Over these many years I have been told, time & again, about what a really great actor Paul Newman was in his heyday.Well, I have now seen Newman in 6 films that all came from the first decade of his acting career, and, let me tell you, I am not at all impressed. In fact, I'd actually go so far as to say that Newman was one of most over-rated and disappointing, big-name actors from that particular era, bar none.Set in the year 1946, From The Terrace was yet another star-vehicle of Newman's where I strongly felt that, at 35, he was clearly too old for his part. This time around he played a young soldier returning to his Philadelphia home after the war.The very minute Newman's character (a spoilt, tormented rich kid named Alfred Eaton) sets foot inside the door of his home the story immediately accelerates into a most tedious and predictable soap opera of non-stop bickering, jealousy and resentment, with a generous dash of infidelity thrown into the mix for good measure.Everybody in this story seems to either have an axe to grind, or be out for blood, or at one another's throat, ceaselessly.I, for one, found this 1960 film (with its plodding 145-minute running time) to be a tiresome ordeal which went far beyond anything even reasonably tolerable.Paul Newman, or not, I would never, ever recommend this bitchy, backstabbing bull to anyone.

This is another film which, though a staple on Italian TV over the years, I somehow never bothered with until now (obviously included in my Paul Newman tribute) – mainly because it’s a glorified soap opera of a kind (accentuated by garish color and the Widescreen format) that was prevalent in Hollywood for about a decade, beginning from the mid-1950s.It’s based on a John O’Hara best-seller which, if the trailer is to be believed, was a “sensation” when it emerged; its impact, however, has been heavily diluted in the screen adaptation – not to mention by the passage of time since the film’s release! Still, the result is reasonably entertaining (often unintentionally so in view of the ongoing histrionics) and, thankfully, its hefty 144-minute duration isn’t an excessive burden. Besides, no expense has been spared with respect to production values (director Robson, screenwriter Ernest Lehman – both of whom would memorably reteam with Newman on the delightful Hitchcock pastiche THE PRIZE [1963; still bafflingly M.I.A. on DVD], cinematographer Leo Tover and composer Elmer Bernstein).On the other hand, casting is variable yet surprisingly adequate – this was Newman’s third teaming with wife Joanne Woodward: interestingly, she plays an unsympathetic role (whereas he’s typically brooding), so that the couple’s initially blissful relationship (compromised by his ambitious drive and her own faithlessness with ex-beau Patrick O’Neal) deteriorates and sends Newman into the arms of decent girl Ina Balin…all of which leads to an idealistic ending in which the disillusioned hero gives up his career in favor of true love. Myrna Loy, then, appears briefly at the start in the role of Newman’s perennially soused and whorish(!) mother; ditto Leon Ames as his steel-mill owner father (which Newman abandons after the old man’s death) – fixated on his other, dead son!; Felix Aylmer is an elderly tycoon whose grandson the hero saved from drowning – which wins Newman a position in his firm and later, satisfied by the former’s over-achieving performance, he even goads with a partnership…but the hero turns him down flat!; and Ted de Corsia is atypically featured as Balin’s modest businessman father, whom Newman had been sent by Aylmer to check on.

that a man is promoted by saving wealth financiers (MacHardie's) grandson from drowning in a Delaware pond, then the film is watchable. Almost.Joanne Woodward is too shrill, and I guess given this edge to demonstrate her ability to act the villain, a cheating wife married to all American Paul Newman, a man on his way up the corporate ladder. The actor who portrays Creighton Duffy is noteworthy, a corporate weasel if ever there was one.The part Myrna Loy has is a thankless one, Newman returned from the war ready to make his mark on the world. The clichés abound, as the story evolves into workaholic, failed enterprise, meddling in-laws and faithless wife. Woodward's costumes are noteworthy, and there are a few cameos (George Grizzard and Barbara Eden) worth noting.Overall worth watching as a curiosity of the times. 7/10.

Yes this is a perfectly awful late 50's movie but I watched the mess until its unbelievable ending. The film is flawed for me from the start with the period set in the late 1940's but hey look its really 1960. The clothes, hairstyles and decor are wrong and annoying for the period that the film is suppose to be set in. I know that this was the general practice of Hollywood in the 50's and 60's and it always bothers me. The film was based on a long novel by John O'Hara, which happily I never read, and the film clocking in at 2 1/2 hours is a bore and a chore. Badly directed by Mark Robson who early in his career directed some nice B movies for Val Lewton but who went on to make such schlocky as Peyton Place and Valley Of The Dolls. This one is no better. It has lots of gloss and smooth hard edges, and its always a joy to see Joanne Woodward who sinks her teeth into the role of Newman's slutty wife and is the real villain of the piece and looks great in all those fabulous late 50's Travilla's gowns and frocks. Newman basically sleep walks through the film wearing a bad hair piece and looking like he would rather be anywhere but here. The film as an able supporting cast including George Grizzard actually quite convincing playing a heterosexual sex hound, An underused Myrna Loy, the very good Ina Balin, and Ted de Corsia as her father who is cast against the type of character he usually played. Look for a bit by the great silent screen star Mae Marsh as the governess. See it if you must.