The Chapman Report

you can't get better late 60's than this one: neophyte fonda, madame shelly, glynis johns, and claire bloom as "the nymphomaniac".

a wonderfully vivid, most-fun foto of ugly 60's misogynism.... the moment just before we found out that we're all nymphomaniacs.

jane struggles, shelly sniffles, glynis gurgles, and claire tears it up. the movie, in retrospect, is soooo gay. directed by cukor incidentally.

Vapid, profoundly trashy film, somewhat redeemed by fair performances and glossy production values. Jane Fonda's acting, however, is indeed surprisingly weak; it's hard to believe that the same actress gave such a powerful and moving performance in "The Chase", only four years later. The film is both sleazy and tame; it deals exclusively with the subject of sex, but it is very un-sexy, and never says anything meaningful, either. At least it's painless to watch.

The Chapman Report is about sex and how it plays into the life of an average suburban housewife. Efrem Zimbalist Jr. is a pollster for the survey, and he meets Jane Fonda, by way of interviewing her and then taking a liking to her. While they look like they make a good couple, they became boring with all their talk. Claire Bloom is interviewed, but she is anything but normal. While I knew that Claire Bloom is an exceptional actress, her plot ultimately disinterested and depressed me, despite the fact she has some Oscar-worthy scenes. Shelley Winters, another good actress, is another housewife. Her plot held some interest for me, as she becomes disloyal to her husband. But I ultimately felt unmoved by her plot and grew tired of it. The only person who really shines in this movie and gives it its only charm and bright spot is Glynis Johns as an artist. She sees Ty Hardin on the beach and is enamored by his body. She befriends him and convinces him to pose for her, but then, when she tells him what she really wants, something happens she didn't expect. At least, not in the way she wanted. If you're a Glynis Johns fan, then you must see this film. If not, don't bother. If you want to learn about sex, buy a book, ask a parent or better yet find a partner. Don't watch this.

When I saw this during its theatrical release, primarily because I was a fan of the Misses Glynis Johns and Claire Bloom, though I'd been forewarned by reviewers that it was just as trashy as its best-selling source, I was somewhat appalled that the esteemed George Cukor had consented to direct it. Hindsight tells us that it may have been the numerous young hunks in the cast who ensnared that Hollywood master's interest in assuming the directorial reins. (His personal preferences were not as widely known, outside of Hollywood's insiders, anyway, at the time of this film's production.) Glynis gives it a lively go but the rest of the cast would probably prefer that we not remember their participation in this embarrassing dud. I think I saw it as part of a double feature (Those were the days!), and though I don't remember its companion at that viewing, I suspect I found it somewhat more worth the price of admission.

A few notes about this film. Apparently, director George Cukor was unhappy with the finished product. The studio (Warner Brothers) and producer (Darryl Zanuck) caved to pressure from the Catholic Legion of Decency and altered the ending in order to provide a morally-correct resolution for the main characters (and audience).

It would certainly be interesting to see a director's cut of this film, or at least a shooting script to get a better idea of what Cukor and Zanuck intended. Probably Zanuck's goal was to create a film where people more openly discussed sex. However, America was not quite ready to do that yet in 1962, and with the Legion of Decency hovering over the scene, it would be nearly impossible.

I do think there are some excellent performances in this film, namely Glynis Johns and Claire Bloom who prove that British actresses often surpass their North American counterparts.