The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, September 04, 1975, Page Page 11, Image 11
FORTUNE
Front Page Nine
AFTEII,rwo viewings of the film, the meaning is
still not clear, and the movie does not justify a trip
to the library to look up further details. Joyce 's
characterizations of Oscar and Nick are completely
insound. Nick appears to be the schrewd character
who would have the initiative to instigate illegal
practices while Oscar appears to be the innocent
party who somehow got mixed up in the scheme (he
even breaks under the least bit of pressure and
blabs the whole thing to the police). But Joyce
throws in one line of dialogue that completely
contradicts everything else that was built up: we
are told Oscar had embezzled more than $1,500
when he was a bankteller!
One ridiculous scene has Oscar telling Nick what
his mother used to call feminine napkins when he
was a child - she called them mice beds, and this
scene takes five minutes to explain why, in one of
the least funny segments ever in a pseudo-comedy.
This is all tied in later, when it turns out that
Freddie's mother owned the Quintessa Feminine
Napkin Co., but none of it has any relevance to the
plot, and is certainly not fnnny.
The few almost funny scenes are very predictably
set up, as when Oscar and Nick stop their vehicle in
the middle of the road on a bridge to dump Fred
die's body into the river. Before they can get the
body over the side of the bridge, a traffic jam is
caused by the way the vehicle is stopped, blocking
both lanes. But the audience easily guessed what
would happen simply by the way the vehicle was
artifically parked. The director should have found a
MA
W L
THE
JUNIOR i
AND
SPORTSWEAR
TOPS N'
For Groovy4
** HUGF WAREHOUSE**
ACRO55 FROM FAIRGROUNDSE
1120 SH OP ROA D 771-7079
OPEN A DAYS - 10 TILL 74
* EASY LAYA
one-lane bridge to film the scene, if he wanted any
laughs at all.
ANOTHER SCENE that was even more
predictable was when Oscar and Nick buy a snake
to kill Freddie. They want to test it first, so they put
it into the cage where Freddie keeps her pet
chicken. Instead of doing the normal thing, staying
and watching what the snake does to the chicken,
the two men decide to leave and come back the next
morning to see what happens. This is so artificial
that one knows long before the next morning that
yes, you guessed it--the chicken has killed the
snake.
With such a wretched script as this, it is a wonder
that Mike Nichols agreed to direct it, and it is even
more of a wonder that he was able to convince his
two stars to do it.
What saves the film, aside from the aforemen
tioned performances of the two female members of
the cast, is the professionally lush look that the film
visually boasts. The sets by Richard Slybert and
the photography by John Alonzo were stunning,
capturing the 1920's era with nostalgic grace.
Also of interest is Nichols' sly little camera
technique of panning to a later event instead of
cutting to it. One case of this technique is when
Oscar and Nick take Freddie to a Justice of the
Peace for the marriage. We see them knock on the
door, and then the camera pans over to a window to
show them already well into the ceremony before
the Justice of the Peace. It is all nicely done, but
why for this script?
The Fortune will probably make a fortune at the
box office because of its male superstars, but if
Beatty and Nicholson make any more films like
this, their status as "superstars" will dwindle
quickly. The true "superstar" at work here is
Stockard Channing who will hopefully grace her
talents on some good scripts.
OTAL SYSIEM [FFICIENCY buy
CHED PIONEER COMPONE NTS
isten - We Service
771-7340
PIONEER
A ,hpr ,c n, . VY'
PIPE RACK
Place To Shop
ir "Funky"
iok'ng and
Feminine"
RTY FALL '75
BOT TOMS
Junior Bodies
*BUSH RIVER RD. 1-26 *
7UCt BLOCKS FROM DUTCH SQUARE
IN THE "BOARDWALK" PLAZA
6 DA YS- 10 TILL 7
FRIDA YS TILL 9 -798-305i
WAY PLAN *
Cola. Magazine
not up to par
By LAMA IARLU
Gamecock Staff Writer
Hi there mag hags' Well as we all know, for many months there has
been much fanfare and hoopla about the new Columbia Magazine. It.
along with the second coming of "Pug" R{avenel has been heralded as
the great events in South Carolina history for 1975. Well, Pug came
and went, but Columbia Magazine never made it out of the fallopian
tube.
We were all led to believe that Columbia Magazine would be bright.
sharp and biting, thought provoking, and that you as the reader would
want to throw away your Earth Shoes. But what received in actuality
was Pepsi with no fizz.
