IMDb RATING
7.0/10
3.9K
YOUR RATING
The daughter of a Louisville truck driver marries the scion of a very wealthy family, but the reception at the family estate is boycotted by the invited guests.The daughter of a Louisville truck driver marries the scion of a very wealthy family, but the reception at the family estate is boycotted by the invited guests.The daughter of a Louisville truck driver marries the scion of a very wealthy family, but the reception at the family estate is boycotted by the invited guests.
- Nominated for 2 BAFTA Awards
- 1 win & 5 nominations total
Nina van Pallandt
- Regina Corelli
- (as Nina Van Pallandt)
Featured reviews
Robert Altman films can be hard work at times, and others you just get pulled into straight away.
A Wedding is an instant attraction, a real delight, full of some great characters, and many funny one-liners, the first hour is a real chuckle, the second hour gets down to more serious issues, but if you've ever been to a wedding (and who hasn't?) you will identify with many moments from this.
Some really great performances especially from Carol Burnett, the housewife with a moral dilemma, Howard Duff, the lecherous alcoholic doctor, Viveca Lindfors, the nutty guest, and Geraldine Chaplin as the very irritating wedding planner.
Well worth a look! 8/10
A Wedding is an instant attraction, a real delight, full of some great characters, and many funny one-liners, the first hour is a real chuckle, the second hour gets down to more serious issues, but if you've ever been to a wedding (and who hasn't?) you will identify with many moments from this.
Some really great performances especially from Carol Burnett, the housewife with a moral dilemma, Howard Duff, the lecherous alcoholic doctor, Viveca Lindfors, the nutty guest, and Geraldine Chaplin as the very irritating wedding planner.
Well worth a look! 8/10
I like people who approach art in new and unconventional ways. 'A Wedding' is one of the best Altman films for me, because it goes the furthest towards abandoning a unified structure and rational storyline, and presents a loose ensemble of stories and moments.
A review of the time said it well for me. The film has any number of stories, but few are presented completely. For some, you only see the beginning. In others, it is only the middle, or the end. The camera is voyeuristic, often seeming to stumble on fragments of things, looking through plants, people partly out of shot.
For me, first seeing the film at the age of 22, I found it quietly hilarious from almost the very first shot. In that early shot, two boys are unrolling a red carpet. Because it has been sitting unused for so long, the roll has gone flat, and this makes the boy's arm wobble as the carpet unrolls. I laughed out loud. That is an introduction to the understated humour and fine comic irony of the film. I think this is why the film is under-appreciated in America. Americans seem to like to attach a flag to their humour: "Don't be offended. This is intended as a joke." Whereas 'A Wedding' seems to have more in common with the comedic tradition of Tati. I still think 'A Wedding' is one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
For me, this film was years before its time. It reminds me of modern bands such as TV on the Radio or, especially, Animal Collective. There seem to be a lot of loose ends, unconnected bits, things that shouldn't really go together, stuff happening in layers that go in different directions. Yet somehow it all works. It hangs together, although perhaps the only unities are those of time and place. And when you actually try to reproduce the effect (perform the works) you very soon find out that the seeming artlessness conceals a level of skills and professionalism that is actually of the highest standard - something that has strongly impacted on my own approach to art.
William Goldman said in 'Adventures in the Screen Trade' that directors are basically very good storytellers. But here we don't have one story at all, we have a slice through 20th century society. A picture that is a picture, not a picture that tells a story. This film reminds me of a statement by Vonnegut, that he thought perhaps The Novel had corrupted the public mind, because in a novel, there are important and major and unimportant and peripheral characters. In this film everyone is of equal importance. For me one of the failures of this film is Carol Burnett. That's not because she is not an excellent actress, or very funny. But she stands out, and while just about everybody else is playing slightly tongue-in-cheek but straight, she plays this as overt comedy.
I don't know if I agree with those commentators who say this is a blistering satire. I don't believe it is, any more than Boccaccio or Chaucer are blistering satires. It is much more like 'Peasant Wedding' by Bruegel, full of picaresque characters, a canvas of muddled humanity trying to fill their days. It is gentle, and if it turns darker as it continues, there is a great deal of darkness in Chaucer and Boccaccio too. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised to find that Altman had been deliberately trying to create something similar to 'Peasant Wedding' in a modern art form. The absurdist influence is also strong. This is a European film, not an American film.
So I consider 'A Wedding' to be a finer movie than 'Nashville', and in fact one of the great movies of the 20th c. It is more understated, less obvious, without clear stories or points to make. In that is its greatness. It is genuinely subversive. It is a movie that uses a quite different structure and method than almost any other movie you have ever seen. It is a movie that lets its characters all talk for themselves. I think 'A Wedding' is a landmark movie, a reference point that should be part of the training of every filmmaker. I don't think Altman ever bettered it. This, with his own company, was his chance to do what he really wanted to do. It is one of the three or four films that has had the strongest impact on my own life and art. After half a century of filmgoing, I still clearly recall image after image. 'A Wedding' still sticks out in my head as one of the high points of all that time.
