Fruedian psychology must have been real real popular in the early sixties. Between Psycho, The Manchurian Candidate, Dr Straelove, and this dime store matriarchal film making seem to hit a cheesy crescendo. Why? This seems to be an interesting enough premise for a movie, but (at least in today's standards) seems meek and unwilling to commit itself to anything more than skipping along the surface of it's quirky characters. Plenty of interesting elements lurk right beneath the surface, but in this heavy handed melodramatic bird's stool, it falls flat.
The movie does serve as an oddity (or perfect example) of lazy film making, perhaps because of budget. Every scene is repetitive. The movie follows so closely to the idea of one set set-up, establishment, and fade out, that it seems less and less like a movie and more and more like a series of scenes. To a modern audience it should seem striking. Quick cuts, and lead in being today's norms.
5 out of 10, not bad, but Jimmy Stewart in Harvey is less of a waste of time.........
The movie does serve as an oddity (or perfect example) of lazy film making, perhaps because of budget. Every scene is repetitive. The movie follows so closely to the idea of one set set-up, establishment, and fade out, that it seems less and less like a movie and more and more like a series of scenes. To a modern audience it should seem striking. Quick cuts, and lead in being today's norms.
5 out of 10, not bad, but Jimmy Stewart in Harvey is less of a waste of time.........