Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Taraparain Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Rodrigo Amaro "WUSA" is extremely difficult on us in so many ways that to reach a final conclusion on why we like it or feel it relevant is something that demands a lot from viewers. You have a jaw dropping stellar cast (Paul Newman, Joanne Woodward, Anthony Perkins, Cloris Leachman, Laurence Harvey, Pat Hingle); a director who never extracted a bad performance with his films, the great Stuart Rosenberg ("Cool Hand Luke", "Voyage of the Damned", "Brubaker"); a story working with great basic elements involving the power of media, political and inner conflicts, rich vs. poor and more. What turned this perfect merge into a near let down was its writer Robert Stone, adapting his own novel, writing his first film screenplay and the blame is on him. That was exactly the problem. Stone didn't get the mechanics and language of cinema, over complicated a scenario that could and should be a little palatable to audiences, at least to generate interest for the characters. As said, "WUSA" is a near let down; gladly, we had the cast to save it from ruins and achieve a good cult status. In it, Newman plays the cynical and drunk Rheinhardt, a drifter who accepts a job at a radio station controlled by influential politicians whose motto seems quite familiar in our current times (Make this country Great Again). The WUSA station is one with a point of view, says Hingle character and that distorted point of view destine to include only a certain parcel of New Orleans population and excludes the rest in the majority, it starts to raise some concerns on a fellow named Rainey (Perkins), an idealist survey worker trying to discover the welfare problems faced by the black communities of the place. Rheinhardt and Rainey are neighbors who frequently clash at each other (cynicism vs. idealism; reality vs. utopia) and their quarrels are meddled by Geraldine (Woodward), of whom Rheinhardt has a more intimate involvement, and one that seems to get a grip on this wild drunkard who fail to notice that his bosses are planning something bad as local politics in upcoming elections, and worst of all...his editorials during the radio program are the main force behind the power WASP's success.Such overview of the film seems attractive, specially for those who love those kind of movies about inner conflicts and different schools of thoughts. However, the screenplay jumble up with practically every possible element and device needed to further the plot along with ones that doesn't add up to much. Examples: the radio thing takes an awful lot of time to happen and when it does, it's a huge disappointment that the film never shows what kind of material Newman's character presents to his listeners except "the future of America is up to you". The film allows us to see Rheinhardt shouting about being a liberal but blocks itself when it comes to present what are the actual plans of the powerful and their conservative speech. Perkins with the survey thing occupied a good portion of the film and could have been trimmed down just as much as some of the most tender scenes between the main couple (great chemistry though). Less with the romance, more with the politics and sinister plans, then we'd have a better film than what we've got. And let's face it: the movie doesn't show anything new. If you think "WUSA" is explosive, daring and ahead of its time, then you know very little of this world. "WUSA" just show something called the system and the system is controlled by a minority with money and power on the top of the pyramid, and below there's everyone else following their orders, directly and indirectly; and to avoid giving the appearance of a fascist organization they throw something called democracy, divides itself into parties that look and think different, begs us to vote but whenever there's a shift in the power gear it's always the same corrupt and crooked thing. It never changes, only small fractions but it's always the same and it cannot be challenged because they always come back to haunt or kill your opposition (Rainey defies a businessman at a party in one of the greatest sequences). True in the 1970's and before that, and a more harmful truth now. Obviously the film isn't on the nose with such idea but it's there whenever Rheinhardt opens his mouth, specially when it comes to belittle Rainey, of whom he calls a whiner. But the film keeps it real: the cynic drowns himself under the liquor; the idealist finally does something after spending too much time on a lethargic state (but obviously a wrong act) and the mediator in between them couldn't find the strength in herself to join them, debate ideals and find possible solution to their problems and the ones from the community. But she also had a past and problems of her own, many of which she can't seem to escape. The cast gathering is fine, despite the lack of involvement we have with the characters they play (no one gets saved, they're all critical but substantially real); the ideas carry some relevance but most of it gets torn apart and lost along the way making the experience of seeing "WUSA" a weary endeavor. The good qualities out-weight the bad at the end - I respected that conclusion despite being a predictable cliché. Watch with reservations and low expectations. 6/10

