Staircase

Playful, occasionally moving, often funny comedy about a gay hairstylist and his lover/business partner living in London, an aging couple going on 30 years together who each jab at the others' ego like two bitchy woodpeckers--but who consistently lean on each other (and feed off each other) like two halves of the same person. Richard Burton and Rex Harrison were reportedly unhappy making this film, but they do manage to get a rhythm going that is rather infectious. Charles Dyer adapted his own "intimate" British play--and was probably reeling once his quaint, humble material got blown up on the big screen with major stars--yet his theatrical and literary pretensions are worked out charmingly, and some of his lines get big laughs. There are times when Burton seems more apt to go the distance personally with his character than Harrison is; then, in the very next scene, they flip and it's Harrison who takes off. The "plot" doesn't amount to much (Harrison's Charlie must attend court after being caught in lascivious garb at the same moment his estranged daughter is planning a visit), but to director Stanley Donen's credit the focus of the piece seldom wavers--we never even meet the daughter, which in this case is a blessing. The gay text is not handled madly or foolishly; Donen pairs the scenes down to quick, efficient little episodes, and this keeps the pacing brisk and gives the lead performances a nice edge (we never tire of them). Much ballyhoo was made over two heterosexual stars "camping it up" on screen, but I saw very little swishing. Dyer gets a few dramatic moments perfectly right, and he's written some good lines (such as when Harrison tells Burton, "I need someone new now and then"). The finer sequences are not trampled on by Donen, nor by his editor. "Staircase" is pithy and beguiling and should resonate with audiences who don't mind a tentative mix of sassy humor, self-pity, impatient wisecracks, and a tearing down of vanity. **1/2 from ****

I can see why this might have been disappointing from a 1969 perspective, especially if it was the first relatively mainstream gay couple movie. They behave like an old embittered married couple, hardly promoting the concept of gay relationship harmony. If you're gay, you may have hoped for people with more obvious emotional strength and dignity, to start things off.

But from this end, nearly 40 years later, there's a great deal to admire. Most of us can see them as just people, yes, suffering the issues of the day in certain respects, but otherwise going through the same relationship struggles experienced by any two people who've been together for a very long time.

With only a few mild changes, this movie could be set today, because it's confronting the aging process, a somewhat unequal relationship, the problem of elderly parents—just plain real life stuff told with pathos and humor.

As to the swishiness of either character, say all you want about the womanizing ways of these two actors, they both swished and preened through many of their other previous roles as well. It was enhanced in this movie, but not unnaturally so. There's now enough water under the bridge for us to understand this isn't the Singular Gay Trait, but it certainly does exist, and it's not necessarily the evidence for self-loathing by these two characters. Anyone can have doubts about themselves, and most of us do, in one way or another.

It's not a great movie, because it moves in fits and spurts and there are moments that seem a little emotionally vacant. But it's a decent movie because the characters are believable and you do grow to care for and about them.

Burton and Harrison mince, preen, prance, and flounce about the screen in a horrendous display of bad acting. This movie would set gay rights back a century if it weren't so badly made and badly dated. One must wonder what made it a hit on Broadway at the time. The score is an especially abysmal atrocity by Dudley Moore. All those involved (especially Donen) should be ashamed.

I don't know what movie the other reviewers were watching, or why they are so bitter. I agree completely with the contemporaneous reviews, which praised the movie highly. Two fine actors spend the entire movie, out of their normal characters, showing off to each other and producing a gem as a result. The contrast between Burton's prissy old woman and Harrison's aging swish -- that so embarrassed the Burton character -- was wonderfully portrayed. Yet they managed to demonstrate that querulous yet enduring relationship that often results between an aging couple that experience each other's foibles, constantly express annoyance at them, and yet have too much basic affection to part. This is a marvelous movie, and I regret that I can't find it on video to share with others.

Maybe it's that I'm not gay that allows me to appreciate the fine craft it exhibits, since it doesn't threaten me personally.

This was a poor play,so naturally it made a poor movie.The casting was amiss. Harrison and Burton were two of the centuries finest actors, but, also two of the centuries most notorious womanizers, Harrison tries his best but manages only to give a few honest moments. Burton does not even accomplish that much. a total homosexual stereotype that would be more appropriate to a farce. Cathleen Nesbitt as Burton's mother gives the only honest portrayal in the film.But why blame the actors? It all boils down to the direction. a director is the controlling force of a film. if he could not evoke honest portrayals it rest on his head. ( AND THE AUTHOR.). a waste of talent in a poor production.