MovieChat Forums > Klute (1971) Discussion > Too much Jane Fonda, too little suspense

Too much Jane Fonda, too little suspense

posted 12 years ago by tricksoftrade01
11 replies | jump to latest

This movie seemed to me as just a vehicle to showcase Fonda's acting chops (she IS a fine actress and I know she won the Oscar of Klute)

But the movie as a whole suffered in my view. I would have edited out ALL those shrink scenes, also cutting the screen time of Fonda by about 15 min. Give the movie more of a detective/suspense feel to it instead of focusing on the emotional world of the call girl. Really, Sutherlands character had about 50 words in the movie.

Fonda probably had too much juice in 1971 to be edited out. Warner Bros probably smelled Oscar and went with it.

I really love the score however!

[–] SimplemindedSociety 12 years ago

Without the shrink-scenes, we don't get to know the character.
I noticed that some films are damned if they,damned if they don't;criticized for lacking characterization,criticized for not containing enough action.

[–] rrb 12 years ago

tricks: you're saying that Pakula et al should've made the film you would've made, vs. the film they wanted to make. You want a suspense film, pure and simple. They were making a suspense film cum character study. The reasons Klute resonates as it does is that we get into Bree's head and get to know her intimately - and the shrink scenes are integral to that.

[–] tricksoftrade01 12 years ago

Bree's head was not that interesting to me, that was the problem. She was a call girl who put up emotional defense screens to do her job....big deal!

I do like character studies though, Gene Hackman's conflicted character in 'The Conversation'is probably one of the best.

[–] rrb 12 years ago

Bree's head was not that interesting to me, that was the problem.

That was a problem...for YOU. Happily reviewers and audiences haven't agreed.

The character study is incisive, beautifully acted, and what makes Klute so much richer than the conventional film that you prefer.

[–] tallard 11 years ago

It's not just you. There was absolutely nothing novel to the "character". Yep, prostitute has trouble with love, and tells Johns what they want to hear... yep, I think only chumps think that they're pay for "true love".
I've never been a big fan of Jane Fonda's acting, and seeing this tonight did not change that. The only truth this film delivers is that Johns are creeps, always have been always will be.

***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bon22 10 years ago

This is a character piece, examining Bree and Klute and their unlikely relationship. The thriller elements are merely the framework holding those character studies together.

Exactly. Perhaps this may be a difficult concept to grasp?

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

It may had been called Klute but it was a showcase for Fonda.

Its that man again!!

[–] DracTarashV 10 years ago

I really love the score however!

Yup, that eerie score was the best part of the film for me. (Fonda did gave a first-rate performance, though.)

Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!

[–] spookyrat1 10 years ago

I would have edited out ALL those shrink scenes, also cutting the screen time of Fonda by about 15 min. Give the movie more of a detective/suspense feel to it instead of focusing on the emotional world of the call girl.

A lot of the stuff that makes this a(generally accepted) uniquely, character-driven neonoir well over 40 years after it was released.

I really love the score however!

No argument from me there. It's brilliantly appropriate.