1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
- swo17
- Bloodthirsty Butcher
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
- Location: SLC, UT
1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
Chilly Scenes of Winter
The trailblazing Joan Micklin Silver—one of only five women to direct a film for a Hollywood studio in the 1970s—digs fearlessly into the psychology of a thorny relationship in this anti–romantic comedy, based on Ann Beattie's best-selling novel, about lovelorn civil servant Charles (John Heard) and his married-but-separated coworker Laura (Mary Beth Hurt). Months after their affair has ended, Charles is haunted by memories as he desperately attempts to rekindle a love that perhaps never was. Switching deftly between past and present, Micklin Silver guides this piercing deconstruction of male wish-fulfillment fantasy beyond standard movie-romance tropes into something more complicated and cuttingly truthful.
SPECIAL FEATURES
• New, restored 4K digital transfer, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack
• New program featuring producers Griffin Dunne, Mark Metcalf, and Amy Robinson
• Documentary from 1983 by Katja Raganelli about director Joan Micklin Silver
• Excerpts of a 2005 interview with Micklin Silver
• Original ending of the film, cut by Micklin Silver for its rerelease in 1982
• Trailer
• English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
• PLUS: An essay by scholar Shonni Enelow
The trailblazing Joan Micklin Silver—one of only five women to direct a film for a Hollywood studio in the 1970s—digs fearlessly into the psychology of a thorny relationship in this anti–romantic comedy, based on Ann Beattie's best-selling novel, about lovelorn civil servant Charles (John Heard) and his married-but-separated coworker Laura (Mary Beth Hurt). Months after their affair has ended, Charles is haunted by memories as he desperately attempts to rekindle a love that perhaps never was. Switching deftly between past and present, Micklin Silver guides this piercing deconstruction of male wish-fulfillment fantasy beyond standard movie-romance tropes into something more complicated and cuttingly truthful.
SPECIAL FEATURES
• New, restored 4K digital transfer, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack
• New program featuring producers Griffin Dunne, Mark Metcalf, and Amy Robinson
• Documentary from 1983 by Katja Raganelli about director Joan Micklin Silver
• Excerpts of a 2005 interview with Micklin Silver
• Original ending of the film, cut by Micklin Silver for its rerelease in 1982
• Trailer
• English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
• PLUS: An essay by scholar Shonni Enelow
- aox
- Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
- Location: nYc
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I have not seen this. But I have to ask, why is the English title controversial? It's an American film. IMDB lists it as "Head Over Heels", and my streaming app doesn't recognize either title.
Also, is this a good film?
Also, is this a good film?
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
Yes, I really liked it, here were my brief thoughts from a discussion on the filmmakers' work in the Cohen thread:
I just picked up the TT blu, so I guess I'll gift that to someone for the holidays to rationalize picking this uptherewillbeblus wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:24 pmI recently watched Chilly Scenes of Winter and found it uniquely naked in its willingness to be honest about an oft-depicted narrative that's typically glamorized in a psychologically protective manner, whereby the protagonist reflexively engages in his own non-pathetic fantasy of being a cool protagonist in a romantic story. Heard and Silver go for an authentic portrait, and it rides a subtle range of tones within that wheelhouse. It's funny and it gently stings in all the right places.
-
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
It’s an interesting story. United Artists had 2 films starring John Heard, which were initially called Head Over Heels and Cutter & Bone. The former was reedited with a different ending and re-released in 1982 as Chilly Scenes… while the latter was unchanged, except for its title: Cutter’s Way.
United Artists was going through a fallow period, with multiple films receiving substandard releases.
If you can access it, this New York Times article is worth reading
-
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I’m very surprised that Joan Micklin Silver’s daughters weren’t interviewed for this, and that there is no sign of author Ann Beattie, either. The producers might touch upon it in their commentary, but Beattie’s cameo in the film (as an awkward waitress) was a stipulation she made when she sold the novel rights!
Guess I’ll hold onto my Twilight Time disc for the commentary
Guess I’ll hold onto my Twilight Time disc for the commentary
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
It's good? I was going to get rid of my unopened TT copy, but I'd love to be sold on keeping it. I didn't even check the special features for this announcement since I thought Dunne said they were recording a commentary vs 'program', but I was clearly mistaken
-
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
It has some nice anecdotes and information. Not wall-to-wall informative, but worth hearingtherewillbeblus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 4:24 pmIt's good? I was going to get rid of my unopened TT copy, but I'd love to be sold on keeping it. I didn't even check the special features for this announcement since I thought Dunne said they were recording a commentary vs 'program', but I was clearly mistaken
- John Cope
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
- Location: where the simulacrum is true
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
What seems most precious about the film to me is, in a lot of ways, just how it depicts a commonplace reality. That seems so scarce now, so barely represented or even pursued. I don't know why that is other than that it does, I guess, court a kind of banality. But God knows our event pictures or even what passes for human drama most of the time now is banality writ large. The level of scrupulous care and observation you get here is so rare as to be almost without precedent.
