@@ricardocantoral7672 If we are going to use fame and success as the barometer of rating an actor Vin Diesel's films have superceded anything John Lithgow has done or will ever do. And he did "Pitch Black" and that was godawful. I'm saying actors like John, Kevin Bacon they are successful but I think what they do is not held in the highest regard. I loved him in Santa Claus: The Movie in the way an actor like Shia Lebouf whose work is extremely overstated. I feel he is just another script away from being nominated best actor for something. He is that good.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Reputation and actually being utilized for roles are two different things. He has so much range I'd love to see him in MCU films. Even more dramatic roles as a lead. I mean he should've won for the World According to Garp. I loved him in Santa Claus: The Movie. I'd love to see a bigger main stream use of him. Btw 5th Rock from the sun was ages ago!
@@danielcastillo4537 As I already stated, he starred in a bit tv show and starred and played supporting roles in a list feature films. He isn't underrated by any metric. You want talk underrated, I would say look no further than Armand Assante.
For whatever reason, this movie is rarely mentioned in the many many strong Robin Williams performances on film, it's truly one of his best roles, some scenes are mildly funny, most interesting and some heartbreaking...Glenn Close as his Mother was also very strong, but too bad neither one mentions an equally strong performance from John Lithgow....
1982 is considered a modern film. Anything after the 60s is the modern era, before the 60s is the classic era and the 60s itself is dependent on the film.
A movie that provided a sort of template for PT Anderson and Wes Anderson, among others; a quirky universe you either jibed and rolled with or didn't. I did, seeing it at the time at a midnight showing.
I love the movie. Even though it doesn't conclude with a defining ending it's about life and wonderfully done. Not all movies have to be beginning, middle and end. All of the performances were great for the characters they were portraying.
I remember watching this film as a kid and thinking “ what the hell bizarro world does this represent.” Well welcome to 2020. Where right is wrong and wrong is right. Poor Garp a victim of social architecture... poor us. Ty very much for posting.
First saw this film when I was a kid a couple years after it came out and had never seen anything like it then, or since. Great film, great performances.
It's an odd duck of a movie; having read the book back in the Silurian Age, I can't believe someone actually made a movie from it. The story benefits from being a book because it provides an inner story as the book goes along. Ebert made a good point here about how the incidents the book describes just become funny incidents in the movie without any real context
I read his review after I watched it and funnily ebert said, in so many words, that he liked the movie despite hating the book. I’ve left the movie feeling very confused honestly. I haven’t read the book, but the same author wrote cider house rules and I love that story. I feel like it, in part, is also about navigating the randomness and tragedy of life… but it accomplishes this while maintaining thematic and moral clarity. I literally have no clue what to think about garp. The simplest takeaway seems to be that feminism and extramarital sex lead to tragedy and death (but despite the constant parallels in the film, garp’s affair doesn’t directly lead to any consequences? It’s hard to believe that’s unintentional), while rape is relatively morally neutral and is played for laughs repeatedly. I’m really not sure if this is the intention, but it’s a conclusion I feel the film wants to lead me to while watching (and one that I’m sure countless audience members in 1982 arrived at). The film feels more confused than I am… like feminists cutting their tongues out seems to be some kind of glaring metaphor, but I don’t see how this is analogous to real life sociopolitical happenings. Was this choice simply to illustrate the dangers of political extremism, and it’s ironic to silence yourself as a statement? It feels like someone just trying to write a story that contains as much irony as possible, largely meaninglessly. It’s certainly thought-provoking, but not in a satisfying or enriching way. I didn’t mean to write this much, just can’t stop thinking about garp lol sorry.
While I’m writing too much, it’s strange to me that the assassins (apart from Pooh) act more as forces of nature than as victims of political extremism themselves. Seems like a worthwhile parallel or source of demonstrative irony, especially compared to many other instances that are focal to the story. The singular focus/onus placed on the story’s absurd feminists is strange and waters down what could potentially have been a good message. I wonder if the book is different in this regard?
