- Wilder’s 1960 tragicomedy features a tremendous set design (the endless rows and rows of desk in the insurance office) and career-best work from Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine
- Wilder was coming off Some Like it Hot (1959, so was Lemmon) and MacLaine off Some Came Running (1958)—Wilder had nothing to prove at this point, but for MacLaine and Lemmon they were still sort of considered comedians and this here gave them a chance to show their dramatic chops (as well as keeping a bit of their toe in the water as far as making audiences laugh—a real accomplishment when you read the synopsis of this film)
- The film won five Academy Awards including Picture (the last black and white best picture winner for 33 years until Schindler’s List), director, screenplay, editing and the set decoration/design by Alexander Traune. Traune’s massive room (shot in widescreen b/w) recalls King Vidor’s 1928 The Crowd- making a statement with its sheer size. Lemmon’s C.C. Baster works at desk 861 on the 19th floor

the insurance office lighting design — set decoration/design by Alexander Traune
- Wilder’s talent for balancing the lighter and darker moods rare gift- one of cinema’s greatest writers (he wrote with frequent collaborator during this period for him I.A.L. Diamond). The film starts with a voice-over that drops- it is just introducing us to the story/character
- This is Wilder’s second time calling upon Jack Lemmon as his collaborator (they’d wind up working a total of seven times together)

the tone transitions are brilliant– here Lemmon’s Baxter sharply turns from jovial to gutted
- Few could play weakness as well as Lemmon. He has a cold half the film it seems, he’s sniveling, whining—it is a testament to both the screenplay and Lemmon that the audience still roots for C.C. Baxter
- Writing that has the ongoing “manpowerwise” “octoberwise”, “divorcewise”, etc joke—Wilder a surgeon and economic with his word choices (apparently the lack of freedom he gave his actors to ad-lib or improvise frustrated MacLaine). You wouldn’t know it though because again she’s never been better as the wounded Fran Kubelik. She is charming one minute and utterly tragic the next
- Wilder working again with Fred MacMurry from Double Indemnity in 1944
- You get Jack Kruschen (supporting nomination) as Dr. Dreyfuss with his excellent “be a mensch” speech
- Strong lighting at the Richshaw Man Chinese restaurant with the big star fixture in the corner of the frame
- Visually it isn’t just the massive office The Crowd row of desks wideshot that impresses— there is a reoccurring motif here, Lemmon’s Baxter is shot in isolation in a wideshot three times: at his desk, on the long park bench alone, and at the majestic theater after MacLaine stands him up. Strong visual cinema—depressing

Visually it isn’t just the massive office The Crowd row of desks wideshot that impresses…

there is a reoccurring motif here, Lemmon’s Baxter is shot in isolation in a wideshot three times: at his desk, on the long park bench alone…