It's a commonplace reality which is made up not just of recognizable details but relatable characteristics and qualities, even when we might most like to differentiate ourselves from those things. But that's part of that unremitting scrupulous care in observation. It is warts and all to be sure. Much of that has to do with the sincerity of the characters, their open expressivity, their willingness to be hurt as part of the necessity of opening themselves up to love. But it's also in an all around portraiture of vulnerability and exposure that make up the characters and their environment (never has the bleakness of Salt Lake City been so well employed--and I say that as someone who actually lived there at around the time this was shot). Only Alan Rudolph's films seem to traffic so thoroughly in exposed and vulnerable characters, to make them so much the predominant fabric and texture of the specific filmic reality, and yet his films are far more about highly stylized presentations and so have to deal with that as well. In Chilly Scenes, the most foundational level element here, as it undergirds the rest, is a kind of quietly wistful and pensive listlessness, a very particular post-60's fallout of ultimate aimlessness that ends up also being very universal.
Over the last few years this film has come to be understood more and more as a kind of perverse anti-rom com about a main character who exhibits a toxic masculinity and all the defining characteristics of a stalker rather than romantic hero. And while it is great that this aspect is being picked up on, perhaps inevitably during an era which is so sensitively attuned to it, I wouldn't come down as heavily on that part of the equation. It risks too much be-all-end-all conclusiveness, a sort of counter-productive reductionism. The film is simply too great at being an all-at-once depiction of longing and regret and love to be seen or understood as primarily just one thing: it really is that ideal of comedy/drama/horror which does not seek to overly distinguish each element from the rest and therefore comes closest to a genuine and comprehensive envisioning of our reality.
Conversely though, I do think that Daniel Kremer's assessment of it here (and the trailer itself) is perhaps a little too rosy and makes perhaps too little of the challenge of our ostensible romantic lead: while we may be sympathetic to his struggles and see some of ourselves in him, he does also quite comfortably fit most modern definitions of an obsessed stalker and that confrontational element never abates; if anything it intensifies. I do appreciate the shout out in the video to Danny Peary, one of my own greatest influences and inspirations (and his write-up on this movie really is second to none).
It's a commonplace reality which is made up not just of recognizable details but relatable characteristics and qualities, even when we might most like to differentiate ourselves from those things. But that's part of that unremitting scrupulous care in observation. It is warts and all to be sure. Much of that has to do with the sincerity of the characters, their open expressivity, their willingness to be hurt as part of the necessity of opening themselves up to love. But it's also in an all around portraiture of vulnerability and exposure that make up the characters and their environment (never has the bleakness of Salt Lake City been so well employed--and I say that as someone who actually lived there at around the time this was shot). Only Alan Rudolph's films seem to traffic so thoroughly in exposed and vulnerable characters, to make them so much the predominant fabric and texture of the specific filmic reality, and yet his films are far more about highly stylized presentations and so have to deal with that as well. In Chilly Scenes, the most foundational level element here, as it undergirds the rest, is a kind of quietly wistful and pensive listlessness, a very particular post-60's fallout of ultimate aimlessness that ends up also being very universal.
Over the last few years this film has come to be understood more and more as a kind of perverse anti-rom com about a main character who exhibits a toxic masculinity and all the defining characteristics of a stalker rather than romantic hero. And while it is great that this aspect is being picked up on, perhaps inevitably during an era which is so sensitively attuned to it, I wouldn't come down as heavily on that part of the equation. It risks too much be-all-end-all conclusiveness, a sort of counter-productive reductionism. The film is simply too great at being an all-at-once depiction of longing and regret and love to be seen or understood as primarily just one thing: it really is that ideal of comedy/drama/horror which does not seek to overly distinguish each element from the rest and therefore comes closest to a genuine and comprehensive envisioning of our reality.
Conversely though, I do think that Daniel Kremer's assessment of it here (and the trailer itself) is perhaps a little too rosy and makes perhaps too little of the challenge of our ostensible romantic lead: while we may be sympathetic to his struggles and see some of ourselves in him, he does also quite comfortably fit most modern definitions of an obsessed stalker and that confrontational element never abates; if anything it intensifies. I do appreciate the shout out in the video to Danny Peary, one of my own greatest influences and inspirations (and his write-up on this movie really is second to none).
- CSM126
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
- Location: The Room
- Contact:
- zedz
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
Answer to first question: The film was originally called Head Over Heels, but when it was finally released Silver re-edited it, retitled it, and gave it a different ending.
Which is a good thing, as the original ending is simply grotesque:
SpoilerShow
a 'happy ending' where the moral is that if you stalk somebody hard enough, they'll fall in love with you.
The revised ending is an improvement (what wouldn't be?), but it still frames the entire story as the stalker (maybe) getting over his obsession and getting to 'win' by 'dumping' the woman who keeps running away from him and telling him to leave her alone.
-
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
It’s interesting to note that the ending of Beattie’s novel basically falls between the two filmed conclusions
- The Narrator Returns
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I very strongly disagree with the notion that the movie is unaware of Heard's awfulness, that makes as much sense to me as believing that Modern Romance lets Albert Brooks off easy. It doesn't make him one-dimensionally evil (and Mary Beth Hurt's other romantic interest isn't any better), but nothing within the text of the movie itself suggests to me his behavior is meant to be charming except in his own head (the voice-over had to have inspired The Informant!). I agree that it's not much of a comedy (except for Peter Riegert), it's classified as such because it's a drama about a guy who's convinced he's really funny.