@@cdedberry Your comments are quite wonderful to read. Literate! Anyway, like I said, Irving - both his books and the movies made from his books - are almost forgotten news to me: by 1990 I remember trying to read "A Prayer for Owen Meany", struggling with the opening chapters about the narrator's love of the Anglican church, and saying to myself, "I've either outgrown Irving or just ain't interested", decided it was the latter, and quit reading. As far as Garp goes, the one thing I'm certain of is that the movie was funnier than the book. Lithgow was charming as the trans woman, Close was perfect as the holy nun/nurse/avenging feminist. I remember everything but Robin Williams - weird casting. Imagine casting him and asking him to restrain everything that made him him. It was his first movie! I guess the idea was to get as far away from "Mork" as practicable. As far as the BOOK goes, I recall it as being far more serious, or at least the comic bits came with more context. I remember feeling a bit manipulated by Irving: he made his battalion of infuriated feminists so infuriating and unfair that I remember getting mad while reading and then saying to myself, "There is no one like these people, calm down." Irving has said that the book is about hating other people for their sexuality, or something along those lines. Which I suppose makes "Garp" wayyyyy ahead of its time, given our current climate. I suspect some male anxiety about 2nd-wave feminism though, definitely. Honestly, kinda comes through again in "Cider" - a putatively pro-abortion book that spends a GREAT deal of time giving voice to a sort of gently paternalistic anti-abortion POV. Back to Garp, I barely recall the assassins, so I couldn't tell you. In conclusion, you should read "Garp" - my adolescent memories of it are quite wrong, I'm sure. Take care,
A criminally overlooked and underrated masterpiece, this is my absolute favorite film of all time. Simply put, to me, it’s perfect or as near to perfect as a film can get. It shies away from nothing, and pulls no punches. It’s authentically brave, brilliantly acted, directed and written, at times highly controversial and shocking, sardonic and darkly comic, with a wry wit and sharp take on the dangers of dogmatic, cultish fanaticism, bold and beautiful trans representation that was completely unheard of for its era, a timeless soundtrack (that includes The Beetles) and sweeping cinematic shots of the supposed New England coastline, it’s impossible for me to love a film more than this one.
We’re all quite aware that Irving was no fan of this film, and to be honest, bringing this novel to the big screen was no easy task . That said however, the casting/acting/direction/screenwriting may not have been what Irving intended (and tbh, Irving has always had a pretty lofted ideal of himself ) the film, in my opinion at least, does a great job in being apart, separate from the novel. All the actors did a superb job in bringing those characters to life . And the story arc ends just as it begins . With no moral justification other than that this is just how people’s lives are lived .
Ahhhhhhh.... we enter the time where the actor being reviewed is dead, and both of the reviewers are dead. They're all dead. John Lithgow and Glenn Close are still alive (today) at least.
Yeah the movie was brilliant. I was a little kid & saw it as a double feature with Arthur. We loved Garp so much we just left without seeing Arthur. We were emotionally spent. Thumbs up 👍
The meaning of this movie is captured in a scene where Garp says at the end of one day, "I lived a beautiful life today." And then something like, it's funny how you can live an entire life in one day. In other words, when we live life to the fullest, death stops being a tragedy.
This was a good movie, I saw it when it first came out. But I made a big mistake. I took a new girl friend with me to see it thinking it was a comedy. That is how it was promoted, as a comedy. This is not a comedy, it is a very serious story, not intended for laughs. So for me and my date it was not a happy experience.
I have no idea why this movie doesn't get more acclaim as a great all-time movie. Robin Williams, John Lithgow and Glenn Close give amazing performances.
Its a great movie - and credit to Siskel who nailed this one - he totally got the film You could the light bulb go off above Eberts head when he explained it to him and almost said as much but pulled back at the last second
So many academy Award winning performances swoozie Kurtz,John Lithgow, Glenn Close, Robin Williams but I had the same problem with it's theme. But I whole heartedly reccomend this movie too!
Did anyone notice in the film the losses: tongues, ears, Garp's son loses an eye, and we know what Michael Milton (and Roberta) lost ... See, speak, hear ... and LIFE ITSELF
Some of the performances are great, but this movie was terrible-especially if you’ve read the book and compare the two. John Irving shows his class by not trashing this movie every time he’s asked about it. No plane flys into a house in the novel.
Both Siskel and Ebert, amusingly enough, completely missed the point of this film venture... It is life. A strange and interesting one, but life it doesn't have a defined storyline, it's simply a series of interesting events and that it stops, admittedly very tragically... but then again, even that is a reflection of life itself, not many lives end on a happy note, and this film perfectly portrays the way so many lives end up coming to a close... Unexpectedly, tragically and suddenly and most of the time for no damn good reason... Shit happens, the movie... A very admirable reflection of life as we all come to know it, brilliantly written and portrayed by a stunning and memorable cast
The writers of the Updike/Irving era tried to make up for their lack of humanness and heart with quirkiness, a formula mirrored by Woody Allen in his films. You don't really like or care about the characters, but aren't they wacky?!!
I thought this movie SUCKED. I can't believe they both liked it. Even Roger Ebert said that he came away from the film not knowing what it was about. That's exactly what I was thinking too and I give it ZERO STARS.
