User reviews

The first time I saw this movie was in a drive-in movie when I was in high school (just make a left turn at the submarine races and you'll find it). and the film opened uniquely enough to keep me from ignoring it for better things to do.

As the opening credits rolled, the students were tossing this nice red apple across the campus, looking at it, smiling or laughing, and tossing it on to someone else. This kept up all the way through the credits until it drove you nuts. What the hell was on that apple that was so damned fascinating?!?!? Just when the credits ended, the camera angle changed over this student's shoulder and you could see that someone had carved (very neatly, mind you) into the apple, the following message: "THERE IS NO GRAVITY--THE EARTH SUCKS" I have never forgotten that opening scene nor the message on the apple because as I got older, I found that indeed; the Earth does suck--I can see it in the mirror every day.

I think everyone should see where we came from and what historically we've lived through so I recommend this movie for when you're stuck inside on one of those dreary weather days when you've got nothing to do.

There is a good point and bad point to every argument and that's what this movie is all about and remember that if we don't learn from our past then we're doomed to repeat it.

Even for its period, I found this film's attitudes to women and gay men disturbing and this took away from my appreciation of it as a well-made film which, in many ways, has its heart in the right place. Women seem expected to serve their men both domestically and sexually and Candice Bergen's character puts up with some horrendous abuse from Elliott Gould's character - more so than most liberated educated women of that time would do. Then there is a crack early on about Arizona being a good place to live because of its low rate of homosexuality. And Nick tries to get out of the draft by pretending to be a stereotypically effeminate gay man, with Gould repeatedly using the 'F' word to describe him. And then there's the argument in the last scene. I suspect the writers just wanted the academic to say something absurd but the choice they made suggests that there is something inherently wrong in being gay and/or that academia has been taken over by gay men pushing their "homosexual agenda". Of course it is then up to our heterosexual male hero to violently protest against this. Perhaps the students' rights campaigns of this time were paternalistic and homophobic and this film just reflects that, but I hope at least some of the people at that time had a more progressive way of looking at the world.

one of my favorite oldies.Candice had just left the University of Pennsylvania where she literally stopped traffic on campus because of her beauty (I actually saw it happen!).She never looked as good in films as she did in real life at that time.I believe that the line Eliot Gould uses when he's had enough of the professor's comments about Fitzgerald's homosexuality is that yes it could be possible that he was a homosexual but that it sure would be news to Sheila Graham (not Zelda) with whom he had an apparently scandalous affair when he was in Hollywood trying to make money.I was in college during that era and there its a fairly good representation of the way things were then and indicative of the nuttiness of that era

It's funny, the first 2 or 3 reviews use almost the same phrase that leaps to my mind "Candice Bergen at her most beautiful", and while the lovely Ms B certainly lights up the screen, Elliott Gould is the star, and his Trapper John persona from THE MOVIE M*A*S*H* was still strong in his acting memory. I came here after finding a smelly old copy of the paperback at a Goodwill. First I went to EBay, where some hoser has Getting Straight as BLAXPLOITATION (his caps), then I came here. I never knew it was filmed at Lane CC, but when I saw it at the Aurora Drive-In in Seattle, it was double-billed with Drive, He Said, another non-mainstream college flick which was filmed in Eugene. I enjoyed Getting Straight much more, & I'm looking forward to watching it again. And Cecil Kelloway's last role? Got to. I'll double bill it with They Might Be Giants

Harry Bailey (Elliott Gould) has returned from Vietnam looking to finish his college classes. He is a disillusioned former civil rights protester. He's short on cash and short a few credits before getting his masters to teach. He's often fighting and belittling his girlfriend Jan (Candice Bergen). The rising anti-establishment student movement wants him to join but he's more concerned with his money troubles and starting his career. His professor Dr. Edward Willhunt is close to flunking him.

An unknown Harrison Ford has a small role in this movie and he has some fluffy mutton chops. This is a drama comedy where the lead is a worn out civil rights protester struggling to move on in the real world. His weariness could be compelling but he should definitely be nicer to Jan. They don't just argue. He's emotionally bullying her. She's perfectly reasonable in her struggles and he does nothing but pour belittlement upon her. I still don't understand the test with the crazy kid. He explains it as self-destruction. I guess that's as good an explanation as any. There is one epic exchange with the dean. It's the heart of the matter. The movie needs to wrap up quicker. The Willhunt confrontation is very compelling but it steps on the same idea as the F. Scott Fitzgerald gay panic argument. One of them has to go and I would choose Willhunt. The gay panic debate is also funnier. All in all, I like Elliott Gould's performance and his character. He does need to be nicer to Jan. The movie would probably work as well without the cheating story. It's a very interesting antiwar movie while the war is roaring in real life.

