Cooktopi
The acting in this movie is really good.
Donald Seymour
This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
Lucia Ayala
It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
namashi_1
Based on Tom Topor's 1979 play by the same name, 'Nuts' is an affecting & slightly heavy courtroom drama, that is compelling & also offers strong performances to empower the show.'Nuts' Synopsis: A high-class call girl (Barbra Streisand) accused of murder fights for the right to stand trial rather than be declared mentally incompetent.Much of 'Nuts' benefits from its strong cast who bring in their A-Game. Streisand is excellent as the woman accused of being Nuts, delivering a performance of genuine power & sadness. And the ever-reliable Richard Dreyfuss is terrific as her attorney, nailing the supporting part with flourish. Even The Late/Great Maureen Stapleton does a splendid job as Streisand's imperfect, but caring mother. There is also the pleasure to watch Karl Malden, Eli Wallach, James Whitmore, Robert Webber & Leslie Nielsen on-screen, since they are no longer with us. All the actors are first-rate.Tom Topor, Darryl Ponicsan & Alvin Sargent's Screenplay is grim, affecting & engrossing. The Writing indulges in disturbing matters such as pedophileia & sexual harassment, but with an impact. The Late/Great Martin Ritt's Direction is effective. Cinematography, Editing & Art Design, merit a special mention.On the whole, 'Nuts' is a winning motion-picture.
princebansal1982
This movie just serves as a star vehicle for Barbra Streisand. While it has a credible plot that kept me watching till the end, it is very contrived film. When the movie starts Barbra's lawyer is trying to prove to a judge that she is mentally ill, so that her parents are saved the embarrassment of a public trial, which will surely reveal that their daughter is a hooker.She punches her lawyer who abandons the case and the judge appoints a new lawyer for her. But even though she is sane, she doesn't really acts like that. She is openly hostile to her lawyer who is trying to help and refuses to submit to an independent psychological examination that can help her case. When the hearing starts she constantly interrupts it. And somehow the judge never holds her in contempt but just keeps giving her warning after warning.I do realize that she was a victim of child abuse and she is angry, but she is a big girl and is living as hooker for past 3 years. So I found the the whole affair very fake.
BreanneB
I think that this movie is excellent. Barbara Strissand and Richard Dreyfuss are the best acts. I'm going to get my own d.v.d. of it. I also liked the costumes, production, directing, script, photography, plot, storyline, and realisticness and fantasy.I think that Claudia was right to stand up for herself the way she did. She was not incompetent of standing trial or assisting in her own defense. She could have used some outpatient therapy, even she realized that, but she did not need to be in a mental hospital. If there is anybody here who does need to be it's her parents. Think about it, her mother let her stepfather abuse her for years and her stepfather bathed her until she was 16 years old. The only reason she killed her john was out of self-defense. If she had not tried to protect herself he would have killed her.This was a brilliant film to bring to the screen. This type of movie does not come around very often. Also the judge made the right decision by releasing Claudia on her own recognizes before and during her trial.
theowinthrop
NUTS was a play that was turned into this film that has a first rate cast headed by Barbara Streisand, including Richard Dreyfus, Maureen Stapleton, Karl Malden, Eli Wallach, Robert Webber, James Whitmore, and Leslie Nielson and a top director (Martin Ritt). But it has not gotten the notice it's deserved among Streisand's top performances. I will get to that in a moment.Streisand is a hooker who has been arrested for the murder of a "John" she picked up. Nielson is the "John", and his performance here is a type of throwback to the usually villainous parts he played in the early half of his career, before he demonstrated his mastery of deadpan comedy. He tries to get rough with Streisand, and in the process of defending herself she causes him to get stabbed. Taken to court for arraignment she finds her mother and step-father (Stapleton and Malden) have arranged for her attorney (William Prince) to plead guilty on account of insanity. She gets quite upset about this, and manages to punch Prince in the mouth, breaking some teeth, and making him decide to drop this client. Dreyfus, a struggling defense attorney, is picked by the arraignment judge to handle the defense.Slowly Dreyfus and Streisand find a way of working together - and find it is an uphill battle. Streisand insists that she is sane, and that it was an accident not murder. Dreyfus believes her, but has to fight a top flight assistant district attorney (Webber) who has an accredited psychiatric expert (Wallach) ready to testify to Streisand's insanity. Fortunately the Judge (Whitmore) is pretty fair minded.I notice that parts of the resolution of the story appear on the other comments on this board, so I will refrain. Suffice to say that Streisand not only discredits Wallach quite well, but she also manages to trace her choice of profession to a damaged childhood.NUTS, as I said before, did not get the exposure of THE WAY WE WERE or WHAT'S UP DOC? or THE MIRROR HAS TWO FACES or YENTL as a key performance in the Streisand legend, and yet it bears comparison to them or her two appearances as Fanny Brice. Why was it ignored? I suspect it was that it came at the point where Streisand began making movies every couple of years instead of year after year, and that it was also made just before the change in Streisand film career when she turned director as well as actor. YENTL, THE PRINCE OF TIDES, and THE MIRROR HAS TWO FACES were far more personal films than NUTS was. Then again, it was not the first time Streisand handled the role of a hooker. She played a similar role in THE OWL AND THE PUSSYCAT opposite George Segal (although that was a comedy, not a drama). So it fell into a hole in the Streisand career - and was unfairly forgotten. It should not be, for it was well made, well acted, and thoughtful about the causes of the choices in lifestyles we make. I give it "10" out of "10".
