Let's be realistic.

Brilliant and touching

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

I work in a video shop & found 'Good Grief Its Candy' was available to order so I ordered it. There were several films I remember seeing when I was a kid growing up that would forever change my view of women, they were 'Barbarella', '1Million Years BC' & 'Good Grief It's Candy'. All I remembered about these movies were that there these women made me feel funny and awkward when I was watching them with my family.Years later when I revisited 'Barbarella' & '1Million Years BC' I watched them with a new viewpoint, I didn't feel awkward & appreciated Jane Fonda & Raquel Welch for who they were,beautiful strong women playing strong female lead characters in ever so slightly titillating movies. So, I unwrapped the DVD, put it in the player, told my girlfriend about it being a bizarre film that I saw when I was a kid & I couldn't really remember that much about the movie but there was a gorgeous girl who starred in it who I fancied when I was younger. Then I pressed 'play'.Everything started off great, brilliant opening, great soundtrack, dead trippy, wow, this is gonna be psychedelic. Wow, Burton, Coburn, Starr, Brando, amazing cast. My kinda film. Then I started to feel awkward again, like I did when I was a kid with my mom & dad sitting on the sofa next to me. But this time my girlfriend is sitting next to me.You all know the plot so I wont go over it again. Actings over the top from everyone except Ewa, who doesn't really act. Ewa Aulin, as I remembered, was still incredibly beautiful, but I forgot the actual subject matter of the movie. I think I was too young to understand it. I remember this movie was quite naughty. I kinda felt a little queasy half way through watching it.Don't get me wrong, it is a film that needs to be experienced purely to say you saw it to your mates. There were some proper funny moments, some wtf! moments & some moments you wouldn't want to watch with your girlfriend sitting next to you. I would recommend this to anyone who liked any kind of 'Grindhouse' purely for some of the strange direction & editing & exploitation (Tarantino must has ripped off some of this). I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who takes anything literally (free your mind,man).As a comedy it was OK, not 'carry on..' or 'confessions of..', darker, much darker, more 'O Lucky Man' meets 'Magical Mystery Tour' with breasts & bums. As satire & a social commentary of the time it pretty much took the rip out of all the establishment, including hippies.I am still thinking about the movie a day on trying to suss out what it was trying to say, whether it was trying to say anything, whether it was one of the best or the worst films I have ever seen. My girlfriend & I had a chat for about an hour afterwards. Initially we both thought it was exploitative but as the conversation grew the question became who was getting exploited? Obviously Ewa Aulin was shown to be a naive irresistible beauty but I believe you needed Ewa as the catalyst to show the weakness of the men involved. Any man would have tried it on with Ewa given the chance, thus showing men really for what they are. Ewa reduced these men to primal beasts. My question was: I know the men in the movie supposedly had the strength, but I believe Ewa had the power. No matter what their position or stature, they crumbled. The situations were extreme in the movie, with the outcome of Ewa getting her kit off & getting manhandled becoming more and more tiresome. Initially I laughed at the incest & other taboo quips, not believing the subject matter the movie was delving into. As the movie went on though, I started to realise it wasn't that funny, actually it was a little sad. It was supposed to be a psychedelic saucy romp & I started to feel nasty fancying Ewa all them years ago. I felt nasty watching the old movie stars groping Ewa. All of a sudden it felt to me like Andy Warhol had directed 'Austin Powers'. I started to feel free love and hippies were all starting to look abit weird, well..more weird. Then I realised this was the tail end of hippydom, perhaps this film was the start of the comedown. Or maybe the film was just pants. I don't know.plus points: Brilliant soundtrack, amazing cast, one off performances, some quirky humour.minus points: Wrong in so many ways. PS: scored it 6-7 purely because I know I will watch it again & again & still be thinking about it. Just get yourself a copy & then you can be as confused as me.Ivan.

