The Entertainer

Rating:
Summary: I know what you're thinking:
Review: "Hmm -- a movie called *The Entertainer*, with a smiling Laurence Olivier on the DVD's cover. He looks like he wants to give us all a big hug. There are even chorus girls dancing behind him. This looks like fun!" -- Nope: it's one of the most depressing movies ever made. Well, there IS some fun to be had by watching Olivier totally INHABIT the character of Archie Rice: truly a case of the 20th Century's greatest actor playing one of the best roles in 20th Century drama. Let it be said at once that this is Olivier's best film performance, and never mind all those Shakespeares. (He thought so too, calling the role of Archie Rice his all-time favorite and the one he most closely related to.) The movie is based on the original stage play, written by the original Angry Young Man, the great playwright John Osborne. The superficial thing to say about *The Entertainer* is that Archie Rice symbolizes England itself after World War II. This story encapsulates like no other (including Osborne's earlier *Look Back in Anger*) that "British post-War malaise" you've heard so much about. Much like England in 1960, the man harbors illusions of grandeur based on a speciously "glorious" past. And like the country, Archie is in reality outdated, irrelevant, dingy, unpleasant, past his prime, desperate, pathetic -- in a phrase, he's very much like the sleazy seaside resort town wherein he plies his trade as a vaudevillian. And you can draw an easy parallel between Archie's attempts to keep his bankrupt show afloat with England's senseless, imperial involvement in Palestine at this time. (Or was it Suez? -- it's been a while since I've seen the movie. In any case, it was someplace where they no longer belonged.) But these exercises are for film theory class. The real stuff is in the creation of the wonderfully nasty character. Archie is a REAL character with depth, unique mannerisms and diction, and plausible motives. He has a history. He's believable. But as brilliantly as the character is written, it's Olivier who brings him to searing life. When Olivier delivers Archie's "goodnight" address at the end of the film, you know you're watching a high moment in cinema. Only a great actor with decades of experience could deliver these lines with such withering weight. Archie's divers failures are horrible, absurd, and total -- but Olivier is defiant. We find ourselves grudgingly admiring this rat-like defiance, because we love fighters. And great actors.

Rating:
Summary: Bleak Entertainment
Review: "The Entertainer" concerns itself with a sub-mediocre music hall entertainer, Archie Rice(Laurence Olivier), who in order to stay in the spotlight will do anything despite the ruination of the lives of those closest to him. Olivier plays this character perfectly where the temptation to ham it up in the role of a sleazy entertainer he gives just the correct amount of understatement. Also notable in the role of Rice's social worker daughter is Joan Plowright, who would become the future Mrs. Olivier. Albert Finney distinguishes himself in the one-scene part of Rice's doomed paratrooper son. Why I do not rate this film higher is that it is so unremittingly bleak and I just did not find the story that compelling to warrant this tone. This film in my mind is a dated artifact from the British new-wave of the late fifties and early sixties when this type of realism was in vogue. The film certainly captures the seediness of the world it is trying to capture. To me it stands as a curio from mid-fifties Britain than as a film that will stand the test of time.

Rating:
Summary: Laurence Olivier becomes a great character actor
Review: "The Entertainer" is a pivotal film in the career of Laurence Olivier. Before this 1960 film he had been a handsome leading man, receiving Oscar nominations for his performances in "Wuthering Heights," "Rebecca," "The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with his Battell at Agincourt in France," "Hamlet" (for which he won," and "Richard III." After "The Entertainer" his nominations were all for character roles, beginning with Archie Rice in this film and then for "Othello" (performed in makeup as a Negro), "Sleuth," "Marathon Man," and "The Boys From Brazil." Performing the film adaptation of John Osborne's play, Olivier restaked his claim as the greatest actor of his generation by adding modern drama to his collection of work in Shakespeare and the classics.

