MovieChat Forums > Petulia (1968) Discussion > What exactly was Petulia's problem?

What exactly was Petulia's problem?

posted 12 years ago by Shanak41
7 replies | jump to latest

I wasn't able to fully understand why Petulia was so eager to get Archie into her life. Which is a shame because I really wanted to. Having read the synopsis on the cover made me very curious, because it said that the viewer will understand before Archie does. It emphasized the notion that we would know why she was so desperate. Unfortunately, it wasn't so clear to me. All the flashbacks and flashforwards made it rather confusing. I knew she wasn't too fond of being with Richard Chamberlain, and that she was pregnant, but whether or not either of those were ultimate reason I'm just not sure. Can anyone enlighten me? Because I did like it in spite of not completely understanding it. So I'd like to get to the bottom of this mystery.

[–] intofilm 12 years ago

I think she was drawn to his gentleness. She says "these are the most gentle hands I've ever seen."

[–] Devans00 12 years ago

I got the impression Petulia was attracted to Archie because he was the distinguished, accomplished older gentleman. He was able to heal hurting people in his prestigious, successful job as a surgeon. I think Petulia had already seen Archie, prior to the charity event, when he worked on Oliver, the boy from Mexico.

From what I could tell David not only beat Petulia regularly, he also hadn't really accomplished much. His job seemed to be look good and be the son of a rich man.

Comparing Archie vs. David, I'd go for Archie too.

No two persons ever watch the same movie.

[–] renatom1 10 years ago

What exactly was Petulia's problem? She was played by Julie Christie. I'm sorry, but I find her to be a very annoying actress. I've seen her in two movies--this one and Don't Look Now--and in both of these movies she is so hyperactive and histrionic that it's hard for me to get a handle on her.

[–] Devans00 10 years ago

renatom1
What exactly was Petulia's problem? She was played by Julie Christie. I'm sorry, but I find her to be a very annoying actress. I've seen her in two movies--this one and Don't Look Now--and in both of these movies she is so hyperactive and histrionic that it's hard for me to get a handle on her.

I know what you mean renatom1. The acting style that was popular around the 1960s and 1970s was so jarring and unnatural, it's hard for me to watch at times. 15 minutes in and I want to scream "What's everyone hollaring for? The other person is only 5 feet away."

Every decade or so, movies tend to have different acting styles. At least before the late 1980s. Ever since then, acting, when done well, gives the impression of spying in on regular people going about their lives.

Many of the movies we consider legendary or classic are the ones that broke out of the mold for their time.

No two persons ever watch the same movie.

[–] MystMoonstruck 9 years ago

Thank goodness others feel that way about Christie! I was a teen in the Sixties, so I saw her in many films. I disliked her in every one! I didn't care for her looks ever, especially her tendency to use nude lipstick, making her look "frosted". I was mystified when she won for "Darling", which she has admitted that she was, too.

I watch "Petulia" for George C. Scott. Every time, I detest Petulia that much more, like Ali/Jenny in "Love Story"! I find both females despicable! They try so hard: Petulia is a lovable, misunderstood kook! Well, they tried that with Natalie Wood in "Penelope", to similarly disastrous effect.

For one thing: Petulia is the one who basically kidnapped the boy! She's a ditz from beginning to end! The tuba... As I'm watching this again tonight, I took yet another star away because all of that is AWFUL! It's not cute or adorable. She broke a store window and stole it! Then, she gives Archie grief over not getting it back to the owner! Sheesh!

"Petulia" is at five stars now. I like Scott, Chamberlain and Knight. But, Julie Christie has me wishing that I had a tape of it so that I could fast forward through some of the scenes.

(W)hat are we without our dreams?
Making sure our fantasies
Do not overpower our realities. ~ RC

[–] AvaSinatra59 (195) 6 years ago

I agree with you about Christie's acting style, but it matches the characters she played in those days. Compare them with her role/acting style in "Heaven Can Wait".

[–] dogtired-2 9 years ago

I'm totally mystified by the responses to this question! What exactly was wrong with Petulia? It was that she kept getting the sh!t kicked out of her by her rich and handsome husband. The movie indicates that she is not from money, therefore her husband appears to be the perfect catch. The only problem being that he's a spousal abuser. She, a woman of no independent means, is caught in a very tough spot; this was the sixties, people, a time when spousal abuse was an accepted part of life, with no (or ineffectual) laws, to aid victims. Her husband was from a powerful family (remember the scene where the husband's father intimidates the nurses merely by mentioning that he had recently dined with the hospital's chief administrator?), so there's no question the husband had the upper hand should she make accusations against him, as people were accustomed to looking the other way back then, anyway. That cycle of abuse has made Petulia a bit nutty ("kookie," as the film says) and she was looking for a strong man to be her protector. She latches onto Archie as that someone whom she believes will protect her from her husband. Archie is indeed slow to truly understand the depth of the problem and then may be worried that his own position at the hospital may be in jeopardy if he speaks out. This film is a watershed movie in terms of dealing with spousal abuse, coming out as it did in 1968, at the early stages of the women's liberation movement.