The World's Greatest Lover (1977)

1977 brought the second attempt of Gene Wilder to produce, direct, write and star in another film. The World's Greatest Lover was a varsity effort by the new director to produce a piece based on a movie star in the 1920's. Gene Wilder stars with Carol Kane, and Dom DeLuise to tell the tale of a man who chases his dream of movie stardom by traveling to Hollywood answering the call for a search for the world's greatest lover. Sometimes, it takes traveling far from home to realize that you already have everything you could ever want. Hollywood studio head Adolph Zitz (Dom DeLuise) is competing with the strapping, good-looking, Errol Flynn-esque star of another studio. Zitz decides to post a call asking for men across the country to come to Hollywood and audition for his film The World's Greatest Lover and become a star. Meanwhile, back home in Milwaukee working in a bakery, meek Rudy Hickman (Gene Wilder) dreams of being such a movie star and decides to travel with his bored and listless wife, Annie (Carol Kane) for the audition. All of his life Rudy has wanted to work in the movies and be a star, he daydreams of stardom so much he neglects his work and is unable to keep a job. Rudy ends up getting a screen test, and as his excitement builds with his dream getting closer to reality, his wife is sucked into the Hollywood lifestyle and attempts to have an affair with the famous screen actor Rudolph Valentino. Realizing that he is losing grip on the life he has in search of the life he longs for, Rudy must make the decision to leave his dream in his head, or risk losing everything to chase it.What to say about The World's Greatest Lover, you can tell Gene Wilder was incredibly ambitious and wanted to become a director. Much like The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother, Wilder was unhinged in this venture and clearly does better starring in a film that he is not directing. He would have been better if deciding to continue directing not having a starring role in the film. The film starts out with a good premise, then loses its story with poor fluidity and wild performances from all actors involved. There were a few good gags, and it was a nice homage to classic silent cinema, but not much else shines in this film. The directing bug definitely bit Wilder, and clearly sucked too much blood. As much as I love Wilder as an actor and writer, he falters in the director's chair.

Interesting that 20th Century Fox gave Gene Wilder a second chance to develop his talents as a writer-director-star (and producer AND songwriter this time) after "The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother" left most critics indifferent. "Brother" wasn't terrible, and it reportedly grossed twenty million dollars, but as comic movie-making it was a botch (it had too much manic energy for one picture). Here, Wilder plays a Milwaukee schnook who travels to Los Angeles in the 1920's with his new bride to audition for Rainbow Pictures' answer to Rudolph Valentino. Wilder doesn't float gags around, he hammers away at them without much subtlety or finesse; he loves a good burlesque gag and he's fond of old-fashioned slapstick, but he needs more soft edges (the best scenes are the ones featuring Carol Kane, who is handled gingerly playing the wife). Lots of running jokes (bad ones, like Gene's character being named Rudy Valentine, that simply don't pay off), and too much of Dom DeLuise, bring the picture down. There are some laughs: Gene making eyes at a plain Jane on the train, an overflowing bathtub in a posh hotel. Wilder certainly has lots of ideas, but the results are more miss than hit. ** from ****

I personally thought the film was too long, and had too many belabored or slowly timed gags. They needed to be more crisply and unselfconsciously performed to work.The Abalone character was great, and his give and take with people was one of the better points. Still, to have the A-Baloney bit pounded into the ground didn't improve the humor. Too much of a good thing is too much of a good thing.Same is true for the 'sex by numbers' bit. Clever, but needed tightening up.This said, I'm usually a big fan of Wilder's work. This one just fell a bit flat for me.

ok maybe not really but it sure felt like it the first 60 or 70 times i saw it as a kid on cable i loved this movie cause it was so freakin funny i watched it over and over and over again laughing myself hysterical every time and then when i saw it like 15 years later i laughed so hard i broke a rib laughing ok maybe not really but it sure felt like it ya know what i'm sayin