Last Tango In Paris

[tinybear]

It's 35 years old. I've heard of it of course (who hasn't), but never seen it. Does it really deserve to be a 'classic'?

The lead actress doesn't seem to think so.

I felt raped by Brando | the Daily Mail

[Jack]

It probably would have faded into oblivion by now if it hadn't been the first major motion picture to challenge the film ratings on how much sexual content would be allowed in a widely released mainstream movie with a major star. It was a ground-breaker, but hardly a classic in the usual sense. The plot was thin and the acting only so-so.

Perhaps the only other reason it's well remembered was that a lot of viewers learned some new and interesting ways to engage in foreplay from it.

[tinybear]

That's what I thought, so I never cared to rent it. Besides, I suppose the so-called 'daring' scenes would be considered tame by today's standards.

[Jack]

The first time I watched it, I found myself getting aroused walking through the produce section of the local supermarket. :rolleyes:

[Maryjane]

I was 12 when it came out. My father was working his third job at the drive in theater so we got to go to the moves a lot for free. All I remember is my mother making us cover our eyes when it came to the butter and clipping your finger nails scene. ( I didn't peek)

I think I would get more out of it now. Apparently the subject matter is what is known in the widowed world as "skin hunger." After losing a mate, some widowed find they have an increased desire for intimacy. Especially widowers.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Maryjane I was 12 when it came out. My father was working his third job at the drive in theater so we got to go to the moves a lot for free. All I remember is my mother making us cover our eyes when it came to the butter and clipping your finger nails scene. ( I didn't peek) I think I would get more out of it now. Apparently the subject matter is what is known in the widowed world as "skin hunger." After losing a mate, some widowed find they have an increased desire for intimacy. Especially widowers.

Windowers in a Window World eating Watermellons. I could make a poem out this.
Perky peaches in d cup. Bannas for brains they lust for the lush stawberry feilds foever where the jingle jangle tangeriens dance the Tangle and the Rasins sing "bip bam boom, fruit of the loom".

[tinybear]

I found this old photo. Marlon was quite good looking in the old days.

[LadiesMan217]

Have you seen "On the Waterfront"? Marlon is just dreamy in that movie.... I'm straight.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: tinybear It's 35 years old. I've heard of it of course (who hasn't), but never seen it. Does it really deserve to be a 'classic'? The lead actress doesn't seem to think so. I felt raped by Brando | the Daily Mail

I saw the "Last Tango In Paris" when it first came out. I didn't like it. Watching Brando climax just didn't and doesn't have any allure for me. Except for that scene with the anal sex and the required slab of butter I recall nothing whatsoever about the film.

It is, therefore; not a classic. Some people will declare it so, just to aggravate conservatives. The sex scenes were shocking at the time. Those who get a vicarious joy out of shocking people will likely like the film, but only for its shock value and nothing more. Why? Because there's nothing more there.

[Nono]

There was a housing shortage, the guy wanted the same apartment as the girl, so he raped her and got the apartment. All rather banal really.

[Deadeye]

A little more about Brando. His was a classic case of a great talent wasted. After "Streetcar Named Desire" and "On the Waterfront" nothing else mattered. At least not much. He was okay in "Mutiny On the Bounty" I guess. But his over acting was a movie killer for me.

For most of his career Brando just acted as Brando. While watching his films one would say to one'self, "Oh, here's Brando acting like a cowboy", or here's Brando acting like an Asian fellow.

John Wayne was kind of the same, I think. But I liked the Duke better than I did Marlon. And he became such a self centered weirdo, didn't he.

Brando, Carl Mauldin, Paul Newman, and James Dean and to a lessor extend Eli Wallach and Dennis Hopper set a standard for acting in the 50's and early 60's that was unsurpassed at the time. The "Method" may still be with us, but it's changed.

Oh, BTW: Marilyn Monroe belongs in that group somewhere as well. She was a wonderful actress; maybe Montomery Clift too.

[iclaudius]

Quote by: Deadeye Watching Brando climax just didn't and doesn't have any allure for me.

Because that was totally the point of the movie, right?


