Tag Archives: Mike Nichols

Working Girl-1988

Working Girl-1988

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Melanie Griffith, Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #748

Reviewed April 26, 2018

Grade: B+

Released during a decade known for excess, fun, and light comedy films, especially during the latter half, 1988’s Working Girl was a blockbuster hit at the time, and in modern times is perfectly nestled as an identifier of the decade itself.

This can be both good and bad with both a dated feel and also a whimsical, basic good girl versus a bad approach that is appealing.

The film is romantic comedy fluff but is entertaining and features lovely views of New York City- one of my very favorite locales.

The film is directed by Mike Nichols, known more for the heavier subject matter (1966’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf and 1967’s The Graduate). His leading of the picture, as well as all-star casting, surely made this film better than it ought to have been.

Tess McGill (Melanie Griffith) commutes via the Staten Island Ferry each morning into vast Manhattan where she holds a secretarial job at a Wall Street investment bank.  When she has a bad experience with one of the brokers, she is reassigned to a female boss, the assertive Katharine Parker (Sigourney Weaver).

After Katharine steals Tess’s business idea and passes it off as her own to get in good with handsome Jack Trainer (Harrison Ford), Tess is determined to reveal the truth as a triangle develops between the three individuals.

In tow are Tess’s best friend Cynthia (Joan Cusack) and her cheating boyfriend, Mick (Alec Baldwin) in supporting roles.

Working Girl feels overwhelmingly like a “1980s film” and while relevant at the time and kindly nostalgic, the film does not hold up well in modern times, rather seeming to be suited for a time capsule, unlocked from time to time for kicks.

The most garish example is the hideous hairdos that Nichols has Tess and Cynthia don- frizzed out and caked with aqua net hairspray is over-the-top even for the 1980s.

Then there are the inevitable tacky outfits complete with bright colors and shoulder pads as the girls hustle to their dull jobs. With these costume tidbits in addition to the filming style the tone just screams the 1980’s.

The casting of the three leads is very good- Griffith, Ford, and Weaver all share nice chemistry and the clear rooting value is for Tess and Jack to live happily ever after- with Katharine as the obvious foil.

The conclusion of the film is of little surprise, but as a romantic comedy, this is standard fare. The point is that the relationships are dynamic and the ride is fun. Griffith is quite breathy and seductive in her role- a clear homage to the talents of Marilyn Monroe in her 1950s-era films.

Never known for great acting, Tess is the role of a lifetime for Griffith. Weaver sinks her teeth into an against-type villainous role and Ford is dashing and charismatic as the leading man.

My favorite parts of Working Girl, and the strongest aspects of the film, leaving an indelible impression even after all of these years, are the sweeping camera sequences of New York City featured throughout the film.

Lots of scenes were shot in neighboring Staten Island, but the best shots of all are the luminous skylines of Manhattan that encompass the opening sequence and later, viewpoints from the corporate offices.

There we see Tess on the Ferry heading across the Hudson River all with the wonderful soundtrack song by Carly Simon, Let the River Run, playing in the background. The soothing tune and the approaching mammoth city set a nice tone.

The story itself is a sort of rags to riches, Cinderella-style experience from the point of view of Tess. Taking night classes to better herself and clearly, a blue-collar type battling the giants of the corporate world and the more sophisticated Katherine (she speaks fluent French!) is an enormous draw of the film to sustain mainstream audiences.

Corporate greed versus the little guy is an adept comparison here. Almost borderline fairy tale, the fact that Tess gets the dashing Jack (in real life he would undoubtedly be with Katharine) makes the film good, escapist fare.

The working-class Staten Island versus the sophisticated Manhattan is another theme worth mentioning.

Thirty years beyond its original release. 1988’s Working Girl now seems dated, dusty, and of its time like many similar style films, but does still contain some of the enjoyment undoubtedly beholden to it at the time of release.

