MovieChat Forums > The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas (1982) Discussion > disappointing the second time around

disappointing the second time around

posted 17 years ago by hannahp1
12 replies | jump to latest

I seen this movie at the theater when i was 14 and thought it was great(my hormones may have been talking). Now seeing it, I can see the many problems. Jim Nabors narration for one is a big no no.

None of the hookers have personalities, you have no connection. As well as Dolly(who I love!!!)and Burt have no onscreen chemisty.

Although I do like several of the songs, especially Hard Candy Christmas. It is an interesting movie that has an R rating.

Making the whorehouse a symbol of good is a hard sell-probably better on stage where it originated.

Charles Durning did not deserve an Oscar nomination for his little dance through the capital-there must have not been good choices to fill in the supporting actor nominations that year.

For a musical though, it wasn't too bad.

5 out of a 10.

[–] xylonian-1 17 years ago

I think it might be a bit 'dated' by now.... I think your age at the time of the first viewing did have a bit to do with it though, like you say....

My Life http://www.nga.gov/feature/artnation/vernet/index.shtm

[–] g_dekok 17 years ago

fr hannahp1:

>...As well as Dolly(who I love!!!)and Burt have no onscreen chemisty...<

Oh, for pete's sake. It's a COMEDY, and a very good one, at that.

>....Charles Durning did not deserve an Oscar nomination for his little dance through the capital-there must have not been good choices to fill in the supporting actor nominations that year...<

For a person his size, Durning is amazingly light on his feet.

Get a life, and just enjoy a great movie!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] imnottellingyou101 17 years ago

LOL, I thought the EXACT same thing!!!!! I thought I was the only one! :)

[–] WarpedRecord 17 years ago

Actually, I thought Charles Durning was stunning in this film. I loved the bit he does with his hat. Really, I think the whole cast sparkles, and Burt and Dolly and terrific together.

I saw this film in theaters in 1982, and thought it was merely pleasant, but I watched it again recently, and I thought it was outstanding. I guess you just have to be in the right mood.

[–] WatchCat 17 years ago

You said, "None of the hookers have personalities, you have no connection."

I believe you missed the basic point as to the reason the town wanted to keep the Chicken Ranch. It wasn't because of any of the individual women working there - the town didn't want to shut down their LEGENDARY "institution."

Though the audience DID get a small glimpse into the women's "personalities" while they were at the table, when they discovered who won the football game, and then, of course, during the Hard Candy Christmas number, hookers aren't hired for their personalities, are they??

The audience saw and connected to the hookers in EXACTLY the right way, and with some great music, to-boot. Connecting any more closely to those characters would have muddied the reason for the fight to keep the Ranch.

I don't know whether Durning's nomination was "deserved" or not but who can watch his dance, his smooth hat trick, and listen to his wonderful deliveries of political double-speak without smiling? (Who DOESN'T try to figure out whether his communication with the Press makes ANY sense at all? Politicians, don't you just love them all?)

I'm curious, what did you think was wrong with Nabors' narration?

[–] xylonian-1 17 years ago

"I don't know whether Durning's nomination was "deserved" or not but who can watch his dance, his smooth hat trick, and listen to his wonderful deliveries of political double-speak without smiling?"

I do not think I have ever seen him give anything but a great performance, but do love his character in this the most....

"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five."

[–] teaandoranges 17 years ago

I don't know how anyone can watch Dolly and Burt's scene by the lake and say they have no chemistry.....maybe you were watching a different movie. As for Charles Durning's dance number it was great....think about it he stareted out as a song and dance man and now he gets to use it as the governor of Texas. It was great and sweet. I saw thid movie for the first time last night on "On Demand" and I thought it was a great musical. As an aside it was made for adults which at that time gave us credit for being able to watch main stream movies with nudity and swearing (R rated) Unfortunately this movie coouldn't be made by a mainsgtream studio nowadays because the "Purity" police (who only want purity for others) have taken over. Read purity as christian religious right.

[–] przgzr 16 years ago

I like Durning, he is a great actor, and this role is magnificent, but not because of his acting. The credits go to writers. From the beginning of his political speech (how to say nothing so not to say anything wrong is the biggest art for politicians all around the world) to the fact that his "moral" and "legal" decision was made only after checking the "public" (read: "voters'") opinion, everything was perfectly revealing the character of modern politician (regardless the party or country). But the dance itself was, for me, the weakest part of the movie, because the movie and its plot was not otherwise such a caricature - even de Louise was more moderate (such a dance would fit better in Mel Brooks movies).

Smiling yes, the political message yes, but not an Oscar-level role.

[–] tgibbs279 16 years ago

Durning's performance, with his song & dance number, is the best thing about this movie. It's an uneven movie to me. Some moments work; some don't. But it all just springs to life when Durning is on screen.

[–] jefgg 12 years ago

That is why I usually prefer to see a movie I have not seen instead of something I already have.

[–] sirjeremy 12 years ago

Apart from the narration, I absolutely agree with you about the films shortcomings, especially about Charles Durning - in a weaker year I could just about agree he deserved it but not in 1982. I would also add that I thought Dolly was a little stiff in this role, which pains me to say as she's usually such an engaging presence. Makes me wonder what was going on on set.

I'd like to see this in a theatre but it never gets revived here in the U.K.