A writer in California's Marin County leaves his wife (and four young daughters) for another woman. I'm not quite sure who the audience is for a picture like this. Obviously it's an R-rated film intended for adults, but some of the silly levity--with kids spilling hot chocolate and so on--is so broad that I think it would make most adults uncomfortable (indeed, the film failed at the box-office). As a showcase for the leading actors, Diane Keaton and Albert Finney, it's an erratic mood piece which allows them to blow off emotional steam, but I didn't buy a screaming-match sequence in a restaurant (again, too broad) nor a climactic battle on the tennis court which will leave most viewers cold. No, the best thing in "Shoot The Moon" is the young Dana Hill, who died a few years back of Diabetes-related causes; she was not a natural kid actress (in some of her big scenes, you can feel a mechanical rhythm at work), nor was she adept at subtle emotions (she often zips through at warp speed from A to Z). However, she has a perceptive quality that is rare, and she's very intense. The sequence where she holds her father off with scissors is extremely moving and unsettling, and it's to Hill's credit that a scene like this works at all. "Shoot The Moon" tries for bared emotions and a kind of pent-up, married hostility that few films have explored (maybe Harold Pinter or Ingmar Bergman). It's simply not as entertaining per se as something like "Kramer Vs. Kramer" because of its claustrophobic atmosphere and underpopulated environment. Director Alan Parker tries too hard to liven things up--mostly with crassness--though his joshing isn't in tune with the emotional decay, and the picture leaves you with a peculiar unease. **1/2 from ****
38 Reviews
Dana Hill steals scenes
joejdanielson24 November 2005
Well done, realistic film. Though Keaton gives her usual strong performance. And Finney does a good job of acting as the man coming apart (he reminds me of Richard Burton in Night of the Iguana). But the real story here for me was between Dana Hill's character and both her parents. I am not too familiar with Dana Hill, though I somehow recognize her from something. But in this film she does a marvelous job of showing the pain felt by children from parental separation. Another thing about this film is that it somehow really manages to remind me of the late 70s/early 80s. A side note for compaction equipment fans: check out that Dynapac roller!!! No idea which model is being used to compact the tennis court. But it looks like a great machine.
Family in movies
josege29 July 2019
Shoot the Moon
Coxer9928 May 1999
Honest drama about the breakup of a 15 year marriage that is brought to the screen with brute intensity by acting giants Finney and Keaton. Director Alan Parker arrives at some striking revelations about what keeps people together and what drives them apart. There are moments that are exceptionally moving and the supporting cast should also be commended for their work.
effective divorce drama
SnoopyStyle2 December 2017
Famed writer George Dunlap (Albert Finney) grows tired of his wife Faith (Diane Keaton). He leaves her and their four girls (Dana Hill, Viveka Davis, Tracey Gold, Tina Yothers) for his mistress Sandy (Karen Allen). Faith is depressed and then contractor Frank Henderson (Peter Weller) shows up at her door. He was hired before the split to build a tennis court. The family struggles with getting divorced and life after divorce.
It's dark and it has some light. It has some over the top moments but it feels relatively real. There is a lot struggling going on. The drunken child beating is fine but the arguing in the restaurant is problematic. That scene is played for laughs but I kept wondering why they aren't getting kicked out. There has to be a better way to get them back in bed together. It felt too manufactured. As a side note, it's wonderful to see many of these future stars as little girls. I've been rewatching Family Ties recently. Dana Hill could be the central character but I also see the value of having two veterans at the center. The good far outweights the less good.
It's dark and it has some light. It has some over the top moments but it feels relatively real. There is a lot struggling going on. The drunken child beating is fine but the arguing in the restaurant is problematic. That scene is played for laughs but I kept wondering why they aren't getting kicked out. There has to be a better way to get them back in bed together. It felt too manufactured. As a side note, it's wonderful to see many of these future stars as little girls. I've been rewatching Family Ties recently. Dana Hill could be the central character but I also see the value of having two veterans at the center. The good far outweights the less good.
Quaint early 80's period piece
The_Core15 August 2002
"Shoot the Moon" is a strange film... one of those quaint (I mean that in a good way), early 80's period pieces that flopped at the box office and then disappeared almost entirely from public consciousness, never to reappear. Painful to watch at times... sometimes it feels true to reality, sometimes it doesn't.
The film is more a collection of scenes than a coherent whole, which isn't necessarily a bad thing... but as another reviewer stated, the target audience here is unclear. As an "anti-divorce" statement it makes its point (perhaps too strongly... the tennis court scene was unnecessary, I thought, given that there was no emotional buildup to it). The acting is also a mixed bag -- at times seeming perfectly natural and at other times forced and constrained by the script, as well as by the mixed talents of the child actors.
This film is little more than an interesting, dated period piece, yet it's very enjoyable (though not always pleasant) and never lost my attention for a minute. Makes a good companion film to "Table for Five," another film of a similar bent and genre -- these are good films to see on a quiet, rainy Sunday. 7/10
The film is more a collection of scenes than a coherent whole, which isn't necessarily a bad thing... but as another reviewer stated, the target audience here is unclear. As an "anti-divorce" statement it makes its point (perhaps too strongly... the tennis court scene was unnecessary, I thought, given that there was no emotional buildup to it). The acting is also a mixed bag -- at times seeming perfectly natural and at other times forced and constrained by the script, as well as by the mixed talents of the child actors.
This film is little more than an interesting, dated period piece, yet it's very enjoyable (though not always pleasant) and never lost my attention for a minute. Makes a good companion film to "Table for Five," another film of a similar bent and genre -- these are good films to see on a quiet, rainy Sunday. 7/10
Overlooked
barbarella709 December 2002
A post-Vietnam optimism swept our country in the late 1970's and early 80's; filmmakers began to focus on parents and their children instead of rebels and the counterculture. So we had Kramer vs. Kramer, Ordinary People, On Golden Pond, Terms of Endearment, and even E.T. Shoot the Moon was lost in the shuffle due to it's downbeat feel and it's too bad: it offers scenes and performances that blow away the other films by far. It did not sweep the awards or succeed at the box office but sometimes that's not such a bad thing. Written by Bo Goldman (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest) and directed by Alan Parker (Midnight Express), the film shows the effect on the family unit when love between the parents fades. There's not alot of laughs here and the film doesn't build in the conventional Hollywood-family movie way: it moves slow and takes its time with several sequences individually building better than the film itself. But the filmmakers strive for realism pays off, creating a powerfully intense viewing experience with a major blessing: the child actors are effective and work well. Goldman and Parker have 10 children between them and the intimacy they create in these setpieces is unique: there's no staginess or false notes.
