Watch Simon For Free

Thanks for the memories!

Highly Overrated But Still Good

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

This is a very funny film written and directed by Marshall Brickman, who wrote Woody Allen's ANNIE HALL, MANHATTAN, and MANHATTAN MURDER MYSTERY, as well as numerous other films. He only directed four films, of which this is the first, and it shows the least directorial skill unfortunately. His second film LOVESICK (1983, see my review) was much more satisfactory as a film. SIMON should have been far more hilarious than it is, but Brickman was too inexperienced and did not plot the pace sufficiently to keep the action moving, so that it repeatedly sags with people talking for too long, and with too much space between the jokes. However, it is very good value if you are willing to go with the flow and not mind the minor faults. Austin Pendleton is the co-star, along with Alan Arkin, and Madeleine Kahn is one of the two female leads. Austin is my cousin, and I believe he and I met Maddy Kahn together for the first time at the Upstairs at the Downstairs when she was still doing live shows, long before she was ever in a movie. This film is a comic sci fi caper, where a think tank full of mad scientists interested in brainwashing techniques, which is run by Austin, choose Arkin for an experiment. They put him into an isolation tank for a very long period of sensory deprivation and persuade him that he is an alien. Much of the comedy then results from Arkin's behaviour once he comes to believe this. Wallace Shawn adds good support, as he always does. I won't spoil the ending by discussing what this all leads to, but 'a good time was had by all', as they say.

One of those comedies which are interesting rather than funny. Not that "Simon" is particularly interesting either, but it does have the benefit of being somewhat unusual, straying from the norm until the last third when it gets more formulaic: the wicked, wicked military chasing "the alien" (don't they always chase to kill?), media attention surrounding the title character (a mega-cliché in comedies), and a love interest that brings Simon back to Earth (I'm allowed a bad pun now and again, I believe).Lurking behind all the silliness is quite possibly the writer's social/political agenda, but it is so clumsily presented that it remains unclear where this guy stands politically. (And you can bet your pants that a Hollywood writer will NOT be wise enough to send a politically neutral message, i.e. mocking both sides of the fence for greater impact.) On one hand Simon quotes the Bible, but on the other he cites Sergey Eisenstein as the epitome of a great film-maker; those are contradictory signals, making it difficult to pin down the writer's political orientation. However, considering that he got a chance to write for Hollywood movies, and taking into account the extremely high percentage of left-wingers in U.S. cinema, I'd put my money on him being yet another liberal whining about "modern consumer-obsessed society" or some such childish nonsense. It's just that this one is probably a little confused, hence the way he went about it while writing the script.On the other hand, who could argue with the proposal to send all lawyers who lose a case to prison along with their defendant? Some of Simon's propositions are obviously goofy, included just for laughs, but some clearly reflect the writer's own frustrations with 70s America, so it's hard to figure him out. It's almost as if he used Simon both to mock him and as a jumping board for his own views - which is like wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Whatever the case, it's safe to say the writer is a bit of a malcontent who'd never personally experienced the Third World (or for that matter, the "Second World") in his whole life.I like Arkin, and he's generally well-suited to playing oddballs, but I had a feeling that perhaps someone like Steve Martin or even Bill Murray would have been funnier. Martin is funnier than Arkin when he shouts, and there is plenty of shouting, whereas Murray could have made the character more of a wise-ass hence funnier; Murray is better at playing those, and less suited to playing idealistic victims of circumstance so I guess Simon would have had to be toned down somewhat for Bill. This is not to say Arkin isn't interesting.

I love this film. A wonderful, madcap vehicle for Alan Arkin (who is brilliant), with exquisite cameos by Pendleton, Shawn, Gwynne and Kahn. Zany, but not slapstick. More than enough wit. If you're a fan of Arkin or any of the supporting cast, you'll enjoy it.It's not on par with Woody Allen or Mel Brooks' best, but certainly better than their passable mediocre efforts. Also some fun social commentary.I was working as a theater usher when this movie was released. Curiously (to me, anyway), I watch more than a few folks leave the theater before the film's end, saying the movie was awful.So, obviously not everyone's cup of tea. But I remain a fan.

"Simon" is dated by a number of the foci of different scenes (sensory-deprivation tanks and princess phones, for example). Still, it is one of my favorite comedies despite it's flaws. I can't qualify its appeal to me as entirely rational or securely grounded in aesthetic standards. I saw it on one occasion with a close friend of mine and my house mates at that time. He and I laughed our heads off while the house mates were puzzled by both the film and our reaction. They didn't like it. It's probably a safe bet that those who like the film "Annie Hall" will like this. The introduction to the secret government scientific foundation is a gas as is the "evolution" sequence. The composition of the closing shot is almost painfully beautiful but its impact is much diminished in versions formatted for television.