Last Tango in Paris is might have gained notoriety in lay circles for teetering on the edge of the border between sleaze and arthouse erotica, but that is only one of the reasons it has gained a permanent spot in film history. In the first place, anyone who claims to know anything about film knows that it is also the subject of the most notorious film review in cinema history... Pauline Kael's positively glowing New Yorker bit which ran (I think) a full 6 months ahead of the release. Kael actually wrote that review having only seen a preview screening of the film (an incomplete test-run, to see if audiences like it so far), but felt the film needed to be seen. In this way, she tried to take advantage of her rabid following (called "Kaelites" at the time), but its performance at the box office was relatively disappointing. So there's that, but it's one of the best-shot films in all of history, it is the best film of a now-dead genre, it is one of Brando's last great performances, and the list goes on and on. It is an indispensable part of film history, but also a very niche thing. If you want a movie with a strong plot, flashy special effects, fights, or Brad Pitt, this is certainly not the movie for you. It is pretty much just an excuse to study eroticism. It also pretty much demands that you find the meaning. It's demanding in general. Some people might say it's pretentious, but I enjoyed it. It's not perfect, but what is? For its accomplishments alone, it deserves its spot in the pantheon of everything, but it certainly isn't for everyone.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: iclaudius Because that was totally the point of the movie, right? Last Tango in Paris is might have gained notoriety in lay circles for teetering on the edge of the border between sleaze and arthouse erotica, but that is only one of the reasons it has gained a permanent spot in film history. In the first place, anyone who claims to know anything about film knows that it is also the subject of the most notorious film review in cinema history... Pauline Kael's positively glowing New Yorker bit which ran (I think) a full 6 months ahead of the release. Kael actually wrote that review having only seen a preview screening of the film (an incomplete test-run, to see if audiences like it so far), but felt the film needed to be seen. In this way, she tried to take advantage of her rabid following (called "Kaelites" at the time), but its performance at the box office was relatively disappointing. So there's that, but it's one of the best-shot films in all of history, it is the best film of a now-dead genre, it is one of Brando's last great performances, and the list goes on and on. It is an indispensable part of film history, but also a very niche thing. If you want a movie with a strong plot, flashy special effects, fights, or Brad Pitt, this is certainly not the movie for you. It is pretty much just an excuse to study eroticism. It also pretty much demands that you find the meaning. It's demanding in general. Some people might say it's pretentious, but I enjoyed it. It's not perfect, but what is? For its accomplishments alone, it deserves its spot in the pantheon of everything, but it certainly isn't for everyone.

You points are well taken.

When do you think Brando was at his best?

[iclaudius]

Peak? I don't think he had one. He didn't do great movies all the time, but I don't see any reason to believe he ever lost it. Oh, he changed, to be sure, but that impeccable subtlety never diminished. True, he was more charismatic in Streetcar and Waterfront, and yes, those are definitely his most influential roles (if only for defining a school of acting), but his work in The Godfather, Tango, and even Apocalypse Now is no less nuanced. They are a different perspective, yes, they are perhaps more restrained, more calculated, and less overtly desperate, but they are still absolutely brilliant. Can you imagined anyone but Brando in any of them? He was one of a kind throughout his career. If I had to pick, I'd say his strongest and probably best work is in Streetcar and Tango. Every time I watch them, the depth of emotion he implies takes my breath away. He was really great, and he was great in them. I feel sorry for people who can't connect in some way to those performances.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: iclaudius Peak? I don't think he had one. He didn't do great movies all the time, but I don't see any reason to believe he ever lost it. Oh, he changed, to be sure, but that impeccable subtlety never diminished. True, he was more charismatic in Streetcar and Waterfront, and yes, those are definitely his most influential roles (if only for defining a school of acting), but his work in The Godfather, Tango, and even Apocalypse Now is no less nuanced. They are a different perspective, yes, they are perhaps more restrained, more calculated, and less overtly desperate, but they are still absolutely brilliant. Can you imagined anyone but Brando in any of them? He was one of a kind throughout his career. If I had to pick, I'd say his strongest and probably best work is in Streetcar and Tango. Every time I watch them, the depth of emotion he implies takes my breath away. He was really great, and he was great in them. I feel sorry for people who can't connect in some way to those performances.

I liked Brando in One Eyed Jacks as well. He's a little overblown as usual, but I like the film. I can think of lots of other actors who could have done the part justice. Paul Newman for one. I like Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke, better than Brando in anything. The possible exception might me Brando in The God Father. And indeed I cannot think of anyone in that role other than Marlon.


Brando never did anything the same way twice. He acted to his fellings, which were fickle. He drove his fellow actors crazy in Streetcar.

Brando I think was totally stuck on himself and not really concerned about his charactors. He simply used them to convey his feelings, and not the other way around. Many writers and directors believe that it's the character who they are trying to convey. That's why I said that every thing that one sees staring Brando is simply Brando and not his character.

You, obviously find Brando compelling. I do not. Or at least I don't to the extent that you do. I think that Brando was self centered and sometimes cruel. To Brando it was all about Brando.

Newman, on the other hand was more interested in acting..He was about his charactor. So were Mauldin and Eli Wallac. I'm not so sure about James Dean. We didn't have him long enough to really study the guy. But, in general I liked Dean better than Brando.

Please understand, I'm not throwing rocks at you for being a Brando fan. Lots of folks are. Brando was a credible and popular actor after all.

You know what distracts me about watching a Brando flim. He never learned his lines. He insisted that they be printed on a sign somewhere. Sometimes he had them printed on a piece of paper that was glued to the forehead of the person he was acting with. So when he's looking deeply into some wilting lovely's eyes he's really reading his lines from off of her forehead. Weird.