Archie Rice is a bitter character, without any noticeable redeeming quality besides the attempt to survive. He is a comic whose routines are not funny, and perhaps once upon a time, in the early days, they were a put-on, playing a bitter person taking out his anger on the world. Either way, the act is for real now and is a p[itiful] figure. Archie works in a seedy music hall and has his eye on Shirley Anne Field (Tina Lapford), who must be a symbol of some sort of redemption besides simple carnal desire. Just as he ignores his audiences, Archie ignores his own family, who would provide an even more devastating critique of his wretched life. There is no sentimental side to Archie, who remains unflinchingly flawed unto the bitter end.

The film is directed by Tony Richardson, who had done Osborne's "Look Back in Anger" two years earlier and who would win his Oscar for "Tom Jones." However, "The Entertainer" is clearly representative of the "kitchen sink" style of film that characterized Britain's own "New Wave" cinema, which tended to focus on the growing decline in the quality of life in Britain after World War II. The cast features a young Alan Bates as son Frank, Albert Finney debuting as son Mick, and Joan Plowright as daughter Jean (within a year she would be the third and final wife of Olivier). Brenda de Banzie delivers a touching performance as Archie's wife, a bitter alcoholic, whose husband stopped loving her a long time ago. However, from start to finish the film is focused on Olivier's performance, which Olivier often said was the one of which he was most proud, being such a departure from his usual roles and work. You might not think it is Olivier's greatest performance, but it is one of his finest.

Rating:
Summary: A great movie
Review: Laurence Olivier's performance in "The Entertainer" (1960), is one of the great film performances of all time. A great actor in a great role, Olivier's Archie Rich is so memorable in it's subtle, sad humanity you wonder why movies aren't more often as right on as this. It is because it was the perfect role played by the perfect actor at the perfect time in his career. Olivier said this was the film role closest to his heart. His depiction of the vaudevillian actor stuck in the purgatory of a tacky English seaside resort (the Myrtle Beach of the English 40's; if you haven't been there in place you've been there in spirit) is so brilliant it is no wonder it never receives popular praise, that Olivier did not win the best actor he was nominated for or that the movie is left off of everyone's best 100. Movies are suppossed to be flawed. By not pretending to be anything it's not, by leaving out symbol and putting everything in words "The Entertainer" may put us closer to the stage than we're comfortable with. Amazon is about the only place on the web you'll find it.

Rating:
Summary: A great movie
Review: Laurence Olivier's performance in "The Entertainer" (1960), is one of the great film performances of all time. A great actor in a great role, Olivier's Archie Rich is so memorable in it's subtle, sad humanity you wonder why movies aren't more often as right on as this. It is because it was the perfect role played by the perfect actor at the perfect time in his career. Olivier said this was the film role closest to his heart. His depiction of the vaudevillian actor stuck in the purgatory of a tacky English seaside resort (the Myrtle Beach of the English 40's; if you haven't been there in place you've been there in spirit) is so brilliant it is no wonder it never receives popular praise, that Olivier did not win the best actor he was nominated for or that the movie is left off of everyone's best 100. Movies are suppossed to be flawed. By not pretending to be anything it's not, by leaving out symbol and putting everything in words "The Entertainer" may put us closer to the stage than we're comfortable with. Amazon is about the only place on the web you'll find it.

Rating:
Summary: One of Olivier's greatest roles
Review: Most of us admire the great work of Sir Laurence Olivier in Shakepeare's classics, such as Hamlet, Richard III, Henry V etc. But the depth of this fine actor is really well displayed in this gem of a film. "The Entertainer" is a depiction of a down on his luck vaudeville performer in a seedy English seaside resort. The film combines comedy with pathos in its depiction of life at the fringe. It will amaze you with the fine detail of this character portrait.

Rating:
Summary: Exceptionally brilliant
Review: My husband and I first saw this film in London, as it opened, in 1960. I was a young wife of 23, and Sir Laurence Olivier's moving and extraordinary performance (look in his eyes throughout), gave depth to human frailty, and made me cry then, and most recently, 40 years later, has made me weep again, for the human condition.

