ThiefHott Too much of everything

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Edgar Soberon Torchia After so many years I have at last watched "Move" again, and my first impression that it is a weird funny comedy has not changed. Released on DVD (although not in its original wide-screen format) in 2015, the package includes its trailer and it is quite obvious that in 1970 20th Century Fox did not know how to promote it. Far from the 1960s romantic comedy formula, Fox did not come up with an original campaign to handle the eccentricity and strangeness of many of the scenes and images the plot describes. "Move" is an absurdist comedy that makes irreverent jokes on social stratification, authorities and married life. Though a crazy product of its times (from the company that brought that same year "Myra Breckinridge" and "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls") it is not a harsh confrontational story, but a gentle tale, treating its points in a light and comic way. Based on a tight script that never loses its cohesion, the plot follows New York writer Hiram Jaffe (Elliott Gould) through situations as he tries to move from one apartment to another, an action that also can be interpreted as his attempt at moving up a level, pressured by his wife Dolly (Paula Prentiss). He has to face his creative crisis, his sex life and his paranoia. He is about to leave behind his old quarter and most probably his usual activities, as walking out other people's dogs to make ends meet, and he is definitely afraid of "moving", imagining (or not) all kinds of difficulties and obstacles. The production had an inspired casting, pairing Gould and Prentiss, an ideal couple for the 1970s that surely would have developed into a fine act in other comedies: there's good chemistry between them, they handle the comedy aspects very well, and Prentiss even adds a touch of humor in her single dramatic moment, that fits the whole concept of absurdity by novelist-scriptwriter Joel Lieber. If I have any complaint (apart from Prentiss' excessive make-up) it is Stuart Rosenberg's direction, who maybe was not the best choice to film a screenplay that easily changes from slapstick to verbal comedy, from Brechtian estrangement to a chase on horseback. Although I sometimes felt a too heavy handling of a few scenes (as Prentiss' dramatic monologue), Rosenberg was a professional and did a good job.

JasparLamarCrabb Following his breakthrough role in BOB & CAROL & TED & ALICE, Elliott Gould appeared in a flood of movies (four in 1970 alone). There were some masterpieces like MASH, THE LONG GOODBYE and later THE SILENT PARTNER as well as dismal flops like MATILDA and THE DEVIL AND MAX DEVLIN. MOVE falls somewhere in between. It's certainly not a great movie, but it has enough worthwhile things to offer to make it an entertaining expose of urban angst. Gould is a writer (apparently of soft-core porn) and dog walker trying to move from one apartment to another in a very uncooperative NYC. His flights of paranoid fancy, often tinged with black-humored surrealism, lead him to drift from his loving wife (the great Paula Prentiss) and get involved with a ditsy model (Geneviève Waïte). MOVE is a funny and often cringe-inducing experience as Gould gets himself into various uncomfortable fixes, often resulting in him stripping his clothes off. There's terrific chemistry between Gould & Prentiss and the direction by Stuart Rosenberg (as director of the likes of MURDER INC. and COOL HAND Luke, he was NOT known for a light touch) is fine. Waïte comes close to stealing the film as the elfin Brit who gives Gould a real going-over.

shino I read someone once say that "films like _Move_ destroyed Gould's career in 1 and a half years." Maybe, maybe not, but _Move_ is really not a bad film at all: a bit counter-culture, but not obnoxiously so.Gould is an intellectual New Yorker whose fortunes have led him to walk dogs in central park, and to author pornographic literature to make a living--a self-described "scatological existence." Prentiss (in a straight role) is his long-suffering wife, who watches as he suffers a mental breakdown. This film is of interest to Prentiss fans as it was her first big role in 5 years of eschewing Hollywood. Genevive Waite is the ditzy model Gould meets in the park.Perhaps the film's greatest drawback (to us men, at least), is Gould's penchant for dropping his trousers to reveal an inordinately hirsute physique.When all is said, its a film with its own charms, and the ending sweetly closes the story.

shepardjessica This little-known 1970 film (the year Gould cranked out about six) actually has some interesting social comments to make, but NOBODY ever saw this flick. I saw when it was released, mainly because of the lovely and talented Paula Prentiss, and Gould I liked from B&C&T&A and M.A.S.H. (same year) and the strangely beautiful Genevieve Waite was in it. Gould basically plays a plodding scumbag who doesn't deserve the life he has (which he is clueless about), but he's really too old (even then) to be trying to find himself in that turbulent time period.A 4 out of 10. Best performance = Paula Prentiss (wonderful). This is better than I LOVE MY WIFE (another unknown Elliott movie from that year), but it doesn't follow through with the Gould angst of his character. 1970 was a great year for films (especially the unknown ones), but this condescending and fake-brooding, but if you're interested in that time period (especially film wise), check it out for curiosity's sake.