The big hair and the wide collars on the shirts and suit jackets. Elliot Gould is Harry, trying to get his teaching degree. It's the end of the turbulent sixties, and he has all the usual college age (30 yrs old!) problems... no money, fighting with his girl, and his professor doesn't like him. Co-stars Candy Bergen, Jeannie Berlin, Greg Sierra. Everyone's protesting, and half of them aren't sure what they are fighting for. Lots of fast talking. His friends are getting drafted or trying to get out of it. Somehow. Directed by Richard Rush; would be nominated for two oscars for Stuntman ten years after this.based on the novel by Robert Kaufman, Ken Kolb .

Elliott Gould is bemused and colorful as a Vietnam veteran back in college, stuck between a rock and a hard place; he's working semi-seriously towards getting his teaching credentials, and yet is stymied both by his fellow classmates who want to protest the hypocrisies of the Establishment (with Gould's help) and also by his instructors, hypocrites in power who work by a double standard. Director Richard Rush occasionally does fluid work, and the film has fervently funny and thoughtful scenes, however Robert Kaufman's hot-headed screenplay, adapted from Ken Kolb's novel, is awash with half-realized ideas. The kids sound off violently against the university's directors, but we're never made aware of what they want done about their concerns. Made during an era wherein young people hoped to change the world (as well as get laid), the characters in this picture are nevertheless just sounding-boards for the writer. Topics are brought up not to be discussed but to be challenged--and in these cases, the kids are just as blind as their professional elders. Gould's shaggy character rants and raves, too, but his Harry Bailey presents a different problem: he cheats, he lies, he cuts corners, he heartily embraces his own set of values and yet is happily corrupt! A hypocrite himself, Bailey loves teaching, loves kids, but he doesn't see his own shortcomings...and I'm not sure the filmmakers do, either. Bailey is a one-sided writer's creation (and oddly, for a movie filled with so many liberal stances, Bailey--like many of the other characters--is anti-female and homophobic). Candice Bergen gives a wan performance as Gould's shiksa goddess girlfriend who doesn't like being called a WASP and who would give up everything to be a wife in the suburbs. Bergen is continually put down for that, as if she's a sellout, and yet how exactly would Gould live if he were to achieve his dream of being a high school teacher? As it is, he can't even pay the rent on his apartment. The riot sequences are staged for utter seriousness, filmed and edited with precision, and yet they don't come organically out of this story; they are interjected for shock value. The rage presented here is convincing, but the cause is confusing. These students don't seem to want peace at all, and neither does director Rush. The narrative is pushed towards violence for no other purpose except to vividly stage two movie riots. This is exploitation, and the crummy feeling one gets from the picture can be related right back to the people behind it: they're hypocrites, too. ** from ****

Considering what this film was about I was quite surprised how well the film and its ideology stand up today.

There are several reasons why. Firstly, the film doesn't present the student establishment as 100% right and the establishment/teachers as 100% wrong. This is because the film's central character Harry Bailey is presented as belonging somewhere in the middle. On one hand he's dismayed by the establishment's inabilities to understand what the students actually want but on the other hand he's dispirited by the students protesting on frivolous issues as well as a hint of double standards within the movement.

A good example of this is the character of Dr. Wilhunt who opposes Harry's move into teaching. While portrayed in the wrong, he's not a one-dimensional monster but someone who is realistic about how much a teacher can change students' morals while teaching english grammar.

In fact it's Harry's friend, hippie Nick Philbert, who brings him down when after attempting to avoid the draft, he joins the Marines and turns into a moralistic, gung-ho youth. Only at the end of the film does Harry realise what an unworthy, crazy person he is. It could've been easy for the film to make Dr. Wilhunt as the one who brings Harry down but it avoids the easy path and shows us that there are untrustworthy people everywhere in society whether they be young, old, conservative or radical.

Then there is the character of Harry Bailey who's in virtually every scene in the film. Again the film doesn't portray him as some flawless character who fights against the conservative establishment for noble causes. Instead we get someone who's intelligent, compassionate and idealistic but who also has traits of selfishness and foolishness. That he's a realistic, believeable, flawed but likeable person helps the film immesuarably. A lot of this credit must go to Elliott Gould who's excellent in the role.

Special note must be of the direction and cinematography which make the film look both stylish and fluid.Particularly impressive is the use of focussing on more then one object or character in the same shot as it's cleverly used to make points about events or people in narrational terms instead of words.

All in all a superb film and especially so when compared to another student film of the same era, the inept RPM.

An old-fashioned, talkative film full of clichés, with infuriating characters constantly shouting instead of talking, in which we go around in circles for more than 2 hours to get back to the starting point! Totally useless!