Diane Keaton and Albert Finney are extrordinary: Keaton first showed the signs of strong dramatic chops in Looking For Mr. Goodbar and Interiors but they were merely warm-ups for her crowning work here and in Reds. In her bathtub scene - alone, she looks up and softly sings 'If I Fell' while a flood of emotions wash over her face- Faith's anger and vulnerability are beautifully displayed in such a simple way; most actors would chew the scenery when performing a scene like this -Keaton just breathes and lets it happen. She really is one of our great actors -playing comedy and drama with ease- and a role model when it comes to project choices.
Albert Finney -his face bloated and depressed- displays the raw intensity we used to see in DeNiro. It's hard to believe he's the same good looking young man who brought the sexy Tom Jones to life and became a sixties icon. Finney went on to give an Academy Award nominated performance as the raging alcoholic in Under the Volcano but it's here he does his best work. George's anger and desperation are stunningly realized during the sequence when he tries to give his daughter her belated birthday gift only to be locked out of the home he used to be a part of. It's a brutal scene played without sentiment and is probably the most memorable in the film.
Talented Karen Allen (playing George's mistress) went on to play the strongest female role Steven Spielberg's ever created in Raiders of the Lost Ark; here, she's merely decorative. However, Peter Weller adds great support as Faith's love interest and Dana Hill is heartbreaking as Sherry, the oldest daughter.
A restaurant fight between Faith and George feels very false and played for laughs and the ending is a bit contrived, but there's too much in this film that deserves to be seen. Hopefully, a DVD treatment will be available; maybe then Shoot the Moon will be given its due.
Diane Keaton and Albert Finney are extrordinary: Keaton first showed the signs of strong dramatic chops in Looking For Mr. Goodbar and Interiors but they were merely warm-ups for her crowning work here and in Reds. In her bathtub scene - alone, she looks up and softly sings 'If I Fell' while a flood of emotions wash over her face- Faith's anger and vulnerability are beautifully displayed in such a simple way; most actors would chew the scenery when performing a scene like this -Keaton just breathes and lets it happen. She really is one of our great actors -playing comedy and drama with ease- and a role model when it comes to project choices.
Albert Finney -his face bloated and depressed- displays the raw intensity we used to see in DeNiro. It's hard to believe he's the same good looking young man who brought the sexy Tom Jones to life and became a sixties icon. Finney went on to give an Academy Award nominated performance as the raging alcoholic in Under the Volcano but it's here he does his best work. George's anger and desperation are stunningly realized during the sequence when he tries to give his daughter her belated birthday gift only to be locked out of the home he used to be a part of. It's a brutal scene played without sentiment and is probably the most memorable in the film.
Talented Karen Allen (playing George's mistress) went on to play the strongest female role Steven Spielberg's ever created in Raiders of the Lost Ark; here, she's merely decorative. However, Peter Weller adds great support as Faith's love interest and Dana Hill is heartbreaking as Sherry, the oldest daughter.
A restaurant fight between Faith and George feels very false and played for laughs and the ending is a bit contrived, but there's too much in this film that deserves to be seen. Hopefully, a DVD treatment will be available; maybe then Shoot the Moon will be given its due.
Good 1st half
n_r_koch7 February 2009
This movie starts very well (and is still worth watching) with its close examination of a domestic breakup. Unfortunately, it goes pear-shaped and slapstick in the second half. It gets 2 extra points for being surprising and unusual.
Pauline Kael called this the most revealing movie of its era. What she meant is that it's like ANNIE HALL, ORDINARY PEOPLE, KRAMER VS KRAMER, and all those other Failed Relationship movies merged into one sloppy heap. The only thing that's missing is the drugs-- if you don't count the joint the wife smokes. It goes all over the road trying to hit everything. There's even a courtroom scene. Even Parker must have wondered at times what the writer, Goldman, was trying to do. It rubs you raw and it also makes you giggle.
The four adult leads (all veterans) do as good a job as any actors could do with what they are given. And Keaton does an amazing job in the solo bathtub scene where she has to sing and then break down. But even she and Finney look baffled by the restaurant and hospital scenes; they seem to be saying "How do we play this?" The child actors are, sadly because they are good, given the job of either being a bratty chorus or setting up the adults with things no real kid would say. However at one point one of them (they all look alike) is allowed to cut loose and ad lib a Wicked Witch impression while her TV plays the 1939 OZ. It nearly stops the show (it's the best thing in the movie).
The ending is actually pretty logical: Goldman had written himself into a corner and how else could he get out?
Pauline Kael called this the most revealing movie of its era. What she meant is that it's like ANNIE HALL, ORDINARY PEOPLE, KRAMER VS KRAMER, and all those other Failed Relationship movies merged into one sloppy heap. The only thing that's missing is the drugs-- if you don't count the joint the wife smokes. It goes all over the road trying to hit everything. There's even a courtroom scene. Even Parker must have wondered at times what the writer, Goldman, was trying to do. It rubs you raw and it also makes you giggle.
The four adult leads (all veterans) do as good a job as any actors could do with what they are given. And Keaton does an amazing job in the solo bathtub scene where she has to sing and then break down. But even she and Finney look baffled by the restaurant and hospital scenes; they seem to be saying "How do we play this?" The child actors are, sadly because they are good, given the job of either being a bratty chorus or setting up the adults with things no real kid would say. However at one point one of them (they all look alike) is allowed to cut loose and ad lib a Wicked Witch impression while her TV plays the 1939 OZ. It nearly stops the show (it's the best thing in the movie).
The ending is actually pretty logical: Goldman had written himself into a corner and how else could he get out?
A brilliantly told tale of a family falling apart .
RedRoadster3 November 2008
The title "Shoot the moon" refers to a move that can be made in a card game where the highest possible outcome can be obtained by the risky strategy of achieving the lowest possible score. This description symbolises the events that happen as the story unfolds.
Director Alan Parker (Midnight express, Angel Heart) made one of the most haunting movies about human reaction to a domestic crisis ever done with "Shoot the Moon." Featuring a beautifully written script by Bo Goldman (one flew over the cuckoo's nest) and well measured performances by a solid cast.
