Where's Poppa? (1970) User Reviews (55)

Once Upon a Time there was a school of American Black Comedy

[Gavno · 7/10 · 23 May 2004]

...and it produced some low budget, but VERY memorable films. The genre seems to have been based around New York City. Most of them owe more than a little bit to the '60s vintage British version of Cinema Verite expressed in films like A TASTE OF HONEY and THE L SHAPED ROOM... and further back yet to the French films like THE 400 BLOWS.

The Americans added humor to the mix.

LITTLE MURDERS, THE PRODUCERS, and THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS were some of the better known products. They were made by directors and actors who had huge amounts of enthusiasm, social commentary crying out to be expressed, and intelligence... but not a whole mountain of money to put their visions on film.

They spun off major studio products with big name actors and production values like A NEW LEAF, HAROLD AND MAUDE, and PETE 'N TILLIE.

Enter WHERE'S PAPPA?... one of the "transition" films, firmly between the "No budget" New York stuff, and the later "Low Budget" Hollywood productions that they spawned.

Like MOST of the genre, WHERE'S PAPPA? takes on a sacred cow... dealing with older, dependent relatives (in this case, the hero's mother), and saying the things about it that we ALL think but DON'T DARE say out loud for fear of being thought a monster. In this case, we wrestle with the decision to put Mama into a nursing home. A hard choice... but it has it's comic aspects, which get explored fully.

George Siegel does a GREAT job in the lead, the perfect foil for Ruth Gordon. Ron Liebman's a standout as Siegel's brother. As in his roles in UP THE ACADEMY and WON TON TON, THE DOG WHO SAVED Hollywood, Liebman shows off a deft skill in handling comedic material.

Incidentally... look for Garrett Morris from the original Saturday NIGHT LIVE crew as a mugger in Central Park!

____________________________________________________________

BTW... I'm editing this review after the fact, because I made an interesting discovery about the film.

There are at least TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS of it out there.

Having watched the TV version for a long time, when I recently came up with a copy of the Laserdisc version I was startled to see that the ending on the disc is completely different, and somewhat longer!

In a totally unsettling and quite uncomfortable way, it completely reverses the commonly seen ending's decision and solution to the story's central problem... and today, it would probably earn an R rating... if it's implications didn't get the original ending CENSORED, that is! The Freudian hints left a bad taste for me... I can see exactly WHY the filmmakers changed it.

____________________________________________________________

If irreverence is your bag, you'll enjoy WHERE'S POPPA?

Carl Reiner's black comedy

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 29 July 2020]

New York lawyer Gordon Hocheiser (George Segal) takes care of his senile mother (Ruth Gordon). He dreams of killing her off. Her latest caretaker has quit. He hires nurse Louise Callan who has lost every patient. She's a strange bird and his dream girl.

This is an early directing effort from Carl Reiner. It's a black comedy. There are moments of high hilarity. I love both Segal and Gordon. At points, Segal runs out of energy but that is mostly due to the female lead, Trish Van Devere. Her energy is usually reserved with a dash of sadness. I wouldn't Carl's directions are that great either. Despite the few hilarious moments, I just can't ship this couple. They don't have chemistry. I also don't love Gordon. I would be more intrigued if he's more driven. I had a tough time getting into these characters.

Uneven

[jeremy3 · 5/10 · 7 October 2006]

When I read the review before viewing this video, it said that "it was one of the funniest movies" ever. It turned out to not be that funny at all. I hardly cracked a smile. The movie rambled on with seemingly no point. The mother (played by Gordon) was a completely "nutcase". The brother in the movie just seemed to have no personality whatsoever. The mugging/arrest scenes just seemed to not do anything for the movie. The Rob Reiner scene was "overboard" and didn't have anything really to do with the movie (except that Rob is Carl, the director's, son). However, I will give it at least a 5, for this reason. Seagal plays the kind of man who was disappearing in 1970. I think his character was Jewish, but even if he wasn't, it shows the kind of loyalty that immigrant families had towards the elderly. His character had a terrible life. Probably the best scene was when Seagal bring his Mom to the first "old people's home". Paul Sorvino steals the movie, in a brief role, as a "brass knuckle" independent caretaker of the elderly, who is overworked, but doesn't seem to care about the people he is taking care of. The movie, in the end, does show the dilemmas of caring for an elderly parent, but was not that great, otherwise.

