Siskel & Ebert - Peggy Sue Got Married

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 26 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 79

  • @samanthab1923
    @samanthab1923 3 роки тому +38

    Best part of the movie is Peggy answering the phone & hearing her grandmas voice!

    • @peterh222
      @peterh222 Рік тому +1

      No it's her date with the poet : the world is fantastic, it's the ultimate absurd circus

    • @richardkilroy3248
      @richardkilroy3248 10 місяців тому +5

      Have to agree - that moment with Peggy Sue in silhouette answering the phone and can't talk is my favorite moment too.

    • @AlmostReady504
      @AlmostReady504 2 місяці тому +2

      That part ALWAYS gets me.

  • @debzimmerman633
    @debzimmerman633 10 місяців тому +5

    My favorite movie ever, very underrated!!

  • @flannelogue
    @flannelogue 11 місяців тому +5

    This intro brings up so many memories. Didn't always agree with these guys, but I really miss them.

  • @mikew1507
    @mikew1507 4 роки тому +42

    One of Coppola's most underrated films!

    • @spencer10182
      @spencer10182 3 роки тому +4

      And one of his very best!

    • @BAKER22-l4u
      @BAKER22-l4u 4 місяці тому

      Underrated? Lol..Arguably the most IDIOTIC thing I've heard in years

    • @mikew1507
      @mikew1507 4 місяці тому

      @@BAKER22-l4u Don't take it personally. Just a matter of opinion.

  • @ShiftingDrifter
    @ShiftingDrifter 4 роки тому +43

    I'm surprised they didn't mention John Barry's score. That music shoulders the entire emotional weight of the film. Barry always seemed to deliver - from James bond to Dances with Wolves to Peggy Sue... he always nailed it.

    • @lilchicklets
      @lilchicklets 4 роки тому +6

      Love Barry's score and I agree with you. It has a very sentimental quality that tugs on the heart. It's hard to find those who appreciate movie scores. Barry also did the amazing score to Body Heat.

    • @vdussaut9182
      @vdussaut9182 3 роки тому +2

      Yes! I completely agree, I saw it as a young kid and was absolutely captivated by the score. It brilliantly captures the sense of nostalgia of the film. It’s hauntingly bittersweet and beautiful, especially the scene when they’re in the basement and Charlie storms off, and she opens the little cigarette holder and the theme starts playing on the music box-such a perfect tune for this film.

    • @samanthab1923
      @samanthab1923 3 роки тому +2

      So good. Haunting

    • @corbindallas18
      @corbindallas18 2 роки тому +1

      100% agree

    • @IsSheRebeccaRyan
      @IsSheRebeccaRyan 6 місяців тому +1

      So true!

  • @TorgerVedeler
    @TorgerVedeler 6 місяців тому +2

    A brilliant film. Every time I watch it I see something new. Of course, every time I watch it I have time travelled myself, being a little older.
    And the grandparents are pure genius. I miss mine.

  • @clairefreeman6273
    @clairefreeman6273 3 роки тому +9

    my favorite movie ever- I can and do watch it over and over and I know every line

  • @MsMadmax1
    @MsMadmax1 3 роки тому +14

    I loved this movie though it didn't always get rave reviews-some criticized Coppola's choice of Kathleen Turner to play an 18 year old. I think a number of critics missed the point of them movie--it had a truly deep and profound message about time travel and how we can't escape out past. It had a lot to say about death and near death that was just brilliant. Perhaps I read way too much into its deeper meaning, but it's a bitter sweet movie that captures the essence of the dreams of youth that were never realized and how once we get married and tied down with a home and family, those dreams have to give way to a new dream. I agree with Madd Dogg below; John Barry's score carries the movie and makes me want to cry every time I hear it.

    • @r.t.5425
      @r.t.5425 2 роки тому

      Watched the movie with my girl and ended up losing it. It’s such a flawed movie, but the story and the score are essentially perfect in their sentimentality.

    • @newwavepop
      @newwavepop 2 роки тому

      i literally just finished watching it again, not sure why they would complain about her age as the entire cast are full grown adults mostly playing themselves aged up at the beginning then playing teenagers through the rest of it. it is annoying when they make film about teenagers and have some 30 year old star in it, but in this case EVERYONE was clearly well out of their teens in real life so its not quite as jarring and you understand the reasoning behind it.

    • @louisaparker
      @louisaparker 2 роки тому

      @@newwavepop I got the feeling that Peggy Sue's looks were deliberately left unchanged when she was transported into the past. While the other characters were made to look younger.

    • @IsSheRebeccaRyan
      @IsSheRebeccaRyan 6 місяців тому +1

      Well said

    • @djtmkofficialmusic
      @djtmkofficialmusic 4 місяці тому

      ​@@louisaparker good point

  • @amherst88
    @amherst88 3 роки тому +8

    Glad to know how much they liked this film -- a gem if there ever was one (I'd take better care of my teeth :)

  • @JHallenbeck
    @JHallenbeck 4 роки тому +15

    Roger had to thrown in a shot at Gene at the end, even after they both agreed on how much they loved the movie. Ultimate Frenemies.

