MovieChat Forums > Butterflies Are Free Discussion > Most Underrated Film Of All-Time (Almost...

Most Underrated Film Of All-Time (Almost)


I must say this is probably the most underrated film I have ever seen…three times.

“Butterflies Are Free” gave each three of its major stars the best roles of their careers. That’s not saying much about Edward Albert, I know that. But he was magnificent in this role. His breakdown scenes with both his mother and Jill are unforgettable. Now I ask you…why was he ignored all awards season, besides the Globes? He could have easily fit into the “Best Actor” category at the Oscars that year, replacing Peter O’Toole or Michael Caine.

Eileen Heckart was spectacular as Mrs. Baker. She was pitch-perfect as the over protective mother who finally deals with letting go of her son. She won a much-deserved Academy Award for “Best Supporting Actress” that year. At least someone from the film got some attention.

But the news here is Goldie Hawn. I’ve viewed both of her Oscar-nominated roles and they were both great, especially “Private Benjamin”. But in “Butterflies Are Free”, Hawn delivered the best work of her entire career. She was outstanding as Jill, the carefree hippie. If Hawn was nominated over Maggie Smith that year, I could honestly say that would’ve been the absolute best year for actresses at the Oscars.

Best Picture & Best Adapted Screenplay wouldn't have hurt, either.

Does anyone agree?

FYC 2006: Academy Awards-Felicity Huffman ("Transamerica")

reply

I agree completely!

reply

yeah, i definitely agree that goldie was shafted in regard to an oscar. i've always felt her performance in "butterflies" was outstanding...

:0)

"...when i go outside naked, people throw garbage at me."

reply

I think Albert and Hawn should have BOTH been nominated. Atleast Heckart was and won! GREAT MOVIE!

reply

I agree. I saw it on the big screen eons ago and it was fantastic. Eyes like Albert's have haunted me ever since.

Why ain't you at the garden party you heathen?

reply

I totally agree

reply

Playing A blind person has got to be so very difficult and Edward Albert is so convincing at times I forgot he has his sight in real life. His performance being snubbed was probably the biggest mistake Oscar has made in years. I offer this as a comparison Al Pacino in "scent of a woman" won an Oscar for portraying a blind man. But Mr. Albert was not even nominated.

reply

Eyes like Albert's have haunted me ever since.


OMG, his eyes are gorgeous, aren't they? That piercing blue.

reply

Yes, it's very underrated. I especially love that the characters overall are well balanced. The flower child is not all sweetness-and-light: she's emotionally damaged and commitment-phobic. The mother is not all overprotective bully: she's loving, perceptive, and open to change when she sees she's wrong. And the blind man is not purely sympathetic either: he's prideful, impulsive, and sharp-tongued, sometimes unwise about what he needs or should have. Great job by all the actors, and the script is witty as hell.

reply

I agree with everything you post but those award show are very political and I'm happy that someone got notice and won for such a special movie.

reply

Edward Albert not only should have received an Oscar but he should have been cast for some juicy roles in the '70's. Not only was he a great actor, he was a wonderful human being. He gave up acting to take care of his father Eddie Albert (whom we all remember from Green Acres) after his dad's health started to decline about fifteen years ago. (His dad, by the way, was nominated twice for an Oscar as best supporting actor--in 1953's Roman Holiday and in 1972's The Heartbreak Kid.) Sadly, the son died of lung cancer in 2006, only a year after his father.

reply

I Twitter-searched 'Butterflies are Free' after seeing the movie (my third time in ten years) and in addition to references to the movie I was pleased to see Tweets about several current productions around the country. I'm glad to see that the wonderful script and story are still being revived and staged; I was afraid it was too much of a 'time capsule' to appeal to modern audiences.

But deserving movies being overlooked by the Oscars are nothing new. Conversely, some of the movies that are heaped with nominations you'd never, ever want to see again. I honestly think I'd rather be in a movie like this one that has a legitimate hold on the hearts and minds of audiences who are always up for another viewing, than some depressing art house worthy that inspires an "Ick, no thank you, once was more than enough" response in people who see it listed on the preview channel.

(I also love that Jill's funeral plans would've cost about $100,000 if carried out as directed!! )

reply

I love this one as well.

I especially like the early 70s feel, like the scene in the clothing store, the folky title song Edward Albert sings (he also sings a little bit of John Denver's Country Roads).

Many great comments here, I whole heartily agree that the characters are flawed and not just stereotypes. Jill the flighty girl is also shown as being a bit selfish and callous at times, Mrs Baker is not just an overbearing mother, she is loving and concerned.

One of my favorite exchanges:

Jill: "Oh please, we're just having kicks"
Mrs Baker: " Kicks! that's how it started with Linda-just kicks...but Donny fell in love with her...and he'll fall in love with you. Then what happens?"
Jill: "I don't know!"
Mrs Baker : "Then don't let it go that far. Stop now before you hurt him"
Jill: "What about you? Aren't you hurting him?"
Mrs Baker: "I can't. I can only irritate him. You can hurt him. The longer you stay the harder it will be for him when you leave. Let him come home with me and you can have your kicks with someone who won't feel them when you're gone!"

reply