An incomparable classic

[clemenza51 · 29 July 2001]

After reading some of the negative comments on this film,I felt I must add a comment or two,myself. God bless you,Carl Reiner for taking one of the most laugh out loud novels (By Robert Klane) and turning it into my favorite black comedy classic. My mother,God rest her, was,in many ways very similar to Ruth Gordon's masterful portrayal. While my Mother was still alive,I found many reasons to laugh at some of her shennanagins,especially her treatment of me,and now that she's passed,I have fond,funny memories that if it were not for this film,I'd have spent a lot more time in therapy than I had to. Criticising the film,It's direction,or any of the actor's performences is,to me,ridiculous and can only be a lack of knowledge of the art of acting or cinema in general. Is it the greatest comedy ever produced? No. But it certainly is among the most unique. On newer prints,however,I would avoid the last few minutes of the film,as it does change the overall flavor,and should have ended as it did in it's theatrical releases. Just turn the tape off as you hear the song,"I Don't want to go like this,so I'll just go like that..."

Serious social problem trivialized.

[PWNYCNY · 6/10 · 1 September 2010]

There are movies that withstand the test of time and then there are movies that don't. This movie is in the latter category. When first released in 1970 tastes were somewhat different, the problems of the frail elderly were perhaps less discussed and certainly were not on the front burner of our collective consciousness. So, not surprisingly, the movie was well received, hailed as a hilarious comedy and George Segal and the rest of the cast were accorded much praise for their performances. Yet there is little that one can find funny about this movie today. Not that the characters in and of themselves aren't funny, they are. It's just that it's hard to laugh at a story in which the behavior of a frail elderly senile woman is treated as a subject for humor. Okay, the son is frustrated and overwhelmed but is that really funny? It's not campy. Anyone who has had to care for an aging relative knows that humor is not part of the package. Maybe it was in 1970 but not now. It's too big of a problem and effects too many families.

Outrageous Comedy (and Yet Not Badly Crafted)

[romanorum1 · 6/10 · 15 November 2013]

The answer to the title is "He's dead." New York bachelor Gordon Hocheiser (George Segal) awakens by alarm clock on a typical week day and prepares for work as usual. But then he dresses into a gorilla suit and enters his aged mother's bedroom in hope of scaring her to death while she awakens. But Mrs. Hocheiser (Ruth Gordon) punches Gordon in his groin. Doubling over in pain, he is momentarily disabled. Gordon, a not-too-successful attorney, has the unenviable task of being responsible for his widowed mother, who most unfortunately is both senile and vulgar. She has ruined all aspects of Gordon's love life. Years earlier Gordon and his married brother Sidney (Ron Liebman) had to promise their dying father never to place Momma in a (dreaded) nursing home. The burden fell on Gordon as Momma aged badly.

Although all of the previous home nurses have quit because of the coarse antics of the impossible mother, Gordon's hopes revive when he immediately hires sweet young applicant Louise Callan (Trish Van Devere). Love appears at first sight. Louise explains that most of her previous patients have died, and that she divorced her husband after only 32 hours of marriage for a distasteful reason not mentioned here. No matter says Gordon, who would pay no heed if the nurse killed off his Momma. The demented Mrs. Hocheiser fouls things up for Gordon from the very start. One of her crude actions is to pull Gordon's pants and underwear down and bite his rear end in front of Louise at dinner. Along the way Gordon's brother Sidney provides limited emotional support. To help his brother on more than one occasion, Sidney often rushes out of his house and cuts across Central Park, where he is often mugged by the same black toughs. Mrs. Hocheiser's antics finally get to Louise, who tells Gordon that she is leaving. To save his sanity and his situation with Louise, Gordon becomes so despondent and physically broken that he cannot adequately function in a court of law. Finally Gordon decides that he cannot care for Momma any longer.

This black comedy treats the criminal acts of rape and mugging crassly, but also conveys grave undertones that became manifested after the mid-twentieth century. The question was: How do we care for our senior citizens, who are beginning to live to advanced ages in great numbers? Then the idea of such support groups as assisted living centers and visiting nurses associations had not really sprouted. Nursing homes were the only alternatives; today they still are the option for most. The subject was seriously addressed – even if an easy solution was not forthcoming – in "I Never Sang for My Father" (1970), starting Gene Hackman and Melvin Douglas. In that somber film Hackman was a widower/professor, controlled by his aged but still domineering and stubborn father Douglas, who wanted his son to care for him (at the expense of his own fulfillment).

