I put the apostrophes around her name because they played what was supposed to be a Goldie Hawn double on the tellie the other weekend. But the first movie, Shampoo, is really a Warren Beattie movie, with Goldie supporting. The other movie was Sugarland Express.
Shampoo:
You may notice that I'm not a methodical film critic in my reviews. I don't tend to take much notice of anything technical, so long as I was entertained. My rating is purely how entertained I was. But here I have to pull out a bit of a technical criticism. Stories, I'm told, should have a beginning, a middle and an end. This movie doesn't. This must be one of the reasons why it blows. Warren Beattie plays a vacuous hairdresser who shags all his customers, despite having the scrumptous Goldie as his girlfriend. The acting of the cast was fine, which also included Julie Christie as one of his MILFs. But the story was just crap. The redeeming feature is that you can see so much of Zoolanders character in his. Why they played this movie instead of say, Private Benjamin (which I'd have loved to see) is beyond me. It was pretty hard staying awake for the next movie. Lucky I did (",)
2.5/5
Sugarland Express:
What a contrast! This actually stars Goldie Hawn, who plays the wife of a prisoner who is on pre-release (strange concept to me. You are either released, or not). Anyway, she convinces her husband to break out of gaol, even though he only has 4 months to go! Not the brightest sparks. It all goes awry when a cop happens to pull over the car they hitched a ride in. They end up kidnapping the cop, who is still a rookie. This is well acted, a compelling story. And true!
4/5
The only thing that ties the movies together is that they are filmed in the mid seventies, and set in the late sixties.
Edit: forgot to mention, Sugarland Express is an example of early Steven Speilberg.