I hate GARP. Robin is very controlled and quite good. But... It makes sex the punchline and notice how all who have sex have something bad happen to them. GARP and the neighbor girl. He has his ear bitten off. Later shot. GARPS mom is shot GARPS wife loses a son. Weird, stupid movie. The snickering at sex is disturbing.
John Lithgow is one of the most criminally underrated actors of all time!
I don't see how he's underrated. He has an enormously successful career in film on TV and that is a rare achievement.
@@ricardocantoral7672 If we are going to use fame and success as the barometer of rating an actor Vin Diesel's films have superceded anything John Lithgow has done or will ever do. And he did "Pitch Black" and that was godawful. I'm saying actors like John, Kevin Bacon they are successful but I think what they do is not held in the highest regard. I loved him in Santa Claus: The Movie in the way an actor like Shia Lebouf whose work is extremely overstated. I feel he is just another script away from being nominated best actor for something. He is that good.
@@danielcastillo4537 Lithgow has a fine reputation I. Again, I don't know why you think he is underrated.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Reputation and actually being utilized for roles are two different things. He has so much range I'd love to see him in MCU films. Even more dramatic roles as a lead. I mean he should've won for the World According to Garp. I loved him in Santa Claus: The Movie. I'd love to see a bigger main stream use of him. Btw 5th Rock from the sun was ages ago!
@@danielcastillo4537 As I already stated, he starred in a bit tv show and starred and played supporting roles in a list feature films. He isn't underrated by any metric. You want talk underrated, I would say look no further than Armand Assante.
For whatever reason, this movie is rarely mentioned in the many many strong Robin Williams performances on film, it's truly one of his best roles, some scenes are mildly funny, most interesting and some heartbreaking...Glenn Close as his Mother was also very strong, but too bad neither one mentions an equally strong performance from John Lithgow....
Lithgow's performance was off the charts excellent. I loved that he played the only sane person in the entire film :)
@@monkeyman2407 Agreed. "I was a tight end for the Philadelphia Eagles."
Glenn Close is excellent in this (as she is in virtually every movie she's in). Very odd movie, but worth seeing.
glen close and williams are about the same age
1982 is considered a modern film. Anything after the 60s is the modern era, before the 60s is the classic era and the 60s itself is dependent on the film.
@@anthonyscully2998 The movie started Robin Williams run for Oscar.
Of all the roles Gleen Close was nominated for ,I think she should have won for Garp ,the Natural, or the Wife.
A movie that provided a sort of template for PT Anderson and Wes Anderson, among others; a quirky universe you either jibed and rolled with or didn't. I did, seeing it at the time at a midnight showing.
No. Their movies have endings and make sense. No random bullshit to fill the screen.
A good movie enjoyed very much. One of the best movies in summer 82 along with many others that summer. But sad ending
I love the movie. Even though it doesn't conclude with a defining ending it's about life and wonderfully done. Not all movies have to be beginning, middle and end. All of the performances were great for the characters they were portraying.
try the book.
It was the beginning, middle and end of Garp
I remember watching this film as a kid and thinking “ what the hell bizarro world does this represent.” Well welcome to 2020. Where right is wrong and wrong is right. Poor Garp a victim of social architecture... poor us. Ty very much for posting.
As if right on que a MAN tells us this movie represents everything bad in the world and how disappointed he is.
Both made good points. I felt similar to Roger when I watched it but Gene provided a good perspective on the movie.
It was a great movie. Robin Williams best work.
First saw this film when I was a kid a couple years after it came out and had never seen anything like it then, or since. Great film, great performances.
It's an odd duck of a movie; having read the book back in the Silurian Age, I can't believe someone actually made a movie from it. The story benefits from being a book because it provides an inner story as the book goes along. Ebert made a good point here about how the incidents the book describes just become funny incidents in the movie without any real context
I read his review after I watched it and funnily ebert said, in so many words, that he liked the movie despite hating the book. I’ve left the movie feeling very confused honestly. I haven’t read the book, but the same author wrote cider house rules and I love that story. I feel like it, in part, is also about navigating the randomness and tragedy of life… but it accomplishes this while maintaining thematic and moral clarity. I literally have no clue what to think about garp. The simplest takeaway seems to be that feminism and extramarital sex lead to tragedy and death (but despite the constant parallels in the film, garp’s affair doesn’t directly lead to any consequences? It’s hard to believe that’s unintentional), while rape is relatively morally neutral and is played for laughs repeatedly. I’m really not sure if this is the intention, but it’s a conclusion I feel the film wants to lead me to while watching (and one that I’m sure countless audience members in 1982 arrived at). The film feels more confused than I am… like feminists cutting their tongues out seems to be some kind of glaring metaphor, but I don’t see how this is analogous to real life sociopolitical happenings. Was this choice simply to illustrate the dangers of political extremism, and it’s ironic to silence yourself as a statement? It feels like someone just trying to write a story that contains as much irony as possible, largely meaninglessly. It’s certainly thought-provoking, but not in a satisfying or enriching way. I didn’t mean to write this much, just can’t stop thinking about garp lol sorry.