Ruth Gordon was quite successful in her later career, turning out good performances in "Rosemary's Baby" (1968), "Whatever Happened to Aunt Alice?" (1969), and, of course, "Where's Poppa?" George Segal acted in many films, including "King Rat" (1965), "California Split" (1974), and "Rollercoaster" (1977). Supporting roles of note in "Where's Poppa?" include that of Rob Reiner, son of director Carl, as a hippie activist on trial, and Paul Sorvino as a neurotic nursing home administrator/proprietor. Their vignettes are very good. Reiner of course became famous on "All in the Family." All 6'2 ½" of Sorvino appeared in such films as "The Gambler" (1974), "That Championship Season" (1982), and "Goodfellas" (1990). Warning: No holds are barred with this tasteless movie. Rating is based upon the "Momma?" and "Poppa?" denouement, not the alternative ending, which is perverse.

Running almost exclusively on bad taste...

[JasparLamarCrabb · 7/10 · 17 October 2013]

Running almost exclusively on bad taste, Carl Reiner's way ahead of its time comedy is a must see. George Segal is a lawyer at this wits end dealing with senile mother Ruth Gordon. He fantasizes about having her committed or even murdered. He attempts to scare her to death but fails at every turn. His brother, loony Ron Leibman is of no help. Nurse and babysitter Trish van Devere finally helps Segal figure things out. There's so much black humor thrown at you, it's almost breathless and there's no topic off limits...rape, homosexuality, kidnapping, elderly abuse...and on & on. Segal is perfect in his role as a walking nervous breakdown & van Devere is ravishing (even while telling of the very disturbing reason for her failed marriage). Gordon steals the film and is both comic and disturbing. Some of her behavior is beyond outré...catch her suckling at Segal's bare bottom! It's as cringe inducing as it is hysterical. Paul Sorvino and Vincent Gardenia has very unsettling cameos.

Modern comedy-of-ills...awash in the new permissiveness, but looking scroungy and scattered

[moonspinner55 · 4/10 · 2 September 2009]

New York attorney plots to rid himself of his senile mother after meeting an attractive, available woman. Screenwriter Robert Klane, adapting his own novel (the kind of paperback kids would buy for the dirty parts), doesn't seem to have any knowledge of mental illness: to him, it's just an excuse for prurient comedy and scatological jokes, of which director Carl Reiner is apparently also a fan. George Segal--who, in the 1960s, starred mostly in war and espionage pictures--had by this time become one of America's greatest sad-sack comedians; his nutty reactions and batty responses rival only his mother's inscrutabilities. Segal is paired well with Trish Van Devere, and their moments of connection (though also played for laughs) are really the only sequences one can gravitate towards. Ruth Gordon, lovable as is she, is simply around too much--and more of her amounts to less. This is one of the worst-directed and edited films I have seen from so-called professionals. Promising scenes which ultimately don't play out for the full effect are then haphazardly disconnected from other moments which flail around endlessly, causing the crass, rickety movie to self-destruct long before it's actually over. *1/2 from ****

One of the funniest movies of all time

[gitano1 · 10/10 · 19 July 2008]

I saw this movie originally in 1970. It was a co-feature with a movie called Sunday Bloody Sunday which is what we actually went to see. When this film came on my first reaction was, What the hell! Within minutes I was laughing and the laughs never stopped. I lived in Seattle at the time, but I had grown up in New York City, so the events of the film had a special cache for me. The parts that occurred within Central Park were incredibly funny, and the Taxicab scene is a true classic. I have seen a lot of films in the intervening years and have attempted several time to find a copy of this film (I was finally successful this morning). Despite the years since first seeing it and all that I have seen since nothing has ever topped this film for just plain fun. Carl Reiner is a true comic genius.

Low key nostalgic comedy

[sinclair-64549 · 7/10 · 5 October 2022]

From a very young Rob Reiner (and a tiny cameo by his fiance Penny Marshall), to jokes about rape, this is obviously a product of a very specific window in history. Reiner's character goes off on a World War II officer regarding the draft, black crime is everywhere (almost it's own character) and women are emotional, needy, and can't figure out anything without a man. Sex is considered creepy and weird, and therefore mentioning porn is supposed to have a huge audience shock value. Sorry, no, there's no actual sex, besides an off screen rape, shown. The movie opens with a scene of Gordon being woken up by a clock radio, with the New York radio show "Rambling with Gambling" playing. I remember that show growing up in New Jersey in the 1960s, so that brought a smile to my face right away. The rest of the movie kind of diddled along. I have an elderly mother, so I could relate to Gordon's feelings somewhat. I felt sorry for the guy! With the star power and the funny moments and the nostalgia, I think it's a solid seven.

