Prudência e a Pílula

I remember seeing this movie as a teen in the 80s, but had forgotten all of the particulars except for the fact that Deborah Kerr looked absolutely stunning and wore some great clothes. I had an opportunity to see it again recently and enjoyed the ride. This wasn't a Deborah Kerr film per se, but rather, an ensemble. David Niven was absolutely hysterical in the film. Some of the funniest scenes were of him up to shenanigans. The scene in the drug store getting aspirin was absolutely classic. Deborah Kerr, the reason I wanted to watch this movie, wasn't her usual genteel self, but I liked seeing her b!tchy side and the verbal sparring that went on between her and David Niven. All of the other characters were fun as well. This is a fun 60s romp with very little depth, but was entertaining enough to hold my interest until the end.

The sexually-estranged wife of a London banker (named Hardcastle!) is suspected of infidelity by her hypocrite husband, who is cheating himself with a French lass. He replaces his spouse's contraceptive pills ("Thenol") with aspirin--to catch her in the act, I guess--an idea he gets after his sister-in-law tells of a scheme by her teenage daughter to avoid pregnancy before marriage by swapping out her own mother's pills in the same fashion. Hugh Mills adapted his smirking play for the screen, and might have been astonished to find most of the female roles filled by matronly women (married to very mature men). This is a blue-haired attempt at keeping up with the youth explosion in cinema circa 1968, but the material is highly unsuitable for its stars. Deborah Kerr, David Niven, Robert Coote (awful!) and Joyce Redman look embarrassed to be involved; Edith Evans, as the potential mother-in-law for sexually-active Judy Geeson, is the only cast member to rise above the juvenile plotting. Director Fielder Cook left the project midway after a disagreement with the producers, to be replaced by Ronald Neame. * from ****

This silly romp is quite entertaining and even adorable. Its a lot of fun.

I am not the type of person who takes marriage and infidelity lightly. My attitude us be single or be married. Well this IS a farce and it does show how the complications that arise from sneaking around make it hardly worth the trouble.

I found this one of the most hilarious movies, full of subtle, elegant, classy and witty British humour. A really complicated argument develops itself very intelligently and in a smooth way through the film. Deborah Kerr and David Niven, as well as the rest of the cast, display their professionalism and talent at its best in this movie and consolidates their status as Stars in the whole sense of the word. It shows how a film can be witty and sexual without having to resort to the worn-out trick of out-of-context nudity, and it should be an example for twenty first century film makers. The acting is superb as it is the story. The copyright owners Thoroughly enjoyable, although due to the story it must be kept rated as it is.

The main idea behind "Prudence and the Pill" is one that doesn't make sense to me. While birth control pills might have looked VERY different in the UK in the 1960s, all the ones I've seen look absolutely nothing like aspirins or vitamins--which are much, much larger. So how could people be replacing another person's birth control pills with aspirins without anyone realizing it?

This 1960s sex comedy stars Deborah Kerr and David Niven...both of which made quite a few sophisticated sex comedies in the 1950s and 60s (such as the horrible CASINO ROYALE, BEDTIME STORY and THE GRASS IS GREENER). In this film, Mr. and Mrs. Hardcastle have an open marriage and both have their lovers. In addition, Mrs. Hardcastle's niece (Judy Geeson) is sleeping with her boyfriend. However, someone is messing with these ladies' birth control pills and soon complications ensue.

Like most of the sex comedies of the era, this film talks a lot about sex (or, more rightly, INSINUATING a lot about sex) without really showing or saying much at all. Racy stuff for the time...very tame stuff when seen today. So, while it portrays folks who have affairs and premarital sex, it's done with 60s sensibilities--being both extremely broad-minded AND old fashioned at the same time.

So is this any good and is it worth seeing? Well, at least for me, no especially. I might have enjoyed it had it just been more interesting, made more sense or made me laugh. Plus, and I guess this makes me sound very prudish, but I thought the Hardcastles were a pathetic couple...and I really didn't care one bit about what happened with them. What was a kooky sex romp back in the day now just seems dated and sub-par despite the big-name stars in it.