criterionforum.org

The weirdness and unevenness of 8 Million Ways to Die makes it for me a stunningly interesting film, today even more than 40 years ago. Like therewillbeblues said: the loooong confrontation scene at the warehouse at the end where everyone shouts their lungs out - way before the shooting begins - is as bizzare as it is epic regarding the hysterical turmoil of everyone concerned. I cannot think of a comparable scene in any other film.

It’s so frustrating how Jake’s Journey is unavailable beyond the script, which was published in a book by Graham Chapman

Stefan wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 8:03 pm I cannot think of a comparable scene in any other film.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it. And the movie itself is never boring. It just could've used a more epic length for them to flesh out the many ideas presented

I’m curious to hear opinions on Second-Hand Hearts here. I think Barbara Harris is magnificent as always in it. Again, a flawed work, but it didn’t deserve to basically be unreleased by Lorimar

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 10:48 pm I’m curious to hear opinions on Second-Hand Hearts here. I think Barbara Harris is magnificent as always in it. Again, a flawed work, but it didn’t deserve to basically be unreleased by Lorimar.

I feel I should watch Second-Hand Hearts a second time before assigning it a place in Ashby's canon. It was very difficult to see for decades until it started showing up on free streaming services where I finally saw it about three years ago. I found it fairly inert on my one viewing and there's no way to ignore that it represents a shocking drop in quality following Ashby's golden 7-film run of the 70s. I agree that Barbara Harris is perfect for this material but I didn't think Robert Blake crafted an interesting enough character to build such a flimsy scenario around. Seeing it again may revise my opinion but, for now, I'd place it behind 8 Million Ways To Die and, certainly, Lookin' To Get Out (easily Ashby's best film of the 80s), but ahead of the anonymous The Slugger's Wife.

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 8:13 pm It’s so frustrating how Jake’s Journey is unavailable beyond the script, which was published in a book by Graham Chapman

It's on YouTube.
Coincidentally, after watching the entire series of "Get a Life" for the first time last week, I read this interview with co-creator/Simpons showrunner David Mirkin where he talks about how Graham Chapman had asked him to work on the show if it had gone to series.

PfR73 wrote: Mon Apr 20, 2026 3:19 pm

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 8:13 pm It’s so frustrating how Jake’s Journey is unavailable beyond the script, which was published in a book by Graham Chapman

It's on YouTube.
Coincidentally, after watching the entire series of "Get a Life" for the first time last week, I read this interview with co-creator/Simpons showrunner David Mirkin where he talks about how Graham Chapman had asked him to work on the show if it had gone to series.

WOW! Thank you. It’s astounding to finally have it. Peter Cook, Rik Mayall and Graham Chapman in one episode of television.

beamish14 wrote: Mon Apr 20, 2026 5:30 pm

PfR73 wrote: Mon Apr 20, 2026 3:19 pm

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 8:13 pm It’s so frustrating how Jake’s Journey is unavailable beyond the script, which was published in a book by Graham Chapman

It's on YouTube.
Coincidentally, after watching the entire series of "Get a Life" for the first time last week, I read this interview with co-creator/Simpons showrunner David Mirkin where he talks about how Graham Chapman had asked him to work on the show if it had gone to series.

WOW! Thank you. It’s astounding to finally have it. Peter Cook, Rik Mayall and Graham Chapman in one episode of television.

That version on YouTube, although in excellent video quality, seems to be missing about 5 or 6 minutes; the opening scene appears to be missing as is the conclusion. Overall, this pilot seems like a half-baked combination of Time Bandits and Monty Python and the Holy Grail with some questionable surrealism thrown in (the talking lobsters felt like a desperate stab at Monty Python zaniness). More troubling is there is no attempt at an explanation for Jake's time travel... unless merely seeing the girl of his dreams being driven off to school is enough to send him into a fugue state where he dreams of traveling back to medieval times (and Nazi Germany in a brief and bizarre digression). The performers are all agreeable and there are some small laughs to be had, but it is easy to see why this wasn't greenlit to become a series. Predictably, there is virtually nothing to identify the episode was helmed by Ashby apart from, perhaps, the occasional use of the kind of wide shots that would be atypical of an 80s sitcom.

Roger Ryan wrote: Mon Apr 20, 2026 12:51 pm I feel I should watch Second-Hand Hearts a second time...