Makes You Miss The Daring, Wonderfully Made Movies of the '70's

[alfiefamily · 5/10 · 16 February 2007]

"Where's Poppa" is one of those films that you know could never be produced by a major studio today. It, along with "Harold and Maude" (which coincidentally also starred Ruth Gordon), belonged to a rare, lost breed of film that celebrated black comedy.

It was irreverent, and explored social issues(Alzheimer's, caring for the elderly, rape, feeling trapped in life) that nobody explored seriously for another decade. Although one would not ordinarily think of a Carl Reiner film as daring, or controversial, that is exactly what this film is.

George Segal is Gordon, a mid-thirtyish, semi-successful lawyer who is the guardian of his mother, who is clearly starting to be going through some sort of dementia. He has a brother who is only peripherally any help to him. Gordon realizes that his life is helplessly over, as long as his mother is around.

Trish Van Devere plays Louise, a not so very good nurse (all of her patients have died on her), who is Gordon's Florence Nightingale. Gordon and Louise fall in love, but cannot seem to get together because she knows she cannot compete with Momma.

The ending is a little bit of a cop out and too predictable. I have seen the alternate ending and have found that to be much more interesting and shocking. Although I'm sure that audiences in 1970 would have been repulsed.

The acting is first rate here. Not only are Segal and Gordon terrific, but there is outstanding supporting work from Ron Liebmann, Paul Sorvino, Barnard Hughes, Rob Reiner (with ex-wife Penny Marshall sitting behind him), and Vincent Guardino.

Not a perfect movie by any means, but a wonderful treasure from a time when filmmakers were more interested in communicating to an audience, and not just looking to have a huge opening weekend at the box office.

A True Comic Classic!

[VivienLeighsnumber1fan · 9/10 · 6 June 2002]

The brothers Hocheiser make a solemn promise to their dying father that they will "never put their mother (Ruth Gordon) in a home." But brother Gordon (George Siegel) gets stuck with the old dingbat and she is wrecking his life. His law practice is falling apart, his sex life nonexistent, and he can't even hire a nurse to take care of the wacko. Then, suddenly, a nurse-- the girl of his dreams comes along, but mother has other ideas. This wonderful, creative, hilarious 1970 classic comedy directed by Carl Reiner with its gallows humor could not be made today. We have lost much of our artistic freedom to political correctness, commercial timidity and lack of creative talent. But don't take my word for it, ask Mel Brooks who has remarked that some of his movies could not be made today either. Fortunately we can get the video. The movie does require a somewhat offbeat taste to appreciate. Everything and everyone is in a kind of reality warp, the Hocheiser family, the Central Park muggers, the police, the nurse Louise (Patricia Van Devere). The movie is also comment on life in America in 1970, and on how family members manipulate each other with guilt. Finally, I like the ending the movie was released with, it really does work better artistically.

9/10

1970 87 minutes Rated:R CC.

fun, mostly due to the actors involved.

[ksf-2 · 7/10 · 18 November 2022]

It's funny, mostly because of the actors involved. It's pretty light on story. George segal did a ton of films in between virginia woolf and his television series. And anytime ruth gordon is involved, you know it's going to be a goofy, offbeat film. Have you seen harold and maude, or rosemary's baby? So gordon (segal) hires louise (trish van de vere) to look after his mother (gordon). But he's already fallen in love with louise, and wants to marry her. It's a bit walter mitty-ish... every now and then, it goes into fantasy mode, where we see what gordon is thinking. But it's not actually happening. The running gag where gordon's brother keeps getting mugged in the park. Lots of sight gags, where the taxi won't pick up the black lady, but is perfectly willing to pick up the guy in a gorilla suit. A statement of the times. Small role for rob reiner, the director's son. A couple years before his big break all in the family. The trivia section tells us rob's wife penny marshall was a courtroom spectator. Garrett morris is one of the thugs in the park. Ron leibman is sidney. Vincent gardenia. All kind of cussing in this one, and some pretty rough stuff. And a gay cop, who sends flowers to sidney. In 1970. It's so odd, i would have thought it was written by ruth gordon. But it's not. Directed by the awesome carl reiner, who some know as allen brady on the dick van dyke show. Written by robert klane, who also wrote weekend at bernie's. Van de vere and ruth gordon both made awesome episodes of "columbo"... check em out!

