well. He's a self-centered sexist and arrogant jerk! Women constantly swarm to him even to the point of taking their clothes off in front of him out of nowhere (a scene I'll go into detail later.) So, he's always cheating on his wife Rhoda (Joanne Woodward played to the hilt) as well as threatening to hit her everytime she tries to help him. Furthermore, he gets drunk and insults a women's auxillary group who hires him to read for them and was willing to pay him $200 that he needs for back alimony.

The core plot involves Rhoda's attempts to get professional phsyciatric help to cure Samson's writer's block. Something Samson loathes. The treatments fail even when surgery is induced and Samson is his usual arrogant and violent self. He smashes furniture and punches just about anyone who gets in his way and even throws Rhoda down a flight of stairs! And this is supposed to be played for laughs. Believe me, I'm not one for political correctness but as said before, this all just doesn't work very good.

The only scene that raised my eyebrows and gave me some serious chuckles happens early in the film. Samson, at this point, is working as a carpet cleaner and is assigned to working at an aerospace firm. He is under the charge of the president's secretary Miss Walnicki played by the great character actress Sue Ane Langdon, an actress who can play ditzy bombshells better than anybody else back then. Sexual innuendo is all over the place here. Samson refers to himself to her as "Hank Longfellow", use your imagination. After some of Samson's poetic charm, he manages to woo her into taking off her clothes and she ends up lying naked on her boss's sofa in his arms. The camera then pans over to sounds of lovemaking to the carpet cleaning machine while it oozes bubbly suds. Again, use your imagination. With the suds leaking out into the main office area, the office staff barges in on them with Miss Walnicki screaming in embarrassment as they all gasp. This scene led to Sue Ane doing her only nude photo shoot for the July 1966 issue of Playboy (the film actually had her in just panties, the Playboy pictorial had her fully nude.) From this point on, the film just bogs down into plain silliness with only a few laughs.

The DVD is well presented with very good picture quality, Technicolor is very vibrant here. As for sound, the mono soundtrack is quite solid highlighted by a good jazz score. Not much for extras except for a trailer and a brief original featurette on Connery.

All in all, director Irvin Kershner's (later of Empire Strikes Back fame) first shot and Connery's first ex-Bond shot was a nice try, but again, just doesn't quite work. Close, but no cigar.

At the very least you can say that the makers of "A Fine Madness" attempt something different. That's not to say they hit a bulls-eye,though. Their ambitions are higher than their success rate. They attempt to skewer the artistic mindset and the psychiatric profession but the humor in part is too manic to truly succeed. That said there are enough laughs here to give the film a qualified recommendation. Sean Connery is inspired as the poet disguised as a brawling, boozing, womanizing, blue-collar guy. Or is it vice versa? Joanne Woodward is Connery's match as his supportive long-suffering wife. There are any number of amusing setpieces here: Connery dressing down the ladies' auxiliary, Connery's confrontation's with the process server(John Fiedler, "Mr. Peterson" from the old "Bob Newhart" show), Connery playing the psychiatrist recordings of an unfaithful wife to her unsuspecting husband. A mixed bag, but give this film credit for aiming high and just missing the mark.

Made in 1966. The film depicts several aspects of that eras norms. If one considers cheating husband, spousal abuse, unethical psychiatric practices, and labotomy not entertainment then then movie is not for you.

I loved Joanne Woodward and Sean Connery (and everybody else) and I loved this movie. It was the purest of fiction. But it was a delight. Joanne Woodward I had to say was the best of them all with Connery following close behind and everybody else excellent. I didn't like seeing Bibi Osterwald playing a shrew and I thought it was a low blow giving her penultimate billing in the final credits. Did you recognize Clive Revill (sp?), he was the brain surgeon in this and the original Fagan in the Bway production of Oliver. Also the narrator (I guess, I only heard the album) in the Bway production of Irma La Douce. Much more sympathetic characters both. I had a ball watching this flick. And it was full of familiar faces.

Sean Connery played hard and won with this delicious , ironic and bitter comedy about a poet in the middle of a crisis .
The script is full of surprises and the presence of Joanne Woodward make of this film of Milton Katselas a collector item .
If you want to make an original present to someone you love, try with this . It impossible for you to fail .