The film begins with George Dunlap (Albert Finney) and his wife Faith (Diane Keaton) attending an awards dinner. It is clear from the outset that the marriage is in trouble. George is sarcastic and snaps comments at his wife, whilst Faith is distant and preoccupied. The early scenes, brilliantly underplayed by the two leads, show a couple who keep up appearances for their children and colleagues but who privately have lost their way.
When it is revealed that George is having an affair with another woman, the ensuing sequence of events depict a complete breakdown in the family unit with each member of the house reacting differently to the drama.
The scene where Diane Keaton is soaking in the bath and manages to convey a dozen different emotions with her facial expressions whilst singing "If I fell" is incredibly moving. Perhaps even more powerful a scene though, is where George turns up to the family home unannounced to give his eldest daughter her birthday present, only to be shut out of the existence he used to be a part of and treated as an unwanted outsider. It is a sequence shown with characters displaying desperate and raw emotions completely without sentiment as the gravity of what George has done becomes evident.
Finney and Keaton are on top of their game here as is a young Dana Hill (who tragically died prematurely from diabetes) whose scenes with Finney are heartbreaking. Peter Weller also gives good support with a subtle performance as the new man in Faith's life.
A scene where the two leads have a fight over dinner in a hotel feels a bit out of place with the somber tone of the rest of the movie and was probably added to give some comic relief to the audience after so much depression. The film makers also seemed to go "Hollywood" with the ending which seems out of sorts with the rest of the story.
When Oscar time came around in 1982, "Shoot the Moon" was ignored. The film's depressing story was certainly out of character with the main stream features of the day, but more significantly a factor perhaps was that Robert Redfords "Ordinary People" had already covered the family falling to pieces story in 1980 and the academy had honoured the film heavily. There was likely a reluctance by the academy voters to recognise a similar film in the same way so soon.
"Shoot the Moon" is a harrowing tale of how decisions have tragic consequences for others and how sometimes you only realise what kept you going in life, after you've thrown it away.
Director Alan Parker (Midnight express, Angel Heart) made one of the most haunting movies about human reaction to a domestic crisis ever done with "Shoot the Moon." Featuring a beautifully written script by Bo Goldman (one flew over the cuckoo's nest) and well measured performances by a solid cast.
The film begins with George Dunlap (Albert Finney) and his wife Faith (Diane Keaton) attending an awards dinner. It is clear from the outset that the marriage is in trouble. George is sarcastic and snaps comments at his wife, whilst Faith is distant and preoccupied. The early scenes, brilliantly underplayed by the two leads, show a couple who keep up appearances for their children and colleagues but who privately have lost their way.
When it is revealed that George is having an affair with another woman, the ensuing sequence of events depict a complete breakdown in the family unit with each member of the house reacting differently to the drama.
The scene where Diane Keaton is soaking in the bath and manages to convey a dozen different emotions with her facial expressions whilst singing "If I fell" is incredibly moving. Perhaps even more powerful a scene though, is where George turns up to the family home unannounced to give his eldest daughter her birthday present, only to be shut out of the existence he used to be a part of and treated as an unwanted outsider. It is a sequence shown with characters displaying desperate and raw emotions completely without sentiment as the gravity of what George has done becomes evident.
Finney and Keaton are on top of their game here as is a young Dana Hill (who tragically died prematurely from diabetes) whose scenes with Finney are heartbreaking. Peter Weller also gives good support with a subtle performance as the new man in Faith's life.
A scene where the two leads have a fight over dinner in a hotel feels a bit out of place with the somber tone of the rest of the movie and was probably added to give some comic relief to the audience after so much depression. The film makers also seemed to go "Hollywood" with the ending which seems out of sorts with the rest of the story.
When Oscar time came around in 1982, "Shoot the Moon" was ignored. The film's depressing story was certainly out of character with the main stream features of the day, but more significantly a factor perhaps was that Robert Redfords "Ordinary People" had already covered the family falling to pieces story in 1980 and the academy had honoured the film heavily. There was likely a reluctance by the academy voters to recognise a similar film in the same way so soon.
"Shoot the Moon" is a harrowing tale of how decisions have tragic consequences for others and how sometimes you only realise what kept you going in life, after you've thrown it away.
My brief review of the film
sol-18 October 2005
Although the action is sometimes over-the-top and the story at times is lacking in credibility, the acting strikes no false notes, and it is the natural performances that keep this film moving along. Keaton and Finney received Golden Globe nods for their acting, but it is the actresses who play their children who shine. Dana Hill gives off a particularly good performance as the most mature, but yet still fragile, daughter. The acting keeps the film quite engaging, and it is better than the overall product. There is no sense of time, little in the way of character studies, and the simple music score is very ineffective. It is flawed a film, but one that is certainly better than the average film of its type out there.
A piece of s**t.
marsh8761 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I feel a little embarrassed disliking this movie because all of the other reviewers liked it. I will mention some of the good points. There were occasional beautiful camera shots, but an occasional beautiful camera shot does not a good movie, or in fact, a movie, make. It was delightful to see the main actors in action, they have truly wonderful careers.
However:
As someone else pointed out, most of the scenes are very claustrophobic. Or cluttered. Perhaps the director was trying to make the audience uncomfortable. Or trying to show how the husband and wife were so stressed out. But the result caused me to greatly dislike most of the movie for just this point. In my opinion, this was the work of a bad, egotistical director. "I don't care what anyone thinks or likes, I'll do it my way." Sure, buddy, do it your way. Your way stinks.
Along with cluttered scenes, most of the scenes were loud, screeching, with terrible sound. Again, trying to make the audience uncomfortable? Is this how the couple felt inside, always screeching and yelling and discomfort and pain? That's how I felt watching this movie. Even the ocean sounds were harsh. Also, the childish piano playing grated my nerves. Was this intentional? Or was this a bad sound job? The only way I could watch most of the movie was to turn the sound way low and use subtitles. It wasn't as bad as Catch 22, but bad enough.
That the kids were always talking at the same time and the mother always yelling at them was very unrealistic. This observation was from a professional social worker who has made a long career of working with dysfunctional families.
