Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

calvinnme This is a film about the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court, released about the same time that Reagan appointed the first woman to the Supreme Court - Sandra Day O'Connor - with the female justice, Justice Ruth Loomis played by Jill Clayburgh, and Walter Matthau as her fellow justice and ideological nemesis, Justice Dan Snow. The chief justice is played by Barnard Hughes who seems to just want to keep the peace and keep a low profile, not really what you would expect from a chief justice. Weirdly nobody calls him by name, they just call him C.J.This thing is really a time capsule, and that was surprising since I was 23 when it was released and thought of 1981 as modern times. At Loomis' confirmation hearings she is asked if being a woman will influence her decisions and why she doesn't have any children! Even the justices make sexist remarks like saying "the perfume will make the place smell better" and wondering if she will put up curtains! The really interesting thing for me was that I had a hard time telling whether Loomis and Matthau were just disagreeing on individual cases or if one was right and the other left or if one or the other was supposed to be a moderate! Not until the end does the film clearly tell you which is which with a funny line about cab fare and liberals never having money.There are two cases the justices spar over - one is about a pornographic film that the maker says is actually an educational documentary, and the other is a large corporation's possible attempt to squash the development of an idea that would have competed with their established products.Loomis naively talks about the virtues of big corporations and how they only want to build up America and their stockholders. Matthau does a monologue about defending everybody's right to free speech no matter how offensive. Today nobody believes big corporations are inherently good, and both libs and conservatives would like to squish the other side's free speech rights if they could.The dialogue could have been better for the material, but there is a mini-mystery towards the end that gives the film an interesting twist. Matthau is basically just playing a more erudite version of Oscar the slob from The Odd Couple. Matthau's character's wife (Jan Sterling) leaves him in the middle of the movie because - I'm not sure - the reason she gave was that her husband did not know what kind of wallpaper they had, but she made sure to take that fur coat with her! Probably she left so that there could be a possibility of sexual tension between Matthau's and Clayburgh's characters. I'll let you watch and find out if that actually happens.I loved it if for no other reason than to take a look back at how politics used to be. I'd give it an 8/10 but YMMV. Especially when you see the credits and find that Robert E. Lee co-wrote the play and the screenplay! It probably could not get screened today because of that! Oh how times have changed!

romanorum1 President Ronald Reagan's appointment of Sandra Day O'Connor as the first woman Supreme Court Justice in the USA in 1981 may have inspired this movie even though the original play was several years earlier. Jill Clayburgh stars as the unattached, conservative, and sprightly Ruth Loomis from California who remains undaunted as the new Justice. Co-star Walter Matthau (Dan Snow) is the cantankerous, veteran liberal Justice with whom she repartees on various legal issues. Obviously there are long dialog scenes. Snow is an advocate of free speech and expression. "I'll defend everybody's right to speak and every man's right to be wrong!" he exclaims. Snow also rails, "There are only eight of us left against all of her." There is one odd exchange delivered by Justice Loomis during her confirmation: "The F.B.I. is wrong in reporting to you that I have no children. Ideas are my children, and I have hundreds of them." Yikes! But, exhibiting good chemistry, both stars are at the top of their game. Clayburgh and Matthau are both quick-witted and likable. The movie was shot on location in the District of Columbia and also in California. As the plot is rather thin, the acting carries the movie. It is not bad, but it is also no classic.

mlionfire Walter Matthau will always be one of my favorites from the sleazy bar-owner in King Creole to Hopscotch(another unusual pairing with Glenda Jackson)to countless other films he has appeared in... His droll comments and quick wit are hilarious.... and Jill Clayburgh does stand up to the occasion of matching him in legal argument(although scripted).... Of all the Matthau pieces, I think this is well worth the time, though I think the title(refers to the first sitting each year of the Supreme Court Judges)could have been a little more enticing to the general public... I think as a result of the title this movie has been largely overlooked... It is a funny, believable piece, well worth catching if you can!

myrddyn Clayburgh did a fantastic job of balancing Matthau's usual strong performance. The two struck a rapport that I never expected, and they ran off with the movie. I gave it an 8 instead of a 10 mostly because the script and cast couldn't keep up with them. Also, they have some weak spots when they go for light-hearted comedy. For me, the real shining light of the entire show was the way the two managed to continue an understandable discussion of the hot issues in jurisprudence of that time -- at least fifteen minutes of viewing are justified by that historical perspective alone. In short, it's heart-warming, well-acted in the leads, and technically tighter than most viewers would realize.