Customer Reviews

Two for the Seesaw [VHS]

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The first time I watched this, I was captivated by Mitchum and MacLaine together. I was engrossed with their love story. The second time I watched this movie it stuck me a little bit more profound then just a love story.

Mitchum plays a man, who is dissatisfied with the life that had coddled him, tired of accepting what people handed out to him. He feels as if he has been given a life of luxury at the cost of his own independence. He is tired of taking and wants to give what he has to offer.

Then we have MacLaine. A somewhat innocent and a bit naive woman who has a heart as big as the city she lives in. She gives and gives with no thought or expectations of reciprocation. She is strong and independent. Yet, she is afraid to need someone, to love someone, to let someone give to her.

Then these two meet. Mitchum at last has something to offer someone, enjoys giving what he has, and taking care of someone else, instead of him being taken care of. MacLaine finally has someone to unravel those walls of independence and allows herself to need someone. It's a beautiful relationship that really reaches out to me.

Not only that but Mitchum and MacLaine are magnificent in it. I love the fact that this was filmed in black and white. Color would only distract and add unnecessary noise to the message this movie brings to the viewer. So do these two live happy ever after? Watch it and find out. :o)

Like Helen Morgan's "Applause", the film version of "Two For the Seesaw" gives its viewers a seldom seen look at the real theatre world of New York City in the 20th Century. This is a gritty, realistic love story on the cold, hard streets of New York that somehow is still able to show the real romance of the giant city. Not unlike the neo-realism of Fellini, Viscounti and Pausolini, "Two for the Seesaw" shows how actors and artists romatically collide with everyday people as they barely hang onto their dreams. Shirlely MacLaine lived this life before "The Pajama Game" and probably had friends like Gittel Mosca who were still striving for greatness long after MacLaine was a star. And Robert Mitchum, always surprising in roles in which he seemed to be wrongfullly cast, was never better. All this superior quality is magnified in the beauty and clarity of black and white. Don't read the following reviews. Those people have never been in love and working in the theatre in New York. I have and know how right-on this film is. It should be on DVD in widescreen. I've copied it off TCM and treasure my VHS in letterbox.

Robert Mitchum and Shirley MacLaine star in "Two For The Seesaw", which is a movie that I enjoyed very much. It's refreshing to see Mitchum in a softer (and non-violent) role. (Although, Bob does manage to get in one good whack in this film. But, Shirley gets him back [twice] later in the picture.)

Mr. Mitchum was a very busy actor in the early 1960s, with "Seesaw" already representing his 8th film during the still-very-young decade of the '60s. The first seven being: "Home From The Hill" (1960), "A Terrible Beauty" (1960), "The Sundowners" (1960), "The Grass Is Greener" (1960), "The Last Time I Saw Archie" (1961), "Cape Fear" (1962), and "The Longest Day" (1962).

With just one film in between, Mitchum went from portraying hardened criminal "Max Cady" in "Cape Fear", to his role as a gentle lawyer in "Two For The Seesaw". Mitch's superb versatility was never more apparent than in those two 1962 films.

MacLaine and Mitchum are on screen for very nearly the entire 1 hour and 59 minutes here, and (IMO) treat us to some very good, on-target, realistic dialogue. And the ending was a bit of a twist, which is another big plus.

One line in the script that I particularly thought hit the mark was when Shirley berates Robert with: "Who needs to work THAT hard if things [in a relationship] are going right?!". Makes good sense. There are several clever lines like that in the film.

As I watched this film, I kept being reminded of "The Hustler" (1961), which is very similar in pace, style, and looks. The small confines of the drab apartments and the overall dark visuals are very much the same in both movies.

The black-and-white "Seesaw" premiered in movie theaters on November 21, 1962, and was one of 41 films directed by the distinguished Robert Wise (with "Seesaw" being sandwiched between two of his other highly-notable directorial efforts -- "West Side Story" in 1961 and "The Haunting" in '63).

Featuring two standout acting talents and one of the best directors in the biz calling the shots behind the cameras, "Two For The Seesaw" is certainly a motion picture worth seeing.

