Amarti a New York

This film essentially begins with a mathematics professor in Chicago by the name of "Kate Gunzinger" (Jill Clayburgh) facing a difficult decision on whether to go to a job interview in New York City and while there attending his father's wedding to a woman she doesn't particularly like. Equally distressing is the fact that if she is offered a new job there it will cause stress in her current relationship with her live-in boyfriend "Homer" (Charles Grodin) which-even though it lacks passion and intimacy-still gives her some degree of comfort and stability. What she doesn't anticipate, however, is meeting a former baseball player named "Ben Lewin" (Michael Douglas) who awakens emotions she thought had long since ceased to exist. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a mediocre romantic-drama suffers from a slow pace, uninspired script and lack of chemistry between Jill Clayburgh and Michael Douglas. Even so, Jill Clayburgh performed adequately enough and since this film managed to pass the time I have rated it accordingly. An average film all around.

Kate Gunzinger (Jill Clayburgh) is a math professor but her know-it-all student may be surpassing her. She moved in with boyfriend Homer (Charles Grodin) but she is still troubled by her spinsterhood. It doesn't help that her father (Steven Hill) is getting remarried. She is meeting her future family for the first time. Her new step-brother Ben Lewin (Michael Douglas) is a washed up baseball player. He saves her from an embarrassing situation and the two of them connect despite her boyfriend and his wife.

Like they say, there are too many people in their relationship. That may be the point of the movie but it makes it difficult to root for them to make it. It would help if Homer is a stiff. He needs to have no personality and no chemistry with Kate. There are two ways to take this relationship movie. It's either modern and edgy or it's convoluted modern gobbledygook. Homer is a perfectly good guy and that's a problem. For the climatic talk between them to work, it needs to be setup much better in the earlier interaction. The script got a Razzie nomination although I don't think it deserves it. There are some issues but they are not fatal. There is also a common complaint about the movie's feminism. Let's just say that some boys have very thin skin. Maybe she didn't show enough T&A.

bad product. Can anyone today direct a real film about women in NYC? I love Jill Clayburgh and Steven Hill. And this film did not do either of them justice. Granted, 1980 was a strange year. But did women still have to wear stiletto heels while teaching college mathematics? At this point in time, audiences shifted to a new generation. Yes, Fatal Attraction came out with Michael Douglas- there was a new edge. But there was still a theme, a story.

My primary complaint with this film is the trite stereotypes (Douglas as a baseball star), Hill as a Jewish businessman. We still see these portrayals today. It is tiresome.

While Clayburgh is an excellent actress, we do not get see her act, while she acts the "neurotic white woman in an upscale hotel in NYC" It really is over done; in the most basic sense of the word. If you want to see a good NY film about mid-life crisis, watch Woody Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors"...light years ahead of this film in the sense of direction and projection. 2/10

Mediocre and unmemorable comey, in which a Beautiful college professor suddenly finds herself torn between two men. Clayburgh's staple role, the independent woman, wears thin in this lackluster romance. One of Douglas' earlier leading man roles before his breakthrough in Fatal Attraction.

Jill Clayburgh plays yet another one of those wannabe liberated women in this feminist fantasy/comedy. She's a math professor at the University of Chicago and living with a guy (Charles Grodin) but she feels she wants more ... maybe. On a trip to New York for her widowed father's wedding, she meets a brash man (Michael Douglas) and something happens.

The trouble with this film is that the feminist view is scuttled in favor of formula storytelling. Clayburgh hit the mark in AN UNMARRIED WOMAN because the character fulfilled her promise. In this film, she falls for the same of song and dance and basically gives up any sort of fulfillment for the usual relationship with a man.

The ultimate fulfillment is still to be found in a man. The real irony here is that this film was written by a woman and directed by a woman and they still come up with "a man is the answer," whereas AN UNMARRIED WOMAN was written and directed by a man.

Feminist politics aside, Clayburgh, Douglas, and Grodin are easy to watch even though there are a few wayward scenes that go nowhere or seem to have come out of nowhere. Steven Hill plays the marrying father, and although he's in bad health and popping heart pills, nothing comes of that arc. Beverly Garland is quite good as the new bride. There's also Dianne Wiest, Charles Kimbrough,, and Daniel Stern as a brilliant student.

Clayburgh's teaching career and new job in New York tack a back seat as soon as Douglas enters the story. Director Claudia Weill, who showed such a sure hand in GIRLFRIENDS just goes by the numbers here. There's never a moment's doubt what the conclusion will be, despite the film's title.