who thinks this movie was awful? It carried on for way too long, especially the road trip with that bratty spoiled kid. I also got tired of their constant bickering and felt that their marriage was pretty pathetic. I mean, he barely cared about his kid, that's pretty sad. I felt like it was more a photo shoot than anything else, what with all those outfits Audrey had on and being so skinny. I couldn't find much to like in this movie.
shareFirst, your responseto this movie shows how drenched you are in the fatuous media of today. This is a very good movie. And what's wrong with being skinny: are you in to fat broads. A person of some sensitivity would respond positively to this film--which really is a candidate for the most underrated film of all time. My mind shivers when I think that people like you are watching and responding to films today. I can only imagine your crankiness and belligerence if you had to watch a French film with subtitles.
shareI love this film and think that it is a great commentary on the problems of communicating with the people we love. I adore the fact that they stay together!
shareNice retort, clotblaster. I just saw this for the first time, and right now I feel that it's my favorite film ever.
"Thank you for a wonderful evening."
I just finished watching it and found it wonderful. I don't think many of my friends would like it because they just don't appriciate the older films and the way that they were made or the dialouge for that matter but I found it very enjoyable. I felt rather sad at times but I felt wonderfully happy at times as well. I suppose the end was happy because it's obvious that niether of them would have it any other way. loved it<3
I don't suppose I'm used to dancing
This is one of my favourite films of Audrey Hepburn. I don't think it's an awful film.
share[deleted]
This is my very favorite movie of all times,still after many years and many movies..my 2nd favorite is "the English Patient" and 3rd goes to the musical "Chicago"!
shareMy mother use to watch this movie all the time when I was a kid [so probably 10-15 years ago] and I obviously despised this film. However, a few years ago when I hit about 18 I got very interested in film and started going to film school so one night I actually decided to watch it again because we'd been discussing Stanley Donen as a director in class and the film is very experimental for its time, especially for being a edgy romantic comedy, because the story is told in a non-linear fashion, with scenes from the latter stages of the relationship juxtaposed with those from its beginning. I now consider it one of Donen's best and most enduring films. Two for the Raod is refreshingly sophisticated in its treatment of the difficulties of long-term commitment. Sure, some of the melodrama clashes with forced comedy but Two for the Road is timelessly appealing and truthful to the challenge of lasting love. I personally loved Audrey Hepburn's astonishing and outrageously stylish wardrobes of late-'60s fashion and would say it's one of my favorite films from Albert Finney or Audrey.
shareI don't see anything stylish about Audrey's wardrobe in this film. The original poster got this impression as well as alienlanes05. Her wardrobe in this movie looks like clothes off-the-rack from the time the film was made. She mostly wore pants, blue-jeans, or a modest skirt. When she did wear a dress, it wasn't terribly stylish especially when you compare it to some of her Givenchy gowns.
Her wardrobe looks like what any modern woman would have worn in the late 60's.
I liked the clothes Audrey wore in this film but I have to say I disliked what Audrey is wearing in this photo http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1383/Mptv/1383/0033_2495.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Hepburn,%20Audrey
I think this film is underrated to Audrey's other film's such as Roman Holiday, Sabrina, Breakfast At Tiffanys, My Fair Lady.
It says on the dvd box that all ah's clothes for this film were bought off-the-rack.
can anyone direct me to a still from this film of ah wearing the googgle sunglasses? thanks
I have screencaps over here:
http://artless.lilting.org/caps_road/index.php
I understand what NeuralRust is saying. It has no direct plot. It goes out of sequence too much and never clearly defines where each one takes place. The idea is good though, the film itself as art or romance is well done. The problem is that the plot was jsut the two of them in awakward romance then climax of romance, back and forth. But it is not bad, her oufits were great too, and the whole thing is very artsy with a lot thinking points.
shareI also disliked this movie. I never really connected with Stanley Donen's movies when they weren't musicals. His musicals were superb, but I think that sentimental nature that served him well does not work well with romantic comedies or movies like Charade (another film I feel was very overrated)
I never thought I'd find an Audrey character irritating but she almost was. The script is not clever but overloaded with TV phrases.
I do admire the experiemental editing but even that grew tiresome after a while and became more of a film gimmick. I bought this DVD after enjoying Fox's line of classics including "How To Steal A Million." To me, that was the better romantic movie with Audrey and it wasn't even trying to be one.
