Cineinthecity
World-class acting all around
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
05/10/21
Full Review
Ava S
It's difficult to follow its many toxic drunken ramblings, but Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? strikes a chord with its evocatively sharp screenplay and powerful performances.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
07/31/25
Full Review
Christian K
Obviously a film based on a stage production, the writing is clearly good but I did have trouble keeping up with the pace of the drunken babbling for 2 hours.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
07/14/25
Full Review
Teddy B
One of the most welcomingly uncomfortable film experiences ever, 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf' unravels with scathing cynicism and tension the equivalent of a ticking time bomb just waiting to explode.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
05/22/25
Full Review
r r
When Film Mirrors Reality: Cold Truths from “Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf”
When was the last time you watched a movie that made your toes curl? Maybe for you it was during a Gorey horror movie, but for me it was during “Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf”. If you’ve seen this film before, you’d understand. It's because this film was based on a play written by Edward Albee. His sole goal in playwriting was to make the audience uncomfortable. He wanted to produce realistic representations of the way our society acts so that we can understand our problems. This movie is no exception. Directed by Mike Nichols and produced by Earnest Lehman, this film uses an intense plot and extensive symbolism to deliver an uncomfortable look into the realities of marriage, and the emotional violence it can bring.
Releasing in 1966, this challenging film takes place in the early 60’s on a university campus house in the late hours of night. After a party, Martha (Elizabeth Taylor) and George (Richard Burton) invite a younger couple (George Segal, Sandy Dennis) over for drinks. The night spirals as the group indulges in heavy binge drinking, leading to copious arguments and fights. As the film progresses, we watch an innocent night be taken over by battle between 2 monsters striving for emotional damage.
What made this movie so impactful for me was their brilliant use of symbolism. To begin, the constant drinking of alcohol throughout the film symbolizes the inherently broken and decaying nature of George and Marthas relationship. Over the course of the night, after countless drinks, they become increasingly sloppy and drained. Their physical deterioration due to alcohol resembles their relationship’s decay due to constant anger and emotionally violent “games”. Additionally, the use of the son made a great impact. He seems to represent the power struggle in their relationship. Constantly throughout the second half of the film, the son is being used as a weapon to hurt and humiliate. Even though he isn't real, he is the couple's way of asserting dominance and when George decides to “kill” him, I believe that symbolizes the end of their violent “games”. In the end, the use of symbolism in this film was a great device to highlight the intense struggles of marriage.
Overall, this film was great. I must admit, it can be very uncomfortable at times. However, I said earlier that it was Edward Albee's mission to bring forth accurate representations of reality which we can learn from. Although it can be extremely unnerving, that only goes to show how well the roles were performed. It's uncomfortable because it is so real and addresses the unwanted truth that marriage is not easy. Overall, I would give this film an 8/10. If you like movies that tackle real issues, you will definitely appreciate this film. You may find yourself uneasy at times, but in the end, you’ll be amazed by such a realistic performance.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
10/16/24
Full Review
B K
Come on, Martha.
The 1966 film adaptation of Edward Albee’s stage play, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, is a dark, cinematically historic, and twisted brain game. The sadistically updated writing from Ernest Lehman, combined with the unusual and magnificent monochrome production of director Mike Nichols, provides the film with a truly psychotic feeling that only intensifies with each scene. The film itself, considered controversial at the time, utilized uncommon mature themes and brutal tones of dialogue that were unexpected in Hollywood film. The free-flowing profanity, relationship images of dysfunction, and plethora of sexual matter made this film one of a kind.
Viewing the film today, the shocking subject matter has lost its luster. The film, that is carried by mostly dialogue, is rather slow and difficult to follow. The scene location does not change (besides a short scene in the yard) until around the hour and six-minute mark from beyond Martha and George’s home. The non-stop, heavy pouring of alcoholic drinks, the unfollowable squabbling, and awkward moments of confusing conflict drag on throughout most of the film. However, Elizabeth Taylor (Martha) and Richard Burton’s (George) noble performances manage to carry the film until its climatic and revealing end. In the opening scene, a rare use of realism in acting, Elizabeth Taylor’s character Martha scarfs down some fried chicken while attempting to continue her conversation with her husband. The use of this simple, and yet undignified, action allows the audience to relate to the characters in the scene by its lack of glamour and glitz. It was this moment that I realized that the performances in the film were elevating my experience. The constant building of conflicts between Martha and George, felt like voyeurism and all too realistic. Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton’s intriguing performances make the film what it is, classic.
SPOILERS: In addition to the great performances, there are some magnificent visual imageries captured in peak moments of the film. The dance sequence with Honey (Sandy Dennis) where the audience gets to shake a leg with the character through an unusual camera trick and the extreme close-up camera angles of Martha’s face during her emotional breakdown. Nick’s (George Segal) traumatic realization, when he says he now understands, is timed so accurately that, as an audience member, I was thinking the same exact thought. Lastly, the dramatic close-up of Martha and George holding hands for the first time, while the sun rises behind them gives us hope. The scene is a simple manipulation of the camera’s focus and simulates a new positivity, finally, and a glimpse at the uplifting possibilities of a new day.
Overall, the film was extremely slow, outdated, and compared poorly with the nonstop action-packed Hollywood films we are used to today. My original and overall reaction to the film was of disappointment and boredom. The surprising and dramatic shock factor of 1966 had lost its edge, and I had already decided to dismiss the film’s importance. However, during the next twenty-four hours, I could not help but to continue to think about the film. The confusing, yet eyeball popping big reveal at the climax, that was not so clear at that moment. The delusions of Martha that contradict the actual writings of Virginia Woolf’s stream of consciousness. The conclusion that the couple may have found a happier life because of their dramatically disturbing night. And upon further reflection, I believe I am beginning to soak up the greatness of the film.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
10/15/24
Full Review
Read all reviews
Continue with Google
>
