NOTE IMDb
6,8/10
3,6 k
MA NOTE
Physicien à San Francisco, Archie Bolen est en instance de divorce. Lors d'un gala de charité, il rencontre Petulia Danner, jeune et charmante jeune femme qui lui annonce qu'elle désire l'ép... Tout lirePhysicien à San Francisco, Archie Bolen est en instance de divorce. Lors d'un gala de charité, il rencontre Petulia Danner, jeune et charmante jeune femme qui lui annonce qu'elle désire l'épouser.Physicien à San Francisco, Archie Bolen est en instance de divorce. Lors d'un gala de charité, il rencontre Petulia Danner, jeune et charmante jeune femme qui lui annonce qu'elle désire l'épouser.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 4 nominations au total
Nate Esformes
- Mr. Mendoza
- (as Nat Esformes)
Avis à la une
Critically-lauded drama from fashionable filmmaker Richard Lester is certainly handsome enough, although it doesn't initially appear to leave its audience with much but a sour aftertaste. A divorced, frustrated doctor--who has taken up with an exasperating, unhappily married young woman named Petulia--quickly realizes this new direction is adding no particular meaning to his life. Choppy, infuriating picture seems to be leading somewhere but never does; admirers of the film say this is precisely Lester's point, that his tying the story in loose, inconsistent knots is his idea of symbolism. George C. Scott has some amazing moments, Julie Christie is smartly-attired and attractive, Shirley Knight and Richard Chamberlain try hard in underwritten roles, but the movie is pretentiously off-kilter. Lester underlines his scenes with a modern sort of cynicism--American cattiness--that comes off as unfunny and rude rather than satirical. However, the design and conception of the film is startling, and memories of it may sneak up on you days after seeing it. **1/2 from ****
10maxren17
I saw this film when it opened and recently bought the video and watched it again.
I remembered being very moved by the characters and the pairing of Julie Christie and George C Scott. Christie was so young and Scott was also still quite young as well. They had great chemistry. I didn't know that Shirley Knight was nominated for an award for her role. She's very good. Her scene with Scott where she's trying to appease him and he loses his temper is electric. She says more in her look, using her eyes to convey her hurt and confusion, than most actors say in too many words.
Julie Christie has always had a way of getting under your skin. She is able to make you care for her (a lot like she did in "Darling") despite the fact that her character initially comes off as flaky or "kooky." It starts out light and amusing then turns dark and insightful. I remembered this movie for years until I was able to buy the video. It is very 60's in sensibility. So, if you weren't around during that period, see this movie. It captures the sixties in way few films have done as well.
San Francisco looks beautiful in 1967.
I remembered being very moved by the characters and the pairing of Julie Christie and George C Scott. Christie was so young and Scott was also still quite young as well. They had great chemistry. I didn't know that Shirley Knight was nominated for an award for her role. She's very good. Her scene with Scott where she's trying to appease him and he loses his temper is electric. She says more in her look, using her eyes to convey her hurt and confusion, than most actors say in too many words.
Julie Christie has always had a way of getting under your skin. She is able to make you care for her (a lot like she did in "Darling") despite the fact that her character initially comes off as flaky or "kooky." It starts out light and amusing then turns dark and insightful. I remembered this movie for years until I was able to buy the video. It is very 60's in sensibility. So, if you weren't around during that period, see this movie. It captures the sixties in way few films have done as well.
San Francisco looks beautiful in 1967.
Petulia opens with a shot of a middle-aged woman in a wheelchair, then cuts to a sixties' rock club featuring a very young-looking Janis Joplin. The sixties counterculture definitely torpedoed middle-aged women. Their husbands, like Archie, the middle-aged doctor played by George G. Scott, have the luxury of deciding they're "tired" of being married and jumping into affairs with younger women. This is a cause of continuing sadness to his ex-wife Polo, wonderfully played by Shirley Knight. Archie becomes involved with Petulia (Julie Christie), a clichéd "kooky" young woman of a type that often appeared in films of this period. Petulia is married to an abusive, wealthy husband, David, played with suitable evil by Richard Chamerlain. Christie is such a good actress that she gives some dimension to the role, although she's far outshone by Knight as Polo, the wounded wife. In its technique and attitude it really is a European or British film shot in San Francisco with American actors. There are interesting cultural references to the sixties, that may have seemed daring at the time, but now seem more innocent than anything else. The film is really about Archie and men of his generation and their bewilderment at the changing cultural mores represented by Petulia. On one hand they're delighted to feel that they can have sex with no responsibilities, but Petulia, for all her charm brings nothing but chaos into Archie's life. Was it really worth for him to be involved with her? And he ends up stuck with a high maintenance greenhouse in his apartment.
"Petulia" is one of the best American films of all time. It should be ranked with "Citizen Kane" and I'm not being sarcastic.
