LeaBlacks_Balls This film follows the lives of three friends (Davis, Allen, and Parker) as they attend Harvard in the 1960's. They meet, bond, fall in and out of love, and challenge the system during the time of social upheaval and student unrest. Their friendship is complicated when a love triangle develops, and it takes a senseless tragedy to bring them crashing back down to earth.Like many films set in this era, most key events, from LBJ refusing to seek a second term to the rise of the far left terrorist groups, are seen through the eyes of the main characters. But unlike films like 'Forrest Gump,' the historical references feel more organic to the film, and not just points on a timeline.The three leads are very good as well. Through the various ups and downs in their friendships and the world around them, Brad Davis, Karen Allen and Jameson Parker manage to communicate the changes their characters go through over the two decades this film spans. Even though some of the film borders on melodrama, there are enough interesting sections of the film that keep it from becoming trite.But what I liked most about this film was that it doesn't romanticize the counter-culture. It shows the flaws in the idealism and that not everyone who was against the war was an enlightened peace loving flower child. But it also shows the good things. Like the sense of community, protest through art, and an embracing of love over violence. 'A Small Circle of Friends' manages to show that the hippies were individuals making their own choices and dealing with the consequences, and not some giant smelly organism that shared a collective consciousness.

podium1 This film, and the principal people involved with it, have long held a special place in my life as I was an extra during the riot scene at "Harvard"(nee Bridgewater State College). While I don't have a truly memorable role in the finished film(although many close friends of mine do and were featured on two of the lobby cards from the film), I am part of the cluster of people on the main building's upper balcony(a most unsafe act as that creaky and once condemned balcony held about 15 of us at one point). Shooting went from 6 PM until 6 AM on a very rainy evening. All the rioters, with the exception of the principal actors, were student extras who raided their older sibling's closet to get the historical costumes. Real Boston MDC riot police were used, some of whom had been at the riots in the 60's. First take was particularly chaotic and bloody as students fought with the police who, acting upon instinct, violently did the same. Being part of the student press covering the event(with a story which, based on our notes, was picked up by AP), I got the opportunity to meet and greet the stars shortly before nationwide opening of the film. Filmed opened on a Wednesday and closed the following Tuesday. A great financial disappointment which truly hurt a burgeoning career for Cohen. Other brief notes: there are two familiar Steinman thematics running throughout the film. The first did become TOTAL ECLIPSE OF THE HEART while the second became a #1 hit for Air Supply, MAKING LOVE OUT OF NOTHING AT ALL. The reason that the film ended up at BSC did have to do with Harvard's exam schedule. As it turned out, this was the final scene in the film to be shot, leading studio execs to frantically find a suitable location in order to stay on shooting schedule and budget. Also, the "paddy wagon" seen rocking during the sequence(and featured prominently on one of the lobby cards) was actually rolled over onto it's roof during the first take. The student riding the vehicle is William Hoffman. Truly looking forward to seeing the DVD(first time the film, long out of print on VHS, will be in widescreen) and hearing Cohen's commentary on the while experience.

dunsuls I usually don't like flash back films but in this one,I'll make an exception. The story of 3 folks who meet in Harvard during the Vietnam war. I thought it covered the turmoil of the time as well as being a buddy flick.Two for the price of one.See it if you went through the times as I did.

petershelleyau The most resonant element of director Rob Cohen's film is the music score by Jim Steinman, which includes the melody that was later recorded as Total Eclipse of the Heart. Otherwise this tale of a supposed menage-a-tois between Harvard university students Brad Davis, Karen Allen and Jameson Parker is as dramatic as the cartoon opening and closing sketches. The screenplay by Ezra Sacks attempts coverage of the Vietnam era from 1967 to 1971 from a student activist point of view, but the tri-romance hardly seems from the same era since it isn't until towards the end that there is any suggestion of bigamy. There is also even less suggestion of homosexuality interest between Davis and Parker. When the 3 finally go into the same bedroom, the camera is left outside and the door closed. Their lack of involvement in activism is paralled with the radicalisation of a Texan boy scout who comes to Harvard at the same time and ends up a terrorist, and highlighted by a campus riot that comes out of nowhere. Even the Vietnam connection as a comment on the relationship and vice versa doesn't work. Sacks opens with Parker reuniting with Allen in "the present"before we start flashbacking to 1967, with Davis' absence pre-empting the outcome, and Cohen supplies matching love scene montages. Davis' has steam so apparently is more erotic and ends abruptly, whilst Parker's is set to Chances Are and ends more positively. Sacks has 2 lines I liked - a technique of breaking into a glass window "I saw it on I Spy or was it The Untouchables", though Cohen repeats it, and "Only men would come up with a draft lottery using balls". Utilising period TV and photographic images - the assassinations of the Kennedy's and Martin Luther King - and a series of bad wigs, the only sense of reality and truth comes in a moment when someone sings the Star Spangled Banner to TV closure. Davis has the impossible charming/wild man role, not helped by his looking older than the others, and the best he can do is stare child-like for vulnerability. Allen doesn't have a strong screen persona so it's easy to think one is watching Amy Irving or Janet Margolin or Brooke Adams. Of the 3, Parker probably comes off best even when saddled with a Colonel Sanders look. His character's basic dullness is probably the reason he needs to be reunited with Allen. Even when the competition is Davis, anyone that prefers to experiment with rats rather than go to an Ingmar Bergman film is definitely worth reconsidering as a partner. Watch for Shelley Long as a photographer, and Daniel Stern, billed as Dan.