Énigme à 4 inconnues

"Mister Buddwing" has an interesting start. Seen from the POV of the protagonist, we find ourselves in Central Park. Searching our pockets for clues to our identity--because already it is clear that we have amnesia--we find a train schedule, 2 pills, a phone number and a ring with an inscription. As a jazz track plays in the background, we make our way out of the park and into a hotel where we see our reflection. We are James Garner!

Already we know this is a very stylish film. Most of the remainder of the film is shot third-person, but the camera does use POV for dramatic effects later.

Garner, now knowing what he looks like, calls the mysterious phone number and a woman answers. He is clever enough to get an invitation to meet the woman. He hopes to find clues to his identity. He stumbles outside the hotel and the New York streets are impossibly uncrowded and quiet, contributing a feeling of loneliness. He cobbles together a temporary name for himself (Sam Buddwing) using pieces of visual clues outside. Up until the naming, the film is dead-on mysterious and interesting. Why does he construct the name? It seems pointless. And his response to his temporary name is not authentic and only distracts.

According to a trivia note on this site, this was James Garner's least favorite among his films. I imagine it was embarrassing for him. What is frustrating is that the film had potential. If only the stylish photography and music were not undercut by useless scenes and bad dialogue.

The cast is fun to watch. Angela Lansbury, Jean Simmons, Suzanne Pheshette, Katharine Ross! And most of the acting is excellent. Garner himself has some dicey moments, but I wonder if that was due to the direction. Angela Lansbury shows her range again, playing a low-class, fading housewife who can still manage a motherly feeling or a tender moment. Katharine Ross is a student at NYU, who is suspicious of Buddwing's intent. Suzanne Pleshette is an adventurous actress who falls for Buddwing's charms almost immediately. Jean Simmons is a well-to-do woman on a scavenger hunt, but willing to change course on a whim or a premonition, in search of thrills.

When Buddwing meets these women, he enters a dream state that seems to have clues to his identity. Are they flashbacks? Eventually, the stories seem to overlap. It should makes things even more confusing, but somehow this conceit is fathomable. By the end of the story, all is clear.

Fans of NYC will probably enjoy the many identifiable locations (e.g. Washington Square and Shubert Alley).

One has the feeling that if some annoying items were excised, this film could be a classic. Some dialogue is inappropriate to the moment in the story. Some scenes were totally without value and, therefore, distracting. There are moments when the background music does not fit the action. Mostly small things.

After all the mystery, the ending is rather flat, a disappointment.

The whole feel of this film is great - soundtrack, cinematography, location filming - but ultimately, the storyline reveals its secrets well before the final scene. The actors attracted me to this film, shown very early in the morning on Turner

Classic Movies. Late night viewing is perfect for a mid-sixties, black-and-white, jazzy sort of feature. For the first thirty minutes, I was quite intrigued by the plot. It reminds me of Gregory Peck's "Mirage," a similar (and superior) amnesia- based movie from the 60s. The location filming is perfect, though I know NYC is never that dead, having taken a walk by the Plaza Hotel at 7 in the morning, on a Sunday.

The actors cannot be at fault, and I'm certain that the original novel is quite interesting. Perhaps this particular amnesia variation just doesn't work on film.

After the first "flashback," involving Katherine Ross, her "real-life" presence simply vanishes, unlike the other two women who later provide Garner's

character with memory enhancers. This must be to initially throw us off track, as viewers. Incorrectly, I assumed Ross's character was a complete fabrication. Then, later in the film, Suzanne and Simmons are indicated to be real, as is

Lansbury's "Gloria." Garner simply uses their presence to reformulate images of his wife. There is also a bit of cheating regarding repetitive dialogue between the three women. The "real" Simmons repeats dialogue of the "imaginary"

Suzanne; this must be pure coincidence, as Garner cannot dictate what an

"actual" person says. (Believe me, this makes sense, if you've seen the film.)

The film is ultimately disappointing. By the half-way mark, I knew what the

outcome would be.

