[go: up one dir, main page]

    Calendario de lanzamientosTop 250 películasPelículas más popularesBuscar películas por géneroTaquilla superiorHorarios y entradasNoticias sobre películasPelículas de la India destacadas
    Programas de televisión y streamingLas 250 mejores seriesSeries más popularesBuscar series por géneroNoticias de TV
    Qué verÚltimos trailersTítulos originales de IMDbSelecciones de IMDbDestacado de IMDbGuía de entretenimiento familiarPodcasts de IMDb
    EmmysSuperheroes GuideSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideBest Of 2025 So FarDisability Pride MonthPremios STARmeterInformación sobre premiosInformación sobre festivalesTodos los eventos
    Nacidos un día como hoyCelebridades más popularesNoticias sobre celebridades
    Centro de ayudaZona de colaboradoresEncuestas
Para profesionales de la industria
  • Idioma
  • Totalmente compatible
  • English (United States)
    Parcialmente compatible
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Lista de visualización
Iniciar sesión
  • Totalmente compatible
  • English (United States)
    Parcialmente compatible
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Usar app
  • Elenco y equipo
  • Opiniones de usuarios
  • Trivia
  • Preguntas Frecuentes
IMDbPro

The Subject Was Roses

  • 1968
  • G
  • 1h 47min
CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
7.0/10
1.9 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
The Subject Was Roses (1968)
Drama

Un joven que regresa a casa después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial se ve envuelto en la turbulenta relación de sus padres.Un joven que regresa a casa después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial se ve envuelto en la turbulenta relación de sus padres.Un joven que regresa a casa después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial se ve envuelto en la turbulenta relación de sus padres.

  • Dirección
    • Ulu Grosbard
  • Guionista
    • Frank D. Gilroy
  • Elenco
    • Patricia Neal
    • Jack Albertson
    • Martin Sheen
  • Ver la información de producción en IMDbPro
  • CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
    7.0/10
    1.9 k
    TU CALIFICACIÓN
    • Dirección
      • Ulu Grosbard
    • Guionista
      • Frank D. Gilroy
    • Elenco
      • Patricia Neal
      • Jack Albertson
      • Martin Sheen
    • 29Opiniones de los usuarios
    • 9Opiniones de los críticos
  • Ver la información de producción en IMDbPro
  • Ver la información de producción en IMDbPro
    • Ganó 1 premio Óscar
      • 2 premios ganados y 3 nominaciones en total

    Fotos56

    Ver el cartel
    Ver el cartel
    Ver el cartel
    Ver el cartel
    Ver el cartel
    Ver el cartel
    + 50
    Ver el cartel

    Elenco principal6

    Editar
    Patricia Neal
    Patricia Neal
    • Nettie Cleary
    Jack Albertson
    Jack Albertson
    • John Cleary
    Martin Sheen
    Martin Sheen
    • Timmy Cleary
    Don Saxon
    • The Master of Ceremonies
    Elaine Williams
    • The Woman in Club
    Grant Gordon
    • Man in Restaurant
    • (sin créditos)
    • Dirección
      • Ulu Grosbard
    • Guionista
      • Frank D. Gilroy
    • Todo el elenco y el equipo
    • Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro

    Opiniones de usuarios29

    7.01.9K
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    Opiniones destacadas

    7Bunuel1976

    THE SUBJECT WAS ROSES (Ulu Grosbard, 1968) ***

    As was the case with the recently-viewed BUTTERFIELD 8 (1960), I repeatedly missed out on one this over the years – including a local TV broadcast; with this in mind, I was not especially looking forward to a three-parter talkfest – but the result was surprisingly compelling, perceptively written and very well-acted. The film was proudly listed as "Frank D. Gilroy's THE SUBJECT WAS ROSES", but Patricia Neal's sole above-the-title credit was misleading – as the role (which landed her a Best Actress Oscar nomination) is no bigger than those of Jack Albertson (who actually won in the Supporting Actor category) or Martin Sheen (who received a Golden Globe nomination instead)! Having said that, it was Oscar winner Neal's return to the screen after a series of strokes had almost killed her in 1965…so that could well have been the reason behind it; incidentally, both men were recreating their stage roles here.

    The plot is quite simple: WWII veteran Sheen's return home opens up a can of worms as to how his parents view him. Albertson had thought Neal over-protective in his regards and, in fact, expresses amazement that he made it back without so much as a scratch; she, on the other hand, begins to worry that the boy has grown up too fast – especially since he is making his best (read: trying too hard) to fill his father's shoes, down to the excessive intake of alcohol and repeating a ditty the older man spouts whenever annoyed at something! The situation comes to a head when the two men go out and return with a bunch of roses for her: Sheen insists Albertson tell her he thought of the gift himself, which she takes as an attempt by her philandering husband to change his ways…but when, during an argument between mother and son, the latter informs her the flowers were his idea, she realizes she has lost the affection of both men (given that the boy was willing to deceive her as well)! This leads to her walking out for some 12 hours (just when they were expected at her convention-bound mother's house for the weekly Sunday dinner appointment) – during which Sheen decides it is high time for him to take charge of his own life...

