Sunday, April 22, 2012

Jack Nicholson, Warren Beatty and Stockard Channing in The Fortune (1975)

This delightfully dizzy film was part of a two film package deal Warren Beatty made with Columbia Pictures. The second film was Shampoo (1975). This film was supposed to be the hit of the pair. It had a lot going for it - a wacky, likable script, two very bankable stars, and a sensational director (Mike Nichols), however, when push came to shove, Shampoo walked away the winner.
MoviePosterShop.com
The film tells the story of Frederica Quintessa Biggard (Stockard Channing), an eastern heiress, lured away from home by sexy, but less than swift Nicky Wilson and his equally dimwitted friend Oscar Sullivan. Nicky is married, but loves Frederica... well, he loves her money, actually. Oscar isn't married, and because of the Mann act, which made it illegal to transport a woman across state lines for immoral purposes, Nicky convinces Freddie to marry Oscar, so they can flee to Southern California without risking arrest. Upon arrival, they set up housekeeping in a depressing little hamlet outside LA and Nicky and Oscar start to plot Freddie's demise. There's a wacky, screwball quality to this film and the promotional tag line hits the nail right on the head: "Sexier than the Marx Brothers, Handsomer than Laurel and Hardy, but not as smart as The 3 Stooges." The delightfully clueless quality to the comedy in the film is largely due to Stockard Channing, in her first big screen role.

Though not commercially available on DVD in the USA, copies can be found in the PAL format, which requires a region free DVD player. The whole film is above, uploaded in parts by Beatty001.

Obscurity factor: 9 (not available on DVD in USA, hard to find, available on YouTube)

15 comments:

  1. Y'know, I saw this in the late-'70s on network TV and LOVED it. I remember laughing my ass off. But I was also 11 or 12, so... I'd love to see this movie again, but I'm also scared to: I have such a great memory of enjoying it, that I don't want that ruined (if it falls short).
    Thanks for the blast from the past!
    --Ivan

    ReplyDelete
  2. I always mixed this one with Lucky Lady: another movie with three stars that came out at the same time. I knew that one of them was an awful turkey (probably Lady), but as a result, I went nowhere near either! Talk about tarring with the same brush, or whatever the expression is...

    I often think of films in pairs - and mix them up. That must be my brain's way of using less disk space. I will never know which is Starting Over and which is the Seduction of Joe Tynan; or which is Blue Thunder as opposed to War Games. And don't even tell me about Red Planet versus Mission to Mars: that was designed to mess me up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I remember this film coming out right after Stockard Channing made such an impact in the TV film, "The Girl Most Likely To ...". I thought that this film's failure would be the end of her career; I'm so glad I was wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I only lasted through five parts. It is easy to see why it flopped - definitely an acquired taste.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I remember that it had a great poster. I had my parents take me to see this, and they both thought it was awful. When we were on the way to the car in the parking lot they saw someone they knew going to his car, and he made some comment along the lines of "We're all trying to get out of here before anyone sees us," and my parents laughing and agreeing with his assessment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Honestly, there seems to be no "point" to this film. Slapstick, mixed with constant screeching, a bare-bones plot...and some good set design. What's with that whole scene of Nicholson ending up OUTSIDE the plane.......what? I know it's a "farce," but it's still a mess. Oh, yes, I'll watch "Shampoo" a dozen more times, but cannot finish this film.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I remember reading a tidbit about Stockard Channing in a gossip magazine or in something like Walter Scott's "Personality Parade" or whatever at the time of this movie's release. Stockard said when she was cast she had visions of romance with one or the other leading men, but once filming began they just viewed her as one of the boys, or as she was quoted, "Good Ol' Stock."

    ReplyDelete
  8. Apparently Nichols wanted Bette Midler for the part, until she insulted him by pretending she didn't know who he was... It's just as well - she was much better off making her feature film debut in The Rose.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Did she ever say why she pretended to not know who he was?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think she was supposed to be completely soused when she married him, and, having only just met him that night, didn't remember him when she was sober.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think "x" meant Bette Midler.....

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yes, I did mean Bette Midler. Thanks, Leighton. I was a bit confused by Ben's answer.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh, of course! I thought you meant the Stockard Channing character in the film. The incident was never confirmed, so no, I don't believe she's ever clarified that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the clarification. When I read the earlier posting, I thought maybe it was a typo and you meant to write "met" instead of "married." I had an image of her drunk at a party and meeting him, and then later meeting him regarding this movie and not remembering having met him.

      Delete
  14. Depending upon what source you read, the Midler story varies a bit. The executive producer says that Midler kept Nichols waiting at the Beverly Hills Hotel, where she was staying, while having a massage, and that Nichols and Midler spoke alone, eventually. Others say that she lost the part, because she asked him what other films he had made, actually not knowing. Likely a combination of things. Nichols is known to have an attitude, himself.

    Nicholson wanted his friend Mama Cass to play the role - that didn't go over well - plus, she would soon be dead (and NOT from choking on a sandwich, a major urban myth).

    ReplyDelete