Rich and Famous (1981)

Richard Brody, in the 16 December 2013 issue of The New Yorker, wrote an essay on the films of George Cukor. I watched A star is born, but could not abide watching it all (his own greatest artistic achievement and also that of Judy Garland, its star.). I watched Rich and Famous, and did finish it.

Brody: An esteemed raconteur, Cukor started to write his autobiography, but his lifelong reticence got in the way, and he made his last film, “Rich and Famous” (1981), as if to explain: it’s a deceptively chirpy comedy starring Candice Bergen as a young society matron in Malibu who launches her literary career—and destroys her private life—by writing a tell-all novel.

 MRQE.com offers this synopsis: Two women find their friendship tested when one rises from obscurity to success in this glossy remake of Old Acquaintance. Liz Hamilton (Jacqueline Bisset) and Merry Noel (Candice Bergen) are close friends who met while they were freshmen at Smith College in the 1950s. Liz has become a highly respected novelist, while Merry wed Doug Blake (David Selby) and raised a family. While Merry is happy, she can't help but envy Liz for her glamorous career as an author. Merry decides to write a novel of her own, and with Liz's help, the book soon finds a publisher. While Merry's trashy potboiler earns few positive reviews, it's a massive best-seller, and Merry's fame and wealth soon outstrips that of Liz, leading to jealousy between the old friends and problems in Merry's marriage. Rich and Famous was the final picture directed by Hollywood legend George Cukor; the guest list at the party sequences include such literary and cinematic notables as Christopher Isherwood, Ray Bradbury, Paul Morrissey, and Roger Vadim

I wondered what Ebert thought of it. It contains scenes that make you want to squirm because of their awkwardness and awfulness, and yet you don't want to look away and you're not bored. The movie has the courage to go to extremes, and some of those extremes may not be art but are certainly unforgettable.
The movie forges ahead through tempestuous fights and tearful reconciliations, while Bergen's alcoholic ex-husband makes a pass at Bisset, and Bergen tries to bribe all of New York to win the book prize. I was not (and am not) sure what this movie was trying to tell me about the two characters -- perhaps that if you stay in touch with someone for twenty years, you can be absolutely sure that at the end of that time you still will be in touch.
Insights into human nature don't seem to be the point of the movie, anyway. It's a slick, trashy, entertaining melodrama, with too many dumb scenes to qualify as successful. A film critic for one of the national newsweeklies said, in reviewing this film, that he has a friend who has a rule: He only attends movies that are in color and are about rich people. I deplore the attitude behind that statement, but in a crazy way, I absolutely understand it.

More than once, during shouting matches, I thought it would do well as a stage play.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops's review: Rich and Famous -- Screen version of the John Van Druten play about two very different women (Candice Bergen and Jacqueline Bisset), both writers, who preserve a friendship for more than two decades despite the strains caused by emulation and jealousy. Directed by George Cukor, the glossy soap opera pays more attention to its glamorous locations than to the human dimension of its story. The sole redeeming feature is good acting by the principals. General air of vapid amorality and two graphic sexual sequences. (O) (R) ( 1981 )
O: morally offensive

Vincent Canby's review in the Times: SOMEWHERE inside ''Rich and Famous,'' George Cukor's splashy, elongated new comedy, there is the material for a possibly brilliant two-character one-act play.