    While, as I said, the film is basically just three people interacting – eating, dancing, musing (about their achievements and regrets), or shouting in each other's faces (including the probing of religious faith) – what goes on is so universal that, at some point, one is bound to find something that can be related to…and therein lies its strength (to which the three performers give an exceptional ring of truth)! With respect to the TCM-sourced print, there was some cropping involved as the channel logo was barely visible and some picture freezing/imbalance half-way through (when the former occurred again at the very end, it emerged merely a stylistic trait which quickly led to a dissolve into the final credit-roll!). By the way, the soundtrack is peppered with a number of ear-friendly folk songs showcasing the voice of Judy Collins.
    Doylenf

    Painful observations about a dysfunctional family trio...

    A very young MARTIN SHEEN plays a soldier returning from the war and the small apartment he shares with his parents (PATRICIA NEAL and JACK ALBERTSON). Neal is excellent as the drab housewife, somewhat embittered over her strained relationship with a husband who has never recovered from the Depression blues. Sheen finds himself caught again in the tension between his bickering parents and the film is essentially a coming of age tale for the young man who has to cope with what seems an overwhelming domestic problem.

    Nothing is really resolved in the course of the story, but it's a realistic slice of life and is played earnestly and skillfully by its three main characters.

    It was Patricia Neal's first film after overcoming a long illness associated with her stroke. She looks the picture of a weary housewife burdened by the sorrows of a crumbling marriage and deserved her Oscar nomination.
    8bkoganbing

    The Clearys From The Bronx

    I'm supposing that when you deal with a three character play, expanded to five for the screen, everyone is a lead. It's strange to me that Jack Albertson was not considered for Best Actor as he has as much if not more screen time than Patricia Neal. And certainly Martin Sheen as their son equals their time in The Subject Was Roses.

    The Subject Was Roses was a Pulitzer Prize winning play that ran for 832 performances on Broadway starting in 1965. Albertson and Sheen recreate the roles they did on stage and Patricia Neal replaces Irene Dailey from the Broadway cast. Albertson won a Tony Award for Best Actor yet he only one for Best Supporting Actor for the film. Go figure.

    Albertson and Neal are Mr.&Mrs. Cleary who have a red letter day in their lives in 1945. Their son Tim played by Martin Sheen has come home from World War II. He's been gone for several years, probably the duration of the American involvement in World War II.

    Absence has made Sheen see his parents in a whole new light. As it turns out they're not the happiest of people. Albertson's totally consumed with business and making a success for himself. He's so self absorbed that he treats Neal like a doormat. And in his cultural background the woman merely acquiesces to the men.

    I remember years ago a woman I knew was of Irish background and was involved politically as the female Republican State Committeewoman of her district. She was nice and popular and knew her place. When her male counterpart was getting together with some cronies to pull a power play in the party in her county of Kings, she wasn't crazy about it. When asked about whether she approved or not she wasn't sure, but since THE MEN are in favor of it, she would acquiesce.

    Patricia Neal stopped acquiescing after a few ugly arguments with Albertson and Sheen. Her big act of defiance was to take $50.00 worth of accumulated change, get on a bus and have a big fling just getting out and about for several hours. For her that was tantamount to a declaration of independence.

    The Subject Was Roses set in the Woodlawn section of the Bronx which is still an Irish enclave there, though not anything like it was in 1946 is author Frank D. Gilroy's bittersweet memories of the place. I'd love to know who the models for his characters were, hopefully not him and his own parents.

    The only other nomination was Patricia Neal for Best Actress which makes Albertson in the Supporting Category equally strange. 1968 was the year of the tie between Katharine Hepburn for The Lion In Winter and Barbra Streisand for Funny Girl.

    Maybe Albertson was right to be considered in the Supporting Category purely in terms of winning. Still he and Neal are a matched team of marrieds facing a most uncertain future when Sheen leaves the nest. The Subject Was Roses was a nice slice of Bronx life circa 1946 and holds up well today.
    9jblake1243

    1968 Film Remains Relevant

    This film version of Frank Gilroy's unforgettable play should be considered a classic. Patricia Neal, Jack Albertson & Martin Sheen deliver outstanding performances as the parents & young adult son in an Irish-American, lower middle class family living in the Bronx at the end of World War 2.

    The story centers on the son, Timmy, who has just returned home from the Army after fighting in combat as an infantryman in Europe. He returns to a home in which the relationship of his parents is undergoing strain, due primarily to discreet but nevertheless damaging extra marital affairs occasionally indulged in by the father, who is a kind of loquacious, traveling salesman type who meets lots of people in his work. The mother is played as a suffering in silence housewife who, although she loves her husband, has been deeply hurt by his infidelities.

