Diary of a Mad Housewife

Richard Benjamin would drive anyone crazy in 'Diary of a Mad Housewife'(1970).Benjamin and wife Carrie Snodgrass are an upper- middle class New York couple, he totally absorbed with social climbing and Ms. Snodgrass bored to death with her isolated life.Director Frank Perry(David and Lisa) does an excellent job directing this sometimes funny, sometimes sad film of a materialistic, yet emotionally empty lifestyle.Script by Eleanor Perry.

Brilliant, perceptive look at isolation. Story works on multiple levels from offbeat comedy, to drama, satire, and even feminist viewpoint. It's all rather low key, but slowly builds for a strong impact. Centers around a upper middle class New York housewife who becomes increasingly frustrated at the alienation from her husband, children, and his friends. For a escape she has a affair with a man (Langella) that seems exciting and different, but in the end treats her just as poorly. Ultimately she comes to the conclusion that under the facade he and many others are just as disconnected. Film works on the basic perception that isolation is a definite reality of modern living. Terrific ending puts it all into perspective. Takes some good satirical jabs at the 'upwardly mobile', also has good color detail and a interesting visual style. Snodgrass's performance is excellent in a rather difficult role. Forced to put on a 'happy face' by her obnoxious ,social climbing husband she is still able to convey her frustrations to the viewer through body language, voice tones, and facial expressions. A four star sleeper and one of Frank and Eleanor Perry's most complete work. For TV some scenes were taken out while others added making it slightly different from the theatrical version. For instance in the TV version Snodgrass meets Langella while walking her dog. In the theatrical version she meets him at a party.

This highly entertaining and memorable film provides a glimpse into a New York of not so long ago that now exists only in memory. But Diary of a Mad Housewife ultimately succeeds on the strength of its actors, particularly Snodgress, who plays a Smith graduate-turned prisoner of a Central Park West apartment inhabited by her overbearing, pitifully ambitious husband and spoiled daughters. Her performance is somehow flat and anemic but compelling at the same time--a combination that seems to have been consciously emulated by Chloe Sevigny in The Last Days of Disco.

Bejamin is perfectly cast as the insufferable husband, adenoidally petulant and demanding. When Snodgress's patience is finally exhausted, she takes up with Langella, a glowering animal presence as a bad-boy writer whose selfishness, it turns out, rivals and even exceeds Benjamin's.

The husband and wife represent two people whose lack of use for their education has led them astray: Snodgress finds herself in a state of frustration with the humiliations of her housewifely duties, and Benjamin, unappreciated in his office, comes up with ill-fated schemes for self-expression and social advancement.

All in all, the film brings The Feminine Mystique to life in unexpectedly original and diverting ways.

Tina Balser (Carrie Snodgress) is a tired NYC housewife married to the demeaning pompous Jonathan (Richard Benjamin). He criticizes her on everything even in front of their two young impressionable daughters. At a party she got dragged to by her husband, she meets the arrogant chauvinistic writer George Prager (Frank Langella). She has an affair but George isn't much better than Jonathan. Essentially, I like Tina enough to watch this movie despite the annoying Jonathan and the callous George. This movie is a bit of a torture but it's a fascinating one. It's also a movie of its times. It was probably more compelling back in the day.

I've often wondered if the lady of the title is crazy-mad,or angry-mad.Probably some of both.Benjamin's husband is one of the truly most detestable characters of domestic drama.Selfish,overbearing,pompous,ego-centric,domineering,callous,insensitiv e-and those are his good qualities.In all fairness,I don't think that Richard Benjamin likes him either.He's not a character,he's a caricature.And Langella's lover is every bit as much a swine.Oh,granted,he's sexy and sensuous,but he's every bit as much a villain-and equally immature.Maybe things were different back then,but Tina's decision to stick around after the nonsense her husband pulled,seen in a 90's perspective,makes one wonder as to any masochistic tendencies in her makeup.