…and at the majestic theater after MacLaine stands him up. Strong visual cinema—depressing
- Famous for the last lines in the screenplay as well—the “shut up and deal” that would equal the “nobody’s perfect” sublime final line in Some Like It Hot
- A Must-See film
Interesting review, there seems to be a big difference, TSPDT has it # 56.
I wouldn’t consider myself a big fan of the apartment, i have a problem with non-Allen comedy.
They don’t even seem so funny to me.
It would be interesting to know what Azman thinks about this, he thinks this is the best movie of 1960.
@Aldo- yeah I agree- it is a pretty big difference. I think The Apartment is fabulous– I hope that this page is evidence of that. I think a Must-See is very high praise
@Aldo, Ive seen The Apartment a year ago I think. believe it’s Wilders best film(and I think very highly of his works). It’s just that good. I won’t make any big claims anymore like the “best film of the year” or anything, but I think rather highly of this film.
“I have a problem with non-Allen comedy”.
Are you suggesting that most comedy beside Woody Allen is slightly overrated. I’d strongly disagree.
“Are you suggesting that most comedy beside Woody Allen is slightly overrated. I’d strongly disagree.”
They don’t seem so funny to me, it’s probably the age difference, since they seem to be aimed at a more adult audience. His humor does not fit me.
That is my answer Azman.
And the fact that the apartment is no longer a masterpiece does not affect 1960, it is by far the best year in the history of cinema, it has a crazy depth. My god, the virgin spring, a very good Bergman movie probably won’t make the top 10.
Do you truly believe that Woody Allen is the only funny comedic writer? I align with Azman’s strong disagreement. Comedy is one of the most common cinema genres, and although there are certainly many failures and unfunny scripts, there are nearly as many that gloriously succeed. Is Wes Anderson not funny to you? Monty Python? Charlie Chaplin?
Buster Keaton? Bringing Up Baby? Dr. Strangelove? Some Like it Hot? These, or at least the last five, were made for a much older audience than you and me. However, I still find them hilarious, and thus it cannot be the age difference which you suggest that is causing your preference for Woody’s comedy and against Wilder’s.
Some cool stuff Graham, but you’re making assumptions.
At no time did i say “Woody Allen is the only funny comedic writer”
WA does not cause me grace and i would not put Keaton and Chaplin together with the others, i am referring to dialogues, dialogues do not seem so funny to me.
BUB and Strangelove seem funny to me.
As for Some like it hot i did not like it, i expected something more given its reputation, i found much funnier Network.
The reason i probably enjoy Allen’s comedy the most must be its references to Fellini and Bergman. Take a look at Love and death, it’s worth it.
You may be correct that I was making assumptions, but I was basing them off of your comment. You said “i have a problem with non-Allen comedy.” That implies that you dislike most or all comedy that is not from Woody Allen. I’m glad to here that this is not the case. It is probably true that Keaton and Chaplin do not belong with the others. Physical comedy is very different from comedic dialogue. It’s also quite intriguing that you found Network to be funnier than Some Like it Hot. Network is more of a dramatic satire with about half of the scenes containing comedy, while SLiH is almost entirely hilarious (to me). I will look into Love and Death.
Wow, this films rank dropped. You used to say that most films improve upon rewatching. I guess this isn’t one of those.
Does this mean 1960 is no longer the best year for you?
Was it previously a masterpiece? I guess 1960 is bouyed by the fact that The Bad Sleep Well was added to the Masterpiece ledger last year when Drake previously had not seen it. Even if The Apartment is dropped from MP to MS, that’s still probably a net gain.
I’ve seen a lot of his films improve upon rewatching, The Matrix and To Catch a Thief are two examples of this; originally listed as an HR and R, both are now considered to be MS’s. Ikiru too is listed as an MS on Kurosawa’s page and it is now considered an MP on the page for 1952.
The Apartment is clearly not one of them, and there are other examples of this as well. I’ve seen with a lot of Jarmusch films, they are listed as MPs on their yearly pages but are MS’s on the more recent directors’ page. I can’t really think of any others at the moment however.
There are several examples, i don’t want to cause a debate because they have already been discussed before, but Gravity and Inglorious Basterds was MP and the best movie of its year.
And they are now only MS
I’ve generally aligned with Drake’s rating most of the time when ranking films I’ve seen, and while I’ve not seen Gravity, I adamantly refuse to see Inglourious Basterds as anything under an MP rating. I’m not going to come out and say Drake’s criticisms of the film are exactly invalid, and admittedly some of the lesser members of the Basterds aren’t as developed and prominent as Aldo Raine, Hugo Stiglitz, and the almighty Bear Jew, and the film suffers from the cut-to-cut-back approach to certain conversational scenes (particularly in those with an ensemble like the bar scene; it’s alright in scenes such as the opening scene and the second meeting between Landa and Shoshanna; the former is clearly derived from the beginning of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and I love it) but there is no way you combine that script, the acting by Waltz, Pitt, and the rest of the cast (I think a lot of people are sleeping on Brühl in this film because of how annoying his character is, when I first watched it 4 years ago I was no exception), the production design, and the direction by Tarantino and end up with just an MS. It’s an almost impossibly realized effort from one of cinema’s greatest directors. If Pulp Fiction was Tarantino’s Citizen Kane this is his Touch of Evil.
@Zane and @Aldo– yeah there are a bunch on both sides– I’d like to think each is a step closer to getting it right (I’m sure some will disagree of course). I did a Mankiewicz and McCarey study and moved a few of their films down
@Azman- I’m getting to 1960 soon in my study but I think 1960 is doing just fine.
@Aldo and @Zane, well, I remember Drake replying to me before and he said most of the films he watches improve upon rewatching.
[…] The Apartment – Wilder […]