Dumb, third-rate comedy

[rcraig62 · 2/10 · 5 January 2005]

In the opening sequence of "Where's Poppa?", George Segal rises from his bed one morning, shaves, showers, puts on a gorilla suit and goes into his mother's bedroom, we realize later, to give her a massive heart attack that will kill her and get her out of his life forever. This is about the level of humor one can expect from most of this picture: insanity, blended with what might be taken as morbid daring.

Segal plays a New York attorney who lives with his supposedly senile mother (Ruth Gordon), whose life is further complicated when, while hiring a nurse to care for the old bag, meets the girl of his dreams, the pleasantly prim Trish Van Devere, decked out like Florence Nightingale. His dilemma: how to integrate the lovely nurse into his and his pesky mother's life.

Segal's performance is about the only thing holding the picture together. His frustrations, his reactions, his comic timing is almost peerless (whatever happened to that guy?); where the film fails is in other areas. Ruth Gordon's characterization is dreadful as the mother. At the beginning, you can't figure out if her character is senile or just being deliberately vague to keep her son from moving out. By the end, it's clear she's just nuts. When Segal brings Van Devere home to meet her, Gordon's eyebrows furrow and she gets a mean, sinister look. She wants the intruder in her son's life removed; she's calculating. This is not the mode of a senile person. You're not getting a consistent performance throughout the picture, which is probably the director's (Carl Reiner) fault as much as Gordon's. Ruth Gordon's old lady in "Rosemary Baby" is much more successful because with the kind of ingratiating, cloying person that Ruth Gordon generally plays, the audience responds to her as annoying. But when Mia Farrow is too timid to fight back, Gordon becomes more cloying, her fangs dig deeper and deeper and we're frightened for Farrow; this kind of imposition is genuinely terrifying. Here, we're being asked to laugh at what we'd normally find annoying, and if Gordon played it as helplessly nutty all the way, we might. But she's selfish and mean as well, and it dampens what little humor there is.

There are a few good laughs, though. A courtroom scene with Barnard Hughes as a military officer and Rob Reiner as a counterculture punk is fairly hilarious, and Vincent Gardenia does a nice turn as a Lombardiesque football coach. There's also an inspired bit where Segal's brother (Ron Liebman), having been stripped naked by muggers on his way to Segal's place, asks him for something for to wear home- and he gives him the gorilla suit.

But of a lot of the script is poorly conceived and simply doesn't make sense. Why is a New York lawyer with his own practice even living at home in the first place? Why does Segal, if his mother is senile, try to reason with her logically: "If you spoil this for me, I'll punch your f---ing heart out." Why does Liebman keep cutting through the park if he knows he's going to get mugged? Why does he take a taxi after leaving Segal's with gorilla suit? Why wasn't he taking taxis all along? A funnier bit would have been Liebman, as the gorilla, terrorizing the muggers. Why does Van Devere keep coming back- after her first husband was a kook, why does she want to get involved with this bunch? I suppose if I put this to Carl Reiner, he'd say, 'These are crazy people, they don't have to make sense.' Which is a convenient way to excuse a lousy script that's full of holes. The characters' moment-to-moment behavior may not have to make sense, but their motivations do, and that's where "Where's Poppa?" falls apart; the situations are created just to have the gag, and the gags are mostly one-shots, they don't build to anything.

Carl Reiner is the most guilty in this whole fiasco. How he has acquired this vaunted reputation as a pillar of comedy puzzles me; basically, his career has been to hold a microphone in front of Sid Caesar and Mel Brooks while they talk in funny voices. His son Rob has ten times the skill and intelligence as a director. In show-biz terms, Reiner pushes buttons; a monkey could do his job. And that is most apparent in his framing of the action. Why is all of New York shot in tight and in close-ups, but the scenes in the country are all distant and panoramic? That's the mentality of Carl Reiner's direction, claustrophobic for the city, spatial for the country. In the final lunatic scene at the old folks home, the camera is so far off, you can't even make out what's going on. The abrupt ending suggests a resolution that Segal could have easily arrived at ninety minutes ago; it also suggests Reiner couldn't figure out how to end the picture. So he just cut it, as another example of "craziness". Reiner seems to think dumbness equals craziness, and craziness without logic is always funny. It isn't, and the creators of "Where's Poppa" are as demented as Ruth Gordon putting Pepsi in her Fruit Loops.

A film that takes comedic chances and wins big!