The beauty of the film is how dated it is. Some films that "define" or capture a certain period of time very well often appear very dated later on and lose their effectiveness because of it. But because "Petulia" is so definately set in it's time period, it's like watching a time capsule. There are films which are made today that take place in the late 60's and try for that "mod" feel. But they're removed from that time and therefore can't capture the true feeling of that tumultuous time. "Petulia" captures it beautifully and integrates the 60's experience into it's storyline and structure. For example, when Archie returns from a day out with his sons and returns to his apartment, on TV there is a newscast about Vietnam. It's not overplayed or anything. It's just there as it would have been on any TV in 1968. It's carefully woven into the structure of the film.
Lester has been praised for his editing in this film and it's pretty ingenious. But overall, I found it at times a little too much. There is a LOT of jumping around in time. We learn the story of Petulia and her abusive husband and the little Mexican boy very slowly over the course of the film. It's only in the final moments of the film where we get the gyst of Petulia's neediness and of Archie's as well. I will never forget the final moment where Petulia softly says Archie's name before being putt under gas to have her baby.
A VERY 60's film. Anyone with an interest in the times and how they might've felt should see this film. One of the most underrated films of all time. Lester shows his true genius here. And like the film, he's the most underrated director. Too bad he's not making films anymore.
The beauty of the film is how dated it is. Some films that "define" or capture a certain period of time very well often appear very dated later on and lose their effectiveness because of it. But because "Petulia" is so definately set in it's time period, it's like watching a time capsule. There are films which are made today that take place in the late 60's and try for that "mod" feel. But they're removed from that time and therefore can't capture the true feeling of that tumultuous time. "Petulia" captures it beautifully and integrates the 60's experience into it's storyline and structure. For example, when Archie returns from a day out with his sons and returns to his apartment, on TV there is a newscast about Vietnam. It's not overplayed or anything. It's just there as it would have been on any TV in 1968. It's carefully woven into the structure of the film.
Lester has been praised for his editing in this film and it's pretty ingenious. But overall, I found it at times a little too much. There is a LOT of jumping around in time. We learn the story of Petulia and her abusive husband and the little Mexican boy very slowly over the course of the film. It's only in the final moments of the film where we get the gyst of Petulia's neediness and of Archie's as well. I will never forget the final moment where Petulia softly says Archie's name before being putt under gas to have her baby.
A VERY 60's film. Anyone with an interest in the times and how they might've felt should see this film. One of the most underrated films of all time. Lester shows his true genius here. And like the film, he's the most underrated director. Too bad he's not making films anymore.
I could not give a wide range recommendation for this film. If you don't like abrupt flashback edits and a story that unfolds slowly, then this is not for you. However, if you can hang with the film you will be rewarded for your effort with some truly bizarre moments. There are images from the film that really stuck with me. The absurdity of situations seemed to come back to me days after having watched it. I remembered the gift of the Tuba, the hospital staff trying to explain the 'dummy teevee' procurement procedure, and of course, George C. Scott making his way into not only a 'Big Brother and the Holding Company' concert, but also a 'Grateful Dead' show. Huh?
Added to that you have Richard Chamberlain in all his dandy elfin fabulousness, Joeseph Cotten collecting a paycheck and a very young Howard Hesseman(Dr. Johnny Fever) in a cameo that really served no purpose that I could fathom.
A lot of cat and mouse love affair nonsense between the beautiful Julie Christie and the 'throat lozenged' George C. Scott....what?......it could happen. A lot of obsession and a bit of denial make up the bulk of the movie.
It is interesting to see Scotts' character change throughout the film.
Richard Lester has made many, many great films. And although this film doesn't carry the Richard Lester stamp, it is still one of his best films. I loved it. 9/10.
But really, George C. Scott at a 'Dead' show? Trouble ahead, trouble behind indeed.
Clark Richards
Added to that you have Richard Chamberlain in all his dandy elfin fabulousness, Joeseph Cotten collecting a paycheck and a very young Howard Hesseman(Dr. Johnny Fever) in a cameo that really served no purpose that I could fathom.
A lot of cat and mouse love affair nonsense between the beautiful Julie Christie and the 'throat lozenged' George C. Scott....what?......it could happen. A lot of obsession and a bit of denial make up the bulk of the movie.
It is interesting to see Scotts' character change throughout the film.
Richard Lester has made many, many great films. And although this film doesn't carry the Richard Lester stamp, it is still one of his best films. I loved it. 9/10.
But really, George C. Scott at a 'Dead' show? Trouble ahead, trouble behind indeed.
Clark Richards
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAt the opening scene, the singer in the band, Big Brother and the Holding Company, is Janis Joplin, before going on to her solo career. Also in the film is Jerry Garcia of Grateful Dead. The film is set in San Francisco, during the psychedelic rock era, home of these bands.
- GaffesThe instrument referred to repeatedly as a tuba is actually a sousaphone.
- Citations
Petulia: I'd have turned those beautiful hands into fists.
David Danner: Stop it, Petulia.
Petulia: David, you were the gentlest man I ever knew.
- ConnexionsEdited into The Green Fog (2017)
- Bandes originalesMain Title - Petulia
Written and Performed by John Barry And His Orchestra
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Petulia?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Me and the Arch-Kook Petulia
- Lieux de tournage
- Fairmont Hotel - 950 Mason Street, Nob Hill, San Francisco, Californie, États-Unis(party in the lobby scenes)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 3 500 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 45 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant