I was never a fan of Paul Newman, but every once in a while he impressed me. On the other hand, I was (growing up) always a fan of Robbie Benson, and here -- again -- he does not disappoint.What does disappoint is the film, in general. It has quite a few good ingredients, including Newman and Benson, and certain segments are pretty interesting and decently done. Unfortunately, the separate parts of the film never quite come together as a whole.Harry is a construction worker who is having vision and neck problems, resulting in a near industrial accident that could heave been deadly; he gets fired. Looks for work, can't find any. Robbie Benson is his son who thinks he's a writer but actually details cars; he could work, but he thinks what's available is beneath him.Benson's best scene is when he and his ex-girlfriend are trying to "figure out" what happened. It's as good as any acting Benson ever did, though this is not my favorite Benson movie.The problem is that this film just sorta drifts along seemingly going nowhere. It's rather episodic, but the episodes don't seem to really fit together. The second problem is that a viewer wants to have some general idea of where a film is going...even if he or she ends up wrong. Well, here you just wonder where this film is wandering to. At least it isn't maudlin.Unfortunately, some of the highlights of the film are small supporting parts played by Ossie Davis and Morgan Freeman. Ellen Barki, Joanne Woodward, and Wilford Brimley have small, but significant roles. But the film really belongs to Paul Newman and Robby Benson, and I think more to Benson.

While I thought the movie was good, I had a very hard time with the scene in which Harry's daughter visits. Harry was so unbelievably cruel to his daughter in this scene, that I really wish I hadn't seen it. It actually depressed me for days.Harry's daughter visits Harry and his son with her husband and newborn daughter. Her husband, a life insurance salesman, shockingly tries to sell Harry life insurance, which Harry takes great offense at. The daughter then very nicely asks if she could possibly take her dead mother's china if Harry and his son aren't using it.Okay, so maybe this was a bit insensitive, but it struck me that the daughter seemed like a very hard worker with a full time job and a new baby and, maybe, just maybe it was really tough for her without her mother and that's why she wanted the china.Harry says that she can have the china, but then he maliciously wets the bottom of the box he gives her to carry it in. The china then falls out and breaks in a million pieces. The daughter then sees that the bottom of the box is wet, and she becomes very hurt and angry. She then exits with husband and screaming newborn.Harry finds this funny. I did not.My mother died when I was four, and I must confess that I have always wanted her china as well. It has sat in the china cabinet since her death, one of the few relatively unchanged items since. There are many times when I have missed having a mother and perhaps illogically have associated the china too strongly with her presence.Perhaps wanting the china is materialistic, but it seems inhuman on a Father's part to not understand why his daughter might want something from her mother.I really had a hard time caring about Harry after that scene.

Fans of Newman and/or Benson or of undemanding, character-driven films may enjoy this examination of a father-son relationship. Newman plays a wrecking ball operator who is experiencing jarring pain and vision issues, which cost him his job. His pride won't allow him to accept just anything else. Benson is his son, an aspiring writer, who is content to detail cars and go surfing, not worrying about what the future holds for him. Despite an underlying affection between the two, tension arises because Newman wants to work, but can't, while Benson is able-bodied, but doesn't seem to want to hold on to any sort of job. Newman, a widower of about two years, considers the affection of a quirky pet shop owner (Woodward) and conflicts with his married daughter (Borowitz) over her drippy husband and her own selfishness. Meanwhile, Benson is being seduced by a horny secretary (Ivey) when he's not pining over his lost girlfriend (Barkin) who is pregnant with some other man's child. Newman is genial and engrossing, even though his character is rather curmudgeonly and sometimes cantankerous. He plays a workaday everyman and plays it well (although very few everymen look like Paul Newman!) He has a very different sense of humor and those who enjoy it should enjoy him. Benson, who almost wears clothes in the film, is more of an acquired taste with his whispery voice and overstated expressions. He is amiable and shares a palpable chemistry with Newman despite the fact that they don't exactly look as if they could be related. (To be truthful, their relationship, on more than one occasion, reads as a bit homosexual!) In any case, the actors work hard to put across the father-son dynamic and it manages to emerge. Barkin, in one of her earliest roles, does a nice job. Woodward seems to be enjoying the wackier aspects of her character. She shares a few telling moments with her real-life husband Newman. In another spot of bizarre casting, Brimley turns up as Newman's brother (!), who offers him a spot in his surplus business. Ivey is interesting to watch, but not particularly believable. Several of the actors, such as Borowitz, reveal their stage background through their over-emoting before the camera. Some compelling supporting roles are filled by Davis, as the target of a car repossession, Freeman, as one of Benson's bosses, and Chaykin as the head of a repo gang. The film opens vividly with footage of a building demolition and the episodic nature of the piece keeps things moving for the most part, but there is also a disjointed feel. The script seems almost like brief sketches instead of progressive scenes. There are odd continuity instances, punctuated by some of the more distinctive costumes. It looks like the storyline was played with a little in the editing room. (There is also a very obviously tacked-on or re-shot ending, in which Barkin has freshly trimmed hair and the terrain is Californian instead of Floridian.) It's surprising that Newman would direct a film with so many divergent story threads, lack of attention to the details and pat situations. Still, there are enough charming or touching or amusing vignettes to satisfy most viewers who merely want to enjoy a movie.

This little film from director Newman could have benefited from another director's helmsman-ship. When the story focuses on Howie it really takes off and is beautiful (although Benson reverts to some 'Ode to Billy Joe' facial expressions that limit his range), but when Harry becomes the main centerpiece ... it drags. I found the lusting for Harry by the waitress character, the Sally character, and the Woodward character awfully dumb and pretentious. I did enjoy the Fort Lauderdale setting (I grew up there) and some of the scenes between the father and son are 'real', but could have benefited from more conflict like 'Hud' offered. This film does a good job of recalling the early '80s era, and Barkin (whom I've met and talked about her films with) really is genuine as the young, expectant mother. Woodward is somewhat wasted, as is Brimley until his last scene in which his character comes clean to Howie and is honest about 'janitorial supplies.' One last thing, am I the only one who notices that the last scene WAS NOT FILMED IN Florida? That's a rocky California coastline filling in for a flat Florida coastline! Duh?!