The racism and antisemitism was disturbing, with the mother's lawyer. More pie in the face to the audience. I think, with the lack of worthwhile police, prosecutors, judges and lawyers, the idea communicated was that these people didn't live in society, that they could do anything they wanted without consequence. Of course, the ultimate would be murder. Why didn't they cheese up the plot (what little of it there was) with this, then have the father say "sorry", and we're all listening to the Rolling Stones again and laughing and dancing.
The lack of police and lack of consequence for violent action was insulting to the audience. The only time a policeman showed up, toward the beginning, the policeman seemed weak and ineffectual. The police weren't called when the several violent scenes occurred. This, and many other scenes, stretches the suspension of belief that movies always require. So, the show becomes a comic book, with one meaningless random scene following another.
In another ridiculous scene, the parents are having sex at a hotel with the kids in the next room, and they don't lock the door, so one of their children walks in and sees them in bed. I suppose the kids walked in on them having sex when they were all living together? Isn't that in itself a form of child abuse? Other reviewers say that the father slowly fell apart due to the divorce, till her was nuts at the end. Sure, people go nuts, but this degeneration was too much and too silly. He essentially lost all moral sense. Was he smoking crack? Oh wait, did they have crack then?
The movie gave the message that it's OK to yell and cause a fight in a restaurant, OK to beat your daughter with a hanger, OK to break and enter, OK to kidnap, OK to do property damage, OK to beat someone to death or nearly so, and all one has to do is say "sorry", and everyone will forgive and we'll all be buddies. They even make fun of this when the daughter points this out to the father, yet she, the physically abused child, still forgives him in an oh so touching scene, (oh so nauseating scene). The movie gives the message that child abuse is OK because everyone is hunky dory afterwords. No one is willing to take responsibility, in fact, no one can take responsibility. We live in a big comic book where anyone can do anything to anyone else, and it all turns out well in the end.
We're left hanging at the end. Does the wife forgive the husband? Does he live? His yet again appeal for forgiveness and compassion after he was the total bastard was again pitiful. The children, including the beaten one, all rush to him. What does a father have to do before the children and wife say enough? Kill all of them and himself? So they don't have to listen to the terrible sound background of the movie anymore? At the end, I wondered, what was the point of having watched this movie?
The movie seemed to be a poor man's Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf. Albert Finney certainly was an imitation Richard Burton, and I think he did a good job copying Burton. Diane Keaton kept slipping into her Annie Hall persona. Fortunately, she showed us she could do more in this movie. The constant yelling and emotional violence (and physical violence in this movie) reminded me of Virginia Wolf. But in that movie, there was some sort of reconciliation and understanding of the underlying conflict. As another reviewer pointed out, there was no understanding of the roots of the conflict, just a lot of yelling at each other.
However:
As someone else pointed out, most of the scenes are very claustrophobic. Or cluttered. Perhaps the director was trying to make the audience uncomfortable. Or trying to show how the husband and wife were so stressed out. But the result caused me to greatly dislike most of the movie for just this point. In my opinion, this was the work of a bad, egotistical director. "I don't care what anyone thinks or likes, I'll do it my way." Sure, buddy, do it your way. Your way stinks.
Along with cluttered scenes, most of the scenes were loud, screeching, with terrible sound. Again, trying to make the audience uncomfortable? Is this how the couple felt inside, always screeching and yelling and discomfort and pain? That's how I felt watching this movie. Even the ocean sounds were harsh. Also, the childish piano playing grated my nerves. Was this intentional? Or was this a bad sound job? The only way I could watch most of the movie was to turn the sound way low and use subtitles. It wasn't as bad as Catch 22, but bad enough.
That the kids were always talking at the same time and the mother always yelling at them was very unrealistic. This observation was from a professional social worker who has made a long career of working with dysfunctional families.
The racism and antisemitism was disturbing, with the mother's lawyer. More pie in the face to the audience. I think, with the lack of worthwhile police, prosecutors, judges and lawyers, the idea communicated was that these people didn't live in society, that they could do anything they wanted without consequence. Of course, the ultimate would be murder. Why didn't they cheese up the plot (what little of it there was) with this, then have the father say "sorry", and we're all listening to the Rolling Stones again and laughing and dancing.
The lack of police and lack of consequence for violent action was insulting to the audience. The only time a policeman showed up, toward the beginning, the policeman seemed weak and ineffectual. The police weren't called when the several violent scenes occurred. This, and many other scenes, stretches the suspension of belief that movies always require. So, the show becomes a comic book, with one meaningless random scene following another.
In another ridiculous scene, the parents are having sex at a hotel with the kids in the next room, and they don't lock the door, so one of their children walks in and sees them in bed. I suppose the kids walked in on them having sex when they were all living together? Isn't that in itself a form of child abuse? Other reviewers say that the father slowly fell apart due to the divorce, till her was nuts at the end. Sure, people go nuts, but this degeneration was too much and too silly. He essentially lost all moral sense. Was he smoking crack? Oh wait, did they have crack then?
The movie gave the message that it's OK to yell and cause a fight in a restaurant, OK to beat your daughter with a hanger, OK to break and enter, OK to kidnap, OK to do property damage, OK to beat someone to death or nearly so, and all one has to do is say "sorry", and everyone will forgive and we'll all be buddies. They even make fun of this when the daughter points this out to the father, yet she, the physically abused child, still forgives him in an oh so touching scene, (oh so nauseating scene). The movie gives the message that child abuse is OK because everyone is hunky dory afterwords. No one is willing to take responsibility, in fact, no one can take responsibility. We live in a big comic book where anyone can do anything to anyone else, and it all turns out well in the end.
We're left hanging at the end. Does the wife forgive the husband? Does he live? His yet again appeal for forgiveness and compassion after he was the total bastard was again pitiful. The children, including the beaten one, all rush to him. What does a father have to do before the children and wife say enough? Kill all of them and himself? So they don't have to listen to the terrible sound background of the movie anymore? At the end, I wondered, what was the point of having watched this movie?
The movie seemed to be a poor man's Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf. Albert Finney certainly was an imitation Richard Burton, and I think he did a good job copying Burton. Diane Keaton kept slipping into her Annie Hall persona. Fortunately, she showed us she could do more in this movie. The constant yelling and emotional violence (and physical violence in this movie) reminded me of Virginia Wolf. But in that movie, there was some sort of reconciliation and understanding of the underlying conflict. As another reviewer pointed out, there was no understanding of the roots of the conflict, just a lot of yelling at each other.
A Masterpiece!
Ouarda21 October 2005
This is the best film I've ever seen on how someone can destroy the very foundation that nourishes them, and then, ultimately, resort to the most dramatic measures when they realize what they've done. This is a case study in how couples grow apart. The acting on the part of Diane Keaton and Albert Finney is among the best of their distinguished careers. Ditto Karen Allen, Peter Weller, and most of all, Dana Hill. There are scenes in this film that will stay in my mind forever, especially the one where Diane Keaton is crying while singing "If I Fell" in the bathtub. The soundtrack is outstanding and the songs are used to perfection. Notice the use of "Play With Fire" when Diane Keaton and Peter Weller start their affair.
The movie to me is about how when one person loses touch with themselves, they take so many other people down with them. George is not a bad guy but he has grown irreparably apart from his family. As with many extremely successful people, living in one of the most prestigious counties in the United States, he lost touch of the man he was and what he needs most. The scenes between Albert Finney and Dana Hill, who plays his oldest daughter, are absolutely heart wrenching.
Personally, I think the ultra-dramatic ending is extremely raw and honest. It still haunts me after all these years.
I will always give this film a 10 out of 10.
The movie to me is about how when one person loses touch with themselves, they take so many other people down with them. George is not a bad guy but he has grown irreparably apart from his family. As with many extremely successful people, living in one of the most prestigious counties in the United States, he lost touch of the man he was and what he needs most. The scenes between Albert Finney and Dana Hill, who plays his oldest daughter, are absolutely heart wrenching.
Personally, I think the ultra-dramatic ending is extremely raw and honest. It still haunts me after all these years.
I will always give this film a 10 out of 10.
Intense but with major flaws
sarajevo-210 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This film, showing the breakup of a marriage and the devastation wrought for the four children, has some striking performances, particularly in the scenes with the children. Dana Hill, who played the barely teenage eldest daughter, was phenomenal, and I don't remember seeing better ensemble acting from children ever. Their energy together was remarkable.
Diane Keaton also gave a strong performance as Faith, the wife left by a husband who has fallen for another woman. I wasn't so impressed with Albert Finney's portrayal of the husband, George, but perhaps that's because he played such a flawed character, a warm and passionate man who succumbs to violence when frustrated.
While there are some intense and moving character portrayals in the film, the motivations for the intensity that was portrayed was hardly shown. Why did the marriage break up? We see the anger and frustration, but have no idea what caused it. What was so appealing about the new woman in George's life and the new man in the Faith's life? And most important, why did Faith and the eldest daughter stay loving such a violent man? At one point, George breaks into the house, locks his wife out of the house and beats his daughter because she won't accept his birthday gift or talk to him. Afterwards, there are no repercussions. It's like the filmmakers feel that this kind of violence is normal and acceptable.
There is an almost comic scene in a restaurant, where George and Faith argue violently, and then start to fight with other guests who complain. This incites passion in them, not disgust.
This theme, that violence arises from passion, and is therefore almost acceptable, I found disturbing. I was surprised that other reviewers didn't mention it.
Diane Keaton also gave a strong performance as Faith, the wife left by a husband who has fallen for another woman. I wasn't so impressed with Albert Finney's portrayal of the husband, George, but perhaps that's because he played such a flawed character, a warm and passionate man who succumbs to violence when frustrated.
While there are some intense and moving character portrayals in the film, the motivations for the intensity that was portrayed was hardly shown. Why did the marriage break up? We see the anger and frustration, but have no idea what caused it. What was so appealing about the new woman in George's life and the new man in the Faith's life? And most important, why did Faith and the eldest daughter stay loving such a violent man? At one point, George breaks into the house, locks his wife out of the house and beats his daughter because she won't accept his birthday gift or talk to him. Afterwards, there are no repercussions. It's like the filmmakers feel that this kind of violence is normal and acceptable.
There is an almost comic scene in a restaurant, where George and Faith argue violently, and then start to fight with other guests who complain. This incites passion in them, not disgust.
This theme, that violence arises from passion, and is therefore almost acceptable, I found disturbing. I was surprised that other reviewers didn't mention it.
the film fails to connect with new audience owing to its blatant dramatisation and poor character developments
lasttimeisaw10 August 2015
This is my third entry into Alan Parker's filmography (after BIRDY 1984, 8/10 and THE LIFE OF David GALE 2003, 7/10), SHOOT THE MOON is a visceral divorce drama, centres on Faith and George Dunlap (Keaton and Finney), a couple married for 15 years with four daughters, living in a quaint farmhouse near San Francisco, George is a successful writer, but he has an affair with a divorcée Sandy (Allen), from the beginning Parker and screenwriter Goldman manifestly position George as the one who gets frustrated in their marriage, and should be responsible for the dissolution of their marriage.
It is understandable George is suffocated by the domestic hoopla created by their four young daughters, as the opening sequences vividly render how the family bliss looks like when Faith is surrounded by the non-stopping children's nagging, and for men, the situation could be disheartening, which creates a plausible excuse for his affair, but after a second thought, it is actually a lame one, as it is the couple's concerted agreement to have so many children, why complain now? I hope Goldman doesn't suggest that children is the main factor that causes the disintegration although it apparently seems so. Thus, George leaves, and lives with Sandy and her son together, while Faith fumbles around with her new life sans George, so viewers sympathy is totally on her, and the children, especially their eldest daughter Sherry (Hill, actually is the best thing in the film as the premature girl tormented by her parents' divorce), whose silent treatment towards her father will trigger George's nut-case behaviour on her birthday. Yes, George is a nut-case apart from being an adulterer, things worsen when Faith moves on with a casual romance with a contractor Frank (Weller), who is paid to build a tennis court outside their house. Eventually George will be demonised as a complete lunatic driven by his arbitrary jealousy in the final act, it is a baffling climax felt much too contrived. So, what should it make audience feel? The ex- husband cannot stand his ex-wife being happy again with another man, although he is content with his new lover, does he want her back after they rekindle a one-night passion thanks to the magic potion of alcohol? Personally, no a fan of the gimmick that shifts all the blame on the husband while still makes him an impenitent jerk.
The performances are basically serviceable, Keaton is at her best with her unglamorous candidness when transits from a downcast victim to a nonplussed object-of-desire. Finney, great in hiding his British accent, unfortunately is quite repulsive to keep viewers investing in his emotional roller-coaster (lol to the reference from Sandy to the girls that having sex with their dad is like eating ice cream, she clearly doesn't see through what a lost cause he is).
