the leading man is my tpye

SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

One of the wrost movies I have ever seen

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

As the first and last shots of this film, we see a granular photograph of an elderly man and a man in his prime, arms flung on one another's shoulders, gazing indecisively into the camera as if they're not very convinced what brought them out into the daylight to sit for this picture. And we take notice of Gene Hackman's voice: "Death ends a life. But it does not end a relationship." This film takes that unadorned reality and exercises it to make a moving, if slushy, account about blood relations, living and dying, and all the words that go unheard. The member of the old guard is played by Melvyn Douglas, and Hackman plays his son, and the film is about the turbulent feeling they have for one another, and about their failure to express that feeling, or a great deal of anything else.The tale is set at a stage when the fogey's life is closing down, but he won't acknowledge it, and when the younger man's life is about to allow a fresh start. The stick-in-the-mud is eighty-one, and once upon a time he was one of the community's foremost citizens. Nevertheless, now he's essentially ancient history, left to live a calm life in the sprawling old family home. He lives there with his wife and his reminiscences, and a forceful overprotectiveness for his son.What he wants from the son is a glimpse of affection. He doesn't connect with him. Actually, he fritters lots of time dozing off facing the TV. Yet he wants him there, virtually as a detainee, as he has a need for warmth deferred from his own ignored childhood. The son attempts to do his duty. Although his own wife died a year ago, and now he's resolved to marry a doctor who lives in California. This will entail leaving the hometown, and that'd be sacrilege to his father.The predicament grows insistent when his mother passes. The old man appears to understand the death as a bother, reassigning his sorrow to recollections of his own mother's death some fifty years ago. But his reliance on his son grows to be full-blown. His daughter comes home for the funeral. In a convulsion of wrath, the intransigent had exiled her for marrying a Jew.Now she rationalizes to Hackman, with a neutrality that seems brutal but arises from affection, that plans are going to have to be made about dad. He can't live in the immense estate alone. The problem is, his conceit makes him reject hiring the housekeeper he could effortlessly afford. He requires his son to look after him. And Hackman has not yet garnered the nerve to disclose his marriage plans.Robert Anderson's piece makes a lifetime of sense. Yes, characters fuss and bicker, but the feelings have been gathered not from life but from dated TV. For every line delivered with authenticity, there's another that's lugged with all of the poise and none of the effect. But still, I must concede that his dialogue is straightforward and informative, sans the erudite flourishes or refinement that could've interfered with the characters. For Anderson's narrative, which looks to everyday pragmatism and would find symbolism precarious, the plain dialogue is important, so when we feel the theatrical roots of the script bleeding through the celluloid, it dulls the blade of the poignant material and earnest performances by feeling contrived.Gilbert Cates' direction also defers to the reality that this is a movie not about visual flair or any other trendily cinematic self-consciousness. Not including an unsuitable song which creeps onto the soundtrack early on, Cates has directed exclusively to extract moving performances. Much of the film is simply between Hackman and Douglas and the characters appear to work so capably because they physically answer one another in every shot. The result is not of acting, but as if the story were occurring presently while we see it.Death ends a life, but not a relationship. That's accurate of all intimate and profound human relationships. When one person dies, the other keeps speculating what could've been said between them, but wasn't. This film has the nerve to keep open-ended. The issues between father and son stay largely unsettled. That's actually more unfortunate than the reality of death, which is biological, but human nature shouts that parents and children should identify with one another.

Gene Hackman gives a strong performance as a 40-ish writer and widower who harbors trepidations about moving his life forward once his elderly mother dies, leaving his old codger of a father in his care. Screenwriter Robert Anderson, adapting his own play, works in the usual character-exposition without much skill or grace; still, there are some very real, human anxieties explored here, an internal struggle between a father and his son which is fraught with love/hate dynamics. Anderson's words are no doubt given a great deal of depth just from the players alone. Melvyn Douglas accurately pins down a precise type of strict, no-nonsense gentleman who lives mostly in the past, finds the present a nuisance, is frightened about his own sanity and yet refuses to accept help from anyone. It's a grandly unsentimental tour-de-force, with layers of character underneath to relieve the repetitiveness of the central situation and presentation (which feels like a television movie blown-up for the big screen). With Hackman internalizing the frustrations he has felt his entire life in regards to this cantankerous man, one waits for the proverbial 'showdown', the moment where the son can longer accept not getting answers to his questions, having been fed up a long time ago by the constant criticism and belittling. What's surprising is, the build-up to this moment is just as intriguing as what follows, and the actors (both Oscar-nominated) manage to make their dilemma seem universal. Still, the production is pedestrian, the editing (with jagged little flashbacks) often sloppy, and the music is silly. None of these technical faults take away from the highly-charged work by either Hackman or Douglas, though they do weaken the overall effect of the picture--turning it from something extraordinary into something passable. **1/2 from ****

"I Never Sang for My Father" has to be one of the saddest films ever made. Relations between parents and grown up children are examined in this tight drama that rings true from beginning to end. We can relate to how the dynamics in a family change as parents get older and children are now involved in problems of their own with their families.This is basically about the special relationship between a father and a son. Tom Garrison, the father, is in his eighties. His son Gene has lost his wife and is now seeing a woman doctor in California. When Margaret, the mother, suffers a heart attack and dies, Tom and Gene come to a confrontation because the father wants to keep a grip on his son to help him during that adjustment period. Gene, who has always been a good son, has to make a decision that will put him at odds with his father.The idea of children taking care of their parents during their old age is questioned here. On the one hand, Tom, the father, is a self made man who struggled hard for all he achieved in life. Gene, the son, is in the eyes of the father, a failure, because of his passive nature. Tom has counted on relying on Gene for those late years and because of his intransigent nature, he is not willing to compromise in the solution the son has for him.The film version of Robert Anderson's play, and directed by Gilbert Cates, gathered a stellar cast to bring the family alive. Melvyn Douglas, in one of his best screen appearances, makes Tom Garrison come alive. Mr. Douglas' take on his character shows a man that while giving an appearance of being strong, underneath, shows his vulnerability. Gene Hackman, who plays the son, is a perfect match for Melvyn Douglas. Their scenes together show a raw energy between a domineering father and a son that has gone along to please him. Estelle Parsons is seen as Alice, the estranged daughter and Dorothy Stickney who plays Margaret, the mother.

This is the kind of movie that really makes you think about the people that you love. It also makes you think about the fact that time is inevitable, and thorough communication about the things we feel should hold the highest priority over anything else.Excellent script and the actors are brilliant. Everyone should see this movie!