    Timmy, now changed by the war & his experiences away from home must come to terms with things as they now are. He loves both of his parents deeply but comes to realize that in order to live his life fully he will have to leave his parent's house which is now no longer what it used to be for him. His parents, while dealing with their own problems, want Timmy to stay but on another level realize that he has to leave. You will have to watch to see how things are resolved.
    8unctheel

    Can't believe I waited this long to see this film

    I was a senior in high school, or freshman in college when this film came out. My favorite female vocalist was Judy Collins and her Wildflowers album. Now in 2018,I am finally seeing this film and voila! The songs are by Judy Collins! They accompany the film well! Watching Martin Sheen in his early years of who he was to become. Wow. Excellent acting. And I have always loved Patrice O'Neal. Very poignant film, with 3 main actors/actress. Nicely done, well scripted, and no three actors could have portrayed their parts better. Timeless.

    Más como esto

    The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter
    7.6
    The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter
    Raquel, Raquel
    7.1
    Raquel, Raquel
    Rostros
    7.4
    Rostros
    Last Summer
    6.9
    Last Summer
    The Landlord
    6.9
    The Landlord
    Hospital
    7.1
    Hospital
    Man's Castle
    7.1
    Man's Castle
    Vida de un estudiante
    7.2
    Vida de un estudiante
    The Fixer
    6.7
    The Fixer
    A Touch of Class
    6.5
    A Touch of Class
    Dulce noviembre
    6.8
    Dulce noviembre
    ¡La estrella!
    6.4
    ¡La estrella!

    Argumento

    Editar

    ¿Sabías que…?

    Editar
    • Trivia
      This movie was the first film Patricia Neal made after suffering three massive and near-fatal strokes early in 1965. Neal was in a coma for two-and-a-half weeks and underwent emergency brain surgery. Paralyzed on her right side and unable to talk, she had to learn how to use her limbs again, how to speak again, and had to relearn the alphabet in order to spell the simplest of words. By early 1967, her recovery was so remarkable that it was difficult to tell that she'd suffered a stroke, although Neal admitted to still having memory problems. In April 1968, while shooting this film in an old warehouse on Manhattan's West 26th Street, Neal reflected on her ordeal to critic Rex Reed: "I hated life for a year and a half, then I started learning how to be a person again, and now I've loved life for a year and a half. And I love it a lot."
    • Errores
      The family is seen eating breakfast before Mass. At the time, practicing Catholics could not eat for 3 hours before taking the Holy Sacrament at Mass.
    • Citas

      Nettie Cleary: I never doubted he'd do as well as anyone else.

      John Cleary: Where he's concerned, you never doubted, period. If he came in right now and said he could fly, you'd help him out the window.

    • Créditos curiosos
      The MGM roaring lion logo does not appear on this film.
    • Conexiones
      Featured in Pat Neal Is Back (1968)
    • Bandas sonoras
      Albatross
      Written by Judy Collins (uncredited)

      Sung by Judy Collins

    Selecciones populares

    Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
    Iniciar sesión

    Preguntas Frecuentes16

    • How long is The Subject Was Roses?Con tecnología de Alexa

    Detalles

    Editar
    • Fecha de lanzamiento
      • 12 de febrero de 1970 (Dinamarca)
    • País de origen
      • Estados Unidos
    • Idioma
      • Inglés
    • También se conoce como
      • Güllerden konuşuyorduk
    • Locaciones de filmación
      • Spring Lake, Nueva Jersey, Estados Unidos(Monmouth Hotel where Nettie goes by herself)
    • Productoras
      • Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)
      • Edgar Lansbury Productions Inc.
      • T.D.J. Productions Inc.
    • Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro

    Especificaciones técnicas

    Editar
    • Tiempo de ejecución
      1 hora 47 minutos
    • Mezcla de sonido
      • Mono
    • Relación de aspecto
      • 1.85 : 1

    Contribuir a esta página

    Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
    The Subject Was Roses (1968)
    Principales brechas de datos
    By what name was The Subject Was Roses (1968) officially released in India in English?
    Responda
    • Ver más datos faltantes
    • Obtén más información acerca de cómo contribuir
    Editar página

    Más para explorar

    Visto recientemente

    Habilita las cookies del navegador para usar esta función. Más información.
    Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
    Inicia sesión para obtener más accesoInicia sesión para obtener más acceso
    Sigue a IMDb en las redes sociales
    Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
    Para Android e iOS
    Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
    • Ayuda
    • Índice del sitio
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • Licencia de datos de IMDb
    • Sala de prensa
    • Publicidad
    • Trabaja con nosotros
    • Condiciones de uso
    • Política de privacidad
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, una compañía de Amazon

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.