Search Movie Review Archives

'On Golden Pond' is a movie strange in so many ways it's difficult to mention them all. First and foremost, despite the semi-classic status it now has, and despite many of the normal Oscar-bait trappings, it actually is pretty good. This, I should also mention, is despite the fact that it is about, in the main, two rather screwy old people. The movie stars Henry Fonda in his last film appearance, and he won the Best Actor Oscar for his performance. Few are the performances that have more deservedly taken the little statue. He plays a retired professor, who is (as the cheaply symbolic movie will tell us again and again) at the sunset of his life, and Fonda plays him convincingly, and partially to the credit of the writing. The film also stars Katherine Hepburn, who won the Best Actress Oscar, and few are the performances that deserved the nod less. Katherine Hepburn, in 'On Golden Pond', plays Katherine Hepburn in a way that can only be described as 'nearly lifelike'. ***

But, there is more that is odd about the picture. Dave Grusin, the reigning King of the 'so intrusive it's actually silly' musical score, delivers here what is either his career best or worst, depending on which team you're pulling for. The score isn't bad exactly, it's quite good at times if perhaps somewhat 'television', but you know it's there as though it were sitting in your lap. He was also nominated for an Academy Award. So was director Mark Rydell, and these are the sorts of nominations that let us know that virtually no one knows what it means to be a good director. I've seen no less than six reviews of the film that call the direction 'pedestrian', and there's a good reason for that, that's exactly the sort of direction we have. 'Serviceable' is about the best you could hope to get out of him. 1972's 'The Cowboys' with John Wayne, and 1976's lost gem 'Harry and Walter Go to New York' notwithstanding, he seems to have made his career out of being the go to guy when huge name actors weren't about to take any direction from anybody. See 'The Rose', 'The River', and 'For the Boys' for a sampling of movies which exemplify this idea. ***

But, the strangest thing of all is, as I said, the movie is still quite good despite all these things, and several more. It's good for three reasons: Fonda, the writing, and a surprising (though not spectacular) turn from child actor Doug McKeon. The writing is itself surprising, though only in retrospect. Ernest Thompson's script, which he adapted from his own Broadway play, is at times ridiculously simplistic and borders on the trivial, but it is also deserving of the Oscar win it earned him. The surprise comes when he moves from this to the hopeless '1969', and then to the not-nearly-as-bad, but still uncommonly average 'Sweet Hearts Dance', and then all but disappears. ***

On to the movie, Norman Thayer Jr. is a retired professor, and he's about to turn eighty. He's also the sort of guy who goes to 'camp' every summer somewhere among the lakeside retreats of the North Pacific, where 'camp' means you own a house you spend the summer in. There's a lot more we learn about Norman, a man confronting his age and not liking the glint in the eye of the oddsmaker. He likes to catch fish, mess with people's minds, say "Gaawwwdd Daammn", and he's just the sort of old coot who would own a boat christened "Thayer IV". He's crotchety, curmudgeonly, and just about every '-ly' that is widely associated with old people. We're also led to understand that he was probably pretty widely considered a genius in his day. Perhaps because of this, perhaps not, he is not dealing with his age well, particularly with his fading memory. ***

Curiously enough, Norman is married to Katherine Hepburn. She's a bit more in control of her faculties than Norman, but she's the sort of always chipper that not only grates (and some might say perfectly) against Norman's exterior, but is also generally a result of not being 'all there'. Katherine, luckily, is not a major player in the game, despite her large role and relatively lengthy screentime. She is mainly support, Best Actress Oscar aside, and her main 'use' is to better define Norman, and more fully build his character. Imagine the movie without her, and we get a much different picture of Norman, but in some sense we haven't really lost anything. Still, the character works very well, and her speech about Norman being her knight in shining armor, whereas she is of course serving as his by saying so, is quality writing, even if it does make you roll eyes. ***

So we follow Norman to his 'camp', and he and his wife manage to get respectfully settled and introduce us to their lives. This actually goes on a bit too long, and the first ten minutes are a chore, but we're on solid ground for the most part. Our story gets going when daughter Chelsea (Jane Fonda) shows up with her new boyfriend and his son. Chelsea's character is problematic in a host of ways. The character is written, somewhat contrary to the rest of the script, from a perspective of beating ideas into the audience, for a start. The fact that she has been divorced is rather needlessly brought up before she arrives just so that some bit of 'failure', or 'disapproval' can stand out in our minds. Her first outburst of negative emotion aimed at Norman seems to come from nowhere, and of course there's the rather uninspired fact that she calls her mother "Mommy", but calls her father "Norman". ***