    • @privacyplease23
      @privacyplease23 2 роки тому +2

      No wonder Gene didn’t tell Roger he was dying.

  • @krisdiperna3929
    @krisdiperna3929 20 днів тому

    I just recently learned of a funny blooper that wasn't cut. When the family goes outside to see the new Edsel and Peggy Sue runs to her dad's arms he can smell the alcohol on her breath and says, "Kathleen! Are you drunk?" instead of saying, "Peggy Sue! Are you drunk?" No idea why that stayed in the movie!

  • @natalieps2387
    @natalieps2387 3 роки тому +4

    I loved this movie too & shows Francis Coppola's gift at discovering talent. In this it's his nephew nicolas cage ( who was fantastic in moonstruck the next year w/ cher & hard to believe hes only 23 in moonstruck but it works) I totally loved Ebert's point that even though she knows her marriage turns out to be a failure ( they are married 25 years with 2 kids so 25 years there days is a success but she brings up things how they were never really happy esp with having a baby so young & getting married cause of that & him blaming his music career failures on her & she wishing she did it different & didn't wind up w/ the first boyfriend she ever had & feeling all she accomplished was being someone s wife. ) & she knows she will wind up pregnant on her 18th bday when she loses her virginity to her first boyfriend which forces them to marry & that he does turn out exactly like his dad ( in the film he remarks he doesnt want to be his dad ) someone who sells appliances & chases women around the store . He wasnt a bad person just a guy after many years of marriage resenting he got married so young bc he got his hs gf pregnant & his music career went nowhere so he is bitter.
    I think the interesting part is even though in her past getting a 2nd chance she still does exactly what she fought the whole film even escaping out of town on her 18th bday to avoid getting pregnant but still the bf finds her & they wind up having sex & the history she so wanted to avoid for both of them repeats anyway. I guess for me its saying she did love the guy & end up with him for a reason & could not resist her destiny. She also sees a couple things that arent her fault. Charlie got turned down by some music people so marrying peggy was not the problem. Also she said she always wished she dated the dark loner guy but when she does get that chance she sees they never would have worked out. He wanted her & some other girl to all live some sister wives thing while he writes. He does become a great writer anyway but he is not for her. I did wonder if it was all a dream or happened bc the loner guy dedicated his book to her & their night together when she knows they never even talked in her first go round. Also the super smart rich guy , she gave him a bunch of ideas so u wonder if that's bc of peggy.
    Anyway coppola scouts new talent a lot like in this is a young jim Carey , karen allen & nic cage. In the outsiders its loaded w/ people who went on to big careers. He found pacino caan & duvall in the godfather. Just a really good eye for talent . In apocalypse now I'm not sure if martin sheen was a star yet. Also he has a 14 year old Laurence fishburne who lied & said he was 18. It's crazy to see him that young he literally is in junior high playing a soldier.

  • @gooberclown
    @gooberclown 2 роки тому +3

    I remember when the day to day cars on the streets looked like the ones in the movie.

  • @uyeda
    @uyeda 4 роки тому +6

    Classic.

    • @uyeda
      @uyeda 3 роки тому +1

      Best film of 1986.

  • @bennydemario4624
    @bennydemario4624 2 роки тому +3

    Is there life after high school?

  • @louisaparker
    @louisaparker 2 роки тому +6

    Great movie. But they forgot to explain some things. For instance, why was one girl in a wheelchair at the reunion? Was Peggy's mother selling family jewelry to this man in their house? Looks like some parts were cut from the movie.

    • @NailsRed88
      @NailsRed88 Рік тому

      I believe the girl in the wheelchair was supposed to be someone Peggy tries to save when she goes back because she had an accident their senior year that left her paralyzed, but it was scrapped.

    • @lw3646
      @lw3646 9 місяців тому +2

      I thought it was quite a messy script to be honest. She goes back in time it seems like to relive her youth and have fun because she's used to being a 40 year old jaded woman but she doesn't really do a whole lot, she spends most the movie fighting with then making up with her to be husband who at the end of the movie is still an adulter anyway so he still didn't appreciate her during their marriage, so everything that happens still happens anyway making the journey back in time seem unimportant, assuming it even happens at all. They also have the overdone cliche of the old wise understanding character at the end who knows just what to say. The science geek character is enlisted to help her but then just disappears half way through the film. She also toys with the idea of breaking up with the Nick Cage character but it never seems to enter her head that her children wouldn't have been born then which I don't think any mother would ever for a second not consider....it's meant to be a comedy apparently but they forgot to write any jokes. You also have a 40 year old to all intents and purposes trying to strike romance with all these 18 year olds which just doesn't work.

  • @newwavepop
    @newwavepop 4 роки тому +10

    the way ive seen them pick at movies before, im surprised they made no mention of the weird voice Cage chose to do in the film.

    • @aldenmartin623
      @aldenmartin623 3 роки тому +1

      He was relatively new. They might not have noticed.

    • @Wellch
      @Wellch 3 роки тому +1

      Pokey.

