Diane Keaton acted ashamed of this one

The passing of Diane Keaton brought one memory to mind. It was instant. And this was the movie "Looking For Mr. Goodbar." It was a "hot" movie at the time it was current. The east coast-based highbrow critics anointed certain movies as such. This was long before the "democratization" of media caused by the Internet. Mostly we sat back and accepted the judgment of the east coast folks. 

The people out in Flyoverland harbored skepticism I'm sure. But the judgments seemed too difficult to resist. So "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" became a gem in the eyes of the prime critics. Looking back I have to resent that. All a movie had to do was present "conflicted characters" and "moral ambiguity" and the highbrow crowd was most approving. 

So what's my problem with "Looking for Mr. Goodbar?" It's that it has the veneer of sophistication and depth while really being little more than titillating. I'd share the same assessment of Jane Fonda's "Klute" with Donald Sutherland. "Klute" came out a few years earlier. I paid to see both movies in the theater. Was I responding to the titillating aspect? I will confess "yes." 

Males had to jump through hoops to get access to pornography back then. A male actor from the "Golden Age of Porn" said the nature of the product then was "underground." I'll be very frank here: males including the adults - maybe especially the adults - could feel starved for sexually stimulating content. Are you offended by that? Well I won't back off because I am merely stating reality.  

Fonda posed in suggestive photos to promote "Klute." The movie pushed her fame forward. I believe this was after her "Hanoi Jane" phase. Well she sure became big-time. 

It is the definition of "quaint" to describe how young males found it to be a turn-on to watch "Klute" and "Looking for Mr. Goodbar." Shall we admit that sex was the big selling point? But the powers-that-be in Hollywood would strongly avoid "selling" the movies as such. 

There had to be the pretense of art and depth. So let's present "conflicted" characters. Anyone can be made to look conflicted. Once this gets woven in, the "Oscar" hype can set in. Such was the case for both movies I'm writing about here. Hollywood can be thankful I paid to see both movies. 

Oh, but the sex as seen on the screen was so tame. I mean it's tame compared to what can be called up on the free Internet today. Some Republican politicians are fighting that, like the guy from Utah. Remains to be seen how successful they will be. Enjoy it while you can? Maybe that's the attitude. 

Once a young man consumes some of the new stuff - would be called "hardcore" in the old days - he is relaxed in knowing he isn't going to be "teased" (toyed with) anymore. Man, it's all right in front of him. 

And this gets to the point where a male gets "desensitized." The shock value is gone. The feeling of watching something "taboo" is completely gone. 

We used to hear the term "triple-X" along with "hardcore." In fact wasn't George C. Scott in a movie called "Hardcore?" All of this was discussed in restrained terms as if with a whisper. Forbidden stuff in the eyes of many. Young males would go to Hennepin Ave. in the Twin Cities to see "Deep Throat" and "Debbie Does Dallas." Wide-eyed of course. It was an "adventure." And they'd feel sexual arousal. 

The "sex" in "Klute" and "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" was not very open or revealing, as I recall. A contemporary review of "Goodbar" used the term "fake sex." 

I became somewhat wide-eyed, because what else was there to satisfy one's, well, urges? We filled in some blanks with our imagination. 

Adolescent boys went to the Annette Funicello "beach" movies of the early '60s and developed an erection. Many of them were probably mystified. "What is this thing that is happening with my body?" And I assure you this could bring feelings of discomfort, even anxiety. And my goodness, it didn't help that the moms of the time would be horrified if they knew their sons were having sexual feelings. 

I'll point to another movie: "Born on the Fourth of July" with Tom Cruise. Maybe the best movie to show the tragedy of the Vietnam war. But the subject here is sex. Crisis, as a lad in his teens experienced every boy's worst nightmare: Mom discovering a hidden-away "Playboy" magazine. I would argue that this type of thing inflicted real psychological harm. Am I a case study? Perhaps. This would make me a victim. 

I guess we were dealing with Victorian attitudes. 

Our fathers knew what was up. But they totally held back. Maybe they just assumed with a wry smile that the boys would turn out OK. In the meantime, hell had no fury like a mom "cleaning out her son's bedroom" and discovering a Playboy. I have read the old account of main street barbers having a Playboy tucked away for the pleasure of male customers when no women were around. 

My God, why all the stealth? Of course there must have been psychological reasons. It's just the way God created us. The inhibitions. The actual fear that boys could feel. The anxiety. 

I'm with those women who feel that porn has been totally liberating. 

In "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" we see Keaton "cruising the singles bars" to hook up with men, transitory of course, and then you-know-what. The critics told us it was a story about the excesses of the sexual revolution of the '70s. With a wink the critics were telling us this was a deep movie with a message about cultural change. Well I think the producers knew full well that people would come to the theaters because of the titillating aspect. Same with "Klute." 

Diane Keaton

So these movies had the blessing of the east coast intelligentsia. So then why did Diane Keaton want to distance herself from "Goodbar" in later years? I nodded my head when reading about that. She's really just a dreadful whore in the movie. And just because Fonda as "Bree Daniels" presented herself as a "high-priced call girl" doesn't mean her character wasn't also a dreadful whore. There was absolutely no example to be set by the characters played by Keaton and Fonda. 

Strip away the Hollywood pretension, a pretension required for marketing, and these were soft-core porn flicks, actually rather poor soft-core porn flicks. Sadly, for the young male population of the time, the movies were turn-ons. The young men just had to add their own imagination to "fill in the blanks." 

Today? Oh my Lord. A simple Internet connection is all you need to surf for the explicit stuff in the privacy of your home. Oh it is absolutely endless. Certain politicians disapprove. But I must say, males get "desensitized" and I think this is healthy for them. Hey, they are more likely to appreciate women as real people! I can't think of anything that would make "women's libbers" happier. The libbers can move on to other areas of grievance which I'm sure they'll find. 

 

Less-enlightened 

Hollywood had a way of treating prostitutes in a light way in the 1970s. An example: "The Poseidon Adventure." Remember Ernest Borgnine's squeeze? Another example: "Harry and Tonto." Remember the woman saying to Art Carney, "When was the last time you 'made it' with someone?" 

Any level of prostitution can be described with just one word: bad. It is dangerous. We were more naive in the 1970s. 

Well we lost the actress Diane Keaton recently. Talented, yes. And I can't blame her for not wanting to put forward "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" as in the forefront of her career.

 

A commenter on Reddit: "Plus it doesn’t seem like Keaton wants any involvement with this film."

 

- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com