MovieChat Forums > The Goodbye Girl (1977) Discussion > I can't even begin to tell you how many ...

I can't even begin to tell you how many problems I have with this film..

posted 18 years ago by Entgegengelaufen
68 replies | jump to latest

First of all , I usually love Neil Simon's work , but I think he didn't quite hit the mark with this one. I found his portrayal of the dance community to be way off the mark.

The first thing that struck me when watching this film was , what an irresponsible mother Marsha Mason's character was. She shouldn't have had the daughter if she wanted to continue dancing. Having children in the dance world is a major no-no. It really destroys the figure.

The second thing that struck me was how could she dare be living with a man , out-of-wedlock , and exposing her daughter to that kind of lifestyle?

This is not the cheery , cute film that it pretends to be , or that one might think it to be.

How could she allow herself to financially depend on a man that is not committed to her? She has a child!

The man was married! She should've known , they never leave their wives.

And I found it very startling , even though the scene was played innocently , that she allowed Drefuss' character to rub on her child and then fall asleep in the bed with her. Maybe I feel more strongly about this because times have changed , but I still think that was wrong of her to allow that.

Now , back to Neil Simon's portrayal of the dancing world.

First of all , Marsha Mason's character was only 33 , yet Simon hat her hobbling from scene to scene like she was 100! Thirty-three years old is not old in the dance community! I know this for a fact. There are dancers 50 and upwards still dancing in Broadway shows , still doing the difficult choreography and routines.There are even principal dancers in ballet companies in their 50's! So , I think Marsha Mason's character in this film was just lazy.

That's my 2 cents.

Amicus verus est rara avis.

[–] tomtkh 10 years ago

Eeeek! Living with a man "out of wedlock"! LOLLL...do you even know what century you're living in?! Nobody thinks or talks like that anymore! Welcome to the 21st century!

[–] oscarunger 10 years ago

well, it was seven years ago, maybe he/she feels differently now (-:

[–] mdonln 9 years ago

Entgegengelaufen says > The first thing that struck me when watching this film was , what an irresponsible mother Marsha Mason's character was. She shouldn't have had the daughter if she wanted to continue dancing. Having children in the dance world is a major no-no. It really destroys the figure.

Wow, really, dancers don't have sex? I have to assume that's what you meant because anyone who has sex must know they can expect they might at some point have a child. As we all know, the ONLY method of birth control that's 100% effective is abstinence.

Oh, before anyone says it, abortion doesn't keep one from having a child. Abortion ends the child's life keeping it from developing further into its potential. That would be no different than if she snuffed out Lucy. She's not yet a woman but if her mother decided she was an inconvenience and 'got rid of her' it wouldn't mean she never existed.

Marsha Mason's character was only 33 , yet Simon hat her hobbling from scene to scene like she was 100! Thirty-three years old is not old in the dance community!

Paula may have been relatively young but she had obviously not kept in shape. Even a once elite athlete will struggle if he fails to maintain some level of fitness and discipline after he stops practicing his sport. By the same token, anyone who pushes their body to extremes, like athletes and dancers, can expect to be past their prime while still relatively young; even if they stay fit. They will be able to do many of the things they once could do but not at the same level. They may experience more aches and pains, take longer to recover, lack the energy and vitality, and not be able to keep up with younger, even less fit, peers.

Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]