720 The Big Chill

[Aunt Peg]

Speaking of comparisons, I always felt that this was a rip off of John Sayles' superior debut Return of the Secaucus 7 that came out three years earlier. Is it just me?

Anyways, I'll skip this one, for sure.

I was going to post something similar but you beat me to it. And speaking of John Sayles, there is a rich well of work that could do with the Criterion treatment.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

I'll second that. Give me any Sayles over Wes Anderson and those odd Whit Stillman picks...

[Gregory]

Speaking of comparisons, I always felt that this was a rip off of John Sayles' superior debut Return of the Secaucus 7 that came out three years earlier. Is it just me?

Here's something I wrote about that in another (now locked) thread:
I don't think The Big Chill was [any kind of] remake of The Return of the Secaucus 7. They have obvious similarities, but no direct connection other than that Kasdan may have been inspired by the Sayles film, though he has denied this. There are many, many differences between the films and their stories and characters. I never really got the sense that the Big Chill characters had ever been New Left or seriously countercultural but had simply taken the Sixties detour on their path to careers and "success" in rather ordinary terms. Basically, in addition to class differences between the two groups, Secaucus 7 is about people who were politically involved and were trying to maintain their idealism, while The Big Chill is about those who have lost any idealism they once had or never had any in the first place.
Sayles said this about it in the Sayles on Sayles book.

Even though the form of the two movies and the plot in some ways are very close, they're really about very different people, which is why I never felt like it was a rip-off. . . It's like saying if my movie had an Indian and a horse in it: "Oh, it's a rip-off of Shane."

[Numero Trois]

I was in my thirties before I could truly appreciate this film.

I thoroughly disliked this film the first time I saw it a few decades back. It struck me as completely fraudulent from the script to the acting to the choice of soundtrack music itself. Couldn't connect with it on any level. After having watched it a few times in the past week my opinion of it now is much more positive. The script is much more sardonic and knowing than I remembered or was able to perceive. Not near as acidic as Arcand's movie, but still with plenty of dark shadings given to the characters. The film as a whole may still be accurately called solipsistic- but at least its solipsism with sincerely portrayed, flawed human beings. And layered enough to withstand repeat viewings.

Not to say that my contempt was completely unwarranted given the film's terribly unimaginative soundtrack. Back then pre-internet radio most of those songs were truly hard to avoid short of staying away from commercial terrestrial radio or TV. Now that one can effortlessly go months without hearing them (for the most part), the songs complement and energize as intended rather than feeling oppressively, contemptuously familiar. Though there still are a few moments where the song choice underlines the sequence too heavily, like with the post-funeral use of the Rolling Stones's "You Can't Always Get What You Want." For me the best scene in the movie is the brief nightime sequence that uses the Steve Miller Band's Quicksilver Girl in the background. Of the whole bunch probably the song played least by commercial radio.

[Michael Kerpan]

They're polar opposites in many ways. Arcand clearly identifies with his characters, and so does Kasdan. One big difference is that Arcand is incisive and mordant in his development of the characters. Kasdan, on the other hand is clearly wearing his heart on his sleeve. He's wistful and sentimental. Not a shred of either in Arcand's passionate but astringent movie.

Thanks. Sounds like Arcand's movie is more my type of film. ;-}

[Numero Trois]

Yeah, I think most cineastes would prefer the Arcand film. Even with my revised opinion of the Kasdan film could say the The Decline of the American Empire works on a deeper more resonant level. One could say the same about The Barbarian Invasions as well.

[Lemmy Caution]

It struck me as completely fraudulent from the script to the acting to the choice of soundtrack music itself. ...

Not to say that my contempt was completely unwarranted given the film's terribly unimaginative soundtrack. Back then pre-internet radio most of those songs were truly hard to avoid short of staying away from commercial terrestrial radio or TV. Now that one can effortlessly go months without hearing them (for the most part), the songs complement and energize as intended rather than feeling oppressively, contemptuously familiar.

I have to take issue with this.
When the film came out in 1983, much of this music was in limbo, having been largely relegated to the margins. It was barely played on the oldies stations (WCBS being then dominant in NYC) and was far from mainstream consciousness (except perhaps for the Procol Harum and Stones offerings). The Big Chill was responsible for kicking off a classic Motown revival and after the film came out these songs became fairly ubiquitous for a time.

I had undertaken a fairly major Motown binge circa 1981 and all the Motown tunes plus Aretha and such were very familiar to me, but not to my friends or others in 1983 who treated TBC soundtrack as major revelation (which I think is a comment on the state of the music industry and music of 1983, as much as anything).

Sounds to me like you first saw The Big Chill after the Motown revival it kicked off and so the songs seemed stale. I'd agree that they mainly skimmed the most obvious tunes from those years/catalogs, but by 1983 they were mainly dusty unwanted songs. When the film was released, those songs did complement and energize the proceedings, and were far from being ubiquitous and familiar (except to, uh, me at the time).

I haven't seen the film in a long time, but have a vague recollection that Tell Him and Whiter Shade of Pale were especially effective in the film.

