THE PRINCE OF TIDES (1991)
Starring: Nick Nolte (Tom Wingo), Barbra Streissand (Susan Lowenstein), Blythe Danner (Sallie Wingo), Jeroen Krabbé (Herbert Woodruff), George Carlin (Eddie Detreville)
Directed by: Barbra Streissand, Written by: Pat Conroy and Becky Johnston, based on the novel by Pat Conroy
Rated R by the MPAA for strong language, violence, sexual situations, and rape
Reviewed by Doug Skiles
Something must be said about THE PRINCE OF TIDES. It is very possibly the most mysterious of any Oscar nominated film ever made, because it also one of the worst films ever made. It is a triumph of horrible storytelling, ugly images, questionable acting, horrendous directing and unrelentingly terrible writing, and to appreciate it on any level is nearly to question one's sanity. The "glory" of the film is its failure - very rarely is such a spectacular failure made that nothing can redeem it. In the more recent annals of bad films, many have been the major releases that, unfortunately, fall back on special effects in place of an actual story or good characters. But THE PRINCE OF TIDES doesn't have such comforts, and, as a result, fails on every level imaginable. Perhaps something can be stated about Nick Nolte's acting, but then, how hard is it to play a stereotype of a tough southerner? Do we celebrate Judd Hirsch for his stereotypical Jewish role in INDEPENDENCE DAY (1996)? No, we celebrate him for his success as a comedian in "Taxi," and his acting in ORDINARY PEOPLE (1980). This movie is as dull as it is insulting. A failure of epic proportions.
The plotline is ripped right from the worst of soap operas. Sallie Wingo is having an affair. Tom Wingo's sister tries to kill herself. When he goes to visit her and meets her psychiatrist, Susan Lowenstein, it's discovered that Susan's husband is also having an affair. So Tom and Susan have an affair together, which is clearly not only the not-quite-professional thing for Lowenstein to do, but also totally disregards the well-being of her son. That son, incidentally, in another painfully contrived subplot, is being taught to play football by Tom, who becomes the boy's surrogate father. We come to find out that Tom, his sister, and his mother were all raped by escaped convicts when he and his sister were children, another soap-ish, and downright sick, turn of events. Not only does this serve no real purpose in the storyline other than to make the audience feel ill when they have to see flashbacks of it, but it also makes little sense. How did these three men escape? What location did they escape from? How far did they go to reach the Wingo house? Why did they choose to break into that particular house but none of the others along the way? Streissand doesn't know, or care. She's more interested in making the worst episode ever of "One Life To Live" than in telling a good story. Yawn.
Nearly all of the roles here are stereotypes. It's mildly amusing to see George Carlin play a flamboyantly gay man in one of the most anti-typecasting roles ever seen, but that's just another stupid character/stereotype to toss on the fire. No one is really notable, because everyone is so one-note.
What is Streissand's message? She portrays the affair of Lowenstein and Wingo as a glorious thing. These two married people don't love each other in any sense, but comfort one another with sex, and Streissand finds that beautiful. As vomit-inducing as that sounds, it seems to be a Hollywood trend to try to destroy the institution of marriage. Marriage is often portrayed as a trap, where spouses are purely evil men (or women) who frequently cheat and have no redeeming qualities (like Lowenstein's husband, Woodruff, is here), and act as an obstacle to having free sex with anyone who's willing - all of whom, of course, are better than the spouse. Even excellent films, like TITANIC (1997), can fall part way into this trap. Why does this happen so much in movies? Is it because marriages so rarely last in Hollywoodland? Do they want to try to justify their multiple spouses, torrid affairs, encounters with prostitutes, etc? Streissand's portrayal of the glories of extramarital affairs is a solid slap in the face to marriage and married couples, and Streissand herself deserves a solid slap in the face in return for this infuriating effort to strike down an institution that the world holds dear using nothing but her ego and lack of morality as a weapon.
Incidentally, since this was the first of her films that I've ever seen, I had never actually seen the full extent of her egotistical nature - until now. Look at the direction in this film - in every shot in which she appears, she zooms in on her face, her legs, her chest. She makes herself shine for the camera, trying to flaunt her sexiness to the best of her ability. Sadly, she doesn't realize that she's not sexy at all - and, in fact, isn't terribly attractive, at least nowhere as near as much as she thinks she is. Especially by the Hollywood standards that she seems to be holding so dearly. It was considered a snub when she wasn't nominated for best director for this movie. I have to wonder why... if James Cameron had made himself the star of Titanic and zoomed in on nothing but his face in every shot, would it be as well-loved as it is? I would have to doubt it.
When it's all said and done, and the cheating couples have all finally returned to their spouses (in a rather uncelebratory fashion, sadly), Barbra Streissand's THE PRINCE OF TIDES is enough to make you sick. Today, we complain that Hollywood makes so many hollow blockbusters that have nothing but loud explosions and big special effects to guide them. But I'd gladly trade this piece of gutter trash for any one of those. If you have the poor sense to watch it on video, take heart in the fact that, when it's finally over, you can rip it from the VCR, declare "Sermon over," stub out your cigar on the tape, and chuck it out the window. Maybe, if we're lucky, it'll sink back into the hell from whence it came.
Rating: (no stars)
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews