Obviously, tastes differ on films like this. A few reviewers like "Buddy Buddy," but others don't think much of it. Even those who enjoyed it didn't score it very high. The fact that so few people have commented out of the number who have rated it probably says as much. I think it's a dud for several reasons. First, it's not very funny. A couple of chuckles are the most I could manage. The plot idea is OK, but the screenplay with so many goofy aspects (the psycho-love palace, etc.) is way overboard. There is very little witty or clever writing for a Billy Wilder vehicle.
Then there's the complaining persona of Jack Lemmon's character, Victor. I know there's a movie following that thinks "The Out of Towners" of 1970 was a very good movie. I can't seem to appreciate movies like that and this one that have nagging, whining characters who carry on throughout much of the film. I just don't see the humor in that. If it were a single short scene or two, perhaps. But that type of film soon wears very thin on me.
I wonder if Wilder and/or MGM had their heads on, if not their hearts in this film. The stereotyped stupid cops and murderous use of clichés make it seem like they just wanted to toss something together and get done with it. Another reviewer noted the tedious repeats of Walter Matthau's Trabucco. He opens his suitcase, takes out and sets up his assassin's rifle, scope and tripod, and then takes them apart and puts them back in the case. Not once, but several times. Who, unaffected by mind-altering substances, would think that was funny, or interesting? Someone obviously thought it must be good, because it repeats so often. Well, that must answer my question, indirectly.
On top of all this, the screenplay is quite crude and crass. I wanted to laugh, because the idea for the story had real possibilities. It just falls flat. My four stars are solely for a fine cast of wonderful entertainers who probably gave it a good shot, considering the rotten egg they were handed. That includes Paula Prentiss, Klaus Kinski, and others besides the leads.
I'm a viewer who thinks this film is as bad as one may have heard.
Then there's the complaining persona of Jack Lemmon's character, Victor. I know there's a movie following that thinks "The Out of Towners" of 1970 was a very good movie. I can't seem to appreciate movies like that and this one that have nagging, whining characters who carry on throughout much of the film. I just don't see the humor in that. If it were a single short scene or two, perhaps. But that type of film soon wears very thin on me.
I wonder if Wilder and/or MGM had their heads on, if not their hearts in this film. The stereotyped stupid cops and murderous use of clichés make it seem like they just wanted to toss something together and get done with it. Another reviewer noted the tedious repeats of Walter Matthau's Trabucco. He opens his suitcase, takes out and sets up his assassin's rifle, scope and tripod, and then takes them apart and puts them back in the case. Not once, but several times. Who, unaffected by mind-altering substances, would think that was funny, or interesting? Someone obviously thought it must be good, because it repeats so often. Well, that must answer my question, indirectly.
On top of all this, the screenplay is quite crude and crass. I wanted to laugh, because the idea for the story had real possibilities. It just falls flat. My four stars are solely for a fine cast of wonderful entertainers who probably gave it a good shot, considering the rotten egg they were handed. That includes Paula Prentiss, Klaus Kinski, and others besides the leads.
I'm a viewer who thinks this film is as bad as one may have heard.