Otherwise, I saw The Big Chill when it was first released. Thought it was a fine enough. Amusing at times, rather self-absorbed, fun music, fairly polished. I rather liked it, but it seemed more solid than special. I totally forgot the name of the film, and was fairly surprised to learn that The Big Chill that was being talked about so much was the film I had enjoyed and largely forgotten.

It was the first time I was aware of the power of a film to revive old music. Then a few years later Stand By Me put Ben E. King's quarter-century-old song back into the Top 10, making it clear that there was good money in music/film tie-ins.

[Numero Trois]

When the film came out in 1983, much of this music was in limbo, having been largely relegated to the margins. It was barely played on the oldies stations (WCBS being then dominant in NYC) and was far from mainstream consciousness ...... but by 1983 they were mainly dusty unwanted songs. When the film was released, those songs did complement and energize the proceedings, and were far from being ubiquitous and familiar (except to, uh, me at the time).

Saw the film around 1995-97 or thereabouts. Given their widespread commercial usage well before then its extremely hard to imagine that any of these mostly key songs had been forgotten about. I was under the strong impression that they all had stayed on regular rotation since their original release. This article does back up your timeline by the way:

Perhaps more insidious is the cultural revolution that resulted in the ensuing nostalgia for all things 1960s

[FrauBlucher]

When the film came out in 1983, much of this music was in limbo, having been largely relegated to the margins. It was barely played on the oldies stations (WCBS being then dominant in NYC) and was far from mainstream consciousness (except perhaps for the Procol Harum and Stones offerings). The Big Chill was responsible for kicking off a classic Motown revival and after the film came out these songs became fairly ubiquitous for a time.

I had undertaken a fairly major Motown binge circa 1981 and all the Motown tunes plus Aretha and such were very familiar to me, but not to my friends or others in 1983 who treated TBC soundtrack as major revelation (which I think is a comment on the state of the music industry and music of 1983, as much as anything).

I disagree with this. These songs were still very popular in Brooklyn, NY where I lived at the time. You could go to any club, wedding or block party in Brooklyn and these songs would be played and danced to prior to The Big Chill's release. I worked in a catering hall in the late 70s to early 80s and these songs were always played. The genres of music that were dominant in Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst, and other south Brooklyn neighborhoods during that period were disco, soul and Motown.

[Roger Ryan]

The songs were certainly known if you had any interest in popular music during the second half of the twentieth century, but they had not yet reached the point of being overplayed. As for the Stones' track, the impression I got in 1983 was not that the subject of the lyric underlined the funeral sequence too heavily, but that it was completely unorthodox to play something like that at a funeral. Given that there is very little in the way of "generation gaps" these days (especially when it comes to popular music), some of the "us vs. them" elements of THE BIG CHILL seem irrelevant. Then again, I think one aspect of the film that saves it from being too self-congratulatory is the sense that these people aren't nearly as radical or hip as they think they are and that their "youth" is being commodified before their eyes.

[Lemmy Caution]

I imagine people who grew up during that time were still listening to some/most of this music, as most people's musical taste is formed and firmed during their late teens and early 20's. And again the film primarily culled some of the best known examples.

But Motown was at a low ebb in terms of commercially viability circa 1983. As I recall, the main Motown presence in the early 80's was a goofy TV commercial in which a father tells his son to turn down his music, to which the son replies plaintively, "But Dad, it's Smokey!" -- hawking mail order Motown.

The music from the film was a cultural phenomena, and spawned a broad-based Motown revival. And the Oldies radio boom too. Mid-to-late 80's, post TBC, you couldn't walk around Manhattan without hearing WCBS FM playing the oldies, which now included more 60's/early 70's songs rather than the previous heavy 50's/early 60's fare.

[Numero Trois]

As for the Stones' track, the impression I got in 1983 was not that the subject of the lyric underlined the funeral sequence too heavily, but that it was completely unorthodox to play something like that at a funeral.

It was a good idea to play it with church organ; maybe they should've stayed with that rather than fading into the original version. It was at that point & after which seemed a bit heavy handed to me.

[domino harvey]

I was hoping to be able to say I was wrong about Lena Dunham's inclusion in the supplements. Now that I have the Criterion, however, all I can do is more accurately criticize Dunham's contribution. It is not an essay about the film. Rather, it's a poor Lorrie Moore imitation, complete with refrains and speculative second person implementation throughout. It is bad, though if you like Dunham you can appreciate the essay without having seen the film because it's not immediately clear if Dunham's seen it either, given that her only tangible references are the same go-to talking points everyone knows about the film sight-unseen. This is like a film about your parents, man. Wow, deep shit yo.

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

I first saw The Big Chill years ago. And, I honestly never never really connected with the film, probably because I'm a generation younger than these characters - I was born in the early '70's. (For this same reason, I never really got into the '80's TV series 30-something, which was about people from this same generation...)

Recently, I decided to give the film another chance on the Criterion Blu. And, this time around I was quite impressed. This is only the second time I've seen this, and this viewing resonated much more than the first one. Now that I'm older, I appreciated the theme of friends who had drifted apart over the years coming together & reminiscing/reflecting on their collective past(s). Very nostalgic, and I think all of us in a certain age range can probably relate to this...also appreciated the themes of looking back on your youth & questioning your decisions....and thinking about what you have/haven't accomplished....