[big_bellied_geezer · 2 September 2002]

Short of most John Waters films, today's cinema offers little by way of absurd comedy. Generally speaking, cinema has sold out to Nike, Madison avenue and all the rest of the greedy faces behind Hollywood who make sure their "clients" products are wagged in yor face and written into the script.(Think of "What Women Want" or "E.T." for instance) Well, here's a film that takes comedic chances and pays off big! This film is a equal opportunity offender and is in nobody's pocket! Segal and Gordon are in perfect pacing and timing thanks to Carl Riner's direction and no holds barred attack on everything. I can not recommend this film enough to the intelligent viewer who hungers for more than the banal "comedies" of today which are for the most part nothing more than padded 90 minute commercials.

I appreciate Reiner's attempt to make a tasteless film...too bad it's just not that funny

[planktonrules · 4/10 · 21 May 2007]

George Segal lives with his elderly and senile mother. There are many jokes about her Alzheimer's-like dementia and most of them aren't funny, though there were a few funny moments sprinkled in here and there (such as the nude running through the park scene and the old folks home). At first, Segal tries to kill his mother because she's tough to live with and because he's a selfish guy. Making the film sort of like a Wiley Coyote versus the Roadrunner comedy where he tries again and again to kill this indestructible gal would have been a hoot--too bad this was NOT the overall tone of the film.

I do applaud Carl Reiner's attempt to make a tasteless film that is intended to offend everyone. I have a special place in my heart for films like ED AND HIS DEAD MOTHER, EATING RAOUL and HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS--all films about death that dare to offend. The problem here, though, is that WHERE'S POPPA? has some funny moments, but it also has a lot of flat ones and the overall product is amazingly bland. Plus topics such as homosexual rape, incest and the like are really difficult to make funny. I read in "THE ROUGH GUIDE TO CULT MOVIES" that it is considered a cult film, though I just can't see anyone wanting to see this more than once.

Previous reviewer (Wayne Malin) is wrong!

[Harrison-37 · 8/10 · 24 April 2005]

No, he did get one thing right: the plot summary is fine. But, Wayne misses the point about "black humor": it's NOT supposed to have limits, by definition. Yes, the bits are meant to skewer what we consider "sacred" and, yes, it will offend those you can't ponder why certain societal taboos exist. As a whole the movie is far, far tamer than a lot of the crap that passes for "art" and comedy these days. Is the plot warped? Yes. Do you stare slack-jawed in disbelief at some bits? Yes. Is it funny? Totally, but not in a Jerry Lewis or Jerry Seinfeld way (though some of absurd parts do have a Seinfeldesque quality). That's why I give it an 8 out of 10. (He did get one other thing right: the courtroom scene is pretty priceless).

"Where's Poppa" - When farce plods.

[roy-zornow · 4/10 · 19 April 2008]

I was prepared to love "Where's Poppa", it features the nexus of Normal Lear sitcom character actors who, when I was growing up, felt like extended members of my raisenette-sized broken nuclear family. How fun it would be to see censor-free Barnard Hughes, Vincent Gardenia, Ron Liebman, Rob Reiner, and a pre-SNL Garret Morris.

But alas,"Where's Poppa" drags. It's claustrophobic and plodding, and breaks the cardinal rules of farce, lightness of mood and a fast pace.

The plot involves the efforts of a lawyer (George Segal) to rid himself of his overbearing Jewish mother, who lives in his gigantic New York apartment. Along the way we are exposed ridiculous characters and situations: a comedic group of muggers who repeatedly mug the brother of the main character, the rape of a policeman which involving a gorilla suit and subsequent gay love, Ruth Gorden pulling down Segal's pants and biting his ass as he serves her dinner. Why doesn't this work? Part of the explanation is the sense of doom engendered by the cramped, dark interiors and antique set-decoration. I absolutely eat up cinematography of New York during this era, but watching this movie felt like I was leafing through the Police Gazette in a dark bus terminal.

The main reason though is the slow pace. Modern MTV-style quick cuts have changed what moviegoers feel is a comfortable editing tempo, but, even taking this into consideration, camera shots are held for an excessively long time. Plot developments are also very slow. There is one situation in which this works: a weird love song George Segal sings to Trish Van Devere, softly, very close to her face, and for an excruciatingly long period of time. It reminded me of those cringeworthy extended shots in the British version of "The Office", where you find yourself mentally begging the camera to cut away, and at the same time you can't stop looking.