- zedz
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
What, not the fact that his amiable best friend happily goes along with him invading Laura's home under false pretences (with the added 'hilarity' of the "they're gay and harmless" assumption). Or the fact that Laura goes back to him at the end of the film? And keeps talking about how funny he is and how much fun they have together? That's a bit of a weird thing for the film to be doing if we're supposed to find him repellent and unfunny. Or are we supposed to think Laura is an idiot as well?The Narrator Returns wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 8:54 pmI very strongly disagree with the notion that the movie is unaware of Heard's awfulness, that makes as much sense to me as believing that Modern Romance lets Albert Brooks off easy. It doesn't make him one-dimensionally evil (and Mary Beth Hurt's other romantic interest isn't any better), but nothing within the text of the movie itself suggests to me his behavior is meant to be charming except in his own head.
- knives
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
To play narrator’s advocate couldn’t that, spoilers for The Heartbreak Kid, apply to May’s film as well? After all by the end he gets all that he’s after and his previous wife is shown in an extremely unflattering light throughout.
- The Narrator Returns
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I don't think it's a contradiction that Laura enjoys his company and that the viewer sees straight through his aw-shucks front. She's not "an idiot", Silver is careful to show that she's in a bad spot and Heard has some appeal relative to who she's been stuck with, and that doesn't make the rest of his behavior any better. He's not quite as outwardly evil and noxious as Grodin in Heartbreak but they're very much in the same vein of realistically detestable, where you can kinda see getting won over at first.
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I can’t fault anyone for disliking this film if taken at face value, but I also didn’t expect to ever read an impression that didn’t acknowledge the film’s critique of Heard’s character. Silver just approaches the material with uncomfortably gentle observances, like… his subject!
- zedz
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
Oh there's definitely a very light critique of Heard's behaviour, but it's so mild it's more along the lines of "aw shucks, the poor guy's lovestruck, isn't he funny?" which is completely out of proportion to what he's actually doing. For me, the film is tonally inept. It's not an Elaine May satire, that's for sure.
In pure plot terms, Laura's return to Charles at the end of the film should be an act of desperation: Charles' selfish actions have destroyed the marriage she was trying to salvage and have (permanently?) alienated her from her child. If the film had been brave enough to embrace that darkness - she goes back to Charles only because he has closed off all other means of escape - that would have been a bracing and interesting finish, but instead we get cop-out after cop-out. Her marriage isn't over because Charles cheated his way into her house and detonated it, but because she finally realizes she can't get on with her husband (i.e. the writing lets Charles off the hook for his behaviour). The last word on Charles and Laura's relationship problems isn't that he's a creepy obsessive who has been stalking her when they're apart and trying to control what she does when they're together, but that she "can't make up her mind." Again, the writing lets Charles off the hook and blames Laura. And then, in the original version of the film, she comes back anyway, declares she loves him and always has ("you kept the key!" - wot? no vomit emoji?), and bakes him that cake he's been craving. The film totally indulges Charles and rewards him throughout. There's no dark irony in that original ending, it's just a tone-deaf cliched happy ending, because that's what everybody wants, right?
Anybody got some textual evidence for their countervailing interpretations?
In pure plot terms, Laura's return to Charles at the end of the film should be an act of desperation: Charles' selfish actions have destroyed the marriage she was trying to salvage and have (permanently?) alienated her from her child. If the film had been brave enough to embrace that darkness - she goes back to Charles only because he has closed off all other means of escape - that would have been a bracing and interesting finish, but instead we get cop-out after cop-out. Her marriage isn't over because Charles cheated his way into her house and detonated it, but because she finally realizes she can't get on with her husband (i.e. the writing lets Charles off the hook for his behaviour). The last word on Charles and Laura's relationship problems isn't that he's a creepy obsessive who has been stalking her when they're apart and trying to control what she does when they're together, but that she "can't make up her mind." Again, the writing lets Charles off the hook and blames Laura. And then, in the original version of the film, she comes back anyway, declares she loves him and always has ("you kept the key!" - wot? no vomit emoji?), and bakes him that cake he's been craving. The film totally indulges Charles and rewards him throughout. There's no dark irony in that original ending, it's just a tone-deaf cliched happy ending, because that's what everybody wants, right?
Anybody got some textual evidence for their countervailing interpretations?
- John Cope
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
- Location: where the simulacrum is true
Re: 1176 Chilly Scenes of Winter
I always perceived this as very much from Charles' perspective so it doesn't surprise me that it's not more self-implicating than it is; he's not going to admit anything he doesn't have to and only what is intrinsic to his telling (we recognize much that he won't). In that sense then it also doesn't surprise me that it's not more directly confrontational than it is. It's just not a film of that sort which admits the darkness in as an overt complicating element. But the perverse romanticism is part of what I like so much about it. So there is a romanticism to it but also a disquiet that pervades and lingers.