The William Gibson play-cum-film Two for the Seesaw was on TCM recently, and being a Robert Mitchum fan I wanted to see it. Not to mention Shirley MacLaine (yes, she's been around forever!), Robert Wise (his first post-West Side Story direction) and Andre Previn doing the music.
But little did I know that the music and the cinematography (by Ted D. McCord) would be the best part of this film. Both were nominated for Academy Awards, they stand out so much-not that Mitchum and MacLaine, who dominate this two-hander almost totally, were terrible, to the contrary-that the movie became more of a celebration of New York in glorious black & white, and the jazz score a stunning evokation of the tumult of star-crossed love.
I certainly was surprised by Mitchum's settled and reserved performance here, as a seperated wandering Nebraskan lawyer who falls hard for a younger dancer. His characteristic muscularity or physical imposition is covered by a sharp suit the whole time, and the internal strife of his instability-which is only exacerbated by MacLaine's Gittel, her immaturity and vibrance-combined for a distinct performance in the Mitchum canon. MacLaine by the way is very cute and spunky here, sharp and vulnerable, & but for her nasally whim and inflections, she is also excellent.
But the cinematography of Ted D. McCord and the music of Andre Previn are the highlights here. In fact I later realized that Two for the Seesaw was on TCM because of it's brilliant cinematography, scheduled along with To Catch a Thief, Black Narcissus, A Farewell to Arms, all of which won Oscars for cinematography, and The Facts of Life, which was also nominated....

I decided to watch "Two for the Seesaw" because it starred Robert Mitchum and I must say that this is one of his better movies. His strong, forceful "man in control" persona comes through very well. Unfortunately, that's the major problem I had with "Two for the Seesaw" because the lead male role calls, in my opinion, for a more bewildered man. Consider the plot's premise; A middle-aged lawyer from Nebraska comes to New York City to escape his marital problems at home. He meets a Greenich Village-type woman who's his complete oppostite and they attempt to have a normal relationship. I looked up the history of this play and Dana Andrews as well as Henry Fonda (a REAL Nebraska fellow) played the part on stage. Without knowing for sure, I presume that they brought a humorous sort of "Gee Whiz" bewilderment at not only the big city but the strange folks that live there. I presume that this made this comedy a funnier presentation than Mitchum's "ho-hum, nothing gets in my way" approach. With his leading role, the rest of the cast had to put together whatever humor they could salvage. Maybe I'm missing the playwrite's purpose; maybe he meant to show a man buckled under by others controlling his life who becomes a person looking for someone he could control. I think not.

OK that's out of the way, now for the positives. Mitchum and MacLaine work very well together and create a very interesting relationship. As I said, this is one of his best "Robert Mitchum" preformances. There is a good supporting cast but it's essentially a two person show. There is a soundtrack that is outstanding. Whoever was playing that trumpet has a knack for jazzy blues. I was absorbed in the movie but I kept thinking that someone was coming on too strong. Apparently the director, Robert Wise, didn't think so.

To my knowledge this film didn't receive good reviews when it was released. I believe its because its downbeat and slow. The good points are there is true chemistry between Mitchum and Maclaine (lovers in real life). Both characters are "losers" thrown together out of a need to relieve loneliness. Mitchum, as the divorced, flunky lawyer, and MacLaine as the lost, free spirit are a joy to watch. Believable. Don't expect a typical ending!

I'm frankly astonished at the number of negative reviews of this film, but I think I may know the reason why. First of all it seems that all the DVD's out there (the only non DVD-R versions, like Amazon offers, are Region 2) are cut down to full screen instead of giving us the very effective use of the original widescreen. Sin one, as the exceptional camera work drew an Oscar nomination for Best Cinematography.

It also appears that the DVD version may have been edited to de-emphasize the pretty blatant sexuality and passion, as it seems to have been marketed after the Sixties as a light hearted romantic comedy. Sin two. It's hardly funny. It's a serious, heart wrenching drama.

I just watched the original version on TCM and was blown away by it, especially by Shirley Maclaine's compelling performance, for which she also received an Oscar nomination.

Perhaps we can someday look forward to a restored version of the original work. This film deserves it.

Very powerful stuff.

