Candy Reviews
Mike T
Super Reviewer
October 25, 2009
A perverted, frantic, nearly incomprehensible attempt at comedy. Difficult to sit through, and even harder to follow. It's amusing to watch talented actors playing ridiculous parts, but aside from that Candy is just an arduous task to get through.
January 27, 2012
The only place to begin this review is by sayin that in the first 30-minutes, Ringo Starr, playing a Mexican gardner, kind-of rapes the title character. Next to him, at the time, Richard Burton is raping a plastic mannequin and Sugar Ray Robinson is mixing drinks. I'm not kidding. Apparently intended to be some spoof of pornography written by Buck Henry, Candy is the object of desire of everyone she comes into contact with. As she goes forward through her journey, she meets lots of different people who also pretty much try to rape her. She's very nice about it. But the guys are clearly just kind of jumping on top of her. The she's led into the back of a moving semi, where Marlon Brando, playing an Indian yogi, actually gets down with her in way she comfortable with. They travel through deserts and snowy mountains, screwing in various positions. It made absolutely no sense to me. In the end, nothing is learned or gained except that Ewa Aulin was a stunning Swedish flower who needed to be in a better movie.
July 15, 2011
My dad was waxing nostalgic about this "bizarre, awful (funny)" movie he saw in theatres back in 1968. After naming off the surprisingly notable cast he finally came upon the name--Candy. He then confided to me that he could never find a copy of the film anywhere else and that it must have been withheld from distribution. This, to me, sounded like a challenge. We watched it together the next day.
This movie reeks of 1968. It's such a snapshot of some of the "wackier" films of that time that that aspect alone makes it worth watching. The inclusion of all the star names--Brando, Astin, Matthau--adds a definite freak factor to it all. How did they corral all these people into one strange sex comedy? Perhaps all the actors thought they could do their one obligatory embarrassing psychedelic movie in one fell swoop and then return to "legitimate" film. Either way, it's nothing short of hilarious to watch Marlon Brando in the back of a sixteen wheeler spouting off new-age nonsense as the "traveling guru"--before launching himself at the films titular blonde protagonist, of course.
The entire film is carried by each man's wanton desire to bed Candy, the overtly innocent and breathy-voiced star of the film. The movie sort of meanders after a point, and is carried only really by the fascinating cameos and how none of them seem to let on how strange what they're doing really is. John Astin is the standout performance of the flick, being the only one to really communicate comedy in a way that isn't incidental.
Candy is a bizarre little slice of cinema that has no doubt garnered some kind of a cult following in the decades since its release. It's too peculiar not to have.
I came upon this movie in a very peculiar way.
My dad was waxing nostalgic about this "bizarre, awful (funny)" movie he saw in theatres back in 1968. After naming off the surprisingly notable cast he finally came upon the name--Candy. He then confided to me that he could never find a copy of the film anywhere else and that it must have been withheld from distribution. This, to me, sounded like a challenge. We watched it together the next day.
This movie reeks of 1968. It's such a snapshot of some of the "wackier" films of that time that that aspect alone makes it worth watching. The inclusion of all the star names--Brando, Astin, Matthau--adds a definite freak factor to it all. How did they corral all these people into one strange sex comedy? Perhaps all the actors thought they could do their one obligatory embarrassing psychedelic movie in one fell swoop and then return to "legitimate" film. Either way, it's nothing short of hilarious to watch Marlon Brando in the back of a sixteen wheeler spouting off new-age nonsense as the "traveling guru"--before launching himself at the films titular blonde protagonist, of course.
The entire film is carried by each man's wanton desire to bed Candy, the overtly innocent and breathy-voiced star of the film. The movie sort of meanders after a point, and is carried only really by the fascinating cameos and how none of them seem to let on how strange what they're doing really is. John Astin is the standout performance of the flick, being the only one to really communicate comedy in a way that isn't incidental.
Candy is a bizarre little slice of cinema that has no doubt garnered some kind of a cult following in the decades since its release. It's too peculiar not to have.
autumnwalden
April 12, 2007
oh yes, you can't get any more 60's than with this movie. richard burton, james coburn, and marlon brando- plus the guy who played gomez adams in the original adams family...La, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la- Ocean's 12 used the music from Candy at the end. nuff said
Catherine S.