Sadly, most of the film is more "hurry up" than "can't look away". Which made me wonder if it's possible to have a black comedy that is also a farce. The dilemma is that the gravitas of the subject matter in a black comedy tends to weigh down lightness of the farce. Movies like Robert Altman's "M*A*S*H" and Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove" prove that it can be accomplished. They do this not only through speed but also through entertaining subplots, something "Where's Poppa" neglects.

Although the film features multiple, stereotypically-funny characters, almost all of them are directly involved in the central drama of how to deal with the recalcitrant mother. The scenes featuring Garret Morris and the Central Park muggers are as close as the viewer gets to a mental break. The muggers seemed almost Shakespearean, following the tradition of comic ne'er-d0-wells. If the rest of "Where's Poppa" had clung a little more closely to stage tradition it would have been a better film. Edgier isn't always better. It's as if all these talented actors and the director Carl Reiner, were taking a short before the creative maelstrom of the 70's .

Random notes: After strealing Ron Liebman's clothes, the muggers mention Cornel Wilde's "The Naked Prey" (1966), a great action movie that was a stylistic precursor to 1968's "Planet of the Apes".

As politically incorrect as he was, it's disquieting to learn about the death of an action hero as formidable as Charleton Heston. Linda Harrison, who played "Nova", Taylor's mute mate, said that James Fransicus, in the sequel seemed to be cute and tiny compared to Heston.

Stands the test of time

[Pamsanalyst · 9/10 · 8 November 2004]

I nervously put my newly acquired DVD into the machine and sat down with my housemate who had never seen the film. Remember back during the Watergate hearings and witnesses with talk about limited or full hangouts? Well, this is a full hangout. No one goes away without being insulted. And all of this is done without someone vomiting, breaking wind at the dinner table, or scratching their crotch....the sine qua non's of modern 'comedy.'

There is something in the opening scene of Touch of Evil, the long setup toward scaring Mom to death with the gorilla suit, only to find she is immune to such tactics and simply wants her Fruit Loops in Pepsi.

We have the cabbie fly by an elderly black woman to pick up the naked Ron Liebman and the wonderful reference to the Cornel Wilde 'epic' by the boyz in the park. All is complete when the Mother from Hell makes sure Trish V sees her son's lovely tush at dinner.

Housemate ended by remarking 'now this is a funny movie.'

Adult humor of the 70s doesn't hold up..

[mrcaw12 · 5/10 · 3 September 2006]

Gotta say I was disappointed by this flick. It was one of those films that somehow I'd never managed to see, so when I saw it was available on Netflix, I happily selected it.

Unfortunately it's just not very funny or even interesting.

I suspect that a lot of its notoriety at the time was simply because the film is rather lose with its language and there is even some mild nudity.

For better or worse a lot of the profanity in the movie is now common stuff on HBO & certainly in the movies.

For film buffs I guess it's an opportunity to see little seen Ruth Gordon and Trish Van Devere but once the novelty wears off of seeing these two again, the movie really does have little to offer contemporary viewers.

The performances are fine, that's not the problem. It's just that the script is so slow. Scenes that should take 2 minutes take 10 instead.

Again, I think everyone at the time must have thought they were involved in a very 'adult' project but the movie seen through modern eyes, just seems a bit contrived and kind of tiresome.

Oh there's an early brief performance by Rob Reiner and supposedly you can glimpse Penny Marshall in the background...if you care.

A Truly Tasteless Gem

[G-Man-25 · 20 June 1999]

"Where's Poppa" is a true cult classic of black comedy/absurdist humor. It pokes fun at things that we really shouldn't find funny, but manages to have us howling with laughter at nonetheless. Surprisingly, even though it's nearly 30 years old, it still has the power to shock and surprise an audience. An excellent cast and perfectly-timed direction by Carl Reiner (this is one of his very best) make this a comedy classic worth watching again and again.

Waste of Time

[TedMichaelMor · 1/10 · 13 May 2010]

Ruth Gordon is an acquired taste that I have not acquired. Her performances are all the same—affected and silly. George Segal is much the same—repetition of mannerisms is not necessarily effective acting.

The film is not creative, innovative, funny, or interesting. It seems locked in the time from which it emerged when almost anything out-of-the-ordinary counted as groundbreaking. This film is a holdover from the fifties. It reminds me of fifties television comedies.

The tone is corrosive, not ironic. The film does depict New York as a region of hell, which it was at the time. That part is on target.

The narrative wanders off course and never lands in any harbour. Watching it is a painful way to waste an afternoon.

