Quell'estate del '42

I saw this film with my dad at the long-gone Surf Theater on 74th Street and Collins Avenue on Miami Beach as a sneak preview. The theater was packed and I was 13 years old and three girls in their early 20s sat next to us, and I was a little red-faced about the movie. But, what a truly beautiful and romantic film. I always thought that my "first" love would be like the Summer of 42. Unfortunately in my case it wasn't. I joined the Army and had my "first" experience with a B-girl(bar-girl) overseas. It wasn't until I was 25 that I think I really had the "love feelings" that were shown in this timeless classic. A great film with outstanding performances by all involved. Really a shame that Gary Grimes and Jerry Houser never achieved the super stardom they deserved. And Jennier O'Neal was so beautiful. She was all-natural, so fresh, so down-to-earth. The Summer of 42 is great.

After watching Summer Of 42 and noted it's Oscar recognition came in the form of an award for Michel Legrand for Best Musical Scoring for1971 it occured to me that this film is one of the best examples of how the proper music can make a film. It's a beautiful film score, but more than that without it and lesser music this movie could have been a version of Porky's 42.

Three horny teen boys Gary Grimes, Jerry Houser, and Oliver Conant are ; vacarioning on Nantucket Island hich has fewer tourists than normal in that first summer of America in World War 2. The usual teen girls like Christopher Norris and friends get the engines racing. But who really intrigues them is Jennifer O'Neill a war bride whom they catch sight of sending her husband off to war.

Her aloneness sets the hormones racing. But Grimes who meets her accidentally and helps her with groceries becomes a friend. You take it from there.

The score is also helped by the photography of some beautiful scenes of Nantucket or whatever passed for it. Both Grimes and O'Neill got career roles out of the film. They both give sensitive and nuanced performances.

The film holds up well after almost 50 years. No remake will ever be necessary.

A good classic romance movie; it has a good story and good performances; I recommend it.

This movie captivated me beyond my expectations. Not being a movie-goer or a TV-watcher, I had not yet seen (or read about) the movie, its excerpts, the original book, or the cast, although I had heard references to the summer of '42. After an intense work week, I had tuned into the PBS channel on TV to watch 30 minutes of a business news program, at the end of which, PBS showed that "The Summer of '42" was next. I thought of watching it only for a few minutes - not really being interested in seeing a story from 62 years ago in a movie made 33 years ago. PBS played the movie without a break, and I sat through all of it - totally captivated. I don't think I can explain the reasons with a typical technical analysis. I think it held me in a trance, because it reflected my own coming of age. Even though I grew up in a different era, country, culture and society, there were many parallels to the drugstore episode, the furtive readings of the book, the carrying of the grocery bags, the storing away of the boxes, and the attempted "fooling around" inside the movie theater.

I like a production (movie; theater; music) that reflects the reality one experiences in life. This movie was one of those rare productions. I felt it was quite artistic in its balance - the way it assimilated simple elements from everyday living, with a simple, but enchanting, musical score. The movie did not need any dazzling stage effects - Jennifer O'Neill was enough; and, even in her, the art and beauty was in her being so natural.

In the end, I felt good about spending the time to see the movie.

Oh. My. God.

What a stunning piece of craftsmanship. A masterpiece. Such innocence. Such humanity. Such wisdom. Such truth. Such is the need to touch the soul of another, and such is the need to seek comfort. Yet tenderness risks so much. Oh to be tender again. Yet who could bear it again?

I remember when I was eight years old and I remember what a splash this movie made. I don't really recall that I was told or even understood why, and of course I wasn't taken to see it at that age, at that time, when it was common to keep children ignorant of much they are not today. I'm not sure now that it wasn't the craving of the parents to let themselves drown in the strangeness that is naivety prolonged too long for the sake of innocence itself rather than some strange desire to protect their children from things the children could already begin to feel within themselves but were not allowed to mention or ask about.

Though the latter is, even today, what is trumpeted about as the reason for shielding children from things they might not be ready for, I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't really the parents who are just protecting themselves, trying to squeeze out more childhood days from their children for the parents to enjoy before they must finally release their darling children into the fray that tides upon the whims of nature and destiny.

This movie came out in 1971. Tonight they played it late on our local PBS station here in Dallas. I'd never seen it and not thought about renting it and watching it in all these 33 years since then.

One might say it is simply about a couple of 15 year old boys coming of age. But it is more than that. So much more. In fact, without question, it is about the human condition itself.

This is a movie about sex, no doubt about that either. But a movie of a kind that I don't think I've ever seen before. Everyone should see this film. Everyone.

If you live alone, see it and feel your own soul's needs. If you live with someone, see it together and draw him or her close.

Above all, when it is over, you will find yourself remembering and feeling that rarest of all feelings, true tenderness.

The young men should have received acclaim for their performances , and without question so too should have the woman.

For she was woman, every woman.