Watch I Wanna Hold Your Hand For Free

Simply Perfect

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Overrated

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

I WANNA HOLD YOUR HAND was the first film directed by Robert Zemeckis (it was also produced by Steven Spielberg). It's a fictional comedy that plays on a winning idea of having a group of New Jersey teenagers traveling into New York City with the goal of meeting The Beatles on their historic first trip to the United States, one early February weekend in 1964. Their adventures will take them right up to the momentous Sunday Night TV appearance of The Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show. The young actors here include: Nancy Allen (she plays an engaged girl who's too mature to get involved by something as trivial as The Beatles); Theresa Saldana (an aspiring reporter looking to snag exclusive photos of The Fab Four); Susan Kendall Newman (Paul Newman's daughter, playing a folk music lobbyist looking to expose the saccharine Beatles); Wendie Jo Sperber (a wildly obsessed Beatlemaniac who's in love with Paul); Eddie Deezen (bespectacled "geek actor for all seasons" with a serious Beatles addiction); and Bobby DiCicco and Marc McClure (two guys along for the ride who don't care much for the English quartet but tag along anyway to get the girls).The movie is quite a distant cousin away from the classic American GRAFFITI. It's a wild day out, and its comic style includes a good dose of slapstick pratfalls and the like. Nerdy Eddie Deezen is at the center of most of the silliness, but Wendie Jo Sperber is well suited to her role as the biggest female Beatles Nut of the group. Theresa Saldana's character is a tad more interesting and complex, and Nancy Allen gives one of the better performances I've seen from her as the conflicted bride-to-be who feels herself helplessly switching allegiance from her fiancé in favor of John, Paul, George and Ringo. (The Beatles themselves only appear in the movie via old film clips; stand-ins are used and photographed from behind in key moments). Murray the "K", the original DJ who documented the Beatles' every move in New York, comes back a dozen or so years after the fact to recreate his old persona. Impressive is that none of the film was actually shot in New York, but the sets and subbing locations fooled me for many viewings until I ultimately found out it's actually California. A favorite scene capturing the a sign of those times centers around a younger boy who sports a moppish Beatles-like haircut, admonished by his typically conservative dad.Finally, I wish to add that the most recent 2004 DVD release from Universal is not the best way to experience this movie. I had been pretty familiar with the film from seeing it several times on VHS, but that version was issued in the much preferred audio format of MONO. The 2004 DVD has since remixed the sound to an undesirable 5.1 arrangement which now almost completely drowns out the accompanying music soundtrack which consists of many vintage Beatles classic recordings, taken from the actual records. They were intended to be heard in the background more prominently right along with the spoken dialogue, but are now toned down whenever people are speaking to the point where you can barely decipher anything that's accompanying the talking. **1/2 out of ****

I don't love Robert Zemeckis; he always seemed a shadow of his sage and master, Steven Spielberg. Oscar wins or not, he's simply not as talented as his teacher. That being said, he's had some seriously, delirious high points (Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Contact, and Back to the Future), but the rest of his oeuvre is, well, cloying at best (Forrest Gump) and atrocious at worst (What Lies Beneath). He's a capable mid-level director who was rocketed to superstardom by his association with a true master of the cinematic artform (though, truth be told, Spielberg has missed the mark on numerous occasions).In any event, one could view I Wanna Hold Your Hand as a microcosm of Zemeckis's entire career--frequently excruciating with bouts of brilliance. Where are the lows? How about the saccharine reiterations of the three four central female characters. For the first 45 minutes, the women are defined by repeated phrases that beat into the audience's brain their too-flimsy characters. Rosie loves Paul, Janis loves folkies, Grace wants to take some photos, and Pam wants to get married.Ultimately, the arcs for the former three characters follow predictable patterns. With Pam's storyline, however, Zemeckis finds the heart of this film and creates a lasting tale that, more or less, makes this movie recommended (though not necessarily essential) viewing.Pam's conflict is fairly straightforward until she finds herself in the Beatles' suite. Then something interesting happens--she does something to a guitar that, well, I don't want to mention here for fear of having the post deleted. She cowers in front of that guitar and she shudders. Later, she clenches the hem of her dress in tightly wound fists between her thighs.What Zemeckis finds between Pam's legs is the nascent youth movement of the 1960s. Pam's running away from her betrothed at the end of the film to the Beatles and that funny feeling causing her to quiver, demonstrates the shift from the cleancut, conformist ideals of 1950s America to what would become a more liberating--sexually and emotionally--period in the late 1960s. The Beatles were at the forefront of that youth movement and, here, the rumblings of the movement are present.What Pam reveals in this movie is among the most emotionally and sexually truthful representations of that turbulent decade. I credit Zemeckis for his willingness to not ignore the sexuality inherent in Beatlemania, and I credit too Nancy Allen for an amazing performance. It's a real shame she's never received the recognition she deserves (for this movie, Blow Out, and Dressed to Kill).The rest of the movie, though, is hysterical, in the late-19th century definition of the word. Mostly, it's a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. Bobby Di Cicco turns in a performance that is worth seeing, as he's able to find, by movie's end some level of truth in Smerko's character. And then, of course, there's the overzealous Eddie Deezen's overacting, which is shrill beyond all reason. It's rare to find a performance that strident and, at the same time, ingratiating due to the actor's prowess for physical comedy (again, his physical shenanigans are, well, overblown, but I somehow found them riveting).All in all, this movie really isn't a seven--it's probably a six at best--but I cannot shake those scenes of Nancy Allen nor do I want to. They're probably the most wonderful moments Zemeckis ever contributed to celluloid. For that it gets an extra point.