One of the funniest movies ever made

[deheor · 9/10 · 6 December 2005]

This film is on my short list of best comedies. It is unbelievably funny while at the same time revelling is non-PC behaviour that will forever limit its appeal. This movie is not for the easily offended.

The plot concerns Gordon Hocheiser (played in pitch perfect fashion by the great George Segal) who after making a promise on his Father's deathbed finds himself caring for his Mother (Ruth Gordon) who is on the rocket sled of senility. Unfortunately she seems to ruin every relationship he has and when she begins to sabotage his courting of the lovely Louise Callen (Trish Van Devere) she finally pushes Gordon over the edge.

When the hero of the film is doing his best to give his Mother a heart attack it is clear that you are walking on shaky ground. It takes an actor as likable as Segal to make the audience root for his character and when you consider the dark ending this movie had before its first theatrical release (Seek it out if possible) the film finishes on a tragic note as Gordon finally admits defeat.

As if the 3 strong lead performances were not enough you also get Gordon's brother Sidney (played by Ron Leibman in a scene stealing turn) who doesn't want to take in Mother but finds himself rushing to her defense whenever she gets Gordon too wound up. His short cut which goes through the park finds him frequently mugged by the same gang and at one point being forced to rape a woman (who turns out to be a male, undercover cop who asks for his number afterward). Keep your eyes open for a great Rob Reiner sequence in court and try to remember the era that this film was made in while watching. This movie was made a time when the notion of being politically correct was just some fever dream that you would wake up screaming from. Everything was not being watered down to make sure that no one is ever bothered by anything they see. If you keep that in mind you will understand why this movie is held is such high regard by so many.

Not many laughs in this dark mockery

[SimonJack · 3/10 · 23 August 2019]

Not all people can enjoy dark comedies. But to appeal to those who do, such films have to be done very well. The obvious first requirement is that they must be funny - very funny. They must be filled with humor, including clever dialog, funny antics and hilarious situations. And that means that the humor must touch even the dourest of movie goers.

If an intended dark comedy fails the comedy test, it fails period. Because its appearance then changes. It's no longer a comedy, but a mockery. Without clear and definitive humor, efforts at dark comedy become little more than insult, insensitivity and crass finger-pointing. And that describes this film, "Where's Poppa?" The very few lines and scenes with any comedy are smothered by the overall flat screenplay that mocks or denigrates various people or groups, one after another.

I doubt that many people found this film to be funny in 1970, in spite of some critics liking it. The film is based on a 1970 short novel of the same title, and its author, Robert Klane, also wrote the screenplay. The film got mixed reviews decades ago, with many critics finding more dark comedy but a disconnected script and too much deviation from the main focus.

My three stars are solely for the effort put into the performances, especially by George Segal. Ruth Gordon takes getting used to and loses her humor after several minutes of screen time. Ron Leibman's Sydney Hocheiser was the hardest to take for comedy. His jaunts through the park are not funny when he knows he will be accosted each night by the same gang of African-Americans. This comes across as racial stereotyping and a distraction from the main subject.

Many movies have been labeled as black comedies, that are more insulting mockery than they are comedy. Some movies that are superb dark comedies have become classic satires. Among the best of these are "Dr. Strangelove" of 1974, "The Great Dictator" of 1940, "Kind Hearts and Coronets" of 1949, "Death at a Funeral" of 2007, and "Throw Momma from the Train" of 1987.

When budget and box office information about a film is hard to find, it's a sure sign the movie didn't fare too well with the public. My search of the Web found nothing on the finance numbers for this film -- except that it wasn't among the top 25 films for the year in U.S. box office gross. Which means it had to come in under $1.5 million. This film is mostly a crass and crude mockery.

came out at the perfect time

[lee_eisenberg · 9/10 · 27 June 2007]

"Where's Poppa?" is the sort of movie that only Carl Reiner could direct and could probably only release around 1970. Casting George Segal as a lawyer still having to care for his demented, clingy mother (Ruth Gordon) - even though he's now found his dream-girl (Trish Van Devere) - the whole movie really goes all out. There are some scenes where, even though they set up what's about to happen, it's just a total hoot to watch it happen...especially everything that happens in the park! My point is, this is a true black comedy classic. But don't take my word for it; just watch the movie. Watch for some cast members in before-they-were-famous roles: Rob Reiner as Segal's courtroom defendant (in a role not far from Meathead on "All in the Family"), Penny Marshall as one of the courtroom spectators (though she doesn't have any lines), and future "Saturday Night Live" cast member Garrett Morris as one of the men in the park.