While I’m writing too much, it’s strange to me that the assassins (apart from Pooh) act more as forces of nature than as victims of political extremism themselves. Seems like a worthwhile parallel or source of demonstrative irony, especially compared to many other instances that are focal to the story. The singular focus/onus placed on the story’s absurd feminists is strange and waters down what could potentially have been a good message. I wonder if the book is different in this regard?
@@cdedberry Your comments are quite wonderful to read. Literate! Anyway, like I said, Irving - both his books and the movies made from his books - are almost forgotten news to me: by 1990 I remember trying to read "A Prayer for Owen Meany", struggling with the opening chapters about the narrator's love of the Anglican church, and saying to myself, "I've either outgrown Irving or just ain't interested", decided it was the latter, and quit reading. As far as Garp goes, the one thing I'm certain of is that the movie was funnier than the book. Lithgow was charming as the trans woman, Close was perfect as the holy nun/nurse/avenging feminist. I remember everything but Robin Williams - weird casting. Imagine casting him and asking him to restrain everything that made him him. It was his first movie! I guess the idea was to get as far away from "Mork" as practicable. As far as the BOOK goes, I recall it as being far more serious, or at least the comic bits came with more context. I remember feeling a bit manipulated by Irving: he made his battalion of infuriated feminists so infuriating and unfair that I remember getting mad while reading and then saying to myself, "There is no one like these people, calm down." Irving has said that the book is about hating other people for their sexuality, or something along those lines. Which I suppose makes "Garp" wayyyyy ahead of its time, given our current climate. I suspect some male anxiety about 2nd-wave feminism though, definitely. Honestly, kinda comes through again in "Cider" - a putatively pro-abortion book that spends a GREAT deal of time giving voice to a sort of gently paternalistic anti-abortion POV. Back to Garp, I barely recall the assassins, so I couldn't tell you. In conclusion, you should read "Garp" - my adolescent memories of it are quite wrong, I'm sure. Take care,
RIP Garp.
The reason you don't know what to feel about where things end in the movie is that it's only parts of the first half of the book.
Interesting! I need to find a copy of the book somewhere and read it then.
Love that intro.
A criminally overlooked and underrated masterpiece, this is my absolute favorite film of all time. Simply put, to me, it’s perfect or as near to perfect as a film can get. It shies away from nothing, and pulls no punches. It’s authentically brave, brilliantly acted, directed and written, at times highly controversial and shocking, sardonic and darkly comic, with a wry wit and sharp take on the dangers of dogmatic, cultish fanaticism, bold and beautiful trans representation that was completely unheard of for its era, a timeless soundtrack (that includes The Beetles) and sweeping cinematic shots of the supposed New England coastline, it’s impossible for me to love a film more than this one.
We’re all quite aware that Irving was no fan of this film, and to be honest, bringing this novel to the big screen was no easy task . That said however, the casting/acting/direction/screenwriting may not have been what Irving intended (and tbh, Irving has always had a pretty lofted ideal of himself ) the film, in my opinion at least, does a great job in being apart, separate from the novel. All the actors did a superb job in bringing those characters to life . And the story arc ends just as it begins . With no moral justification other than that this is just how people’s lives are lived .
Garp is like a slow burn horror film. There's a quiet, ominous sense of doom that haunts the entire film. 5 stars.
I have a different take. The story is more about the tremendous highs and lows in life. It's joyous and horrible simultaneously.
Zero stars for me.
Ahhhhhhh.... we enter the time where the actor being reviewed is dead, and both of the reviewers are dead. They're all dead. John Lithgow and Glenn Close are still alive (today) at least.
one of my all-time favorite films
The Ellen Jamesians freaked me out!! "GOP!!"
What, did they all take a vow of frowns or something? I still remember that line from 39 years ago
This may the only time one of them changed the other's mind about a movie.