Without an assignment of score, the film is intermittently accompanied by the scoreless bars of piano music interludes, reminiscent of the love lost in time, and occasionally, the scenic cinematography is breathtaking to watch. However it tallies with its time when divorce becomes a topical trend in America's silver screen, the film fails to connect with new audience owing to its blatant dramatisation and poor character developments, sorry Mr. Parker.
It is understandable George is suffocated by the domestic hoopla created by their four young daughters, as the opening sequences vividly render how the family bliss looks like when Faith is surrounded by the non-stopping children's nagging, and for men, the situation could be disheartening, which creates a plausible excuse for his affair, but after a second thought, it is actually a lame one, as it is the couple's concerted agreement to have so many children, why complain now? I hope Goldman doesn't suggest that children is the main factor that causes the disintegration although it apparently seems so. Thus, George leaves, and lives with Sandy and her son together, while Faith fumbles around with her new life sans George, so viewers sympathy is totally on her, and the children, especially their eldest daughter Sherry (Hill, actually is the best thing in the film as the premature girl tormented by her parents' divorce), whose silent treatment towards her father will trigger George's nut-case behaviour on her birthday. Yes, George is a nut-case apart from being an adulterer, things worsen when Faith moves on with a casual romance with a contractor Frank (Weller), who is paid to build a tennis court outside their house. Eventually George will be demonised as a complete lunatic driven by his arbitrary jealousy in the final act, it is a baffling climax felt much too contrived. So, what should it make audience feel? The ex- husband cannot stand his ex-wife being happy again with another man, although he is content with his new lover, does he want her back after they rekindle a one-night passion thanks to the magic potion of alcohol? Personally, no a fan of the gimmick that shifts all the blame on the husband while still makes him an impenitent jerk.
The performances are basically serviceable, Keaton is at her best with her unglamorous candidness when transits from a downcast victim to a nonplussed object-of-desire. Finney, great in hiding his British accent, unfortunately is quite repulsive to keep viewers investing in his emotional roller-coaster (lol to the reference from Sandy to the girls that having sex with their dad is like eating ice cream, she clearly doesn't see through what a lost cause he is).
Without an assignment of score, the film is intermittently accompanied by the scoreless bars of piano music interludes, reminiscent of the love lost in time, and occasionally, the scenic cinematography is breathtaking to watch. However it tallies with its time when divorce becomes a topical trend in America's silver screen, the film fails to connect with new audience owing to its blatant dramatisation and poor character developments, sorry Mr. Parker.
shoot the moon
mossgrymk21 March 2022
A loud, obnoxious film from a master of those moods, Alan Parker, about marital breakup that features lots of smashed crockery, yelling and cursing in public places, physical abuse of children and destruction of property and whose message seems to be that if you're a husband who is trying to save his marriage then act like a complete and total butthole and you just might make it.
Parker, however, as he proved in "Bugsy Malone" and "Fame", is a very good director of kids and indeed the performances of the four young gals playing the Dunlap daughters are excellent, with Dana Hill, who died tragically of diabetes at thirty two, worthy of special mention. Thanks to them let's give this noisome dog a generous C plus.
Parker, however, as he proved in "Bugsy Malone" and "Fame", is a very good director of kids and indeed the performances of the four young gals playing the Dunlap daughters are excellent, with Dana Hill, who died tragically of diabetes at thirty two, worthy of special mention. Thanks to them let's give this noisome dog a generous C plus.
Unintentionally comical !
marcdesbiens30 August 2004
I gave it 2/5 ... the film really fell apart in the 2nd half, turning in a movie that could be described as 'COMICAL' (unintentionally). Even though it is supposed to be a serious film about 2 people divorcing, there were quite a few moments where I laughed out loud, (no spoilers) especially that ending on the tennis court, I was laughing so hard right there ! ;-)
This is a sign the film was a failure because it was supposed to be 100% dramatic and I was thinking it was funny, so there was definitely something that wasn't right *there* ...
The beginning was pretty good, the actors were excellent as well, Albert Finney and Diane Keaton in particular. It was fun to see a pre-Robocop
Peter Weller in there too as the hunky guy who Keaton hires to build a tennis court next to her house.
Multiple nominations as I can see, Golden Globes, Cannes Film Festival, etc.
The 4 young daughters were running around in their underwear quite often, using 'inappropriate' language and the camera was lingering unnecessary long on the pre-teens as well, it was noticeable, it hasn't been mentioned here though.
This is a sign the film was a failure because it was supposed to be 100% dramatic and I was thinking it was funny, so there was definitely something that wasn't right *there* ...
The beginning was pretty good, the actors were excellent as well, Albert Finney and Diane Keaton in particular. It was fun to see a pre-Robocop
Peter Weller in there too as the hunky guy who Keaton hires to build a tennis court next to her house.
Multiple nominations as I can see, Golden Globes, Cannes Film Festival, etc.
The 4 young daughters were running around in their underwear quite often, using 'inappropriate' language and the camera was lingering unnecessary long on the pre-teens as well, it was noticeable, it hasn't been mentioned here though.
Would definitely not be acceptable in today's culture
Bgappl0725 October 2021
Vicious version of "two for the road"
The Supposedly understated violence until the end of the two male leads was kind of scary at parts.
Since I am of a certain age and Have always been an Albert Finney fan The fact that I can bridge generations due to my children mostly makes me see some of the reasons they're so adamant about stopping the commercialization of violence.
Since I am of a certain age and Have always been an Albert Finney fan The fact that I can bridge generations due to my children mostly makes me see some of the reasons they're so adamant about stopping the commercialization of violence.
Somewhat of a Modern-Day "The Pumpkin Eater"
mmitsos-19 December 2004
If you haven't seen "Shoot the Moon", see it. It is very difficult to find, as it appears to be out of print. To a degree, it reminds me of "The Pumpkin Eater" (Eng., 1964), with Anne Bancroft and Peter Finch. Both films deal with bad marriages, in which the husband cheats. Also, the husbands in both films are writers (Peter Finch plays a screenwriter, Albert Finney plays a novelist), and the wives are very supportive, up to a point. However, comparisons seems to end at this point, as "Shoot the Moon" really portrays the emotional stages of divorce and its effects on the entire family and others in their environs whereas "The Pumpkin Eater" focuses mostly on the character of Jo Armitage, played by Anne Bancroft, and her proclivity to have children and find most of her self-worth in raising children.
