Kramer vs. Kramer

One of my favorite movies. I was astounded as to what Amazon charged for such as old movie. I'd like to share the movie with guests, but the rental fee just doesn't allow it. They could rent more movies if the just lowered he cost - especially movies made literally decades ago! Great movie if you want to pay the price.

A wonderful, beautifully acted film about the meanings of love,friendship, and above all parenthood. This is the film where RobertBenton's complex humanism really comes to full flower.In a situation that almost demands taking sides - a sudden divorceleading to an unprepared father taking over childcare only to bechallenged for custody when the mother returns 18 months later - Bentonmanages to make everyone a complex human being, with strengths andweaknesses, trying their best to do the right thing in a painful, messysituation.Hoffman, who has been brilliant so many times playing characters farfrom himself is perhaps the most moving he's ever been playing acharacter that director Benton described as really, honestly playinghimself - perhaps the hardest character of all. Streep takes a womanwho could have easily come off as the villain of the piece, and makesyou understand her actions - - even abandoning her little boy. JaneAlexander is wonderful and subtle as the slowly developing friendHoffman makes as a single father, and young Justin Henry is utterlyreal in a way few child actors are as the 7 year old stuck in themiddle. It's also beautifully, if understatedly shot by NestorAlmendros.It's flaws are minor. Some of the supporting roles, while played byterrific character actors, are a bit more one note and characturishthan they need be. And some of the courtroom theatrics feel just a tinybit... well, theatrical. Also, there's a logic point that's always buggedme - why doesn't Hoffman - doing quite well on Madison Avenue, hire apart-time housekeeper or nanny to help him from becoming terminallyoverloaded by the combination of career and single parenthood? Lastfamily politics have changed enough in 31 years that no longer wouldthe climactic court fight stack up quite the same way - it's no longera rarity for a man to want custody of his children - but that's not aflaw in the film, just a welcome reminder that some things do getbetter.And none of the above are enough to detract from the fact that this isstorytelling and acting of the highest order.The blu-ray, while not a dramatic leap from the fine DVD, is stilla worthwhile upgrade. The additional richness and texture inboth the image and the sound gives the film an even greatersense of immediacy.

Movie 2 of 1979 and 62 overall in my journey through films of my lifetimeA lesson I've learned watching David Lynch movies is that things are so much better when they are juxtaposed to something else. If you want a funny scene you can make a joke. If you want a really funny scene make the same joke sandwiched between two dramatic scenes. The big laugh of "Kramer VS Kramer" got a harder laugh out of me than "1941" could have ever dreamed of. Spielberg said what he loves about "1941" is what critics disliked: that it was busy and loud - sensory overload. I would suggest that the critics were right and it's too bad Spielberg didn't learn a lesson from that. "Kramer vs. Kramer" makes you invest in a relationship between a father and a son and when a comedic moment happens it is not just hilarious it's a relief. Although far from a comedy this movie had me in the palm of its hand, they could make me laugh any time they wanted.Mark of a story teller that respects their audience's intelligence: The father, Ted Kramer, is advised to make a list of pros and cons to decide if it's worth it to spend more money than he has to fight for custody of his child. The scene shows nothing but cons and the pros list was blank. If this had been a Hallmark Christmas special one can only image the corny words that would have appeared in the pros list. As it was it was indeed blank and it was left to Hofman's acting to make the point. Excellent!Today so much is made out of connections people make in film school then have few real life experiences. They create caricatures of humans to score political points. This movie could not get funding today, it's way too real, it's about real humans.I liked the ending. I also wonder what it would have been like to end it not knowing the outcome of the court case. I just don't need conclusive answers to be happy with a story. This is a powerful film and timeless. It has enriched me having seen it. I'm greatful it was made.Pros-incredible acting-incredible storyCons-slow beginning

Mum ( Meryl Streep ) decides to walk out on husband Dustin Hoffman. The problem is they have a young son. Hoffman tries his very best to keep his job. Meryl Streep plays a very good do I really want to be a mother, do I really want to be in this relationship, who the devil am I really ?. She goes away and comes back watching her husband dropping of their young son at school every day. But he is unaware of this. Quite tense and gripping at times. Especially when they meet up in the restaurant. This scene is highly charged. Eventually she wants to see her son. Even going through the divorce courts as well. Did they actually get back together or not ?. This is where I find the ending rather strange. The ending is well. no ending at all. Very odd I thought. Or maybe I was missing the point. Very good to watch, although the ending if you can call it that should have been planned better. PC. 14. 12. 2017.

This is yet another film that as a young man passed me by first time around. A film about a ‘custody battle’ was not really my kind of thing in my twenties? So, some 35 years later I decided to catch up with it.It does look a little dated now – as one would expect. – the clothes, the décor etc. Today of course a custody battle is hardly news. The film is not long at 105 minutes and the finale in some ways leaves you guessing as to what may eventually transpire – which is always a nice way to leave a film?Any ‘tug of love’ film is always going to be a bit mushy and full of sentimentality. But whilst it’s certainly present here, it’s not overly done as to bring on the sick bag at regular intervals! Both main protagonists do a fine job, as do the rest of the cast. An 'AA' nomination for the child - Justin Henry, was quite ridiculous - he was good but not outstandingly good.The film won 5 AA’s, as well turning an $8 million budget into a gross taking of $65 million. I found it a reasonable film to watch considering that the content these days is rather run of the mill and hardly anything out of the ordinary? I’m glad that I’ve covered it but it won’t stay on the memory for too long.

I have now , over the years, watched this film three times. I am always very moved and saddened by the story of the couple who each want their son to live with them ---after their separation. Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep play their parts superbly, and the film is a real tear-jerker.

My daughter is disabled and is missing Eastenders during lockdown unfortunately this dvd jumps I cannot return it as she loves it and doesn’t seem to mind it jumping. It annoys me but not her. 😢

I ordered a DVD . Kramer vs Kramer & received a Backpack Cover wtf ?? Which was reflective & Waterproof . Needless to say it's going back . What the hell would I want with one of those . I wouldn't care I was looking forward on watching it .