Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966)

Written by Ernest Lehman

Directed by Mike Nichols

1998 List Ranking: NA

2007 List Ranking: 67

As a former theater major (and still current theater lover), there are certain works that one hears about semi-consistently (beyond whatever the “popular” thing currently is). One of those, for me, is the play Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, which I knew nothing about. It’s one of those works that I have always told myself that I’ll get to reading one day, so when I saw that the film adaptation was on this list, I was quite excited. Finally, I could see just what the fuss was all about!

Well, whatever I thought this film would be about…this wasn’t it.

i think the party is going rather well, don’t you?

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf is about two couples who basically spend an entire night drinking and fighting. Like, really, that’s the film, in a nutshell. There’s lot’s of subplots about infertility and infidelity, repressed anger and expressed delusions, but the overarching plot is four couples who basically are on a mission to destroy their livers. The older couple, Martha and George, invite a younger couple they met earlier that evening at a party, Nick and Honey, back to their house for a nightcap. At two in the morning. I know I’m getting old when I heard that and said “But that’s so LATE”. Anyway, Martha and George are already on a bit of a bender, and of course it doesn’t take long for them to be pouring alcohol down the throats of their guests. Soon, flirtations begin, fights break out (A LOT), and secrets are revealed. AND IT DOESN’T END UNTIL DAYLIGHT. HAVE FUN WITH THOSE HANGOVERS.

Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton

So, while I intensely dislike the plot (for reasons YOU CAN BET I’m gonna get into in just a moment), I do want to say that the performances are pretty good, especially Elizabeth Taylor. She is stellar in this film, and it’s the first time that I think I’ve been impressed with her acting (which, considering I’ve only seen her in two other performances, I suppose that isn’t such high praise). Regardless, she really is great in the film, even if the plot makes her borderline unbearable. She stars alongside her then-husband Richard Burton (the one that caused the scandal), who I don’t think I’ve ever seen in a film before. He, like co-stars George Segal and Sandy Dennis, is good and brings depth to his role, but they are all outshone by Taylor.

Let’s just keep sitting and talking, shall we?

So why didn’t I like this film? There’s a few different reasons. First, as I mentioned, the film is based off a play. A typical play is a lot of sitting around and talking, and standing around and talking, or walking around a single room and talking. This film…is exactly that. Primarily confined to one room of a house, it’s A LOT of sitting and talking and standing and talking and walking and…you get the idea. In short, this film falls victim to exactly what makes me cringe at the movie-musical version of The Producers: there’s no actual adaptation going on when the content is being adapted to a new medium. Stage and film are two very different mediums, and what works on one will not work on the other without there being some sort of change in how the story is told. Setting up a camera and just filming the play works if you’re doing a live-from-the-stage presentation, but as a straight drama film, it gets deathly boring.

George shoots Martha (with an umbrella), and I’m just here like WHAT IS THE POINT?

The plot itself is also just exhausting and nonsensical. The entire film, just over two hours long, is just an unending series of screaming matches and guzzling alcohol. Like, if Prohibition needed a promotional film, this is the best candidate. The four just chug their drinks and scream and yell and fight with each other, going around and around and pointlessly needling each other and for what? What am I supposed to get out of this? The only message I get is maybe to know your limits (and maybe don’t manifest an imaginary child?). There’s a small twist at the end that frankly, I didn’t care one bit about because long before that point, I was mentally begging these people to go home and go to bed. Alas, even when the younger couple does try to leave, they end up right back at the house.

This strangely-angled shot lasts for LITERALLY a single second

There are also just some strange decisions made behind the camera. I’ve already mentioned that the film just takes the play’s unaltered dialogue and just plops it into the real world, but then it also films many of these monologues with long, unbroken takes. Like, it’s not bad enough that they didn’t alter the play at all to fit the new medium (which, I’ll admit, sometimes films overdo this (The Phantom of the Opera and Rent are EXCELLENT examples of this) and still make something awful), but then the filmmakers highlight the issue by basically setting up a camera and letting it run. There’s no excitement or drama in the visual language of the film, which becomes boring to watch. There are also some strange angles used in some reaction shots that just feel like they’re from a completely different film. I can’t really explain that any better, it just added to the mess.

If you’ve been reading these reviews (which if you haven’t, and you’re reading this one, stay a while: grab a favorite snack or beverage (or both), put on some music, put your feet up, and enjoy. Wake the kids, tell the neighbors), you’ll know I’ve mentioned the Hays Code a few times (a quick recap: the Code outlined what could be shown in movies as a matter of “decency”. Seriously, look it up, it’s really interesting). By the time this film was released, the code was basically dead and buried, but this film helped lead to the creation of the MPAA rating system as we know it today (this system would be adapted as time went on, but its birth begins here). A big part of this is the strong language used in the film, something I even noticed.

I REALLY wanted to like this film, but ultimately, I’m left with more questions, the biggest of which is: WHAT THE HELL DOES VIRGINIA WOOLF HAVE TO DO WITH THE FILM? THEY SING THE TITLE CONSTANTLY (set to the tune of Disney’s “Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?”…there is seriously no escape), YET WHY THEY DO IS NEVER EXPLAINED, NOR JUST WHY VIRGINIA WOOLF IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SONG: HER WORKS ARE NEVER MENTIONED. Clearly, it is BEYOND aggravating, and I find myself incredibly disappointed. There are great performances in this film, but they aren’t great enough to make me want to watch this again.

FINAL GRADE: C-