For every exigent situation in life that ends in happiness, another ends in tragedy... Life IS a zero sum game. Only two pictures in my life, have moved me to tears....Two for the Seesaw is the second one. The other moved me on a more superficial level, for a death of a young love is almost unthinkable. That movie was LOVE STORY, and at that time I was young and in love, when death is imponderable. This movie leaves both protagonists alive, but both of them with a hurt inside, that will never heal. It would have been easy to let MacLaine and Mitchum live happily ever after. But, that would not be real life, which is a series of unrequited loves that ultimately fail, interspersed with new loves that(look at marriage statistics and factor in all the bad marriages that stay together for children, family, societal mores,etc.) most often fail again and again. Evolution is not the best way to propagate a species, just the most efficient. Evolution works great, until you add a large frontal lobe to the brain.

I always am amazed when someone uses the phrase " against type" For example , Robert Mitchum, against type stars in " Two for the Seesaw" with Shirley MacLaine.

" Against type" thats another typical media throw away to enable any writer to let readers know that he/she has an encyclopedic knowledge of an actors body of work. That knowledge , however is mostly superficial and absurd in its merits

Robert Mitchum was a truly fine actor( when he "was" around he would chuckle with the use of any other adjectives..I,m sure)

Mitchum was always capable of giving a performance.when required. For a guy with a photographic memory it was easy.He was a natural..and didnt give a damn about the rest of it. Now, some 37 years later we should take another peek at " Two for the Seesaw" Is there anything profound being said in this film..no..but is there a reality of character and performance..that few more recent films have attained..without blaring soundtracks..and absurd closeups....You Decide!!

CP

I remembered watching "Sweet Charity" when I was just a teenager. I am now well into my fifties and I decided to revisit this movie. What I remembered was it's visual style, I couldn't remember the story, but after watching it again I had to conclude, that was really all it had. The story was a little story and the musical was too much, and all I can say watching the movie years later, I felt like I was wasting my time. Shirley MacLaine, made an early career of being a cute dumb sweet innocent, but by the time she performed in Sweet Charity, she seemed too old for the part. She managed her extremely energetic dance scenes , but the energy came from a work ethic, not from the exuberance of her youth. Her love interest played by Oscar Lindquist who, was just about perfectly cast, didn't help the movie in any way. It didn't draw me in although it still had great dance sequences and Edith Head outdid herself with the costumes; in the end all the extremes with the audio and visual elements just buried the story. Recently I saw the same little story again, in the movie "Two for the Seesaw". The director, Robert Wise, regretted that Robert Mitchum, was cast in the role of Jerry, the callow youth from the Midwest who runs away from his velvet cage, to try to become his own man. How old was Mitchum when he made this film? Obviously he was much too old for the part, too strong of a character, with a voice much too deep and powerful to say the words demanded from the script. I have read that MacLaine wasn't authentically Jewish enough although I loved her performance in this movie. I guess the characters in "Two for the Seesaw" are essentially at odds with the script, but what wasn't at odds with the script was an emotional story. The emotional story was that Shirley MacLaine, in this movie was a sweet young innocent, yet could create an empathic connection with a man, that was all wrong on a physical and cultural level for her. Robert Mitchum was a man who fell for a much younger woman from the wrong side of town, and the movie brings out the realities of why it can't work. The dialogue was all about Jerry's emotional inability to leave a twelve year marriage, but this could easily apply to an older man's inability to leave his wife of many years. He complains that his wife has over mothered him, but Mitchum's desire to take care of MacLaine seems authentic from paternalistic point of view. Mitchum's despair and loneliness, is something many older men experience as they confront what they have made of their lives, with real emotional regret. The casting of this movie should have made it unbearable to watch, but it was a delight to watch, and I have to conclude, the reason is because the emotional chemistry between Mitchum and MacLaine was telling it's own story outside of the lines of the script. Years later MacLaine confides she and Mitchum started an affair that lasted well past the filming of the movie, and that chemistry ultimately makes this movie succeed, and without it, makes "Sweet Charity" fail. "Sweet Charity" has MacLaine in the lead roll, but she is the wrong woman for Oscar Lindquist on all levels. It is very hard to believe that Shirley fell in love with Oscar, and so all Sweet Charity has is some grand dance numbers, and costumes.