Working Girl (1988) (mini-review++)

working_girl_tess_cyntia.jpg(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

Working Girl (1988)

acting 8

directing 8

effects 7

editing 7

writing 7


3.7 out of 5 šŸ™


Plucky Upstart could be another Hollywood genre. It usually involves business. Like in Big where Tom Hanks’ character takes the corporate world by storm. But in that case, he’s a child shaking things up. In Working Girl, the protagonist Tess (played by a winsome Melanie Griffith), is sharp but she doesn’t have the right academic pedigree to break into her desired corporate niche of high finance. Mike Nichols steers this ship deftly, as he usually does, and it’s a very satisfying comedy / drama / dramedy. And it’s such a time capsule movie. The following cast members are all basically babies in this film: Alec Baldwin, Kevin Spacey, Sigourney Weaver, Joan Cusack, Oliver Platt. What a cast!

There is one decidedly creepy sequence in light of the advent of the #metoo era. Kevin Spacey plays a business guy who wants to hook up with Tess so he tells her he wants to interview her for a job. But then he says the interview will take place at his corporate hotel suite. Holy shit. Isn’t that the Harvey Weinstein’s modus operandi? And let’s not forget, wasn’t Kevin Spacey accused of sexually harassing and/or assaulting like a billion people? Obviously, none of this was known at the time. But watching it now sent a cringe through me.

In a weird random note: I watched Tess (1979) last night and the protagonist of this film is named Tess.







(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 šŸ™, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feelingā€¦not that SW score is scientificā€¦but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)


Leave a Reply