    • @samanthab1923
      @samanthab1923 3 роки тому

      Wonder what they would say about him today?

    • @iadorenewyork1
      @iadorenewyork1 Рік тому

      I think he was self conscious about possible accusations of despotism, being Coppola’s nephew.

  • @MysteryManBob
    @MysteryManBob 3 роки тому +1

    he didn't have to go for the throat like that at the end

  • @lw3646
    @lw3646 9 місяців тому +2

    I thought it was quite a messy script to be honest. She goes back in time it seems like to relive her youth and have fun because she's used to being a 40 year old jaded woman but she doesn't really do a whole lot, she spends most the movie fighting with then making up with her to be husband who at the end of the movie is still an adulter anyway so he still didn't appreciate her during their marriage, so everything that happens still happens anyway making the journey back in time seem unimportant, assuming it even happens at all. They also have the overdone cliche of the old wise understanding character at the end who knows just what to say. The science geek character is enlisted to help her but then just disappears half way through the film. She also toys with the idea of breaking up with the Nick Cage character but it never seems to enter her head that her children wouldn't have been born then which I don't think any mother would ever for a second not consider....it's meant to be a comedy apparently but they forgot to write any jokes. You also have a 40 year old to all intents and purposes trying to strike romance with all these 18 year olds which just doesn't work.

    • @keeblergraham211
      @keeblergraham211 3 місяці тому

      I had some of the same critiques. Would it be ethical for a middle-aged man to seduce the quirky, beatnik ingénue he’d always wondered about? (Capt. Picard considers something similar in “Tapestry”, the Star Trek episode where he has a Peggy Sue time travel experience, and I seem to recall the writers playing it safe there.)
      I had a more charitable view of Nicholas Cage’s character, and I think that was the main thing. He hurt her so badly that she has to go back to remember what she saw in him in the first place. She performs an autopsy of her marriage and empathizes more with the young guy with a dream that was never to be, who ends up cheating during a midlife crisis. By the end, she’s not quite ready to forgive him, but she can see how they got there and I thought that was solid writing.

  • @mainstreetsaint36
    @mainstreetsaint36 2 роки тому +2

    Did Ebert always pronounce Chicago as, Chi-caw-go? I just noticed that. Is that like a native Chicago thing?

    • @Joscope
      @Joscope 2 роки тому +2

      It is on the south side. On the north side they say Chi-CAH-go..

  • @Stefarooh
    @Stefarooh 10 місяців тому +1

    Nepotism at its finest. Turner is great, Cage (Coppola) is horrifying. His acting is still horrifying today.

  • @ethereal1257
    @ethereal1257 4 роки тому

    Oh wow I just realized Bill Barr is a Roger reincarnate the wicked version. Shiver me timbers.

    • @iamnostalgic9567
      @iamnostalgic9567 4 роки тому

      A great thread of comments and you gotta ruin it by bringing in politics. STFU!

    • @Hellraiser0601
      @Hellraiser0601 3 роки тому

      Fuck no!!! Poor Roger, comparing him with that monstrosity.

  • @mtolivesecurityshipping5455
    @mtolivesecurityshipping5455 3 роки тому

    Ebert looks like the SNL character, "Just Pat."

  • @pam0626
    @pam0626 3 роки тому +7

    I loved this movie, but Nicholas Cage’s weird orthodontics and voice ruined a part of it for me. I fast-forward through all of his scenes.

    • @lilchicklets
      @lilchicklets 3 роки тому +2

      Kathleen Turner saved it with her performance.

    • @ultravioletpisces3666
      @ultravioletpisces3666 3 роки тому +1

      I love the weird way he talks in this. This was actually.my introduction to Nicolas cage.

    • @pam0626
      @pam0626 3 роки тому +1

      @@ultravioletpisces3666 Did you ever see Valley Girl? That was one of his earliest films and he was so good.

    • @danieljohnson2005
      @danieljohnson2005 3 роки тому +1

      pam0626 I guess it’s a matter of taste, but I thought he was great in this. That scene in the basement was really good, and I loved how his voice cracks when he’s upset. You’re right about Valley Girl, though. He was probably the best part of that movie.

    • @Wellch
      @Wellch 3 роки тому

      I liked his character.

  • @kingcaesar5
    @kingcaesar5 4 роки тому +4

    Nic cage ruined the damn movie

    • @Wellch
      @Wellch 4 роки тому +10

      kingcaesar5 He made the movie great .

    • @SkolneyVikings
      @SkolneyVikings 4 роки тому +2

      He didn't ruin it but it is easily his biggest miss of a performance.

    • @TheAnnasmee2
      @TheAnnasmee2 4 роки тому +6

      Aw, I liked his performance.

    • @kamster518
      @kamster518 4 роки тому +4

      kingcaesar5 I think his character fits, he’s supposed to be a product of the time. Most of his reactions to what Peggy sue does makes sense from his perspective

    • @suzanneolivar1
      @suzanneolivar1 3 роки тому +1

      His goofy voice was meant to mimic the persona of an awkward teenage boy.