Just to say that this is one of the good movies that still holds up well. Richard Rush (director) didn't make many movies, but he did well with many of them. The screenplay is often excellent and Elliot Gould is usually excellent. There aren't many other good roles or performances, but that doesn't in my opinion bring the film very far down below good.

Gould's acting in this story about student protests and "riots" in the late 60s is about as good as he got (gets?) - and that is very good.

Technically the movie's first rate. Photography, cutting, timing. All good.

I hope this show gets more credit as time goes on.

Too bad Richard Rush doesn't make more movies. He's got a fantastic style, as can be seen in the more recent "The Stunt Man" and this movie should have retained a "classic" status. Set in the campus riot era, Harry Bailey only seeks to fulfill his dream of becoming a teacher, molding another Salinger and making enough to live on. He can't be bothered with the idealistic ravings of his younger friends and fellow students until he see "it's not what you do that counts, it's what you are". Check out this totally superb performance of Elliot Gould's. Even if you find the movie dated and somewhat silly, Gould is extraordinary. Unfortunately Candy Bergen has about one decent scene, the rest of the time her acting is very trying. The rest of the actors are right on though, especially a very young Harrison Ford.

While it would be easy for many to catagorize "Getting Straight" as a period film,it nonetheless is a timeless homage to those poor souls who are casual victims of circumstance.

From the beginning of the movie we see as protagonist Harry Bailey is set upon by all of his much younger and very politically naive fellow college students who think that if only Harry would join up with them,then their causes of the moment would be complete.It doesn't dawn upon these people that Harry is much older,with a completely different set of priorities than he had before going off to fight in the Vietnam war.

At this time in Harrys life,he wants to finish his masters degree in order to be given a teaching credential.Once he gets this,he can go about the business of molding future system challengers and left-wing banner carriers.

The only thing that stands in his way is his own naivite and egalitarian mind-set that he has reserved for all but himself.

"Getting Straight" shows us all the inevitable complications of fence-sitting and ignoring our potential in life.

Elliot Gould salvages what is otherwise a very mediocre movie. Candice Bergen's early reputation as a bad actress was molded in part by this film, where virtually the only thing she does in Getting Straight is whine, whine, & whine. I remember watching this film for the first time, and thinking to myself "Will somebody PLEASE slap her?" Her father's dummies, Charlie McCarthy & Mortimer Snerd, were better actors than her, and made better movies. Elliot Gould did M*A*S*H that same year, and built a well-deserved reputation as an excellent actor, even though he's had his cinematic ups-and-downs since then, like most actors. His work in Getting Straight is excellent, but unfortunately is balanced out by a typically bad performance by Candice Bergen.

This so-called exploitive campus revolt film from 1970 actually has some wonderful things going on in it. (I can't believe I still have the soundtrack and recently got the video). Elliott Gould was at the peak of whatever powers he had as leading man, without Donald Sutherland to play off (M.A.S.H.) or Dyan Cannon(B&C&T&A - supporting role), and he's perfect as Harry (who I think is in every scene). Candice Bergen was never more beautiful (still learning to act after five years in film - and right before Carnal Knowledge), and throw in Jeannie Berlin, Harrison Ford (not boring for a change), and a host of other young up-and-comers at the time, along with Jeff Corey (James Dean's acting teacher, who played elder Hickock in In Cold Blood, and Wild Bill Hickock in Little Big Man) as Gould's semi-mentor, with campus revolt in a frenetic, casual (until later) sort of way.

I know a lot of people worship The Stunt Man directed by the same man, Richard Rush ten years later ( and that film is better than this; but not that great), but he did have his own style (I'm not sure what happened to his sensibilities or career). Throw in Robert F. Lyons as Gould's buddy (does anybody remember that guy?) and there's real possibilities, not politically, but in those areas of film that carry over into thought and heart and hope. This is not even close to being a definitive campus revolt flick from that time, but it has aspects (every other scene almost) that have stature ABOUT real topics with semi-interesting characters along the way, without taking SIDES about Viet Nam or rebellion. If you come across it, you'll find some other actresses and actors that were well on their way (if yo're interested in that) and the ending is strange, but somehow appropriate in an uplifting and yet depressing way. It's worth anyone's time who is, at all, interested in that time period (concerning youth vs. establishment). To make a long story short, it's not some dopey, campus comedy with nudity and platitudes and wise-cracks (except for a few scenes concerning Gould's car and landlady).

It's nothing important to convey the ideals, emotions, and contemporary feel of that era, but it hits some spaces and is also funny in a human way that is appropriately not cynical (even for then).

