Review: Days of Wine and Roses

Schmoozing PR man Jack Lemmon is in a job that requires him to do two things; drink and BS people. He’s really good at both. Too good, actually. Even more unfortunately, he’s just gotten involved with somewhat naïve Lee Remick, a secretary who at first is not a drinker. Lemmon changes that when he introduces choc-o-holic Remick to the wonders of the Brandy Alexander. Soon, they’re madly in love, and for a while it’s fun. Until it isn’t. Sadly, by that stage, the drinking has become a huge part of the relationship (and it had always been a part of it). Will either or both of them be able to escape their addictions before it’s too late? Charles Bickford plays Remick’s simple, firm, but caring father who has Lemmon’s number immediately but can’t do a damn thing about it. Jack Klugman (from TV’s “Odd Couple”, remembering Lemmon himself played the other part in the film version) plays a supportive, somewhat matter-of-fact AA sponsor for Lemmon.

 

There have been several very fine film portrayals of drug and alcohol addiction over the years: “The Lost Weekend”, “Leaving Las Vegas”, and the highly underrated “Clean and Sober” spring to mind. Here’s my personal favourite, though. Previously filmed for TV (by John Frankenheimer), this absolutely shattering, truly affecting 1962 Blake Edwards (“The Pink Panther”) examination of a relationship doomed due to alcohol dependency, is a must-see film. Lemmon and Remick have never been better, with the former’s likeability and comedic image working tremendously well here, in some of the most harrowing, near-unbearable scenes of his entire career. That’s including the celebrated and truly pathetic greenhouse scene, and an even more gut-wrenching scene in a hospital where Lemmon really goes all-out. It’s really quite uncomfortable at times to watch this descent into alcoholic degradation. I suppose the film is somewhat heightened at times, but I don’t think it devolves into campy melodrama. If it were any darker it’d be unbearable, and even in this form I bet it’ll be a bit too close to home for some. You could argue that the slide downhill happens a little too quickly, but then, alcohol affects different people in different ways, so I won’t call that a flaw, really. For her part, Remick has one scene of truly pathetic, unedifying degradation towards the end in a motel, that you’ll simply never forget.

 

We start off with a traditional romantic comedy set-up, before Edwards, Lemmon and Remick take us to alcoholic hell, with a horrifying, sometimes surrealistic relentlessness that seldom lets up, including its rather downbeat, open ending. Perhaps a bit too melodramatic for some, but I reckon if it were any more real, I’d need a straightjacket for myself. And it’s this innocuous-seeming set-up (though there are warning signs) that is most important, as it gives the audience an extra kick in the guts when everything starts to go sour. We care very deeply about this couple, thanks to that build-up. In fact, due to the very likeable Lemmon’s very casting you might not realise at first that he’s playing a bit of a sleaze. You probably shouldn’t care so much about him, to be perfectly honest. He’s a frankly pathetic sleaze at times, and it’s to Lemmon’s credit that this guy does actually earn your sympathy. He’s playing a well-meaning man, in some ways I suppose. But he’s really just a genial sleaze who probably has himself convinced that he’s a really swell guy…at least until things go south and the innate self-loathing creeps in. No, he’s not that nice and he clearly doesn’t like his job, saying it makes him feel like a ‘pimp’. He’s a corporate schmoozer and boozer who takes a long time to wake up to the fact that his job is part of the problem. He’s always drinking on the job, and drinking the rest of the time, too. Always drinking. ‘It makes you feel good’ Lemmon says about the booze. Yeah, for a while perhaps. This is the dark side of Lemmon’s corporate pushover in “The Apartment” with a side order of his usual neurosis as well. It’s very, very clever casting. Anyone else, and you’d probably hate this guy. Remick’s the one who truly earns your sympathy though, because she’s far more innocent. She’s a nice sweet girl who gets taken into the abyss of alcoholism simply because she hooked up with the wrong guy. Bickford, who reprises his role from the TV version, is as always, perfect in his standard role of the stoic, but well-meaning father.

 

Yes, it’s all very indicative of the 1960s in some ways, with an ideal Henry Mancini (“The Pink Panther”, “Wait Until Dark”, “Breakfast at Tiffany’s”) music score too. However, it’s actually a really ugly, and quite uncompromising film that sneaks up on you just as you think you’re set for a typical 60s Jack Lemmon romantic comedy. There’s nothing funny here folks, it’s an absolute tragedy. Don’t miss this one, it might keep you off the booze for good! Intelligent screenplay by J.P. Miller (“The Young Savages”), who also wrote the teleplay. The B&W cinematography by Philip H. Lathrop (“The Cincinnati Kid”, “Hard Times”) deserves a mention too, it’s terrific in this shattering film that although indicative of its time, isn’t exactly dated. Nominated for five Oscars including nods for Lemmon and Remick, it won for Henry Mancini and Johnny Mercer’s title song, which is actually pretty terrible if you ask me despite the score itself being tops.

 

Rating: A-