Hair

One night at home I had nothing to do, and I saw that Hair was on t.v. later. I was curious about it, I mean I had no idea what to expect. I had heard people make fun of it, and I had heard people praise it. So I had to watch, I had to have an opinion.

At the beginning of the film, I enjoyed The Age of Aquarius number, and was intrigued. However, when the number Hair came on, I didn't know how to react. I wanted to laugh at it and change the channel, I didn't want my siblings to make fun of me. Yet the song, though a little stupid, was also catchy. I kept watching. After I was finished watching the entire film, I had no idea what had just happened. I didn't know if I liked it or not, I did know that I wanted to see it again.

This is a strangely addicting film. I watched it three more times in the days following, and my final verdict is, I love it! I can't help it. It's just so fun! The fist time I watched it I was mocking it, but by the third time viewing it I was in anticipation over when the number Hair would come on so I could sing along. I especially loved the song, How Can People Be So Hard, it's a different pace from the majority of the film. What can I say, when it was over I was singing the songs in my head for weeks. I just have to buy it. I highly recommend this film to musical lovers (especially if you love musicals like The Who's Tommy). And although I know I would never be a hippie, this film makes me want to say "Heck with work, I'm going to grow out my hair so fleas can live in it!" Watch it, but beware, I think it just might do the same for you!!!

The 1979 film musical of HAIR was loosely based on the infamous 1960's Broadway musical that became famous because of its infamous nude scene. The stage musical isn't really much more than a group of skits strung together with some amusing musical numbers; however for the film director Milos Foreman (who won an Oscar for directing ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST) and the writers have taken the basic premise of the play and the score and constructed a real story to make the show more "user friendly" for the big screen. In the film, naive farm boy Claude Hooper Buchowski (John Savage) is about to go into the army and decides to spend a couple of days in New York where he meets a group of aging hippies (Treat Williams, Dorsey Wright, Annie Golden, Don Dacus)who get him involved in a group of nutty misadventures, including the pursuit of a snooty society girl (Beverly D'Angelo). The story divides into a series of vignettes that range from the ridiculous to the sublime, but it is all gorgeously photographed with a clever use of NYC locations and imaginatively staged musical numbers (outstandingly choreographed by the legendary Twyla Tharp). Treat Williams lights up the screen as Berger, the unconventional and free-spirited hippie who does his best to get Claude to loosen up and is matched scene for scene by Savage as Claude, who brings a lovely sweetness to the role of Claude. Annie Golden is a charmer as Jeannie, the pregnant hippie who is pregnant by Wright or Dacus, doesn't know which one is the father and doesn't seem to care. There is one outstanding musical number after another here..."Aquarius" is a tour through Central Park which includes dancing horses...Treat Williams disrupts a fancy dinner party in "I Got Life"..."Black Boys/White Boys" features the late Nell Carter and Ellen Foley extolling the ethnic virtues of men and "Easy to be Hard" is a powerful rendering of one of the best songs in the show by original cast member Cheryl Barnes, who plays Wright's ex-girlfriend and mother of his child. This is a beautifully photographed, well-acted sung, and danced psychedelic acid trip of a movie that must be seen and once seen, will initiate multiple viewings as this dazzler has to much to offer to catch it all in one showing.

Yes, HAIR came out in the late 70's. But please don't call it a "disco-era" musical; there isn't a single thing in it that would suggest any detraction from its 1968 period. Judge it on its own merit; too often, a movie is compared to its stage roots and is inevitably crucified. As it is, the film plays out like one long, fantasy trip (whether that trip is substance-enhanced or not is your call)- starting with the "Aquarius" sequence and continuing on to the marvelous set pieces for "Manchester England," "Ain't Got No," "I Got Life," and best of all, the "Electric Blues"/"Hare Krishna" fantasy which shows lovers John Savage and Beverly D'Angelo literally flying through their own wedding ceremony. (BTW, the woman singing "Aquarius" in the film's opening is not Melba Moore, but Ren Woods- a wonderful singer-actress seen a lot on TV in the 70's, and star of the Los Angeles production of "The Wiz.") The opening Twyla Tharp corps-de-ballet shot right on the Central Park grounds- with Woods' solo in a dizzying 360 camera pan- is an awesome start to a rock-infested musical. Ms. Moore (who performed in the original Broadway HAIR) appears later in the film singing "3-5-0-0" with Ronnie Dyson in the war protest scene shot in Washington, DC. And there are moments- like the "Walking In Space" basic training sequence or the simple close-up on Cheryl Barnes's torch solo "Easy To Be Hard-" which are just plain astonishing.

I was fortunate to have seen the revival of the Broadway show three times. Prices were a bit cheaper then. This movie is vastly different from the show. The similarities are; the music, the characters, the setting. That's it.

The plot is entirely different. The characters may be the same but it's like they stepped into another story. The songs are interspersed where they seemed to fit, but to me they feel wrong. Most of the movie is wrong - in my humble opinion. This seems like Hollywood's attempt to remake Hair with the same music. I wish the show was available online.

At least I have my memories.

The first time I ever saw this movie was when I was four years old. I remember loving it and everything about it. 13 years later, I am now 17, and decided to watch it about a month ago because I am taking a 1960's class in school. I didn't really know what to expect, since it had been 13 years since I last saw it, but I was completely blown away by it. The actors were amazing, the music was so fun, and I now find myself singing along to every song. Treat Williams is great as Berger, the "leader" of the hippie group, who always gets what he wants, one way or another (except for at the very end, of course). John Savage is actually very convincing as Claude, the Oklahoma draftee who falls in love with Sheila (Beverly D'Angelo). D'Angelo is lovely as the prim and proper rich girl who eventually rebels against her upbringing and joins the hippies. The other hippies are played by Annie Golden, Don Dacus, and Dorsey Wright. Annie Golden is just adorable as Jeannie, the girl who is pregnant but still as cute and innocent as a child. Don Dacus and Dorsey Wright are good as Woof and Hud, the other two members of the group, and Cheryl Barnes, who plays Hud's fiancée, has an amazing voice.

The only problem I have with this movie, however, is that the relationship between Claude and Sheila is not very convincing. They are barely ever shown together, and when they are, they fight (remember the skinny dipping scene?). It seems as though their relationship is very weak, and by the end of the movie we are supposed to believe they are madly in love, only based on the few meetings they had. I also see that many people writing reviews here are upset by the PG rating this movie has. I personally would raise the rating up to a PG-13, only because there is some drug use... but remember in 1979, PG-13 didn't exist. I don't think the nudity is bad at all, it is in no way sexual (in fact, there isn't really any sex at all in this movie), and it is only to show the childlike innocence that the group maintains. In most European countries, nudity isn't regarded as something bad, and I don't see why it is here in the US. Anyways, I give this movie a high rating, and I'm glad it was made back then, because in the insanely "politically correct" world of today, they wouldn't even think of making it, and even if they did, it would be a very "watered down" version, and I'm sure you wouldn't get the full effect.

In conclusion, this is a very underrated film that is definitely worth checking out.