AS I SEE IT, there are only three things in Columbia Magazine
worth your attention, and two of those are ads. To put it mildly.
Columbia Magazine would be a disappointment to a manic Lepressive.
and it is tacky. It's like wishing for a bicycle for Christmas and getting
a toothbrush. But then a toothbrush is useable. I would not say that
Columbia Magazine is like a cold bowl of cream of what, but the
temperature is falling rather quickly.
The guiding philosophy of Columbia Magazine, at !east from this
point of view, seems to be: cover our butts with the Columbia business
community: let's not do anything to offend the Burnsides, the Hamp
tons, the Gibbs, the Bessingers, (the old guard Columbia Merchants
who might spend $550 for a full page black and white ad) The end
result of Columbia Magazine is a rather bland mixture of old topics.
produced in the old overworked newspaper format, using old news.
and very little imagination or inspiration. In other words. those same
tired old tits only this time in a new sagging bra.
BUT LET'S BE honest people, what can you say about a magazine
that died with its first issue? That it was gray, that its copy was
uninspired: that its graphics were rejects from the Yellow Sub
marine: that it was young that it cost 75 cents" Try as I might. I can
find nothing in print to compare Columbia Magazine I nless. one
could say it has the graphics of larpers and the copy style of the North
American lorticians Digest.
But boys and girls ! did not have to be that wa If lonsieur>
('alabrese and Ilaght had done \w hat they said the. w ere going to do I
would not havc beenl able to w'ite this review Arid that would hat t
niade me very happy If in fact they are reaching for the Imomniod
class. the intel.gentsia. that 10 per cent of the population that r'a'i h
does read and think, then they w ill not do it with unmispired copy aho
topics that ha\e been covered elsewhere -new spapers to collt-Lt
yearbooks
Ha ve they not heard of (;eorg4c Bernard Shaw. Doroth\- Parkew
()scar Wilde. Nocl ('oward. (;,arr.T TrIudt'au, Nicholk von lloffr,v.:
Instead we ha ( ten >erved ver. poor imitations ot 1)avid S Brodth
John Kenneth (;,tlhraith. Kate Mlillet. Tolstoy ('olumbnia lagaini:
needs to walk iitt N75 They need to think about their audience. Th
need to entertain not insult their audience
So what about specifics' The[ cop.\ is at best bland The graphi
those that are there, ail suffer I roim a boring samemr-'ss The tull p'
art works (iily t\%o' are positioned wkrong Both pies led a
froni the rebspte('tive articles
1IWT' ALL. IS not had with ('oluuIIa M\agazine Previousl\ I mniel
lioned that this new literary effort did have three good item> hat
imlight be wo'th your time.
First is the full page ad for M1aximri's on page one It has graphics
quality that the rest of the magazm.re dloes not Iivye up to It is realbI a
sad state of things when the advertisers have better art work, bet terv
Iayout , better design than the magazine itself Next . on page 21 . we
have a ratheir double entrendre ad for Brirttons Yet another exam ple
of the advert iser' being better than the vehicle in which it appears
And saving the best for last, ''Play it again. Pug' is the only article
'that offers an> piromise for the fut ure survival of this magazine
Writ ten by Bob ('aft. who undlerstands that w r'itmg for a magazine is
much dliffer'ent than writing for a newspaper, the article attempts to
be the things that ('olumbia Miagazine fails at llow~ever. it is onlh fair
t) say, that from my> point of view, this art i('le has also suffered f rom
an editorial hatchet jot) done none to grac'efully with a pick ax. Being
famiiar with the ('raft style ot w.~riling. I can only account for te hop
scotchb effect as bt e d itoiialIi manrdat e But in spilt' of the hatIchet oh.
the article (do's flow, is rather huimorous, andl is min.u of the timgs
that ('olumiu a Mlagazine is not
Thus fair tthi b ave onl> pr'odu('td tint' issue fut .: is past tun' bor
(oltumbia \1laga/im and itsa people to tcan uip t hi': :v T1'hat is ift ht'r
w.' ish to pusth and1( flourish arid not1 to be a !.n u riteoff for a io
porat I on H t ionne one. numbi er ne is ant t'\an ii ! what t he' flunl
holds in stor < mat I suiggtesl t t t'i'trr ont' fi K ent om
the' A I st> I bt hok .mid phi> that new funi filled canii lt A .\ lagaioc