The Goodbye Girl

I loved the original. This remake was just painful. Try though he might Jeff Daniels could not carry off the roll of Elliot with any degree of charm, humor or frenetic energy that Richard Dreyfuss made work so well in the original. Matthew Perry MIGHT have been a better casting choice for Elliot, but it's hard to follow a classic.

And though Patricia Heaton is much easier on the eye than Marsha Mason ever was, she seemed to be phoning in her part as well. Marsha sold the part of a hopeless romantic who'd been dumped one too many times. Patricia seemed to be acting like it was one of her Albertson's commercials.

I really tried to cheer for this remake, but it just didn't hold a candle to the original.

Why did they remake this picture? It was a pleasant enough TV movie if there was not a really excellent original to which it pales in comparison.

Jeff Daniels, usually a favorite of mine, is not cut out for this type of comedy. He is neither funny or sympathetic as Elliot. Patricia Heaton is OK, but there is virtually no chemistry between her and Daniels. The daughter is too cute and wise.

Oddly, a high point in this picture is a cameo by director Richard Benjamin. This production makes one want to go back into the archives and retrieve the Dreyfuss/Mason version to REALLY see the show.

It is almost impossible to watch this movie, without comparing it to the 1970's movie. Jeff Daniels does a servicable job in this role, but to my eyes he seems miscast. He is just not desperate or manic enough in this part. Patricia Heaton is actually an upgrade over Marcia Mason in the female lead.

This is just an odd film to remake. The original was not exactly out of date. They did not make any big changes in this version, except very minor mentions of more current events. If you are bored, the source material this comes from is still pretty good. However if you really enjoy this movie, take the time to rent the 1977 version. I promise you will appreciate it being better.

I thought Patricia Heaton did a fantastic job as Paula but No1 was as good as Richard Dreyfuss. They could have done a better job with the casting of Elliot too. Jeff Daniels was mediocre @ best. I also liked the daughter in this one better. The script was almost verbatim & it was still funny but I wasn't rolling & laughing so hard my sides hurt like I did when I first saw the 1977 version. As my title says: it was good but not great. They could have done a LOT worse. Look how horribly musicals like Best Little Whorehouse in Texas ; for one; the movie totally sucked. The musical was much better. All in all I give this remake of a classic a 6. I like how they modernized it too although it didn;t fit in the original plot. IE: Elliot first tries to use his cell phone . Then he drops it & breaks it. They didn't have cell phones in 1977. They were also talking a lot about revivals & improvs which are much more common now.

I have both the 2004 and 1977 versions on my TiVo, and the former is a scene-for-scene remake of the latter. It's interesting to see the small changes in the scenes from the two movies. Like in the "morning after" breakfast scene where the 1977 Lucy's Bicentennial lunchbox (remember 1976? remember lunch boxes), is replaced in 2004 with today's over-sized book backpack. Also, the 1977 Lucy had a Habitrail (TM) for her hampster -- still available today, but alas, not in the 2004 set. Of course, political correctness is evident in the 2004 version -- the 3 black purse-snatchers in 1977 are replaced by 3 white purse snatchers in 2004. In more evidence of progress, the 2004 rooftop dinner has much more Christmas lights than the 1977 version. Similarly, the Subaru in the 1977 auto show scene gets 39 mpg, while the Toyota in the 2004 auto show gets 60 mpg.

The best thing I can say about the 2004 version is that Patricia Heaton looks better in the role though 10 years older than Marsha Mason at the time of shooting.