First saw Candy on release at the local cinema, was blown away by most of the music on the soundtrack,went and got the L.P as soon as it was available! The opening music really set the standard, found the film OK. The L.P got lost in 1975 when I got married and moved but I have just bought the new D.V.D which is really great to see again, after all the years. I think the movie is better for seeing again some truly fantastic "one liner jokes" and way out sets! I am now searching for the L.P again to go with the D.V.D. I am not holding much hope of the music being issued on a D.V.D as I understand the master recordings have not been kept.Still at least the D.V.D is a good standby until I can find an old copy of the L.P.

I saw this movie in December of 1968 when it was first released in the US. I was in High School, had just turned 16. This movie was rated "X" (noone admitted under the age of 16). I remember it being somewhat disjointed. When I think about it, I can't help comparing it (loosly) to the "Austin Powers" type of film, except much racier! By todays standards quite tame. It seems so campy now, but what a cast!! I'm glad it's on DVD now; I'll watch it again. I started being a movie buff when I was very young. My uncle owned the "63rd Street Drive-In Theatre" in Kansas City, Mo. from the late 50's to 1998. So I'm quite well-versed in cinema history.

I first this during it's theatrical release days. I was 14 at the time and had read the book by Terry southern and Mason Heffenberg from which this movie was adapted by Buck Henry. I saw this when it was making the Drive-In circuit and since there is nudity in this movie it must have been rated R but 14 year-old's had no problem getting into Drive-In features. I had mostly forgotten much about this and then a few years ago when DVD's started replacing videos I found a video of this in a nice hard shell case on wide screen format at less than half price so I bought it, watched half of it and forgot about it again. A few days ago I decided to watch it in it's entirety for the first time in 38 years. One of the most amazing films ever made in the fact that so many talented people could get together and turn out such waste of money, film, time and talent. Marlon Brando, Richard Burton, Charles Aznavour, James Coburn, Walter Matthau, John Huston, Ringo Starr, john Austin, Elsa Martinelli, Anita Pallenberg and Sugar Ray Robinson are among the cast with Ewa Aluin in her first film role as Candy. Haley Mills was offered but turned down the role as Candy. Actor Christian Marquand somehow got the nod to direct this mess. He had acted in European films and had been in several English language films like The Flight of the Pheonix, The Longest Day and Lord Jim but only directed this and another forgettable film in his brief directorial career before he returned to acting. Respected Cinematographer Giuseppe Rotunno brought a lot of credentials to this film. He had done cinematography for several Fellini films as well as for directors Stanlry Kramer, John Huston, Arthur Hiller and Edward Dmytryk. He must have had a mental lapse of the skills he had acquired while filming this or he just sold the filmmakers his name to put on the credits but one of the two must have happened. I can't believe he would want to sully his resume with this product. Douglas Trumball, who as a Special Effects artist would do 2001 A Space Odysessy, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Silent Running, Star Trek the Motion Picture and Bladerunner produces what can be passed off as special effects here. It is interesting seeing Burton and Brando in comedic roles. Burton in the films beginning as the poet has some good lines and it's funny hearing him talk about a "fearsome poetry loving tribe" in Africa. Brando as the guru who travels the country in a specially equipped semi trailer gives a pretty good performance with what he's got to work with. Coburn is in his In Like Flint character. Starr is over the top in his Mexican gardener role with the pigeon English speak and English accent and his natural comedic talent is misused. Walter Huston make a cameo. Anita Pallenberg is good. Sugar Ray Robinson is way out of place here but actually isn't too bad at his role. John Austin is typical John Austin in his dual role as "Daady" and "Uncle." Elsa Martinelli is forgettable. Charles Aznavour is in a Fellini-type character and is unfunny. Matthau looks lost and out of place and is unfunny. Buck Henry has a pathetically unfunny cameo role. Aulin is awful. The Dave Crusin scored soundtrack is horrible. The two Steppenwolf songs could have been utilized better or left out altogether. The original Byrds-Crusin closing song is forgettable. This movie is like a film school project gone wrong. If you saw this film while you were high it still wouldn't be funny and would probably scare you instead. The overall ineptitude of this film and the monumental waste of talent does warrant some kind of perverse redeeming value to it however.