I wonder if Paul Newman ever got tired of playing "Paul Newman". It seems like he's always cast in the same role: rebellious but still seeking approval, parents don't like him, bad boy, a ladies' man, and a bit of an unlikable edge. However, unlike other Paul Newman movies where this type of character actually captures the audience's attention, From the Terrace is lousy.Paul Newman comes from an unrespectable family, but he wants to make something of himself. He wants to become a member of high society, so he can see the view "from the terrace". In his quest, he pursues high-class Joanne Woodward. In his overwhelming ambition, he works too much and leaves his wife alone too often. She turns to alcohol and humiliates him by having an affair. But why are we supposed to be surprised? When he met her, she was engaged to someone else. She cheated on her fiancé and left him for Paul Newman. Once a floozy, always a floozy! The plot is disjointed and boring, and despite Hollywood's repeated casting of Joanne Woodward in sexy roles, her aura reeked like she didn't know where the bedroom was, not like she spent all her time there. The costars were married by the time they made this movie, but if you really want to see their chemistry, you have nine other films to choose from.The only good scene in this movie is in the beginning. Paul Newman returns home from the war and witnesses an argument between his parents, drunken floozy Myrna Loy and stern Leon Ames. Go ahead and watch the first twenty minutes of the movie, then do yourself a favor and turn it off.

Screenplay based on a novel by John O'Hara in 1958. One of a dozen films Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward did as husband and wife. They stayed married until Newman died in 2008. The film cost $3 million and grossed $5 million. So it was major deal in those days but was not a runaway success. There was quite a lot of adult content for the time which was surprising. It was certainly apt for the time but all the concern about divorce makes it a period piece but an accurate period piece. I find all the filming on sets restrictive as I am spoiled by modern location and outdoor shooting. Although it is certainly not a great work. Will give it a solid 7. RECOMMEND

This is one of those movies that I can't pass up when it shows up on cable. I grew up in the 50's and 60's, so movies like this are also a bit of time travel. This time it was TCM. Saw it coming up and had to use the DVR.It is not easy to make a novel into a movie. An average novel would require eight to ten hours of movie--so a mini series is the least. A childhood to maturity novel must be a real challenge. In this case, selecting just a portion of the novel and writing a screenplay around it, in my opinion, worked nicely. Here's what I like about it.Joanne Woodward and Paul Newman. They do good work separately and extraordinary work together. Woodward is believable, especially playing a southerner (which she is not here), but also playing a member of high society in New England. Paul Newman is just a good and versatile actor. The story moves slowly, but not too slowly, and the characters have enough interest to be savored in the quiet moments. Scenes with the early 1950's cars in the forest. Elmer Bernstein's score. The scene where the Eatons meet Natalie in New York. Mary Eaton is wearing a tiara (crown?). The king and queen meeting the king's courtesan. Mary, afterward: "She calls me Mrs. Eaton. You call her Natalie, but she doesn't call you anything."Don't like. Glaring hole in the story. What happened to Eaton Steel and Martha Eaton. Big family owned business and only an alcoholic widow left, and Alfred just goes off to make airplanes? Clearly Samuel Eaton was a hands on manager. Did a middle manager pop in on Mrs. Eaton and say, "I'll take care of the company for you. Don't you worry. Just get a board resolution appointing me as CEO." Or did Alfred shut down the plant in his father's honor and to spite the striking union, with his mother just living off accumulated wealth?And I wonder. Compare the last half of this movie with the AMC TV series "Mad Men", which starts out set at about the same time that this movie is set. Imagine MacHardie coming in to the Sterling Cooper conference room. Compare the morals and mores of Terrace with those of Mad Men. Considering that they were written in times 40 years apart, they fit surprisingly well, don't they?

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.