Diane Keaton and Albert Finney play the husband and wife in "Shoot the Moon", and they are both absolutely superb in their roles. Ditto for Dana Hill, the actress playing their oldest child (very tragically, this very talented actress died in 1996 due to complications from diabetes). This film is so realistic, and the acting, all the way around, is so natural. Diane Keaton's scene singing in the bathtub is particularly moving, as is the scene in which Albert Finney wants to give his eldest daughter her birthday present. This whole latter scene was portrayed very realistically....no sugar-coating here, and for that, I applaud Parker and the cast. Keaton's scene with Peter Weller (who plays Frank) on their first "date" was also very realistic and low-key, considering the emotions her character Faith is going through, just re-entering the "dating" scene since her husband left her. Faith's announcement of her knowledge of her husband's affair, to her husband, in the middle of talking about running out of orange juice, was also so realistic. This screenplay was simply very well written all the way around. I might not agree with the ending entirely; but, it was a story option that was plausibly pursued.
On a few other notes, the soundtrack offers a nice throwback to the '70's (Bob Segar, etc.). Also watch for a young Tracey Gold, who would later star in "Growing Pains" and a younger Tina Yothers, who would later star in "Family Ties". I highly recommend this film....a very good story and great acting together provide for a thoroughly enjoyable cinematic experience. In retrospect, it was sorely overlooked on Oscar night.
Diane Keaton and Albert Finney play the husband and wife in "Shoot the Moon", and they are both absolutely superb in their roles. Ditto for Dana Hill, the actress playing their oldest child (very tragically, this very talented actress died in 1996 due to complications from diabetes). This film is so realistic, and the acting, all the way around, is so natural. Diane Keaton's scene singing in the bathtub is particularly moving, as is the scene in which Albert Finney wants to give his eldest daughter her birthday present. This whole latter scene was portrayed very realistically....no sugar-coating here, and for that, I applaud Parker and the cast. Keaton's scene with Peter Weller (who plays Frank) on their first "date" was also very realistic and low-key, considering the emotions her character Faith is going through, just re-entering the "dating" scene since her husband left her. Faith's announcement of her knowledge of her husband's affair, to her husband, in the middle of talking about running out of orange juice, was also so realistic. This screenplay was simply very well written all the way around. I might not agree with the ending entirely; but, it was a story option that was plausibly pursued.
On a few other notes, the soundtrack offers a nice throwback to the '70's (Bob Segar, etc.). Also watch for a young Tracey Gold, who would later star in "Growing Pains" and a younger Tina Yothers, who would later star in "Family Ties". I highly recommend this film....a very good story and great acting together provide for a thoroughly enjoyable cinematic experience. In retrospect, it was sorely overlooked on Oscar night.
Painful, Realistic, Beautiful
Katz523 June 2005
Why this movie is not on DVD is a mystery. It blows away Kramer Vs. Kramer, which came out a few years before, and is on par with Ordinary People. Anyone who's witnessed a family tearing itself apart because of infidelity, among other issues, will find this movie occasionally unbearable to watch. The ending is a bit too much--for the few who've seen it, the tennis court scene. And a few other scenes are just too over the top. But the acting is so natural (I believe it's the best acting Albert Finney and Diane Keaton have ever done) and their emotions so raw and powerful, that I cry every time I see it. Note to whichever company owns the early '80s MGM catalog--GET THIS ON DVD!
99.4% of a Fabulous Movie-0.6% Total Crap
fldelk-16 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Once upon a time, art and literature were judged based upon an ability to make the viewers better people - uplifting literature was considered desirable. Although it has been nearly 25 years since I saw this movie, it sticks with me. It has one of the most realistic portrayals of children of any movie, and presents a picture of the end of a marriage with truth. As trite as it seems, the characters seemed to have gone through the fire and been refined, to have learned a better way of relating. And then there's the last 2 minutes or so. The maturity, the realism are destroyed as a main character inexplicably disintegrates and takes the movie along.
Why isn't this movie on DVD? Why don't families watch it together? Why isn't it on anyone's top movies list? Easy. The cheap shot ending.
Why isn't this movie on DVD? Why don't families watch it together? Why isn't it on anyone's top movies list? Easy. The cheap shot ending.
Undeniably Real and Sad
britishdominion26 April 2012
SHOOT THE MOON is an unbelievably heartbreaking movie. I saw this as a kid, by myself, in my local theatre in 1982. I love movies - then and now - particularly adult-skewing films, even when I was 13. I don't know what I was thinking, but at 13 I wanted to experience everything... from RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK to REDS.
Like Alan Alda's serio-comic THE FOUR SEASONS the year before, this was an introduction to how complicated relationships could be in my future. I came from a happy family, and my parents are still happily together. But my reality is that I lived around this exact movie with my school-aged friends: parents' separations, divorces, the anger and the selfishness, and the confused kids caught in the middle.
The film captures the subtle reality of divorce and the demolition of a relationship through the screen writing of the legendary Bo Goldman and the beautiful direction by Alan Parker.
To this day, the combination still floors me as a viewer. Albert Finney and Diane Keaton have never been better, as a couple going through a separation, a divorce and yet a difficult familial uncoupling, and are perfect for this film. Their performances are stunning. Dana Hill as their child caught in the middle of this separation is phenomenal, that nails the confusion and conflict of forced-adaptation brings.
SHOOT THE MOON helped me understand at a very young age that this is how relationships collapse, and illustrated that people are imperfect. It showed that hubris, loneliness and expectation come with exceptional price-tags - it was a shocker at an early age.
This is one of the lost "great" movies of the 1980s, and I am glad it is on DVD. It's just a movie that is so difficult to embrace, but I am pleased that it exists. It is an amazing movie.
Like Alan Alda's serio-comic THE FOUR SEASONS the year before, this was an introduction to how complicated relationships could be in my future. I came from a happy family, and my parents are still happily together. But my reality is that I lived around this exact movie with my school-aged friends: parents' separations, divorces, the anger and the selfishness, and the confused kids caught in the middle.
The film captures the subtle reality of divorce and the demolition of a relationship through the screen writing of the legendary Bo Goldman and the beautiful direction by Alan Parker.
