Watch The Man Who Loved Women For Free

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

As Good As It Gets

Absolutely Fantastic

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

The many women of sculptor David Fowler (Burt Reynolds) have gathered for his funeral. Among them is his psychiatrist Marianna (Julie Andrews) who recounts the story of his womanizing. He was living with Courtney Wade but he became enamored with a pair of legs. He chased the legs to Agnes Chapman (Marilu Henner) but she claimed that the legs are actually her cousin. There's Nancy who he saved from prostitution and put to work as one of his helpers. There's Louise (Kim Basinger), the wife of rich Texan Roy Carr (Barry Corbin). Louise shoots Roy and David has to testify in her trial. It's a long line of women and Marianna could be next.This is a remake of a French film from director Blake Edwards. I'm sure the French original had an art house appeal. Edwards has no such cushion to work with here. In the end, not all of the women are compelling. The least appealing is probably Basinger. Reynolds is not that much better. He may be a sex symbol back in the day but his persona lacks an intellectual aspect that is required by this role. There are a few intriguing stories but these women are dropped all too quickly. His story is not compelling.

The title of 1983's "The Man Who Loved Women" tells you everything you need to know: Burt Reynolds plays David Fowler, a man who sees the beauty in practically every woman and therefore can never settle down with one. As such, he ends up isolated and on the couch of a therapist, Marianna (Julie Andrews). The entire movie consists of Marianna trying to figure David out and help him while the latter relays several of his amorous connections in flashback. When the therapy is over will THEY start a relationship? Fowler's many women include Kim Basinger, Marilu Henner and Denise Crosby.I encourage you to read Nsouthern51's review from April 25, 2001, on IMDb because it expertly interprets and evaluates the movie. While the film could be considered a romantic comedy it's also a tragic study of a Romeo and therefore there's a pall of melancholy despite the light tone and amusing elements, including black comedy. Speaking of which, while I don't think adultery's something to take lightly and therefore don't find it very amusing, it ties into Fowler's folly and blindness due to his weakness, women.The good thing is that Fowler's not all bad or unlikable (Burt is his typical amiable self in an atypical role). He's not the conventional lothario who uses and abuses; he genuinely loves women and is fascinated by them. He loves them so much he can't bear to be with just one because that would mean he'd never know hundreds or thousands of others, but then he aches because he doesn't want to hurt the women he leaves.The best part is Fowler's salvation of a new-to-the-trade prostitute whom he ends up hiring for his sculpting business. He nobly resists acting on his carnal instincts and therefore sacrifices for her good. The girl is played by a pre-Star Trek (TNG) Denise Crosby and she looks great.At the end of the day the movie features Reynolds in an unusual role, which might turn off fans, and the strange mix of melancholy and amusement may turn-off others. It's not great, but it's good enough for what it is and therefore worthwhile. It's similar to Altman's "Dr. T and the Women" (2000) so if you don't like that movie you probably won't like this one.The film runs 110 minutes and was shot in Houston, Texas, and Los Angeles, CA.GRADE: B-

Opera Ghost Page2Another point that nsouthern51 made was that David Fowler 'drowns in isolation.' This in fact a bit of a complex statement and somewhat contradictory from the films point of view. This statement seems to suggest, or hint at, that David is either cutoff from the world or is completely unknown to the world or both. Perhaps, both statements are true. Perhaps, both statements are false. Or perhaps, one is true and the other false, or vise versa.Let's return to the film for a minute. David Fowler has known hundreds and HUNDREDS of women and is always looking for more. How can he be so lonely? If he was in-between women, he had the semilive-in girlfriend Courtney Wade. So he always, or almost always, had someone around him at home. If he was lonely, by knowing hundreds and HUNDREDS of women, he surely had telephone numbers to call and surely one would respond. Or reverse it, they could be calling him. With all thoughs women around, he would have to fight them off with a fly swatter or girl swatter. In the work place, we see that he had several assistants. So how can he be so lonely and cutoff? David Fowler wasn't a hermit like Howard Hughes nor an oddity like Glen Gould. From the film, we see that his work was well-known. He lived in L.A. but has a commission in Houston, Tx. So we see that he wasn't just a local artist, but someone who is well-respected on a national level.(This might be debatable.) From Sue the baby sitter, we learn that he is known in academia circles, 'Lipschitz, Henry Moore, and me.' We also see from the film that he wrote a book. I'm sure the book was meant for a national audience and not just one or two copies made for a private edition nor several hundred printed for a local audience. This again proves or demonstrates that he was well-known or was wanting more name recognition and wasn't trying to cut himself off from the world.In summary, do these contradictory statements mean anything? There might be something more going on at a much, much deeper level.When we get into the actual review, we will have to return to these statements. There is a lot to these statements. Like I said folks, this is one of most complex motion pictures ever filmed. This complexity that I speak of is not the complexity of cameras, film, lights, etc., of a "Lord of The Rings" type epic but of an quiet inner complexity ideas the likes of which this film "The Man Who Loved Women" has no equal. There are things going on in this movie that have never been done before and will never be done again. Ever.O.G.

I just saw The Man Who Loved Women, and I found it to be a rather delightful movie. It's a plot you don't see to often; it's focused on one man and his love of women. The movie may seem pointless, but you'll get it once you see the ending. I won't ruin it here, but it was kind of depressing and unexpected, and looking back on the movie, I enjoyed it much more afterwards than during. It's not the most exciting movie. You won't see any amazing or dynamic cinematography or camera angles that are all to creative. In fact, it seems more like a movie from the '70's than 1983 in the way it was filmed, but if you like the kind of movies that you enjoy much more after having looked back on everything, I think you'll find this a rather enjoyable work.