December 12, 2010
Candy focuses on the main character Candy Christian (played by Ewa Aulin), who apparently comes from outer space, and lives among the humans. She constantly gets into sexual mishaps with the strangest of characters who are all attracted to Candy, including a popular poet Maphisto (Richard Burton), the household gardener Emmanuel (Ringo Starr), and several other eccentric characters.
This film made absolutely no sense. First of all, if Candy is from outer space, why does her father live on Earth? It's clear that this was made in the late 1960's, as most of the film is completely random and feels like it was written in a drug-induced haze, which it probably was. That's also some of the fun of the film. Most of the actors were probably on drugs during filming, so most of their reactions to the dangers in the film are just hilarious, such as: "Hey, there's a gang of biker chicks following us!" "What could they want?" "Perhaps they want to talk to us?" I mean really, what person thinks like that? The acting as you could guess, is pretty poor, but probably because the actors know what this film is.
I think I was most surprised by the amount of big name stars in this film. I mean, this has Richard Burton, Marlon Brando, Ringo Starr, and more. How did they get so many of these stars? I'm guessing their budget was pretty high, or they got these celebrities to exploit their popularity so they can get higher ticket sales. This film, along with Yellow Submarine, is often chosen as the films that sum up an era. And I'll agree, it shows, with all the psychedilic imagery that the sixties encompassed.
Really, Candy is pure camp. It makes no sense, but some of the subtleties is what makes it kind of fun to watch. I'll say this though, there are too many friggin sex scenes! They aren't even good sex scenes, they are painful to watch! If you decide to watch Candy, don't watch it with high expectations. Just expect a stupid, nonsensical, yet strangely entertaining time. (Real rating: 69%)
Ah yes, another B-movie that somehow roped Richard Burton, Marlon Brando, and Ringo Starr into it's twister of catastrophe. I'm not saying that Candy is the worst B-movie ever made, but it's certainly a weird and not exactly good film.
Candy focuses on the main character Candy Christian (played by Ewa Aulin), who apparently comes from outer space, and lives among the humans. She constantly gets into sexual mishaps with the strangest of characters who are all attracted to Candy, including a popular poet Maphisto (Richard Burton), the household gardener Emmanuel (Ringo Starr), and several other eccentric characters.
This film made absolutely no sense. First of all, if Candy is from outer space, why does her father live on Earth? It's clear that this was made in the late 1960's, as most of the film is completely random and feels like it was written in a drug-induced haze, which it probably was. That's also some of the fun of the film. Most of the actors were probably on drugs during filming, so most of their reactions to the dangers in the film are just hilarious, such as: "Hey, there's a gang of biker chicks following us!" "What could they want?" "Perhaps they want to talk to us?" I mean really, what person thinks like that? The acting as you could guess, is pretty poor, but probably because the actors know what this film is.
I think I was most surprised by the amount of big name stars in this film. I mean, this has Richard Burton, Marlon Brando, Ringo Starr, and more. How did they get so many of these stars? I'm guessing their budget was pretty high, or they got these celebrities to exploit their popularity so they can get higher ticket sales. This film, along with Yellow Submarine, is often chosen as the films that sum up an era. And I'll agree, it shows, with all the psychedilic imagery that the sixties encompassed.
Really, Candy is pure camp. It makes no sense, but some of the subtleties is what makes it kind of fun to watch. I'll say this though, there are too many friggin sex scenes! They aren't even good sex scenes, they are painful to watch! If you decide to watch Candy, don't watch it with high expectations. Just expect a stupid, nonsensical, yet strangely entertaining time. (Real rating: 69%)
Pizza the Hutt
June 25, 2009
"Candy... beautiful name. It has the spirit and the sound of the Old Testament."
James J. Lee
June 24, 2009
Must be Brando's worst performance and that's saying something.
I know it was made during the rise of flower power and the hippy movement but the producers and all involved in this awful movie must have been on mind bending/life altering drugs to have made such a dog.
Avoid completely unless you want to see how a bad movie is made.
One terrible waste of talent and money.
Must be Brando's worst performance and that's saying something.
I know it was made during the rise of flower power and the hippy movement but the producers and all involved in this awful movie must have been on mind bending/life altering drugs to have made such a dog.
Avoid completely unless you want to see how a bad movie is made.
