Buried Treasures: Carnal Knowledge

My series on early Mike Nichols films concludes this month with what I consider to be his greatest achievement — a 1971 adaptation of Jules Pfeiffer’s brilliant screenplay, “Carnal Knowledge.” Starring the most vibrant screen actor of the day, young Jack Nicholson, “Carnal Knowledge” follows the sexual lives of two men (the other played by singer and Nichols friend Art Garfunkel) from college through middle-age.

The year before, Nicholson had introduced his now-famous bad-boy counterculture image in Bob Rafelson’s “Five Easy Pieces.” He perfected that persona in “Carnal Knowledge.” Younger audiences might be familiar with Nicholson’s sly, winking caricature of his bad-boy image (which he still hauls out every couple or three films he makes), but if you really want to see him at the top of his game, watch “Carnal Knowledge.” He’s alluring but with enough touch of psychopathic behavior to be frightening, particularly to women. Nicholson turned in some of the best acting achievements of anyone during the 1970s (“Chinatown” and “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” come to mind), but none better than in “Carnal Knowledge.”

As you might expect, Nicholson’s character, Jonathan, is the more aggressive; he is attracted to women based on their physical attributes. His friend Sandy (played by Art Garfunkel) is the shy, passive character, attracted to women based on their intelligence and sensitivity. How these two become best friends is unknown, but their adventure begins in college at Amherst, where Sandy begins a relationship with an astute co-ed named Susan (a young and attractive Candice Bergen). Through Sandy, Susan inevitably meets his roommate, Jonathan, and the two of them begin a sexual relationship. So while Sandy meets Susan’s intellectual needs, Jonathan satisfies her sexual desires.

Lest you think a menage-a-trois of this nature is doomed to fail, Sandy and Susan emerge as husband and wife, with Sandy none the wiser, although their relationship later ends for other reasons. The film then immediately jumps to young professional adulthood — with Sandy as a doctor and Jonathan as an accountant. Sandy is now dating Cindy (Cynthia O’Neal), and Jonathan believes he’s finally met the perfect woman for him — a buxom young beauty named Bobbie (played by the beautiful Ann-Margret), a woman of merely average intellect who dotes on him hand and foot. While Jonathan is perfectly fine with this arrangement, Bobbie hopes for more out of life. Jonathan’s controlling nature and Bobbie’s apathetic indifference eventually lead to an eruption the likes of which hadn’t been seen on film since Nichols’ own 1966 classic, “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” Jonathan then suggests a partner swap, which prefaces the conclusion of this portion of the film.

The final act features Sandy in his mid-40s dating an 18-year-old hippie chick named Jennifer (Carol Kane, in her very first role) who purportedly understands Sandy on a deeper level than anyone else ever has, and Jonathan seeing an upscale prostitute, played by Rita Moreno. In case this progression of courtship sounds depressing. Believe me when I say it is not. “Carnal Knowledge” is fascinating because of the top-notch acting, writing and directing. This is one which cannot be watched passively. If it’s on your television, you’re engaged. A lot of ground is covered — not just in terms of the passage of time, but in terms of cerebral depth. New York film critic Rex Reed equated 90 minutes of “Carnal Knowledge” to a year on the psychiatrist’s couch. Much as with Nichols’ previous work “Catch-22,” Carnal Knowledge” practically demands second and third viewings.

Furthermore, this picture not only deals more frankly with its subject matter than any film up to that time, it dealt only with its subject matter. In other words, very little mention is made of any other aspect of the lives of the two leads — their careers, their families, their neighbors. Neither of them had a “best friend at work” or a “favorite neighbor” — at least that we were aware of. No, “Carnal Knowledge” was a movie about sex, and only about sex.

In what I still consider to be his greatest performance, Nicholson laid bare the vicious manner in which some men treat women. Parts of “Carnal Knowledge” are difficult to watch, yet not once does the screenplay talk down to its audience, nor (and this is very important) use its subject matter to titillate. As with Nichols’ two previous films (“The Graduate” and “Catch-22”), “Carnal Knowledge” is shot in extreme close-up with no establishing shots. Unlike “Catch-22,” “Carnal Knowledge” is told in chronological order, but the screenplay jumps through time without warning and without titles to advise us as to the new time period. We’re expected to be smart enough to follow the script by ourselves.

And that’s what I love about these first Nichols films. They are brilliant and cerebral, and they task us with matching wits with him and his characters. Oh, if only more Hollywood directors would give my intelligence the credit it is due. Unfortunately, as I watch any of these films, I have a hard time believing any would be made today. I can’t see a studio, save for possibly an ambitious indie, greenlighting any of these large-scale, witty, acerbic, perceptive, highbrow projects in this day and age of risk-aversion.

Unfortunately, Nichols was unable (or unwilling) to keep up the cleverness and wisdom of his early career. To wit, his next project was the very ordinary George C. Scott vehicle, “Day of the Dolphin.” Sure, Nichols had hits. I personally loved Melanie Griffith in the 1988 comedy “Working Girl” (which featured that great Carly Simon song “Let the River Run”). I loved John Travolta’s spot-on impersonation of President Bill Clinton in 1998’s entertaining “Primary Colors.” But that’s just it. Most of Nichols’ later films were entertaining. Simply entertaining. But if you want to see a young genius at work, please watch “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf,” “The Graduate,” Catch-22" (which you’ll have to view at least twice), and “Carnal Knowledge” (which you’ll want to view at least twice). Then you’ll realize Hollywood truly lost one of its greatest in 2014.

Andy Ray's reviews of current films appear on http://www.artschannelindy.com/