My Favorite Year

1982 US
Dir: Richard Benjamin
Str: Peter O'Toole, Mark Linn-Baker, Jessica Harper, Joseph Bologna

Where does this movie's charm come from?
My Favorite Year is surprisingly enjoyable. I've read several reviews about this movie, and all of them are telling My Favorite Year is an excellent movie. I also agree with them without hesitation. I can even say the movie is one of the best movies I have ever seen in 1980s. However, it is rather difficult to explain why. It is a drama with the tinge of comedy. But neither a downright drama nor a sheer comedy. In 1960s, there appeared dozens of so-called romantic comedies. Though this movie has the element of a romantic comedy, it is not the focus of the movie at all. So what is the focal point? Before discussing it, I am going to explain the outline of this movie.
They are all looking energetic. Where has this energy gone these
days? Some enchantment must have totally vanished.
My Favorite Year illustrates America in 1950s when the age of TV was about to explode. The story is told from the view point of a young TV man. He is assigned to the job of taking care of a legendary movie hero Alan Swan (played by Peter O'Toole) who is to appear as a guest star in the TV program the young TV man is assiciated with and not always in good shape for acting because of his booze. The movie handles the atmosphere of the days of incipient TV culture very well, all surrounding people acting energetic and hopeful, and behaving as if they had no worry at all. Even the Peter O'Toole's estrangement with his daughter looks not so serious. This optimistic view will surely become clear when compared to such a movie like Network that is also depicting TV business. As I wrote a review about the movie Network, I am not going to explain it in detail here. But, Network handles only darker aspects of TV business, and will surely give the audience the feeling of a totally paraniac mad world. Despite the fact My Favorite Year was made in 1980s while Network in 1970s, we might feel Network's situation is nearer to the image we are holding about TV business present time than My Favorite Year, if ignoring the extreme exaggeration of Network's plot. But, now, I am wondering if the motives of making both movies, anyway, might have stemmed from the same origin. That is; Network depicts the problems of TV media through ten times magnification of them, and My Favorite Year depicts them through showing the age of devoid of them. In short, strategies employed in both movies are completely opposite to each other, yet the real motives might be the same. I presume it's true whenever someone shows the glory of the past, the lack of that very glory in the present time is always implicitly suggested. Hence, if one felt energy and hope in this movie, it might be proving the lack of them in the current situation. In this way, it can be said while Network explicate our hopeless situations by depicting them straight, My Favorite Year makes us notice the lack of energy and hope in this age through the depiction of the age when they are fully materialized. Yet, it's fun to know such an age when people are energetic and hopeful ever exists (Oh I feel I am extremely pessimistic by saying so). Though I was born in 1960 in Japan, and therefore I am not in a position of judging whether the background of the movie is accurate or not, nevertheless I don't doubt the authenticity of the movie. And I also remember the days when firstly came a TV set in my home, and all the members of my family was literally gazing into the TV display, though that was in 1960s. This kind of refreshing experience never occurs these days, even when I purchased a brand new computer. Probably, the existence of this precious experience would be of what My Favorite Year is trying to convey, I presume.
Anyway, what does the word "reality" mean these days? Can
someone tell exactly what virtual reality is?
Then, what has been lost, and what's wrong with our age? That would be very difficult to answer. Some SF movies has depicted dreary future world where everything is controlled by authoritative structure. But, today, the world doesn't seem to be dominated by such kind of explicit coercive force (I'm not going to talking about inner situation. I just say, in this subject, I recommend you to read the famous book written by Erich Fromm "Escape from Freedom"). Then what? I think there might be many answers to this question. But, as clearly elucidated in the movie Network, we seem to have lost the clue about what actually the reality is, and carefully sustained equilibrium has been torn down by the massive force of recent state-of-the-art media technology whose power against human perception should never be underestimated, as I discussed it in the review of the movie Network. Here, I pick up one proof of our confusion about reality. These days we frequently hear the words with the prefix "virtual-". Though I don't know the exact meaning of these words, if they meant "assumed", it would be probably right, but if they meant "almost real", it should be pointed out that the most important aspect of reality would be being ignored. That is; reality cannot be an objective to be pursued in any way. Because the moment you think you catch it, it has long been slipping away out of your palm. That is the nature of reality. It is always with you, and never without your existence, which surely means it cannot be persued as a certain objective. So I presume the overdosing use of the word "virtual-something" in these days is well reflecting the recent confusion of our notion about reality. It goes without saying that, all values being originated mostly from the structual differentiations in the cultural fabrication carefully interwoven with the fragments of embers of what used to be considered to be a real thing that, in turn, might not have been real at all, it has become extremely difficult to grasp what is real or even what can be real. One reason why TV, as a media, could be dangerous for all of us resides in the fact TV deeply involves human perceptions in its own peculiar milieu without clearly demarcating itw own boundary.
An architect Christopher Alexander gives us some hint of what has
been really lost these years, which eventually leads us to feel the
lack of any reality.
Recently, I read the book written by an architect Christopher Alexander who had, allegedly, had an great influence upon computer industry. His key word is "pattern". Pattern means a kind of matrix by whose force many things can get the quality of being alive. For example, can you feel newly built massive modern buildings are alive? Certainly not. Because, using his term, they are devoid of patterns. Their uniformity and homogeneity are killing us. On the other hand, the buildings built in the old age frequently gives us the feeling they are alive, for they are full of patterns. You shouldn't consider the word "pattern" as something like pre-determined rules. Rather, it means dynamic force that can vary according to the situation under which it is applied, and it has nothing to do with our intentional designs or images. It will come out only when we have succeeded in negating our own prejudice toward our environment, and becoming the part of that environment itself. And, only after these patterns have been successfully materialized and applied to the environment we are in, our environment will become really real for us. Because, in this way, we will be able to establish a relationship and an interation with our own environment. Anyway, though, for now, I can't point out concrete examples, My Favorite Year seems to be full of these patterns. I guess this feeling is strongly related to the fact that the movie is depicting the era when versatility and diversity are abundant, which is the one important element of those patterns coming out, in contrast with the era when uniformity and homogeneity dominate, which certainly reduces the possibility of materialization of those patterns; that is present time. In short, one answer to what has been lost must be this versatility and diversity and "pattern"s that enable those precious characteristics to emerge. Certainly, My Favorite Year seems to be teaching us this fact. This is the answer to the question I raised in the first paragraph of this review. It's a great movie, isn't it?

Go Back to Movie Reviews Main Page