Product: Last Tango in Paris (1973)
Rating: 2.0
Overrated classic
This is one of those movies where reading the negative reviews is far more interesting and even funnier than reading the positive ones. The positive ones usually gush about what a groundbreaking movie it was, and its unvarnished portrayal of a completely carnal relationship lacking any other redeeming qualities. Brando is usually thought to have done a remarkable job portraying a depressed man who is trying to lose himself in an orgy of erotic self-indulgence after the suicide of his wife. Another common complaint is that the movie, although perhaps great for its time, hasn't held up very well.Amazingly, I had never seen the movie until a few days ago, and felt this was a huge lacunae in my cinematic education so I decided to watch it. While I'm not as negative as the other negative reviews, I have to admit that they have some validity. It was a ground and pathbreaking movie for its time, and it deserves some credit for that, which is why I give it at least two stars.Unfortunately, I have to agree with many of the other negative reviews here that the movie just hasn't aged well. I also agree with many of the other comments that in ad libbing much of the dialog, the script, or lack of one, suffers and it just sounds like Brando on some analyst's couch engaging in sophomoric psycho-babble much of the time. But one must remember that this was the inner-space obsessed and psychedelic 60s and things like psychotherapy were all the rage, which is why the movie just sounds like Brando on the couch free-associating much of the time. It was also a time of supposed sexual liberation, and in that sense the movie accurately reflects its milieu but attempts to ratchet up the shock value on the carnal side, from which the movie's notorious and vaunted reputation mostly seems to stem.While all of that is fine, and I'm certainly no prude, a movie whose main attraction is its portrayal of a steamy, nihilistic, and exploitative sexual relationship but which lacks any other redeeming qualities may be a good candidate for the most sexually and sensually daring and controversial movie of its time, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a great movie, either. There is no character development, and no story arc beyond that of a dissipated, depressed, middle-aged man indulging his sexual fantasies with an ingenue.The dialog is mediocre at best, and except for the very emotional early scene by Brando, he spends most of the rest of the movie walking around like he's in a Quaalude-induced haze, although that drug was 15 years in the future. And by today's standards the movie wouldn't be considered sexually shocking at all. But then this was also the era of Leave it to Beaver which was considered a realistic portrayal of an American family. It's also one unremitting, humorless downer from beginning to end, as Brando wallows in his narcissistic world of grandiose and bottomless self-pity. This might have been okay for 15 minutes, but 2 hours of it is too much.So while I'm not as negative as many of the reviewers here, I can give it only 2 or maybe 2.5 stars. It certainly deserves some credit for breaking new ground in its portrayal of a sexually explicit and kinky relationship, there are one or two scenes in which Brando truly is great, and as one negative reviewer here said, it's something of an achievement to manage to make Paris look ugly.And last but not least, I hear the Cornhole Review rates it "5 sticks of butter." :-)