A film that is fine to take out of the vault, dust off, and enjoy for some good escapist cinema and a predictable story of good overcoming bad.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols, Best Actress-Melanie Griffith, Best Supporting Actress-Joan Cusack, Sigourney Weaver, Best Original Song-“Let the River Run” (won)

Closer-2004

Closer-2004

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman

Scott’s Review #605

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B+

Closer (2004) is a very odd, offbeat sort of film, yet it is strangely fascinating and reels you in as the story unfolds and more is revealed. One will become engrossed in the characters as the film is rich in nuanced character development.

Closer is very adult and not for everyone, but if you enjoy character-driven films this one is worth checking out.

Based on a play of the same name and featuring a star-studded cast to go along with several Oscar nominations, Closer tells the story of companionship, isolation, and betrayal.

It centers on four characters, (Anna-Julia Roberts, Dan-Jude Law, Alice-Natalie Portman, and Larry-Clive Owen), each of whom spends the film either bedding, scheming, or jealous of each of the others.

Purely a character study, we see many different emotions from each, which is the film’s strength.

To the film’s credit, it is shot much like a play, however, is just a tad on the slow-moving side.

However, I adored the London locales, and the film’s successful attempt at making the viewer uncomfortable and just a tinge disturbed.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Clive Owen, Best Supporting Actress-Natalie Portman

The Graduate-1967

The Graduate-1967

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Dustin Hoffman, Anne Bancroft

Top 100 Films #48

Scott’s Review #335

555221

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

The Graduate is an immeasurable success and highly influential comedy from 1967- a time when films were gaining creative freedoms and pushing the envelope in new, edgy ideas and risqué subject matters.

Almost scandalous at the time of release, the film holds up exceptionally well after all these years and remains fresh and cutting edge.

It is slick, sophisticated, and quite funny, though peppered with dark humor.

Thanks to Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft, the film works and is among my favorites of all time.

Hoffman plays Benjamin Braddock, a nervous, insecure recent college graduate, who returns home to sunny California unsure of what his future will hold.

His overbearing parents throw a lavish celebration at their home where Benjamin is flocked by well-wishers, most of whom have a materialistic edge to them. His parents live in a very affluent community where wealth and items are of great importance.

All Benjamin wants to do is be by himself. At the party, Benjamin is pursued by the much older and glamorous Mrs. Robinson (Bancroft), who lives nearby and asks Benjamin for a ride home.

Her attempted seduction of him kicks off the meat of the film and how their relationship progresses, especially when Mrs. Robinson’s daughter, Elaine (Katharine Ross), enters the picture and steals Benjamin’s heart.

Director Mike Nichols successfully sets the right tone for the film and we see the style and the sophistication of wealthy California in the 1960s.

Fashion, style, and glamour are prevalent, but they go against what Benjamin and Elaine, stand for.

The film is also an exploration of generations. Benjamin’s parents and all of their friends are into material things cars, houses, and parties.

The triangle between Benjamin, Mrs. Robinson, and Elaine is the heart of the film. At first, we find ourselves rooting for Benjamin and Mrs. Robinson. There is a sweet nature to their romance. She is the aggressor- mature, in control, and confident whereas Benjamin is insecure and shy, yet enamored with Mrs. Robinson.

Their awkward exchange in the hotel bar and their liaison in the hotel room are fantastic scenes.

Slowly, once Elaine emerges, Mrs. Robinson becomes manipulative, more of a villain-type character, as the youngster’s love blooms and we begin to root for their happiness.

A fantastic aspect of The Graduate is its musical soundtrack- completely done by Simon and Garfunkel, a major musical duo of the late 1960s. From the opening chords of ‘The Sound of Silence’, to the appropriate ‘Mrs. Robinson’, music adds much life and energy to the film and was successful at attracting young viewers at the time.

The featured soundtrack was highly influential to other films released after The Graduate.

Still fresh today, The Graduate (1967) launched the very successful career of Dustin Hoffman and emerged as an inspirational film that, controversial in its day, seems tame now, but the writing is as crisp as it ever was.

A film to watch over and over again.  