Yeah the movie was brilliant. I was a little kid & saw it as a double feature with Arthur. We loved Garp so much we just left without seeing Arthur. We were emotionally spent. Thumbs up 👍
The meaning of this movie is captured in a scene where Garp says at the end of one day, "I lived a beautiful life today." And then something like, it's funny how you can live an entire life in one day. In other words, when we live life to the fullest, death stops being a tragedy.
I think the movie is about the simultaneous joy and dread of life.
Glenn Close should have won the best supporting actress Oscar for this role!
This was a good movie, I saw it when it first came out. But I made a big mistake. I took a new girl friend with me to see it thinking it was a comedy. That is how it was promoted, as a comedy. This is not a comedy, it is a very serious story, not intended for laughs. So for me and my date it was not a happy experience.
So you didn’t get laid I presume?
@@inger132 You guessed right!, I did not get laid.
or even blown
I have no idea why this movie doesn't get more acclaim as a great all-time movie. Robin Williams, John Lithgow and Glenn Close give amazing performances.
Its a great movie - and credit to Siskel who nailed this one - he totally got the film
You could the light bulb go off above Eberts head when he explained it to him and almost said as much but pulled back at the last second
Here it is, the oldest looking "Student" in movie history. LOL
lol
I do not know if the film would have been released 2 years later if it would have been PG 13
So many academy Award winning performances swoozie Kurtz,John Lithgow, Glenn Close, Robin Williams but I had the same problem with it's theme. But I whole heartedly reccomend this movie too!
I'm still a Catholic!
👍 ok
Did anyone notice in the film the losses: tongues, ears, Garp's son loses an eye, and we know what Michael Milton (and Roberta) lost ...
See, speak, hear ... and LIFE ITSELF
Wow! Swoozie Kurtz from Liar Liar!!!
Some of the performances are great, but this movie was terrible-especially if you’ve read the book and compare the two. John Irving shows his class by not trashing this movie every time he’s asked about it. No plane flys into a house in the novel.
I agree. The book is a classic. The movie does not do it justice. Of course, it's almost impossible to adapt a John Irving novel.
Robin Williams would have killed it as Jack Torrence in The Shining
Both Siskel and Ebert, amusingly enough, completely missed the point of this film venture... It is life. A strange and interesting one, but life it doesn't have a defined storyline, it's simply a series of interesting events and that it stops, admittedly very tragically... but then again, even that is a reflection of life itself, not many lives end on a happy note, and this film perfectly portrays the way so many lives end up coming to a close... Unexpectedly, tragically and suddenly and most of the time for no damn good reason... Shit happens, the movie... A very admirable reflection of life as we all come to know it, brilliantly written and portrayed by a stunning and memorable cast
A good analysis and accurate point about this very good movie
.. word
The writers of the Updike/Irving era tried to make up for their lack of humanness and heart with quirkiness, a formula mirrored by Woody Allen in his films. You don't really like or care about the characters, but aren't they wacky?!!
I grew up with and liked the quirky movie. The book is a great representation of the life of a particular kind of guy that grew up in those times
Ive read some of of the book and i dont recall the prudish behavior towards sex.
The book was better
Can you explain the book to me in detail? I would love a very detailed explanation of each chapter. Thank you in advance.
Good.
Just heard about the book. Dk there was a movie. Stephen king recommended
Forest Gump always reminds me of Garp,
I thought this movie SUCKED. I can't believe they both liked it. Even Roger Ebert said that he came away from the film not knowing what it was about. That's exactly what I was thinking too and I give it ZERO STARS.
THE OSCARS SHOULD BE ASHAMED !! ROBIN WILLIAMS AND MARY BETH HURT SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED OSCAR NOMINATIONS !!
Rarely is a decent movie made from a shirty book. Not here either.
Not interested in seeing John Lithgow in drag.
Garp predates but similar to..
Gump.
Kinda gross Glenn Close was only 4 years older than Robin Williams yet played his mother.
You're right, I guess women are just better actors then men since it's rarely the reverse. Thanks for the clarity.
Glenn Close was edged out by Angela Lansbury who was just 3 years older than Laurence Harvey when she played his mother in "The Manchurian Candidate."
Irving was in that overrated New York writers group with Updike, Oates, Vonnegut, etc.
Vonnegut?
I hate GARP. Robin is very controlled and quite good.
But... It makes sex the punchline and notice how all who have sex have something bad happen to them.
GARP and the neighbor girl. He has his ear bitten off. Later shot.
GARPS mom is shot
GARPS wife loses a son.
Weird, stupid movie. The snickering at sex is disturbing.
Gene got it...Roger didn't. Like many good quality films it takes a few viewings to get it all