One side note - that scene with the cop in Washington Square is totally dated and ridiculous. And, PLEASE, can we avoid all NYC scenes involving

characters running into a dead-end alley?????? It has become one of the

major clichés of NYC-based films and TV series.

I don't know why this web site messes up my paragraphs and spacing!!?????

Mister Buddwing, a curious made up name for the lead character, finds James Garner as a man who wakes up in Central Park without a clue as to who he is. All he has are a couple of scraps of paper with a phone number on one, an address on another and the name of Grace ringing through his clouded mind. From this he tries to build an identity. He's also given some reason to suspect he's an escaped mental patient.

He also runs into during the course of his day, three women, Suzanne Pleshette, Katharine Ross, and Jean Simmons all of whom as his fevered mind flashes back, play the elusive Grace at some point in his life. And they're three very different Graces. We do find out he was married to Grace.

Some of the issues involving amnesia were done better in Mirage which starred Gregory Peck and Diane Baker and in Garner's own film 36 Hours. In 36 Hours however Garner is made to think he's developed amnesia. Here it's the real deal, the hysterical kind after some kind of mental trauma.

Mirage is a much better film however, far more suspenseful. Mister Buddwing is interesting, but really does lack suspense as a whole. Jim Garner does his best with the Buddwing character, but you really don't develop a rooting interest in him.

Best in the film is Angela Lansbury who plays an Adelaide from Guys and Dolls type character, presumably after she finally married Nathan Detroit and settle down somewhat. She only has two scenes, but you really remember her. Especially now since the character is so different from Jessica Fletcher or Mame Dennis roles we know her far better for.

The role must have been thought of as a challenge for James Garner, but I think he was betrayed by a flawed story.

I saw this movie on TNT after being intrigued by the lackluster comments from reviewers. I typically like James Garner movies. After seeing the movie, I saw it as a religious allegory. James Garner plays Everyman who was searching to answer the question "Who am I?" During the movie, I realized that he asks that question rather than the question "What is my name?" He is asking an ontological question.

Furthermore, there are two scenes where he refers to the deity. In the first scene, where he is youthfully impetuous, he refers to "all the gods of the earth and cosmos" or something. In the latter reference to deity, he soberly and humbly refers to "God." This reference occurs after an intervening scene of a flashback where he tells his young wife that he loves perfection that he finds in music. He then hears Bach's Requiem Mass; they enter a church and stand before an altar. This is an example of how knowledge of nature can lead to God. As the flashbacks bring back more of his life, Garner matures as finally realizes his current, wretched condition.

The final scene is quite touching. He finds life through grace. Of course, Grace is his wife's name but the scene allegorically refers to the "saving grace." The movie is not a typical amnesia movie. It is disjointed and the dialog stilted, but, like a classical painting, many scenes have meaning when viewed from a religious viewpoint. Perhaps seeing this viewpoint requires knowledge of Christian doctrine. I would've ordered it on DVD, but it doesn't seem to be available.

James Garner is "Mr. Buddwing," a man who wakes up in Central Park and can't remember who he is in this 1966 film directed by Delbert Mann. Taking the name Buddwing off of a Budweiser truck and the wing of a plane, Garner has a train schedule for a Harlem line, a phone number, and a ring with a crack in it from "GV." Gradually things start to come back to him as he meets various women throughout the day, all of whom he thinks are named Grace. Through them, he relives different stages of his married life: Katharine Ross, a college student; Suzanne Pleshette, an actress; and Jean Simmons, as a drunken blond on a scavenger hunt. Angela Lansbury plays a blowsy woman whose phone number Buddwing finds in his pocket - or thinks he does.

The film is made in an interesting way - one minute, Garner will be talking to Pleshette, for instance, in the present, and then a second later, he's talking to Pleshette as Grace, at some time in the past. The film is like that all the way through, as Buddwing's memories come back. Despite its stylishness and the '60s New York City scenes, "Mr. Buddwing" moves somewhat slowly. Garner does a good job, portraying the man's confusion and frustration well. Both Pleshette and Simmons are excellent; Ross has the least showy role.

A dark movie, worth seeing.