I remember seeing this film at three-thirty in the morning when I couldn't sleep and I was in the sixth grade. It was really funny and kept me awake until about five fifteen in the morning...and I had school to go to! Needless to say I never went back to sleep, and at school all I could talk about was this film. The film, directed by Robert Zemekis and produced by Steven Spielberg, is about the pandemonium that ensued when the Beatles came to America to play for Ed Sullivan. Naturally, this film being about teenagers, it appealed to a younger crowd, but an older one at this day and age, as it was the older crowd who were alive and witnessed this chaos. Nancy Allen and Theresa Saldana are great(what ever happened to her?) Wendie Jo Sperber as usual does a fine comedic performance, while Mark McClure and Eddie Deezen have funny little side roles. Written by Bob Gale and Zemeckis, this one is sure to be a laugh riot, almost as laugh out loud as 1941, but with more real life issues and realistic tones. A Funny Film!

I have always been a massive Beatles fan for as long as I could remember, but I have to admit that after seeing this film, my love for them went to an even higher level.Let me explain... now, I'm what you would call a late generation fan. I wasn't even THOUGHT of in 1964 because at the time, my mom was only 10 and my father was 12. So, with that said, I don't know anything personally about Beatlemania or what this performance meant to the nation at that time or what it was like just being a teenager during this time. That is, until I watched this movie. Watching this film and the antics of these characters is possibly the closest I will ever come to experiencing first hand what Beatlemania was like. It was like I was an unofficial member of this group of kids as they are trying desperately to get tickets to see the Beatles live on the Ed Sullivan show, all this starting by them trying to sneak into the Beatles' hotel.I loved that Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale made a wonderful dynamic by NOT making all the characters involved Beatles fans which made the film that much more believable. Let's face it... as popular as the band was then(and now), they did have a great number of detractors and they were brilliantly represented in this movie by Susan Kendall Newman as politically driven, Janis who feels the Beatles are nothing but meaningless drivel and Bobby Di Cicco as macho greaser, Tony who thinks they just suck, period. Their presence was a great contrast to the rest of the cast, especially Wendie Jo Sperber as the sweet, cherubic Rosie, the most fanatical of the bunch that at one point of the film, she literally throws herself from a moving car just so she can get to a phone booth to win Beatles tickets on a radio call-in contest. The rest of the cast is rounded out by Nancy Allen as Pam, a bride-to-be roped into this adventure against her will and ends up having fortunate luck of accidentally ending up in the Beatles' hotel suite; Theresa Saldana as Grace, the career minded, future reporter who wants exclusive pictures of the band and will do anything(literally) to get them; Marc McClure as Larry, who has a crush on Grace and is willing to do anything to help her achieve her goal and Eddie Deezen as Richard who is Rosie's equally fanatical partner in crime as they reek havoc throughout the hotel.Another thing I thought was a great direction taken by Zemeckis and Gale was to use Beatle sound-a-likes, not look-a-likes and to have the guys' faces hidden. This decision was terrific for this reason: the casting director could have auditioned actors until the cows came home and NONE of them would have been good enough to play the Fab Four. None. Thank goodness Robert and Bob realized that the power just in the Beatles' voices and music was enough not only to be the soundtrack of the film, but allowed we the audience to imagine the real Beatles instead of insulting us by making us accept four actors that would have most definitely paled in comparison to the real thing. I feel that even attempting this would have seriously cheapened the film and wouldn't have given it the impact that it has. It almost has the feel of it being a sort of time capsule and most certainly shows us the difference between hearing about what happened from someone else and being there. The film made me feel like the latter, like I was actually there.So, long story short, the movie is a must-see for any Beatles fan. It'll make you relive the energy and excitement of Beatlemania or if you're like me, who was not around during this time, will show you first hand exactly what it was like.