Been There, Seen That
I missed "Being There" when it came out and I never seemed to find it later on TV so I finally rented it to see what all the excitement was about. I now understand the reputation it has accrued and I must say that I really did enjoy it. I can't see my way to rating it with "5 Stars" but "4 Stars" is certainly an indication of my respect and appreciation of this quality film. I laughed out loud on several occassions but the more common reaction I got was one of curiosity. Although everything that takes place in "Being There" seems to be normal, I never knew what to expect next. That's because, in the midst of all these characters who play their expected roles, there is one person who is completely out of place. Right from the beginning we are aware of who this character is and why he is so out of place. We just aren't prepared for the places he goes, the people he meets and the things he does. At times we see the parody of lifestyles, at times the parody of philosphies, at time the parodies of relationships, and at times the parodies of something else (we may not fully grasp what the parody is of...but we know it must be a parody).

The movie, will draw you in if you let it. Although I am often too pragmatic for my own good, I found it easy to be drawn into "Being There". A cursory look at some other reviews tells me others were not. I think the way this movie succeeds is the way the character was set up for us. I recall seeing "The Sixth Sense" years ago when it came out. I was insulted not by the movie but by a trailer in which the writer and director reviewed scenes in which a deceased character was able to believe that he was actually alive based on his perceived interaction with living persons. Their contention was; See! You doubted that this could happen but we just showed you how it could! OK, I thought, that proves your point for those 7 or 8 scenes but they took place over several days at least and you don't account for what this character did the rest of his time. In "Being There" we never need to concern ourselves with such pragmatic issues because we know that Chance Gardner is usually going to be off by himself watching TV. We can accept that the only scenes with him interacting with others were the only ones that actually occurred. (My pragmatism often works overtime). We can accept him as he is which enables viewers like myself to then accept everything else that happens as well.

The ending is a bit peculiar and left me reviewing what I had seen. There is an opportunity to elevate the meaning of "Being There" depending on how you react to that final scene. Personally, I thought it was simply more parody only this time it was of us.

So painful to watch that I
wanted to burst into tears. I like movies that are long, with character development, but this isn't one of them. I can't believe how many people gave this movie 4 or 5 stars. This is a movie/plot that could have been cut down to 90 minutes and STILL have been way too long of a movie. Lastly, what the heck was up with the ending?! I didn't get that at all. My family and I sat there and stared at each other blankly when the credits started rolling, then had to watch another movie to try to erase the painful memories of that one. Ugh.

being there dvd
It is obvious that some portions of the movie were cut out on the dvd version of Being There which was disapointing to me. I don't know if the vhs version is the complete film or not, but I would have opted for vhs if it was a complete version of the film.

Subtle and Sublime Masterpiece!
It's been nearly three decades (ugh!) since I saw this film in the theater and always remembered it as being one of the great movies of all time - intelligent, witty, satirical, and thought-provoking. Sadly, I hadn't had a chance (no pun intended) to see it since and, while browsing for something to watch that would transport me to another place (something that all good movies should do), I remembered "Being There." To my great delight, I was surprised to find a copy.

Needless to say, I was absolutely thrilled with my decision to buy this movie. The wit and humor remain as powerful today as it was when the movie was first shown. The only part that seemed "dated" where the 70's clothes and styles but that only ads to the movie's "character."

Granted, the movie may appear "slow" to some but, like a good piece of music, every moment needs to be savored in order to fully appreciate every nuance of the magnificent script and brilliant performance of each actor; without question, this was Peter Sellers' finest performance, Shirley McLaine was magnificent, Melvyn Douglas was brilliant, and Richard Dysart was superlative.

The film is fraught with all kinds of unanswered (but intriguing) questions which leave intelligent audiences with countless topics for discussion. For example, just who (or what) was Chauncey Gardner? Other reviews (rather disturbingly) refer to Sellers' character as "learning disabled," "retarded," a "simpleton," and other epithets and yet, other than the hilarious comments by the maid that Gardner "has no brains at all. Stuffed with rice pudding between the ears. Short-changed by the Lord and dumb as a jackass" we really don't know why he led such a bizarrely sheltered life that centered on his need to watch TV and his childlike behavior that exuded strength and confidence to so many others. Why was "Chancy" left alone? By whom? Why did the maid leave Chauncey after having taken care of him for so many years?

Of course, that's all part of the mystery that makes this such a sublime masterpiece - there are a lot of questions for which answers are not needed in order for the genius of this film to succeed. People will continue to debate the mysteries of the film including such things as who stated ""I understand" at the death bed of one of the characters, or the meaning of very last scene, forever. Obviously, there are no real answers to these and trying to answer them is simply futile. I would strongly suspect that that was exactly what this film was trying to accomplish - to get people to argue over something that really doesn't exist (or doesn't matter) - while, at the same time, ignoring more important issues. The real brilliance of the movie; however, is found with the amount of satire - almost nothing is sacred in this movie if one has that courage to really take a good look at exactly what is being said. Every word (especially those uttered by Sellers) is spoken with precisely the right amount of meaning, nuance, and inflection required. Some may feel that this movie is "slow" but the slothfulness of the main character and his careful, yet simplistic, dialog with others (in contrast to the constant cacophony of a blaring TV which he surrounds himself with), is precisely what makes this movie so great.

Prize turkey with all the trimmings
The word 'awful' doesn't even get near to describing how bad this movie is. 'Appalling' or 'crass' would be more apt, but even then I would be tempted to use an expletive intensifier with it. The idea itself has some sort of value, there is some satire in the motiff of a pure simpleton becoming the most listened to man in any major political regime, never mind the White House. And yet...! And yet the outcome here is a terribly contrived, horrendously artificial, and maddeningly overwritten piece of cliche.

The thing is, I like some of the actors in it. The actor who plays the pres - sorry, I can't remember his name - is a pretty good character actor who adds a bit of colour to films he's in, and Ms McClaine is a fine female foil and always entertaining. Then there is Sellers - the man is a bona fide genius, I love him as an actor, there is no one who quite shares his gift for characterisation, not Sim, not even Guinness. But his judgment was way off when he took on this preposterously OTT role. A screenplay like that should have gone straight in the bin, and his agent should have been sacked for giving it to him. The whole thing is just so painful to watch, a blatant and totally predictable narrative is so slowly, so uninterestingly constructed and there is hardly any dramatic tension in it, even at the points where the screenwriter has demanded their should be some, but it is just lifelessly directed, so flatly played by everyone, seemingly concentrating so hard on playing it straight, including Sellers, that it just comes across as flat, one dimensional, and artificial. A TRULY awful project from beginning to end, no way at all to be remembering one of the greatest comedy actors of cinema. And I don't agree with the consensus that this was a great performance. To me, this seriously overworked and privately troubled man looked in dire need of a complete rest.