Oscar Nominations: 1 win– Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols (won), Best Actor-Dustin Hoffman, Best Actress-Anne Bancroft, Best Supporting Actress-Katharine Ross, Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Cinematography

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?-1966

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? -1966

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton

Top 100 Films #41

Scott’s Review #200

1120753

Reviewed December 3, 2014

Grade: A

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? directed by Mike Nichols (The Graduate), is a dark film based on the play from the early 1960s.

Thankfully, by 1966, the Production Code had been lifted, allowing for edgier, darker films to get made- think The Wild Bunch or Bonnie and Clyde from the same period.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is dreary, bleak, and with damn good acting by all four principles.

George and Martha (Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor) are an associate history professor and daughter of the college president respectively, living in a small New England town.

They have a bitter love/hate relationship.

One night they invite young newlyweds, Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis), a new professor and his wife, over for drinks at 2:00 in the morning.

From this point, a destructive night of verbal assaults and psychological games ensues with damaging and sad results for all parties involved, as their personal lives are exposed and dissected.

At the forefront are George and Martha, who have a relationship based on insults, neediness, secrets, and booze. After an evening out, they return home and have a vicious fight.

When their young friends arrive, the tension is thick.

Eventually, the young couple becomes sucked into the older couple’s web of dysfunction, aided by endless drinks throughout the night.

The film is shot very much like a play and filmed in black and white, which I found highly effective- most scenes take place in George and Martha’s house.

While all four actors are great (and were all Oscar-nominated), the standouts for me are Taylor and Dennis.

This role is Taylor’s finest acting performance in my opinion- she is overweight, bitter, angry, frustrated, drunk, and at times vicious to her husband. It is a different performance from many of her other film roles and it is just dynamite.

As her anger flares up, one can feel the heat and intensity oozing from the screen. She goes from vulnerable and soft one moment to a grizzled, bitter woman the next.

Dennis, conversely, is a pure innocent- kind, vulnerable, impressionable, and somewhat of a ninny. Having had too much brandy and spending more than one occasion in the bathroom, Dennis successfully plays giddiness and innocence to the hilt.

Both Martha and Honey harbor dark secrets, which eventually are revealed.

The ambiance is just amazing- black and white cinematography, a hot, suffocating feel to the film, it feels like a quiet little college hamlet, and the setting of the eerily quiet wee hours of the morning is conveyed successfully.

Each story told- mainly by George and Martha- is captivating in its viciousness (both usually belittling the other) that the film becomes mesmerizing in its shock value at the insults hurled.

What will they say or do next?

I loved the scene where Honey does an awkward dance at a late-night bar that the four of them go to. Also, the shotgun scene where George obtains the gun from the garage during one of Martha’s insulting tales is disturbing- what will he do with the gun?

The stories involving George and Martha’s son are sad and mysterious- the viewer wonders what is going on.

The final reveal still gives me chills.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) is one of the greatest film adaptations of a play that I have ever seen.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Mike Nichols, Best Actor-Richard Burton, Best Actress-Elizabeth Taylor (won), Best Supporting Actor-George Segal, Best Supporting Actress-Sandy Dennis (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Original Music Score, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Costume Design, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing

Catch-22-1970

Catch-22-1970

Director Mike Nichols

Starring Alan Arkin, Martin Sheen

Scott’s Review #41

60020883

Reviewed June 18, 2014

Grade: B

Catch-22 (1970) is a satirical film similar in subject matter to Robert Altman’s M*A*S*H, released the same year though admittedly I have not seen that film yet.

It does remind me of Dr. Strangelove, and Slaughterhouse-Five in their anti-war theme.

This film is well-made and certainly effectively portrays the outrageousness and lunacy of war.

Most of the characters are presented as crazy, albeit in a dark-humored, over-the-top way.

Alan Arkin is wonderful as the protagonist trying to find a way out of the island of Italy where he and his fellow pilots are stationed.

At times the film feels disjointed and tough to follow, which I understand the novel is too (I have not read the entire book), but the message of the movie comes across loud and clear.