A review of the time said it well for me. The film has any number of stories, but few are presented completely. For some, you only see the beginning. In others, it is only the middle, or the end. The camera is voyeuristic, often seeming to stumble on fragments of things, looking through plants, people partly out of shot.
For me, first seeing the film at the age of 22, I found it quietly hilarious from almost the very first shot. In that early shot, two boys are unrolling a red carpet. Because it has been sitting unused for so long, the roll has gone flat, and this makes the boy's arm wobble as the carpet unrolls. I laughed out loud. That is an introduction to the understated humour and fine comic irony of the film. I think this is why the film is under-appreciated in America. Americans seem to like to attach a flag to their humour: "Don't be offended. This is intended as a joke." Whereas 'A Wedding' seems to have more in common with the comedic tradition of Tati. I still think 'A Wedding' is one of the funniest films I have ever seen.
For me, this film was years before its time. It reminds me of modern bands such as TV on the Radio or, especially, Animal Collective. There seem to be a lot of loose ends, unconnected bits, things that shouldn't really go together, stuff happening in layers that go in different directions. Yet somehow it all works. It hangs together, although perhaps the only unities are those of time and place. And when you actually try to reproduce the effect (perform the works) you very soon find out that the seeming artlessness conceals a level of skills and professionalism that is actually of the highest standard - something that has strongly impacted on my own approach to art.
William Goldman said in 'Adventures in the Screen Trade' that directors are basically very good storytellers. But here we don't have one story at all, we have a slice through 20th century society. A picture that is a picture, not a picture that tells a story. This film reminds me of a statement by Vonnegut, that he thought perhaps The Novel had corrupted the public mind, because in a novel, there are important and major and unimportant and peripheral characters. In this film everyone is of equal importance. For me one of the failures of this film is Carol Burnett. That's not because she is not an excellent actress, or very funny. But she stands out, and while just about everybody else is playing slightly tongue-in-cheek but straight, she plays this as overt comedy.
I don't know if I agree with those commentators who say this is a blistering satire. I don't believe it is, any more than Boccaccio or Chaucer are blistering satires. It is much more like 'Peasant Wedding' by Bruegel, full of picaresque characters, a canvas of muddled humanity trying to fill their days. It is gentle, and if it turns darker as it continues, there is a great deal of darkness in Chaucer and Boccaccio too. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised to find that Altman had been deliberately trying to create something similar to 'Peasant Wedding' in a modern art form. The absurdist influence is also strong. This is a European film, not an American film.
So I consider 'A Wedding' to be a finer movie than 'Nashville', and in fact one of the great movies of the 20th c. It is more understated, less obvious, without clear stories or points to make. In that is its greatness. It is genuinely subversive. It is a movie that uses a quite different structure and method than almost any other movie you have ever seen. It is a movie that lets its characters all talk for themselves. I think 'A Wedding' is a landmark movie, a reference point that should be part of the training of every filmmaker. I don't think Altman ever bettered it. This, with his own company, was his chance to do what he really wanted to do. It is one of the three or four films that has had the strongest impact on my own life and art. After half a century of filmgoing, I still clearly recall image after image. 'A Wedding' still sticks out in my head as one of the high points of all that time.
It seems, I am one of the few commenters who think this movie very funny. Maybe it is, because I am not American. In my opinion A wedding is a great spoof of American culture. It is not a prerogative of the English to keep up appearances. Maybe it is just my weird sense of humour. There are few things as funny as people trying the best they can to run everything smoothly and perfectly, just because decencey commands it, and failing. Altman mercilessly shows the inevitable result: hypocrisy. This is what happens, when people deny human shortcomings. That's why I think A wedding is not typical a 70's movie, but has enduring qualities. Compared to Gosford Park it is easy to follow all the subplots. I like A wedding even better than Mash.
I think this film does a splendid job of showing both the charm and the pitfalls of Robert Altman's style of direction. And curiously, it may be his most likable film.
Of course, Altman's trademark soft-focus drama and overlapping soundtrack are in evidence here, giving us a clear approximation of what it is like to be thrust into a big, bustling and poorly-organized social event. A WEDDING shows us what Altman does best, creating an atmosphere where individuals come into and out of focus seemingly at random and the storyline unfolds less like a narrative than as a string of half overheard bits of gossip. The large and varied cast performs with seemingly exaggerated gusto, a necessity to help make clear the individual threads of the tangled narratives. You either love this about Altman's films, or it infuriates you -- sometimes it does both.
Yet, as much as this meandering style of film-making can exhilarate the game viewer, it can also rob the story of a sense of gravity. Certainly, the point of the film is that such an event as a phoney-baloney society wedding is a trivial affair, at the same time when the film turns to matters of life and death, the Altman style makes this seem trivial as well. Altman has never been able to punch home his films with "a big climatic moment" -- and he has never really tried -- and that is what is missing from A WEDDING. It just sort of peters out, like guests who randomly wander out of the party without saying goodbye.
