I had forgotten how much I used to enjoy Burt Reynolds. No, he was never a GREAT actor, but he was almost always enjoyable on screen. And this is another of his engaging performances. It's a decent story about a man who is dumped by his wife (a quite young Candice Bergen) and has to start over. And after a few stumbles he starts over with Jill Clayburgh, who plays a rather insecure teacher who has trouble developing relationships because she is too in need of permanence early on. And just when they finally do move in together, up shows the old wife! So, of course, the question is, which way will he go...although we all really know the answer. But meanwhile, he makes the poor choices.Just for the record, this is one of Burt's more serious films. It's not a comedy, although there is some humor in it. I think it's more drama.There are some other familiar faces here, including the wonderful Charles Durning, but they don't have much screen time...just along to move the plot.Burt is good here. Not Laurence Olivier, but he's good for the role. So is Jill Clayburgh. I wasn't very impressed with Candice Bergen, which is odd, because usually I don't care that much for Jill Clayburgh...here they flipped.

this film is very well done, portraying those very real situations that people find them selves.first off, in small but very important, vibrant roles, Mary sternhagen, and Charles durning once again prove their worth, their talent, and their ability to MATTER to a story. both of these actors are just fantastic at recognizing their roles, and DELIVERING more than needed. just fantastic.also look for Austin Pendleton, in a small but vital role playing it to the hilt. he is a spectacular actor who deserves way more credit and recognition then he receives from Hollywood. versatile, fantastic actor. without actors like him, Hollywood would never survive.as to the two female leads, well, one and a half, as i can't see why Candice bergen would be nominated for an academy award for this limited performance. she is definitely a major part of the story, BUT NOT A MAJOR FORCE ON THE SCREEN. now, Jill clayburgh, on the other hand is so good in her role here, and so believable, that she definitely deserved recognition. she has the character, the personal trauma, the desperation, the fear down pat. bergen, on the other hand, while she does nail the character, is not that memorable at all.and Burt Reynolds, is is usual magnificent self, giving 110 % to the story, the character, the production.if you are an aspiring actor, STUDY Burt Reynolds. he is far more than a plastic banana head sex symbol, leading man. he is of the same cloth of classic actors Humphrey Bogart, Clark gable, john Wayne.....he gets the character down, and gives his all.this film is a keeper, very well done, and keeps your rapt interest in the final outcome, WHICH IS NOT ETCHED IN STONE, by any means. it can go either way.well produced, well directed, and well acted.

It was 1979, and I was trying to impress a girl with whom I was trying to re-connect, so I (being 17) took her (she was a very mature 15) to see this movie.I was bored beyond tears, I was disappointed that Vicki seemed to be very interested in the movie, and I was about to fall asleep when I heard Candice Bergan trying to impress Burt Reynolds by informing him: "I had a vaginal orgasm." I laughed so damn hard and loud... and it took several long moments to realize that I was the only one laughing...You know? - The floor of the movie theater wasn't really that sticky when I crawled under my seat to await the end of that motion picture.Oh well - good times I guess...Peace

"Starting Over" works very well because it's a film made for and by adults. And it's got some very funny moments.Yes, it's got all the trappings of a typical "ROMCOM" but back in 1979, the ROMCOM formula had not developed into the hackneyed, tiresome concept that it became. By the late 90's, the style that "Starting Over" began seems to have expired (it arguably reached it's zenith circa 1994 with "Sleeping in Seattle". Whether one liked that movie or not, all the trappings of the stylized ROMCOM formula were firmly and grossly used in that one.) But I digress."Starting Over" works so well because of Pakula's typical very low keyed direction which allows James L. Brooks' screenplay to shine. But this film would be nothing without the cast. Clayburgh is fine but of the three leads, she's the least appealing. Don't get me wrong. She's an engaging presence in the film and it's quite understandable why Reynolds is attracted to her (except for a shower scene in which, to me, she over reacts). The hands down winners in this film are Reynolds and especially Bergen. Bergen tapped into a completely unexpected flair for comedy as a royally flaky song writing ex-wife of Reynolds. She's a gas especially in an hysterical scene when she begins singing a disco ditty ("Better Than Ever") in a hotel room while trying to reconcile with Reynolds.Reynolds is a complete revelation. Gone is his trademark mustache and cockiness and it works to marvelous effect. He's mature, low key and completely likable. It would've been so easy for Reynolds to play down the part to the point where he appears to be sleepwalking (ala William Hurt in "The Accidental Tourist"). But here, though he's depressed, he's also alive. He's just a guy going through something that he wishes he didn't have to. He loves/likes his ex-wife and can't understand why he's the odd man out.From a plot and structural standpoint, "Starting Over" isn't much. It's setup and resolution are standard and completely unremarkable. Aside from the wonderful cast and good writing, the film is photographed beautifully by Sven Nyquist. This Swede (who was Ingmar Bergman's chief Director of Photography) knows how to film chilly northern environments and he gives Boston in winter an appealing glow.