★ 7 / 10
“Jonathan” (Jack Nicholson) is having a pep talk
CinemaSerf
“Jonathan” (Jack Nicholson) is having a pep talk with his bright-eyed roommate “Sandy” (Art Garfunkel) about the latter’s nervous interest in “Susan” (Candice…
“Jonathan” (Jack Nicholson) is having a pep talk with his bright-eyed roommate “Sandy” (Art Garfunkel) about the latter’s nervous interest in “Susan” (Candice Bergen). Their conversations now proceed to give us a blow by blow description of the evolution of their burgeoning romance, only for “Jonathan” to jump the gun and start an affair of his own with her! They keep that a secret from “Sandy” for a while, and indeed the three become a regular social group, but all the while duplicity is never far away. Indeed, throughout their lives it seems that one is “borrowing” from another - until “Bobbie” (Ann-Margret) appears on the scene and offers “Jonathan” a chance to shack-up with someone. She’s a larger than life character who, in reality, craves certainty. An husband, a child, an home. Thing is, though, with “Sandy” now courting the imposing “Cindy” (Cynthia O’Neal) the whole cycle appears set to start again. Are either of these men ever going to settle down, to find stability and happiness, or is this love triangle scenario destined to prevail to old age? Garfunkel delivers quite well here as the generous spirited and sensitive young lad, but it’s really Nicholson who steals the show as the flawed and obnoxious creature who makes hay when the sun shines, but gradually finds himself becoming lonelier and bereft of that which he craves most. Perhaps it’s because there is so much descriptive dialogue of their peccadilloes, but at times it can come across as a combination of the predatory and the sexually sterile but the roles from Bergen and especially the troubled Ann-Margret give this quite a punch. It’s often photographed like it’s a documentary with us looking head on, unaware of who is speaking, or who is listening, or even who else is the room at all. I found it really quite easy to take a dislike to “Jonathan”, but as it progresses I began to feel a bit of pity, and that’s a testament to some skilful acting and potent writing. It’s interesting that there is female nudity a-plenty here, but Nicholson is noticeably always shielded by a pot plant, or a towel or even some steam!
★ 6 / 10
**_Psychological study of the romantic lives of two
Wuchak
**_Psychological study of the romantic lives of two males over the course of 25 years_** In the late 1940s, Two roommates at Amherst College (Jack Nicholson…
**_Psychological study of the romantic lives of two males over the course of 25 years_**
In the late 1940s, Two roommates at Amherst College (Jack Nicholson and Art Garfunkel) exchange personal info about their sextivities with various women as the years progress to the early ’70s. The female cast includes Candice Bergen, Ann-Margret, Cynthia O'Neal, Carol Kane and Rita Moreno.
“Carnal Knowledge” (1971) is not a conventional look at college life in the manner of the later “Small Circle of Friends” or “The ’70s.” Rather, it’s a sometimes depressing, sometimes amusing chronicling of the evolution and devolution of the sexual lives of two college friends, one a smooth-talking narcissist (Nicholson) and the other a sensitive nice guy (Garfunkel). Their friendship and discussions are reminiscent of Jerry Seinfeld and George Costanza in the 90s, just more edgy and not as funny.
When released, the counterculture revolution of the late 60s was still fresh and nudity was the hip thang, which explains the skinny-dipping sequence in "Woodstock" and, a year later, the nudity in this flick and "The Last Picture Show,” as well as the soon-to-come "Stigma" and “The Harrad Experiment.” Of course, nudity in mainstream movies was nothing new in light of the pre-Hays era, as observed by "Tarzan and His Mate" from 1934. With the code lifted after almost three decades, movies like this seemed to exult in a new sense of libertine freedom. Whilst risqué and cutting edge at the time, it's just a quirky adult-oriented drama today.
Nicholson has his likable smirk, as usual, but as the story progresses his character becomes increasingly distasteful and pathetic. Reflect on where he ends up; it’s a powerful point. Garfunkel’s character isn’t anywhere as bad, but he also becomes somewhat pitiable. “Meaningless! Meaningless! Everything is meaningless.”
Although the story is sometimes tedious and there are distasteful elements, the cast is great and the psychological insights interesting.
It runs 1 hour, 39 minutes, and was shot in New York City and at Panorama Film Studios in Vancouver.
GRADE: B-
91%
TOMATOMETER
· 35 reviews
72%
AUDIENCE
· 5K ratings
6.9/10
17.4K
•••
4k plz