Still, there is something endearing about A WEDDING that is missing from much of Altman's other works. Despite the large hubbub of characters, this is an intimate affair and little bits of bittersweet drama filters through. The lightly sketched vignettes give us an insightful vision of family ties in various states of unraveling. The characters, though ludicrous from a distance, are somehow endearing when viewed up close. Kudos must go to vivid performances by such unlikely costars as Carol Burnett, Pat McCormick, Dina Merrill, Geraldine Chaplin, Lillian Gish, Nina Van Palandt, Mia Farrow and Lauren Hutton, some of whom have but a few seconds of screen time to create memorable characterizations. Like many a real-life wedding, A Wedding is vaguely disappointing, yet strangely unforgettable.
Of course, Altman's trademark soft-focus drama and overlapping soundtrack are in evidence here, giving us a clear approximation of what it is like to be thrust into a big, bustling and poorly-organized social event. A WEDDING shows us what Altman does best, creating an atmosphere where individuals come into and out of focus seemingly at random and the storyline unfolds less like a narrative than as a string of half overheard bits of gossip. The large and varied cast performs with seemingly exaggerated gusto, a necessity to help make clear the individual threads of the tangled narratives. You either love this about Altman's films, or it infuriates you -- sometimes it does both.
Yet, as much as this meandering style of film-making can exhilarate the game viewer, it can also rob the story of a sense of gravity. Certainly, the point of the film is that such an event as a phoney-baloney society wedding is a trivial affair, at the same time when the film turns to matters of life and death, the Altman style makes this seem trivial as well. Altman has never been able to punch home his films with "a big climatic moment" -- and he has never really tried -- and that is what is missing from A WEDDING. It just sort of peters out, like guests who randomly wander out of the party without saying goodbye.
Still, there is something endearing about A WEDDING that is missing from much of Altman's other works. Despite the large hubbub of characters, this is an intimate affair and little bits of bittersweet drama filters through. The lightly sketched vignettes give us an insightful vision of family ties in various states of unraveling. The characters, though ludicrous from a distance, are somehow endearing when viewed up close. Kudos must go to vivid performances by such unlikely costars as Carol Burnett, Pat McCormick, Dina Merrill, Geraldine Chaplin, Lillian Gish, Nina Van Palandt, Mia Farrow and Lauren Hutton, some of whom have but a few seconds of screen time to create memorable characterizations. Like many a real-life wedding, A Wedding is vaguely disappointing, yet strangely unforgettable.
This is a fascinating comedy from Robert Altman's peak period
before his 80's downslide. A Wedding is sadly underappreciated,
and really deserves to be rediscovered, especially after the recent
success of Gosford Park which is an obvious companion piece to
this film. Both films deal with class and gender distinctions and
feature an eccentric group of party-goers who can't seem to leave
the soiree and are trapped in a mansion (obviously inspired by
Buenel's Exterminating Angel). A Wedding is filled with great
performances especially Carol Burnett, who is the heart of the film;
Geraldine Chaplin; Desi Arnaz Jr.; and Mia Farrow. Highly
recommended.
before his 80's downslide. A Wedding is sadly underappreciated,
and really deserves to be rediscovered, especially after the recent
success of Gosford Park which is an obvious companion piece to
this film. Both films deal with class and gender distinctions and
feature an eccentric group of party-goers who can't seem to leave
the soiree and are trapped in a mansion (obviously inspired by
Buenel's Exterminating Angel). A Wedding is filled with great
performances especially Carol Burnett, who is the heart of the film;
Geraldine Chaplin; Desi Arnaz Jr.; and Mia Farrow. Highly
recommended.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaDirector Robert Altman admits that the whole production of the film came as a joke. A reporter had kept asking him during the middle of shooting 3 Women (1977) what he planned to do next and Altman jokingly replied that he was going to film someone's wedding seeing as that was becoming a more common thing to do at the time. Altman said: "I'm going to make a movie about a great big fancy wedding!" As Altman reflected on it, he decided it was actually quite a good idea, as he had never been to a wedding where something didn't go wrong. Altman's off-hand idea manifested itself in a drinking session with his 3 Women (1977) crew that evening after the meeting with the journalist. Within a couple of weeks, Altman had commissioned screenwriter John Considine to start developing a story and a guest list.
- GoofsWhy would Tracy saying she "missed the wedding" be a goof? The writer could have intended sarcasm, with Tracy knowing full-well that she wasn't invited to the wedding and taking it as a slight.
- Quotes
Ruby Sparr: Do you smoke?
Shelby Munker: No, it makes me dizzy.
Ruby Sparr: Me too, that's why I like it.
Shelby Munker: Well I try to do natural things. A lot of people in my family died of cancer. Bye.
Ruby Sparr: They... they died of cancer smoking pot?
- Crazy creditsThe 20th Century Fox logo plays without the fanfare.
- Alternate versionsThe credits in the German version have a completely different order compared to the original release.
- How long is A Wedding?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Eine Hochzeit
- Filming locations
- Waukegan, Illinois, USA(Amstutz Expressway)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime2 hours 5 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