I felt that the character of Archie Rice was portrayed with all his flaws, yet, Olivier, was able to illuminate,through his superb acting, the tender, vulnerable yet rather caddish side of human life, which side seemed to demonstrate his extreme insecurity. Where Olivier really was so brilliant, I think, was that he showed the viewer that Archie really KNEW himself, deep down. Olivier seems to let the viewer know that he felt inside of himself, that he was a failure by much of societal standards, and that, even personally, he had, somehow, failed to measure up to his own youthful expectations.

I believe this movie ranks with the play/movie "Death of a Salesman" by Arthur Miller -- It is about all of us -- about life.

All of the supporting cast were also outstanding. I believe that this film will move the viewer, and make the viewer think at least, twice, about his/her own life. And hopefully, will help the viwer try to understand yet forgive their own human frailties, as well as to try to understand and forgive others
(And I am not talking about "forgiving," horrible, abusive behaviors, as in "forgetting about it," and somehow going on!)

Rating:
Summary: Don't clap too loud, it's an old building
Review: That line occurs in the play, I believe, but not in the film. Or did I miss it? In any case, it doesn't really matter, since this is a production where the brilliance of the writing is only matched by the brilliance of the performance. I defy anyone to watch this merciless analysis of national character, at a particular moment in British history, and remain unscathed. It is painfully true, and painfully ugly. The war had been won, but everything else was lost. At the time the play was written, it seemed that nothing remained, bar grimy exhaustion. By 1960, however, spirits were recovering. The work remains a historic document, recording the bleakest and most bitter hour. This is certainly one of the purest records ever committed to posterity, and anyone interested in knowing what things were like in Britain in the 1950s will find them here. An absolute masterpiece.

Rating:
Summary: "Look into My Eyes--I'm Dead Behind These Eyes"
Review: That's what has-been vaudevillian Laurence Olivier says to daughter Joan Plowright when commenting on his frustrating, failed life in "The Entertainer", and when he says it and you look, by golly if he doesn't look dead indeed.

This movie makes me uncomfortable and I really don't like to watch it, but that cannot make me deny that it is one of Olivier's greatest jobs. I think part of the way he can convey this male menopause pathos derived from his own life at the time, the way Gable's own tragedies inform "Homecoming". At this point, yes, Olivier had won an Oscar and gained a knighthood, but his personal life was a shambles. He was married to Vivien Leigh who was sickly and suffering from mental illness. He once described it to Lauren Bacall in this fashion: The first ten years were heaven, the last hell. The strain was beginning to show in Larry, and that's what is communicated in his depiction of Archie Rice, the entertainer who hasn't got any joy in his own life. Archie's made a mess of things: he's a bankrupt, he's got a wife who's stupid and tiresome, he's got to play in these tawdry seaside resorts. He manages to seduce a naive young girl, and is hoping perhaps to shake off both the wife and this bad luck that's been plaguing him, but everything always falls through. Life can't help being lousy, I guess is the message of "The Entertainer", and does one heck of a job showing us the seamy side of a two-bit talent's life.

Of course, the great irony is that in real life, Olivier began an affair with the actress playing his daughter, Joan Plowright. What might have been just another example of life imitating art--of Olivier playing out the seducer element of "The Entertainer"--actually worked out to his benefit. The result was the end of his dismal marriage to Vivien Leigh and a new marriage, now to the years-younger Plowright, with whom he had two children (something that never happened with Leigh), and a breath of fresh air into his performing life as he staged more Shakepeare et al. with this new Lady Olivier. All of that is why I can stomach watching "The Entertainer", you know: Thank God Olivier had better things ahead of him after all than poor Archie Rice.

So, if you can appreciate verismo in film and would like to see the English-speaking world's greatest actor play against type, take a seat at "The Entertainer" and count your blessings that you can leave your woes AT the theatre when you leave.