To this day, the combination still floors me as a viewer. Albert Finney and Diane Keaton have never been better, as a couple going through a separation, a divorce and yet a difficult familial uncoupling, and are perfect for this film. Their performances are stunning. Dana Hill as their child caught in the middle of this separation is phenomenal, that nails the confusion and conflict of forced-adaptation brings.
SHOOT THE MOON helped me understand at a very young age that this is how relationships collapse, and illustrated that people are imperfect. It showed that hubris, loneliness and expectation come with exceptional price-tags - it was a shocker at an early age.
This is one of the lost "great" movies of the 1980s, and I am glad it is on DVD. It's just a movie that is so difficult to embrace, but I am pleased that it exists. It is an amazing movie.
Total eclipse of the heartless.
mark.waltz16 November 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This is a difficult film to get into because of the real lack of character development, starting with the leading characters played by Albert Finney and Diane Keaton, great performances but not necessarily a great script. The underdeveloped leading characters are in the midst of a divorce, and because of the relationships both people get involved in, their personal relationship becomes more tempestuous, eventually erupting in violence when she rejects the visiting agreement, causing Infinity to have a breakdown that is truly horrendous and not believable based on how Finney's character was developed up to this point.
There's little personality given to the people involved with Keaton and Finney after the marriage breaks up, although Karen Allen does try to give her character som.e color. Peter Weller, as Keaton's new love interest, doesn't seem to even big digging into who his character is, and is basically left in the background. I wasn't impressed by any of the actors playing the young children of Keaton and Finney, and none of them are even remotely likable.
Some familiar character actors pop up in smaller parts, with Fran Ryan memorable as a very tough family court judge, and. George Murdock and Leora Dana as Keaton's parente. But most of the film is the couple yelling and screaming at each other, and it becomes often painful and irritating to watch.
There's little personality given to the people involved with Keaton and Finney after the marriage breaks up, although Karen Allen does try to give her character som.e color. Peter Weller, as Keaton's new love interest, doesn't seem to even big digging into who his character is, and is basically left in the background. I wasn't impressed by any of the actors playing the young children of Keaton and Finney, and none of them are even remotely likable.
Some familiar character actors pop up in smaller parts, with Fran Ryan memorable as a very tough family court judge, and. George Murdock and Leora Dana as Keaton's parente. But most of the film is the couple yelling and screaming at each other, and it becomes often painful and irritating to watch.
The Best Film of 1982
asc8523 September 2005
1982 was arguably one of the greatest film years in recent memory, with releases including "E.T.", "Gandhi," and "Sophie's Choice." Still, I would say that the best film of 1982 - and one of the best films of the 1980's - was "Shoot the Moon." I am not sure exactly why this film never got the acclaim it deserved...certainly there were many great films that year that overshadowed it. Moreover, it might have been too visceral for some...a couple I knew who were previously divorced from other people were extremely offended by the movie, and found it gratuitous.
I have only seen two films be successful in making the lead characters so likable in one scene, and then so unlikeable in the next scene. This is one of them (the other one is "Twice in a Lifetime"). Bo Goldman's screenplay is tremendous. Diane Keaton's rendition of "If I Fell" while soaking in the bathtub is one of the most haunting and powerful scenes I have ever seen. Also, the scene towards the end of the movie in the restaurant where Finney and Keaton are loudly arguing with each other to the annoyance of other patrons is extremely well done and enjoyable. I believe most of the scene is done in a long take. On regular TV, that scene is butchered due to the language, and they show cut-aways to other patrons to get away with that.
It's been more than 20 years since "Shoot the Moon" was released, and I'm not sure what I could say that would motivate someone to see this film for the first time. But it truly is great. Pauline Kael thought so too, and I'm sure she will carry much more weight with movie fans than me!
I have only seen two films be successful in making the lead characters so likable in one scene, and then so unlikeable in the next scene. This is one of them (the other one is "Twice in a Lifetime"). Bo Goldman's screenplay is tremendous. Diane Keaton's rendition of "If I Fell" while soaking in the bathtub is one of the most haunting and powerful scenes I have ever seen. Also, the scene towards the end of the movie in the restaurant where Finney and Keaton are loudly arguing with each other to the annoyance of other patrons is extremely well done and enjoyable. I believe most of the scene is done in a long take. On regular TV, that scene is butchered due to the language, and they show cut-aways to other patrons to get away with that.
It's been more than 20 years since "Shoot the Moon" was released, and I'm not sure what I could say that would motivate someone to see this film for the first time. But it truly is great. Pauline Kael thought so too, and I'm sure she will carry much more weight with movie fans than me!
shoot the moon
prgolburgh18 December 2010
This is one of the most powerful and truthful movies I've ever seen. I love it and I watch it over and over. I love Dianne Keaton and this is one of her greatest roles. The children are just terrific and the emotions portrayed are intense and typical of the situation. I feel that his is a movie that every married couple must see. In an age where divorce is so common and seemingly so easy, Shoot The Moon shows how devastating divorce really can be and usually is! I know this from experience! There are so many unresolved emotions and feelings between two people. And even if there has been an affair a marriage can prevail and two people can emerge stronger for it. The marriage can become much better and more loving and true. The children will benefit from seeing that their parents can work through their problems and come out on the other side. A MUST SEE!
Great movie, more subtle than the violent emotions indicate
LouisaMay26 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
For me the key to this great film was the scene where Finney and Keaton end up in bed together. In their conversation at this tender but honest moment after their marriage has ended, they wonder aloud what happened to them. He says, "I'm not a kind person." She says, "I'm not kind either." These soft spoken admissions, amid the chaos of the violence, and screaming emotional upheaval woven through the film, provided an answer to what went wrong in the marriage. It's clear they still love each other --the whole film is an illustration of this bond, and he says so to his daughter near the end of the film. But they've run into the mundane problems that eat away at long term marriages without means of overcoming them. What are these means suggested by the film? Kindness and compassion. Neither has kindness toward or compassion for the other. They love their children, and they're "good" people, not immoral. But they have no compassion, not even for their children. Without compunction they say and do things in front of the children that can harm them for life. Neither has any compassion for the other's suffering, or any ability to put themselves in the other's shoes. So at the end (SPOILER) when he lies bloody and beaten with his hand up for comfort from her, she refuses to take his hand, and the camera freezes on this moment.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