A counter culture movie if there ever was one from 1970 starring Elliot Gould & Candace Bergen. Gould is a college student hoping to get his masters in teaching but is thwarted at every turn (fiscal; he owes tuition, emotional; he can't quite commit to Bergen in the way she wants, political; being the epicenter of all things protest, especially since the Vietnam War was in full swing, Gould won't take a stand). Taking place during what seems a few days which are winding down to his finals (which will determine if he'll get a degree to pursue his passion), everything continues to pile up on poor Gould till he break out in impassioned speeches which seem not to sway anyone regardless. Gould, feeling like a more assertive Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman's character in The Graduate), never engenders much empathy since he reacts only when he's cornered & his make-up (conning his way through bills & books he'll most likely never pay for) put him on the outs for me as a protag to root for. Also starring some guy named Harrison Ford as a fellow student, Max Julien (from The Mack) as another, the late, great Gregory Sierra as one of Gould's students (he teaches an ESL like course) & Jeff Corey & Cecil Kellaway as teachers at the university.

Mind you this film IS thirty years old and reflects what was "politically correct" for that era. We do see the early signs of the change from hippie to yuppie. Remember Jerry Rubin's conversion to capitalism? It doesn't wear well however, thirty years of wear at our ardor and idealism shows this film to be a faded glory. If a young person that wasn't around for the march from "the summer of love"; through "is Paul dead"; "Kent State"; and Watergate; and wants to see 1970 through a looking glass.. Just remember that you're looking at a different world.

Harry may have been on side of civil rights and more freedoms for students but he's extremely sexist. Saying multiple times that women shouldn't be allowed to read.

Candice Bergen was very pretty in this role but her acting not so much. Her job was mostly to laugh and cry hysterically. I would have been more interested in this story from Jan's point of view.

The sixties were a radical time which left an indelible mark on American culture!! Underneath all the tumultuousness and counter culture extremism of the 1960's, was the rudimentary need to cogently clarify our nation's privileges which are pertinent to the freedom of individual expression!! The movie "Getting Straight" illustrates how a bunch of young students went to college to learn something, above all else, they should have learned the myriad of desirable prerogatives to a democracy!! Elliot Gould plays a disgruntled and maverick associate professor who is baffled by the college's late twentieth century version of totalitarianism! This film depicts how the polarization of prevailing opinions between the student body of the university, and the faculty, was ubiquitously alarming!! This movie articulates the element of non-cohesiveness with all of the major characters in this film!! The sixties were a time of change, hence, change meant uncertainty.. Why was there such a vehement protestation to the war in Vietnam? For the simple reason that most Americans felt that we did not belong there!! The rumination of concepts that Elliot Gould engaged in left him with a precarious pot luck stew of convoluted ideologies!! Alternative philosophies which had galvanized the American youth could no longer be swept under the rug!! Ultimately, Elliot Gould had to come to grips with the fact that in your life, it does not matter what you do, but, it matters who you are!! Candace Bergen plays his love interest, as well as his succor for comprehending social changes!! The two of them are constantly stalemated by perpetual revolutionary pontifications which they are barraged with on an ephemeral basis!! It stands to reason that a happy ending in a movie such as this would bring on a bevy of unresolved perplexities of rebellion!! Both of these characters don't know what they want in life, but, they know what they don't want in life!! Such a plight cultivated a pleasant solace for both of these free spirited societal malcontents (Candace Bergen and Elliot Gould). I liked this movie, and I felt that the basic concept to this film evoked an individualism which accommodated the era in which it was made!! Effective acting performances made this film an empathetic précis of entertainment for virtually everyone who watched it... I give it a 10!!

Director Richard Rush had an incredible style, and the first half of GETTING STRAIGHT showcases his kind of handing-off of camera movements within either subtle shots of action, like an apple being passed from student to student in the opening credits in the central hippie college, to random conversations...

For instance, an envelope is dropped on a machine and as the person who set it in place is speaking, the person answering is on the other side, where that letter wound up: a beautiful baton-passing flow that would peak with THE STUNT MAN...

But you can't make a miracle out of the sixties, because hippies are simply the most uninteresting characters to ever wind up on film, ironically dying to be independent-minded and free, they're all cookie-cutter machines... and while each look like they're wearing costumes in recent movies, they even looked made up/put-together back then, when it was really going on (mainly because an actor will go from this movie to an episode of Gunsmoke)...

Centered on a very uncomfortable-looking, horribly unattractive Elliott Gould, with big lips and bushy eyebrows matching a bushy mustache and about ten years too old for the role of a student revolutionary who was somehow in Vietnam and now wants to be a teacher... looking the age of someone who has been a teacher for a decade...

He's just horribly miscast here, spouting 1960's platitudes to his so-called fellow students, and, while he does stand out from the younger hippies (including Harrison Ford, John Rubinstein and Max Julien)... being that he's sarcastically obnoxious and selfishly neurotic like the establishment he's supposed to be so against... director Rush cannot make these people interesting beyond the first twenty-minutes.