I decided to revisit Second-Hand Hearts last night and feel I have a better grasp on what goes wrong with the film. Principally, the tone is all over the place with way too much emphasis placed on wacky characters and situations and too little devoted to more realistic interactions. Most of the problems come down to the ridiculously exaggerated performance by Blake who seems to be playing a cartoon character in a film populated by mostly Altman-like characters. Ashby appears to be encouraging the nuttiness instead of trusting that a more subdued approach would produce a better film. This is a shame because you can see glimpses of a more deeply-felt comic drama every time Blake is off-screen. The scene between Barbara Harris and Shirley Stoler is the best this film has and strikes a tone I wish the rest of the film would retain. Why in the world does Ashby include a subtle, and disturbing, moment depicting child molestation only to revert back to silliness with no follow-up whatsoever? If I could time travel back to 1978/79, I would encourage Ashby to use his frequent collaborator Robert C. Jones to do a script re-write that backs off from the hijinks and to cast Warren Oates as Loyal instead of Robert Blake - that version of Second-Hand Hearts might have been a little gem.

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 10:48 pm I’m curious to hear opinions on Second-Hand Hearts here. I think Barbara Harris is magnificent as always in it. Again, a flawed work, but it didn’t deserve to basically be unreleased by Lorimar

It's been decades since I've seen the film which was only shown on late night TV in my part of the world. If Warner's were to update to the film to Blu Ray (I imagine it would be low on the priority list sadly) I'd definitely invest in a copy.

I remember liking it flaws and all and that there were issues in relation to it's production but none of the details.

I recommend to anybody that has read and is interested in reading more about Hal Ashby's life and the making of his films to get hold of Being Hal Ashby: Life of a Hollywood Rebel (2011) by Nick Dawson.

It is a compulsive and informative read but the last couple of chapters are very tough. It is very much a warts and all biography but in now way a hatchet job to one of the finest directors in Hollywood (well at least from 1970 to 1982).

I also recommend seeking out the directors cut of Lookin' to Get Out (1982). I didn't care for the original cut one bit but the director's cut was a much more fulfilling experience.

Aunt Peg wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 8:48 am

beamish14 wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2026 10:48 pm I’m curious to hear opinions on Second-Hand Hearts here. I think Barbara Harris is magnificent as always in it. Again, a flawed work, but it didn’t deserve to basically be unreleased by Lorimar

It's been decades since I've seen the film which was only shown on late night TV in my part of the world. If Warner's were to update to the film to Blu Ray (I imagine it would be low on the priority list sadly) I'd definitely invest in a copy.

I remember liking it flaws and all and that there were issues in relation to it's production but none of the details.

I recommend to anybody that has read and is interested in reading more about Hal Ashby's life and the making of his films to get hold of Being Hal Ashby: Life of a Hollywood Rebel (2011) by Nick Dawson.

It is a compulsive and informative read but the last couple of chapters are very tough. It is very much a warts and all biography but in now way a hatchet job to one of the finest directors in Hollywood (well at least from 1970 to 1982).

I also recommend seeking out the directors cut of Lookin' to Get Out (1982). I didn't care for the original cut one bit but the director's cut was a much more fulfilling experience.

I’m a huge fan of that book as well. Ashby truly hustled to the top of the Hollywood food chain from incredibly humble beginnings in rural Utah. There is fascinating information about unmade projects, including an adaptation of Richard Brautigan’s The Hawkline Monster, which Tim Burton tried to get made a decade after Ashby’s aborted attempt. Ashby’s version was written by Michael Ventura, who is on the Criterion disc of Love Streams

Lookin' To Get Out is an insipid shaggy-dog narrative built around a phenomenal Jon Voight performance. It seems to be trying to emulate California Split, and since that's the greatest American film ever made, falls more than a little short. It'd be easy to forgive this film's faults if it had more to offer. It's trying to be both cohesive and episodic, and doesn't succeed on either front: the overall plot is trite and the segments aren't very exciting, or even 'defined' as such in the way Altman's film functions. The free-flowing rhythm just doesn't work with the unimaginative material offered. Ann-Margret is wasted in a role that's a vehicle for lame attempts at adding shades of humanity to Voight or Young. It's also too long. If this is the best of Ashby's 80s period, that's fine. It's not a bad movie, with inconsistent engagement mostly due to Voight when he's on - though even his performance peaks early and doesn't sustain its pronounced personality for the duration, successfully erupting again in the wild final act. I'm being overly harsh focusing on its flaws. Overall I'd recommend the film for Voight's unhinged moments - the physical acting is a sight to beyond.

therewillbeblus wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2026 5:11 pm Lookin' To Get Out is an insipid shaggy-dog narrative built around a phenomenal Jon Voight performance… It's also too long…

I’m assuming you watched the director’s cut? It’s the better version of the two available, but it does mean you have to watch 15 minutes more of it!

Yeah it was the DC, though I trust the changes ultimately made it a better experience

therewillbeblus wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2026 8:47 pm Yeah it was the DC, though I trust the changes ultimately made it a better experience

I honestly think the originally released version is at least watchable, while the DC is just incredibly tedious