Those Lips, Those Eyes

The warmest, most engaging movie of its genre, Those Lips, Those Eyes, made me smile and cry as it reminded me of the work it takes to pursue a dream and the pain of disappointment. Hulce and Langella are superb and the story seems to write itself. A brilliant screenplay by David Shaber (one of my favorites! - see The Warriors and Nighthawks for more...) and beautiful sets filmed on location (I think) at the actual summer theater in which the story takes place. You can't see this movie and not want to drop everything and get into the theater! Please check this video out if you can find it.

I was intrigued by this movie, because it was shot in my hometown of Cleveland -- actually at Cain Park (Summer) Theater in Cleveland Heights.

A pre-med student, Tom Hulce, takes a summer job as a prop man at Cain Park. He meets perennial summer actor-singer, Frank Langella. The veteran Frank still has dreams of making it big on Broadway, but it likely will never happen. However, he manages to impart his dreams of the theater onto Hulce, who by the end of the movie, loses his virginity and commits his hopes to the theater rather than medicine.

Fine acting by Hulce, Langella, Glynnis O'Connor and Kevin McCarthy, who has a small part as a lecherous agent near the end of the movie. He dashes Langella's hopes again, but Langella acquires another agent "who can get him places that (the mcCarthy character) can only dream of."

This entertaining teen dramedy is a rare thing: a movie about show business that's an argument for the nobility of "normalcy". A pre-mumblecore indie that has many of that genre's pluses (naturalism, relatable emotions, clear goals) without its big minus: bad / no written dialogue. Hulce nails the wide-eyed naivete, but Langella is the scene-stealer; ridiculous, wise, unhinged, egotistical, & fragile. With a great ending, it's a solid little forgotten 80s sleeper that surpasses its amateurish moments.

It's understandable that one reviewer called the show scenes in the movie,"musicals", and Hollywood did make screen musicals of them. But they are excerpts from the genre of operetta. This was a pre 1940 style of "light comic" music drama, originating in Europe, at the turn of the century. Among the leading composers were Franz Lehar, and Victor Herbert. The cast had to have operatic voices, and sing, not talk the song a la Rex Harrison in "My Fair Lady". Of course in direct rebutal, to what I just said, Frank Langella, a non singing actor, sings "Someday", in a sotto voce (soft) style a la Perry Como. If someone says, "Summerstock, and operetta", and you go, "Huh?", this is not the movie for you, which is why about seven people saw it. This was summer live musical theatre, where youngsters with stars in their eyes, and pros who were never superstars, performed operetta classics in local theatres all over the country, like "The Merry Widow", "Rose Marie", and "The Desert Song". The plots are corny and ludicrous....but the songs...."Someday", "One Alone", "One Kiss", make me cry, because I remember how long ago it was when I first heard them and their beauty captures me more and more. Frank Langella is wonderful, as the romantic male lead in all the shows, who you know is not going to make it to stardom. Glynnis O'Connor, as the ingenue who breaks Tom Hulce's heart is impressive, and to show what an unstable field showbiz is, imdb has no credits for her from 98 to 02. I think Tom Hulce is a highly underrated actor. There's something so endearing about him, but the great roles don't seem to be offered to him today. I own this film and I've watched it over and over. As the pros say, "highly recommended".

And what is its genre? The backstage expose story; what theatrical life is really like behind those Broadway (and other) curtains. It certainly has a lot of competition: Singin' in the Rain both I and II (1929 and 1952), 42nd Street, Golddiggers of (You name the year.); Dames of 1934; Noises Off (1992) from the farcical side and A Star is Born I and II from the 1930s and the 1950s from the tragical side: not to mention Summer Stock of 1950: the list keeps rollin' along. So what makes this movie so special? And why are there so few comments about this stunningly great movie? Have so few people actually seen it? How amazing to see a younger Frank Langella pre-Dracula and pre-Frost-Nixon by 30 years! How amazing to see the fresh and talented Tom Hulce so pre-Amadeus! And yet another superb Stiller! What a wonderful line-up of talented people at their very best from so long ago! And such a script! Who was this David Shaber? So full of realistic disillusion and pathos compared to the usual sentimentality and feel-good comedy! As especially exemplified by the Star-Is-Born-like episode where the heroine achieves Broadway while the Langella character has to content himself with still another provincial tour.

Langella's subsequent hysterical and sadistic blowup against the star-struck Latin teacher and his granddaughter in which he vents his fury and frustration is just one of many fantastic and psychologically real moments in the film. (The Latin teacher and his love affair with backstage life certainly echo Marlene Dietrich and her seduced professor in The Blue Angel of 1929.) Another in the series of mercenary and cold-hearted agents like the late Kevin McCarthy who was preceded by Burt Lancaster in The Sweet Smell of Success (1957) and succeeded by Alan Alda in Clubland (2001) in movie history. The sexual liberation of the Hulce character recalls similar incidents in O'Neill's great comedy Ah, Wilderness.

And what a tribute to the vanished operettas of long ago: The Red Mill of Victor Herbert; Rose Marie and The Vagabond King of Rudolf Friml; The Desert Song of Sigmund Romberg etc. What satirical insertions of bits from the great plays like Romeo and Juliet. Tributes to the theater itself as expostulated by the star Langella. The richness and depth of this movie are simply endless. And to be saddled by such a title! Who could have an inkling of what this great movie is about from such a ridiculous and unsuggestive title? But on the other hand, what title could one have applied to such a magnificent drama which might have lived up to its stirring, emotional content?

PS: I just saw (2009) Frank Langella in his latest acting spectacular: as Richard Nixon in Frost-Nixon. How this great actor after 30 years simply goes from triumph to triumph!