Two For The Road, One For The Trash Bin. (or eBay)
yes, you are. I'm sorry this movie didn't feature enough plane crashes and car explosions to hold your attention, but this movie is one of the best American movies made ever and certainly the best of Audrey, second to maybe Breakfast at Tiffany's. Their marriage was far from "pathetic" it was real. They loved each but love isn't the only thing that holds a marriage together. Relationships are hard and I think if you talk to any couple married between 10-20 years or more they'll agree that this movie is right on the money. Two for the road is heartfelt, honest, and very UN-Hollywood so I guess it's easy to see why a neanderthal like you can't take interest in it.
shareI'm with you on this one, and so you are not the only one. One of your critics, relying upon a presumptuous attack on you, rather than your comments, accuses you of being "drenched in the fatuous media of today." Well, never mind that the comment is meaningless. The medium of film, today or yesterday, cannot be "fatuous" -- it can only be a medium, and no medium is in itself "fatuous" -- but a particular film can be fatuous, and "Two for the Road" is just such a film. In fact, today one seldom encounters a new film as fatuous as "Two For The Road."
I saw this film for a graduate class in film criticism. It was the first film we watched, and in our discussion my comment was, "I thought it was like watching a never-ending Pepsi commercial." The professor blanched, and intoned, "THAT is my FAVORITE film!" This comment confirmed my general impression of her -- which proved to be the case -- that she was, to be kind, an entirely uncritical critic.
Your comment that this film was like a film shoot is very astute. It did have that feeling of being a vanity vehicle for Hepburn and Finney. While Albert Finney has had a career as an accomplished actor, Hepburn was little more than a delicate bit of set furniture -- she was just perfectly suited to star with that other charming block-head, Cary Grant.
To make doubly sure that my original impression of this film was correct, I watched it again, recently, and it was just as I had remembered it -- utterly vacuous and unmemorable, except for its annoying empty-headedness. Clotbuster's response is no more than a mindless attack on you, and those who agree with him are simply too illogical to recognize the ad hominem fallacy.
You got this one right. This movie is weak broth.
"Your comment that this film was like a film shoot is very astute."
Actually, the original poster likened the film to a photo shoot - not a film shoot. Two entirely different things.
*****************************************************************************
"You got this one right."
There is no "right" or "wrong" way to respond to a film. One can only have an opinion, and if you agree with that opinion, terrific. And if you don't - well, that's OK, too.
I knew NOTHING about Finney before this movie, but he actually didn't do a bad job at all. The relationship between Mark & Joanna was just so strained almost ALL THE TIME that it seemed like the two were pretty often depressed.
Even if folks argue, it is nice if they seem somewhat more compatible than this movie.
In addition, the adultery in this film was wrong, depressing, and awkward.
I think a movie of this nature isn't so worried about being morally correct, it's not a church sermon, it's a realistic relationship between two flawed people.
---
But what's this got to do with the CIO?
You're in graduate school, and you still can't recognize a good movie? Obviously the professor has experienced more of life than you have, and this is a movie intended for mature people. You can keep on with your juvenile opinions about the movie and Cary Grant; you're just another person that proves my signature.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
I have to disagree. While Two for the Road is not the greatest film ever made, it is a great film and Hepburn and Finney are great in it. To label it "fatuous" or "weak broth" is simply erroneous, however much you dislike it. Two for the Road is a sensitive and brutally honest look at relationships and marital strife, with a script that sparkles with humor and charm. It's a very personal film - ultimately it's not Mr. and Mrs. Wallace vs. the world (however much work and extra-marital affairs contribute to the downward spiral of their relationship), but Mr. and Mrs. Wallace vs. each other. The non-linear time line stresses the fact that life-long partnerships need continuous work - I know some people who can't watch this movie (not because they are of the same opinion as you), but because it is all too painful and real.
Two for the Road was actually quite avant-garde for it's day and broke away from many romantic comedy conventions of the '60's.
And while you may not like Ms. Hepburn, many respected and educated film connoisseurs and critics do consider her an accomplished actress.
It's fine for someone to not enjoy a film - but to go to a message board and blast it and the people who do enjoy it reveals a rather subjective viewpoint on film and film criticism.
NeuralRust: "I also got tired of their constant bickering and felt that their marriage was pretty pathetic."
That is the whole point of the movie. This isn't a happy go lucky love comedy. The movie is a study on how we fantasize about true love but in reality people in relationships tend to drift apart after the initial honeymoon phase.
[deleted]
I wouldn't call it awful, but I found much of this very unpleasant. I realize that's the point, but the feel-good ending didn't seem very genuine after all the other forces pulling these two apart. Oh well, I suspect they got divorced in the '70s like so many others.
share