Armand exploration of feelings nuances , force of an actress, a gray story, a splendid acting.salted flavor of a life who begins later and one of the greatest role of Joanne Woodward, the precise work of Paul Newman and something else, who seduce and fascinate the viewer.a story of balance between past and present, dream and reality, fear and need to be yourself.its secret - the precision of performance for discover, step by step, the character, the possibility to discover slices from yours existences and the measure of each scene. short, a film about self definition. almost a Madame Bovary version. except the last part. who, in this case, represents its essence. and light ray after a long cloudy period.

SnoopyStyle This is Paul Newman's directorial debut starring his wife Joanne Woodward. Rachel is a spinster school teacher. She's shy, emotionally damaged, and stuck with her mother. Then an old acquaintance's visit sets off a chain of emotional breakdowns.It's a bit of experimental filmmaking from Paul Newman. I'm not a fan of his directing. It doesn't build drama and it's very disjointed. The story doesn't flow. Luckily, Joanne Woodward is such a compelling actress. She's able to hold the attention despite the lack of skills with the camera.There are a few powerful scenes where certain unexpected things happen. Those are great scenes and the movie works great at the end. I only wish that those scenes were linked together by a better movie. It's still a worthwhile watch.

Bill Slocum A film that draws its greatest power from its most subtle, fragile moments, "Rachel, Rachel" is a sweet coming-of-age drama where the subject is a woman neither in her teens or early twenties, but of an age where she has begun giving up on anything special ever happening to her.Joanne Woodward embodies the title role with disarming ease, a frumpy small-town teacher who lives with her mother above a funeral parlor. Rachel's life consists largely on flashing back on her childhood and her relationship with her dead father. As summer sets in, new opportunities to experience life emerge in Rachel's life, just as she develops an appetite for change."Nothing is real," she says, echoing John Lennon from about this same time. "Nothing is now."The film can be divided in two parts. The first part establishes Rachel and her surroundings in a quiet, almost eventless way. The director, Paul Newman, obviously knew actors, especially Woodward, and gives his cast ample space to find their voices. Woodward and Estelle Parsons as Rachel's teacher friend Calla were both nominated for Oscars, and Woodward and Newman both won Golden Globes, but the standout for me is Kate Harrington as Rachel's needling, passive-aggressive mother."I'm not criticizing, dear," she tells Rachel gleefully after discovering her daughter forgot to bring her the candy bar she asked for. "We all forget sometimes. Anyhow I got it myself. I took a nice long walk in the heat." She emphasizes that final consonant wonderfully.The second part revolves around Nick, the guy with the key to releasing the woman inside the overgrown girl Rachel has become. James Olson gets all he can out of playing Nick, smug, coy, self-loathing. He's a fellow teacher home from the big city who Rachel knew as a boy, not all bad but prone to saying even complimentary things in a caustic way. "How polite and well brought-up you are," he tells Rachel in one of many uncomfortable moments Olson delivers well.Terry Kiser, best known today as the title walking-dead guy from the "Weekend At Bernie's" series, shines as a charismatic preacher, while Donald Moffat plays Rachel's father in a series of enigmatic, effective flashbacks with Woodward and Newman's real-life daughter Nell Potts as Rachel. It's a real family affair; Newman himself can be heard if not seen as a character in a scary movie Rachel and Nick go see.On the whole, this is a solid and worthwhile film, very much a product of its times yet ahead of them, too. The surreal peeks we get of Rachel's active imagination point toward the less-tethered but more scattershot mind-flipping of films to come like "Midnight Cowboy" and "Catch-22."Newman also gets a lot of value from the more rural enclaves of Fairfield County, Connecticut, looking very beautiful but a bit oppressive. A visit to the cemetery reveals Rachel has her own grave laid out already, with a tombstone bearing both her and her mother's name!There are things that seem under-realized. Kiser's church service is an overacted mash which feels like a shrill send-up rather than the transforming experience presented in Margaret Laurence's source novel, "A Jest Of God." Also left without resolution are some early bits of business involving the principal at Rachel's school and a little boy Rachel dreams of adopting. By the way, the boy wears a holster with toy guns to class. This really was shot 45 years ago!Today, "Rachel, Rachel" is best known as a tour de force for Woodward, as it should be. She commands our attention even as her character seems desperate to escape our notice. Can Rachel survive in the big, bad world? You may not know for certain in the end, but Woodward, with Newman's able support, makes sure you care.

writers_reign I'm very pleased that the several reviews posted here are all positive. This is a fine film, a fine directorial review from an equally fine actor, an outstanding acting performance from his wife and great support from the entire cast. This is definitely art house material but none the worse for that. Director Newman reveals a wonderful sensitivity matched by his eye for pictorial images, the small New England town is captured to perfection yet is light years away from Peyton Place and the theme of time passing is conveyed subtly in scenes of pastoral/agricultural life following the seasons. It's difficult not to praise it too highly.