The main delivery of the movie comes when daughter and boyfriend fly off to Europe for a month, leaving thirteen year-old Billy behind to spend some time with our old folks. After a bit of difficulty, Norman and Billy both get a healthy dose of some things they need in their lives, and they learn that in many ways they are awfully close to being the same person. It's here that the writing really becomes worthy of serious consideration insofar as possible awards. The movie is a dangerous one, and the slightest shift one direction or the other could easily have left it either overbearing and silly, or ineffectual. But, it does work, fairly well anyway, and though the movie has a great many problems, the writing does hold it together. The writing's greatest strength being its appeal to reality. The relationship between Norman and Billy is central to the film's ability to succeed, and in virtually every way this is presented as believably true to the characters that have been shown to us. The writing also does the movie a great turn by giving us our two leads as not only a couple that we can believe (by the way they speak and act towards each other) have shared an entire life together, but more importantly we can believe that these two specific characters have shared a life together. We are given the couple in a way that makes it very easy to believe that these people have a real history. ***

In the end, a fine, if not great, film that deserves most of the praise it has received over the years. -

The DVD, and the film's remastered status, present the film wonderfully, and it's a film that definitely requires that great attention be paid to the transfer. Not only are there no real flaws to speak of, but a great deal of the film's value comes from the cinematography of Billy Williams, and this comes through on the DVD. The often very subtle, but often grand use of lighting is important to this movie in a way that is not the norm, and even the smallest of shifts in contrast or color could seriously harm the effect of the movie. Fortunately, there is none of this to be found. This is truly an excellent transfer. ***

The DVD boasts Dolby 5.1 Digital Surround, but it isn't the sort of claim that translates into any great difference in the experience of the movie. Sound is not exactly critical to the film, not in the proper sense that would get us something from high-tech possibilities anyway. There are a few moments when surround comes into play, but they aren't exactly interesting, and there isn't a great deal to be gained by it. The sound is as good as it needs to be, with dialogue coming through very clearly, but that's about all the movie lends itself to.

As we might expect, this is not a release littered with special features, but the ones it has are nice additions. 'Reflections on Golden Pond' is a 30-minute tribute to cinematographer Billy Williams' work on the film. Director Mark Rydell, writer Ernest Thompson, other directors, film historians, and Williams himself all contribute to this retrospective on what went into the cinematography effort on the film, and give their ideas on why it is such an achievement, and why it worked so well. Williams gives us a lot of interesting detail about many of the choices he made, and why he made them. The others focus mainly on Williams' extraordinary ability to use natural light. For anyone remotely interested in this aspect of filmmaking, this is a great feature. ***

'A Woman of Substance' is a 16-minute tribute to Katherine Hepburn. A host of people chime in with their thoughts on Hepburn's life in general, and her career. Many who directed her movies, film critics, authors, and of course Billy Williams, and Ernest Thompson are on board, and we hear their thoughts, and her history, with the occasional clip of one of her movies. It's a bit too short to get much depth, but it is a very nice overview of her life. -

The DVD comes with two commentary tracks. One is referred to as 'archival' commentary, and this one is by director Mark Rydell. You don't get the sort of commentary you might normally associate with a director's commentary here. For the most part, this commentary is itself just a recorded reminiscence. Rydell talks about a great deal of the production as though reading from his diary, focusing on anecdotes of what happened behind-the-scenes, or throwing out the odd tangential note about members of the cast and crew. We get very little from the perspective of making the film, or decisions he made during production, but it's quite interesting to listen to him. There is certainly much of interest here, as long as you know what you're actually going to be getting. ***

The second commentary is by writer Ernest Thompson, and it is pretty easily one of the better commentary tracks given by a writer. If you can imagine a commentary by a writer where he would talk about just what you would hope, you'd have a pretty good idea of this track. He starts off a bit rough, but he quickly gets the hang of what he's doing, and from then on it's a very solid, informative, and entertaining track. He gives us great insight into the writing process, where many aspects of the story came from, and how he made many of his choices. He throws in the occasional anecdote from the production to keep things interesting, but doesn't go too far down that road.

A classic movie that is mostly deserving of the title, combined with a great transfer and some interesting extras. Anyone remotely interested in picking this one up can do so without any fear that they will regret the purchase.

Marc Eastman

www.movieroundtable.com