Obviously, excellent soundtrack; the music wasn't new as of '83 (when the film was released), but was presumably supposed to reflect what the characters had been listening to in their college years.

Re: the PQ, this Blu is definitely superior to the picture quality of the regular DVD. However, it's worth nothing that while many of the outdoor scenes were incredibly sharp/vivid, the indoor scenes seemed much softer... Maybe it was the lighting....

Did have one question about the film: I know that K. Costner played the friend Alex who had passed away - was his actual face ever seen in the film itself, or in a deleted scene? I looked for him carefully, and though his body was being prepared before the funeral, I don't remember seeing his face at all in the film; several of the deleted scenes show his friends looking down at him in the casket, but you never see him at all in these scenes either....Just wondering...

[domino harvey]

Costner did film scenes for the film but Kasdan cut them and refused to release the scenes even for DVD/Blu-ray (Not sure why, though I suspect it has something to do with contractually having to pay Costner if any of it ever shows up)

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

Costner did film scenes for the film but Kasdan cut them and refused to release the scenes even for DVD/Blu-ray (Not sure why, though I suspect it has something to do with contractually having to pay Costner if any of it ever shows up)

Good to know - Thanks. Makes sense that they wouldn't want to bother having the KC deleted scenes on the TBC DVD/Blu release, since IMHO it honestly wouldn't add anything to our appreciation of the film. In a way, not seeing him (either in a picture or the actual body) makes the death of Alex more powerful; you got to know the character only the way others remembered him & reminisced about him...you didn't need to see what he looked like. The most important thing here was that his passing brought all of the other characters together, and also reminded them of their own mortality....

[Numero Trois]

In a way, not seeing him (either in a picture or the actual body)

To be precise, you do see him in the film-

SpoilerShow

as a dressed-up corpse getting the finishing touches in extreme close-up right at the beginning of the film.

[FrauBlucher]

But it gave us this....Costner's roll in The Big Chill was the inspiration and set the tone for Dances With Wolves.

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

To be precise, you do see him in the film-

SpoilerShow

as a dressed-up corpse getting the finishing touches in extreme close-up right at the beginning of the film.

Yes,

SpoilerShow

I stand corrected - however, though you see a body, it could be anyone - IIRC, you don't see his face.

[albert_m2]

I finally watched my blu ray last night and with it fresh in my mind, I thought would respond some (albeit older) comments.

One, Dunham isn't the voice of her generation. She's just a voice and I think the idea is having someone who writes a show about a current generation reflecting on the film from a different perspective would be more interesting than a baby boomer doing it. It's about the broader experience of the film beyond the film's characters' generation. I don't know why it had to be some rigid, standard love letter to the film etc.

Two, having recently watched the Return of the Secaucus Seven, I don't see this film as a rip off. I do see the Big Chill as a lot better though. I get the criticism of this movie because if one can't relate to it, or get into it from any point of view, it seems like an hour and a half of talking at best, and of course pretentious to some as well.

Honestly, I found Secaucus to be like dropping in on strangers having specific conversations and not caring. It just didn't work for me, or the concept of time passing and taking stock of where the characters are. All of it worked much better in the Big Chill for me.

Last, I'm not sure I understand the criticism of the soundtrack. This was big music that they would have listened to in college. I've read elsewhere that some don't believe that 60's radicals would ever listen to Motown etc. That might be true, but these weren't radicals. They were part of many college kids who got caught up in the experiences of the time, including the ideals of the time, the protests and everything else, but I think it's safe to say, it was the typical experience, not the radical one.

[movielocke]

I got this last year because I remembered liking it vaguely in the vhs days and didn't really remember anything about the film otherwise.

I really remember nothing about the film and I'm shocked at how bad it is. Irritating characters are uneasy around each other and focus on self sabotaging their lives and relationships with ridiculous rationalizations. Good god these egotistical baby boomers are simply awful to watch from start to Finish. What an aggravating experience this film is.

That said, I like the dialogue and performances, particularly Meg tilly stealing every scene reacting to these unrealistic assholes. The music is good, of course. But oy.

[FrauBlucher]

Why Criterion?!

So now these are your parents, their bodies starting to change, little paunches visible under their dress shirts, asses widening, sleepy when they used to be awake, sad when they used to be horny. These are your parents, older now but not yet old. And they have lost a friend.

Couldn't this be any generation. What's her point.... Of all the Criterion essays I've read, this has to be the most worthless, detached writing from the subject at hand.

[carmilla mircalla]

What's her point.... Of all the Criterion essays I've read, this has to be the most worthless, detached writing from the subject at hand.

well, yeah it's Lena Dunham. She is dog food so naturally nothing of quality is going to come out of her mouth.

[Drucker]

Dog food doesn't have a mouth.

[domino harvey]

By no stretch of the imagination could I be called a fan of Dunham, but I think we can refrain from calling her names. I have no idea what being dog food even means, but I doubt it's anything good