Scanialara
You won't be disappointed!
Humaira Grant
It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Billy Ollie
Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable
SnoopyStyle
Blinded since birth, Don Baker (Edward Albert) has a place in San Francisco. It's the first time he's living away from his overprotective mother (Eileen Heckart). His free-spirit neighbor Jill Tanner (Goldie Hawn) visits and is surprised by his blindness. She's a 19 year old aspiring actress divorcée. They get together and then his mother visits.Goldie Hawn is the definition of free-spirit IT girl. It's a fine pairing that heightens when they are joined by Heckart. Her entry just elevates the humor to another level but it becomes more than a comedy. Goldie takes a turn that takes the story into good emotional drama. Heckart rides this roller-coaster role. This has a bit of characters-stuck-in-a-room feel from its source material as a play. Nevertheless, these are compelling characters.
Emil Bakkum
The film Butterflies are free appeals to me notably because of the scenery, which is flower power life in the roaring (last) years of the sixties. You know you are in California, when your pet has its own psychiatrist. This does not imply that the story is outdated or not timeless. However, certain elements do personate the typical spirit of the time, such as the general acceptance of sexual licentiousness ("This would be fun with a few more people"). They are embodied mainly by the female character Jill. Even though she is nineteen years old, she has already been married, albeit for only six days. It were the two most glorious days of her life. She loves to experiment, and has been both a hippie and a young republican (she concludes: "There are no young republicans"). She dresses in the flower power fashion, and lives within the counter culture movement. The male character Don is plain and common, and is exceptional merely due to his blindness. He goes skydiving in order to scare the hell out of his dog (just kidding; he does not have a dog). Jill and Don meet in the apartment, that they share. The apartment is as colorful as Jill, thanks to its former inhabitants who were hippies. Don lives on his own, with the financial support of his mother. This impresses Jill. She falls for Don, and within half an hour she seduces him. However, already the next day she is vexed by second thoughts ("Do you know that the ceiling needs painting?"), and decides to move house again. This plunges Don into an emotional crisis. Let me reflect on that. In general I like to ponder about film scripts, in order to extract a hidden message or meaning. Unfortunately it is difficult to make sense of the Butterfly narrative. Although Jill dominates the relationship, she is evidently as immature as Don. The events are unbalanced, and volatile. Even the peeping toms are booing them. Is this a portrayal of a belated adolescence? Indeed, the naivete saves Butterflies from being perverse. Note that the film is an adaptation of a screen play, and little attempt has been made to enhance the dynamics in space and time and to include captivating cinematic effects. At least the reviews are worthwhile.
fedor8
The first half is really tedious, full of fluffy dialog. Once the blind guy's mother walks in things liven up, and from then on things are more interesting, though at the price of being decidedly soap-operatic. Much of the dialog of conflict reminds of soap-operas; it's the same old lines and attitudes that we've heard and seen a million times before. The guy playing the bondman is okay but somewhat bland, and not really a match for a young, spunky Goldie Hawn. She is cute and charming, and does her best, but there is a limit to what she can do with her stereotypical character; she plays one of those free-spirited, cheerful, young hippie girls with a good heart - a moronic cliché in the movies of that era. There is also little that Hawn can do with the mediocre script; instead of creating a script that exploits the comedic possibilities by creating humorous exchanges between characters, the writer has opted for a safe and easier way: schmaltzy melodrama, with the dialog occasionally being somewhat witty, but never funny. The ultra-dated and annoying hippie-era clichés that creep in on a regular basis don't help, either; it's clear that this was written by some left-wing Hollywood bozo.
gpburdell
I really enjoyed the movie, but one thing I noticed and appreciated was the long shots. Modern movies usually are changing angles and context every few seconds; while like a play, this movie will hold a shot for minutes at a time. I think it shows the strength of the actors, while most contemporary movies can mask poor acting with editing. This is especially true towards the end of the movie, in the scene where Don and Jill confront each other's feelings. I was amazed at how Goldie was able to hold the emotion of the scene and keep me drawn in for such an extended period. I've never been a big Goldie fan, but I had never seen this movie until recently. I have to say this movie changes my opinion and makes we wonder what other films of hers from this period are like.
