At Long Last Love

When I saw it in'75 (I was 25 at the time) I walked out of the theater smiling, and sang Cole Porter tunes in my car all the way home. It was a preview, so it hadn't been panned yet and I had formed my own opinion. Eileen Brennan cracked me up in her wanton pursuit of John Hillerman. Cybill was just my age and a knockout and, no, she doesn't sing badly. I've never been a big fan of Burt, but I liked him more after the movie than before. Kahn was marvelous, Del Prete the weak link, because I couldn't understand his English. Don't expect it to be more than cotton candy, it's sweet without substance and doesn't pretend to be more. It was probably the first exposure I'd had to Cole Porter since Can-Can (1960 - I was 10 then) and I fell in love with his music again, and forever. It's not the Music Man or Top Hat or Flying Down to Rio, but just go along for the pleasant ride, enjoy the sets and costumes, and, especially, the words and music. If you want to trash it, go ahead, but I think that those who do need a glass of champagne(or two)and to just chill out. --- Carl

An homage to 30s musicals, this vastly underrated film features tongue-in-cheek performances by Cybill Shepherd and Burt Reynolds, and terrific comedy turns by Eileen Brennan and Madeline Kahn.

Kahn does a great, obscure Cole Porter (all music in this film) called "Find Me a Primitive Man"; Brennan shines in the "Gentlemen Don't Want Love" number. Duilio del Prete, Mildred Natwick, and John Hillerman are also quite good.

Many obscure Porter songs and a few well-known ones. The costumes and sets are nice and evoke the 30s with the star blacks and whites with hints of beige. While the dancing may be a little rough, the stars more than make up for it in their zest and obvious enjoyment of the material.

The entire cast has fun with this slight story of changing partners until each finds at long last love. Reynolds might be a tad too silly but Shepherd has fun and display a great set of pipes. Ultimately, Brennan and Kahn make this one worth catching.

I'm a bit perplexed regarding what to say about this movie. First off, I think I enjoyed it more when I saw it years ago than I did now. But I think that was mainly because of the choice of songs. Cole Porter wrote all sorts of songs, but the movie goes for the particularly witty and urbane choices, including a number I hadn't heard before.

The style of the movie has giddy improvisational style, as actors often seem to be chatting amongst themselves or making quiet asides. This is true not just in conversation, but in song as well, and it's clear the intention is to make the songs work as a continuation of the story and the characterization. It's an interesting approach that I found somewhat likable in conversation but not so much in songs, because it often completely trashes the melodies.

Unfortunately, Bogdonavich was apparently of the opinion that a musical requires very little musical talent. Reynolds is a decidedly poor singer. Shepards can at least carry a tune, but it's hard to imagine anyone casting her as the lead in a musical who wasn't dating her.

The supporting players do better. None of them are great singers either, but Eileen Brennan, John Hillerman, Madelein Kahn and that guy no one's ever heard of all understand how to sell a song. They would make great second bananas behind actors who were strong singers (or dancers, as was the case with Astaire or Kelly musicals), but instead they overshadow the leads, which is a little sad.

The story is simple, essentially a matter of flirting and coupling among the four. Then ending is unsatisfactory.

I've heard there are numerous edits of this movie floating around, and that some work better than others. I saw the version released on VHS, which is apparently neither the best nor the worst version out there. (I've heard the best version is on Netflix and DVD.)

This isn't as terrible as some people claim, and it has some nice touches throughout, but it comes across as a bit of a vanity project in which a director with no experience in musicals nor much sense of what makes them work decided to put his girlfriend in one.

Bogdonovich & company made this with endless tongue in cheek, and as an homage to the stage musicals of the 20s and stage AND film musicals of the 30s - glib, off-handed, seemingly "UN-artful" if you will. Also, the actors all sang - or spoke - their songs IN REAL TIME, in what was a brave attempt to duplicate the reality and presence of a live production.

Obviously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I clearly saw this film much more in the spirit on Bogdonovich's vision than those who wemt in looking for something else. I feel a lot of baggage was brought to this film by the audience, and the movie was never really "seem" or "heard" by them. Too bad, because technically this is how musicals SHOULD be made.

I enjoyed the movie very much, and lament that it isn't available to allow everyone to make up their own mind about how well the vision of the director, cast, Musical Director and all concerned was carried out.

Remember the scene in the remake of "The Fly" when Gena Davis and Jeff Goldblum are tasting a steak and then tasting a steak that has been sent through the molecular transporter? The reaction is that the transported steak tastes "synthetic", like a computer's "interpretation" of what a steak is. That's the same sensation you get with "At Long Last Love". Bogdanovich, heady with success and power, decided that he could make a "live" musical, the way they had to make them in the Thirties. "Hey, I know what Musicals are made of!" you can imagine him saying. What he didn't understand was casting and historical context. His musical is plastic, inept, and grotesquely embarrassing. It is a "must-see" for your All-Time Worst Movies list, along with John Boorman's "The Heretic: Exorcist II". It's that bad.