Rating:
Summary: You don't look at the mantelpiece when you poke the fire
Review: This was a very strange film developed in the 1960s. The dark themes of love, money, greed, and overall the protagonist's dream of being the next big sensation were chilling. This film was a perfect example of a very depressing story that never had a glimmer of light. Sure, there are several times we think that Archie will taste success, but before he is able to put the symbolic spoon into the bowl, he is shot down harder and faster than before. There is never a big break for Archie. He represents the human in even the smallest entertainer. As I read my local paper and see that Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg stopped at a local DQ earlier in the month, I can't help but realize the fact that this film is trying to show. They are human. While they may have more money and seen by more people, they are still human and have to deal with the human drama that we cope with daily. Archie is no exemption, and his struggles with love, money, family, and success are just stronger realizations of his human element. Add to this mix Archie's father and you see the true element of which I speak. Archie's father represents a dying breed of actors that do not live grandiose lifestyles, but somehow live on just their name alone. They have spent their money and rely on the kindness of strangers for favors. This is where Archie lacks. His kindness is only to women, and they continually hurt him in the long run.

Outside of the "human entertainer" concept, this is a very flat and shallow film. From the opening scene until the end, we are never quite given the big picture of this family or our surroundings. I never quite understood the scenes. Where were we? Why were we here? Who are the people that do visit Archie's shows? This builds a horrible background for our characters to live within. Without the proper structure behind our characters this forces them to crumble with the slightest bit of force. Archie's daughter Jean, the self-appointed narrator of the family, never seems to fit into her role. Plowright never seems comfortable with her character and is constantly giving off the wrong emotion during the scene. There was one part when I swore I saw her laughing. She is a distraction and a downfall for this film. Secondly, Olivier needed to contain his character a bit. I know that he was to portray an entertainer on the edge of reality, but it never showed. He needed more control over his emotions and really build a human element to his character. He was neither believable nor enjoyable to watch. From the beginning of this film I never once felt like he could be successful, and when he is the character we are trying to rejoice over, we need to feel that sensation. I needed to feel like he could really make this show work, instead of constantly being pulled deeper into his depression. This goes with Archie's father as well. It is possible to play too senile, and this is a perfect example. The entire cake scene (when you see it you will see) was laughable instead of emotional. The only character that worked decently well in this film was Phoebe. She had a touch character to grapple with and it felt like Brenda De Banzie was the only one carrying her weight in this film. Her emotion and power made some of the scenes worth watching instead of completely unbearable.

Finally, I would like to say that with the background taking second fiddle to the actors, and the actors taking second fiddle to the background, this band needed longer hours practicing. Not only was this film confusing, but it also only allowed us to see one segment of the story. I needed more pre-story information or possibly a better ending to really allow me to connection with Archie. There was nothing forcing me to feel sympathy for the main character. I didn't know enough about him, nor did I really feel comfortable with the family dynamics between him and Phoebe. What was their relationship? Plutonic? Who knows? All I do know is that director Tony Richardson did not have control over this film. He seemed to slip between what his star player of the film (Laurence Olivier) and a developed story. I do not see why Laurence was nominated for an Oscar for this role. There was nothing spectacular.

Overall, maybe I missed the boat on this film. Perhaps I was expecting my first Laurence Olivier film to blow me out of the water, but instead all I found was a jumbled mess of papers. I understand that the world of entertainment is not as glamorous as we think it is, but it is not as depressing as Richardson shows in this film. I needed a stronger balance and a better cast to make this film work for me. I needed to see some reason for me to attach myself to Archie, but sadly there was nothing. This film failed for me, but I will not give up on Olivier, I think he can prevail.

On a side note, maybe it is just me, but I thought that Olivier in this film resembled Robin Williams in not only the way that he spoke, but also the facial mannerisms. Odd, maybe it is just me...

Grade: ** out of *****