MARIO GAUCI Being Paul Newman's favorite among his own vehicles (and which he also co-produced), calling it "the most significant film I've ever made and probably the best", I chose to watch WUSA on the third anniversary of his passing. For this reason, I had long been intrigued by the movie but, given its relative obscurity, the opportunity never presented itself until the Olive Films DVD was released earlier his year: having made a Newman binge at the time of his demise, I would have gladly added this one too to my collection, were it not for the fact that the bare-bones edition was too heftily-priced for my wallet! Anyway, now that I have caught up with it, I was satisfied to a large extent – though the overall impression remains ambivalent (at least upon a preliminary viewing). The film is basically fuelled by numerous topical i.e. late 1960s attitudes, notably liberal-vs.-conservative politics (but even incorporating Flower Power, most amusingly when a trio of hippies forever "stoned out of their minds", who form a gospel{!?} band and befriend Newman, engage in a philosophical discussion with him but once it is over one of them exclaims: "What was that all about?!"). Incidentally the title should read W (as in Viva) USA (perhaps a nod to the same year's M*A*S*H, though it certainly did not duplicate that film's critical and commercial success!) which is obviously ironic, given the paranoid stance it takes at the attempt by a Southern radio station to brainwash the people to their own power-hungry ends. Even so, this was just one of several thought-provoking but unremittingly cynical pictures to emerge around this time – ranging from THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962; with which it shares both co-star Laurence Harvey and the assassination-at-a-political-rally climax) to NETWORK (1976; which centered around the even-more powerful medium of television).Though direction (Rosenberg was recruited after his fortuitous collaboration with Newman on COOL HAND Luke {1967} and, despite WUSA's failure, would lend his services to two more of the star's efforts i.e. POCKET MONEY {1972} and THE DROWNING POOL {1975}), camera-work and editing (incidentally, the Preview Version ran for 3 hours and 10 minutes but, even as it stands now, the film is overlong – particularly the concluding after-rally scenes) make themselves felt throughout, WUSA mainly relies on the script and the acting to put its various points across. With this in mind, the former is literary (Robert Stone adapted his own novel to the screen) if verging on the hysterical and the latter ably served by an excellent cast.Newman typically exudes cool amorality as the alcoholic drifter anti-hero who is appointed as d.j. of WUSA, though his supposedly subversive comments are basically limited to such subliminal messages as "The future of America is up to you" (in fact, the film was criticized for not really having the courage of its convictions by tiptoeing around its subject matter!) – he even takes to the mike at the rally in calming down the crowd, with his repeated but clearly sardonic assertion that "We {the Americans} are O.K." (his character's essential lack of commitment, which alienates the Joanne Woodward one and sends Anthony Perkins off the deep end, is rather baffling). Harvey is a con-man who is just at home spouting religious fanaticism as ideological elitism, and who likes to keep up-to-date with airport schedules since they are likely to become useful (thus sharing with Newman an instinct for survival). In my opinion, this makes for one of the Newmans' strongest outings as a team...even though Woodward's character is too derivative of Piper Laurie's in THE HUSTLER (1961) with her incarceration and subsequent suicide unfortunately seeming tagged-on this time around! – besides, the hippies' irresponsible behavior in getting her busted in the first place and their apparent nonchalance over her ultimate fate is appalling! Perkins plays typically awkward and easily manipulated, but eventually making a stand – albeit one that horribly backfires on him, thus emerging a martyr rather than a savior). For what it is worth, Newman had already appeared alongside Harvey in THE OUTRAGE (1964) and would re-unite with Perkins for THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JUDGE ROY BEAN (1972).Pat Hingle, then, is the Macchiavellian head of WUSA, Moses Gunn is Perkins' hostile contact while conducting his 'prejudiced' survey in the city slums, Cloris Leachman is the facially-scarred Woodward's crippled friend, Bruce Cabot barely registers as a legendary cowboy during the rally set-piece, Clifton James is a sailor and improbable would-be client of aspiring 'barmaid' Woodward, and Robert Quarry (yes, Count Yorga himself!) is one of Hingle's underlings who becomes Perkins' prime target at his extreme and misguided outburst that leads to outright rioting and, in retaliation, police brutality! The DVD's superb widescreen image quality (particularly effective in capturing the two facades of the New Orleans setting) is unfortunately undercut by audio deficiencies (notably a constant imbalance between the sound effects/score and dialogue tracks and even a couple of glitches during one, albeit pivotal, scene where Perkins corners one of Hingle's yes-men inside a brothel and gives him a piece of his mind).In conclusion and just for the record, the following are the unwatched Newman titles currently in my possession: YOU ARE THERE: THE DEATH OF SOCRATES (1953; TV), PLAYWRIGHTS '56: THE BATTLER (1955; TV), THE UNITED STATES STEEL HOUR: BANG THE DRUM SLOWLY (1956; TV), THE RACK (1956), THE HELEN MORGAN STORY (1957), UNTIL THEY SAIL (1957), ERNEST HEMINGWAY'S "ADVENTURES OF A YOUNG MAN" (1962), THE SECRET WAR OF HARRY FRIGG (1968), WINNING (1969), POCKET MONEY, THE SHADOW BOX (1980; TV) – which he only directed, HARRY & SON (1984) – which the star also helmed, BLAZE (1989), THE HUDSUCKER PROXY (1994) and TWILIGHT (1998).

joebstewart If you like this movie you will love the book it comes from:HALL OF MIRRORS by Robert Stone.This is another example of a book that is so literary it could not really be done justice in a movie.Still I love both the book and the movie.But check out the book for the full experience ofRobert Stone's wit and wisdom.This is my favorite Robert Stone book(Hall of Mirrors)along with his other masterpiece DOG SOLDIERS which was made into the movie WHO'LL STOP THE RAIN. Note: The info here gives the filming location as Louisiana but the final political rally scenes were filmed in Hollywood.

JulJoAnnicgraith Ok, first of all, I definately do not see why all of you don't like this movie!!! I absolutely loved it. I was mesmerized by Joanne Woodward performance....WOW! Paul Newman, I'll admit, wasn't at his greatest. Tony Perkins and Joanne Woodward, however, made up for it! And those scenes between Woodward and Newman! The chemistry that comes with being married (as they are in real life) just comes right through the scene!Great movie! Very moving.