User reviews

THE SLUMS OF BEVERLY HILLS (3 outta 5 stars) I figured this was going to be just another silly movie about the trials and tribulations of spoiled rich kids in Cali. Actually it's a pretty good coming-of-age story circa 1976. Vivian (Natasha Lyonne) has just grown breasts and now considers herself deformed. Her dad (Alan Arkin) is a divorced man of almost-retirement-age who has never been able to provide a stable home for his kids and keep dragging them from place to place like nomads (and presumably keeping one step ahead of bill collectors). One brother is a struggling actor and the other is too young to really fit in anywhere. In a desperate attempt to make ends meet Arkin takes in his troubled 29 year old niece (Marisa Tomei), charging his rich brother a fee for keeping an eye on her. So they all move into a small, cheap Beverly Hills apartment block and try to cope. Very funny moments... punctuated by some heavy drama and some unexpected twists. One of the better roles that Alan Arkin had had in recent years... proving that he hasn't lost his touch as he's gotten older (unlike many other comic actors of his generation). I have never been much of a fan of Marisa Tomei but I liked her a lot in this movie. The scenes of her and Lyonne conversing in their "secret language" are priceless!

"Slums" is one of the more underrated films of the 1990s. It seems to rub some people the wrong way for unclear reasons, but I found it to be touching and hilarious from start to finish. Perhaps I'm just a sucker for Alan Arkin, whom I've always liked, and see on screen all to infrequently. More likely I was impressed by the witty script, deft direction and solid cast. I especially appreciated the spot-on portrayal of Southern California during the mid-70s, which just happens to be the era when I migrated from "back East" to Los Angeles. Fortunately, we weren't as hapless as the Abramowitz family, who throughout this film are trying desperately to hang onto the ragged edge of the good life.

This is one "coming of age" story that you don't need to be a teenage girl to enjoy.

It's summer 1976 Beverly Hills. Vivian Abromowitz (Natasha Lyonne) is a teen annoyed at her sudden boob growth. Her father Murray (Alan Arkin) keeps moving the broke family with her, and brothers Ben and Rickey to avoid paying rent. They stay within Beverly Hills limits so the kids attend the better schools. Cousin Rita (Marisa Tomei) has run away from an asylum and uncle Mickey is willing to pay his brother Murray if she could stay with them. Eliot Arenson is the pot-selling neighbor.

Natasha Lyonne is wonderfully awkward. There is some good dysfunction in this family but there is also some bad awkwardness. It's not a movie filled with big laughs. I could do without one particular uncomfortable scene. There is more good than bad in this movie. It's generally filled with good dry humor.

Being 17 in 1976, this movie perfectly captured that era's tackiness and lack of direction. It hurt just to look at the clothes and listen to the music.

I found the movie a perfectly realistic change from the overwrought seriousness and cookie-cutter "family" pieces.

I especially liked the dead cat, Rita's "boyfriend", and "It's a building thing."

Evocative, scary [in a PVC-upholstered sofa sort of way], redeeming, honest -- I was laughing through my tears.

i'm not quite sure exactly why i like this film but as the credits rolled i was smiling nonetheless. the orange/brown/pea-soup green 70's setting of it was one of the things i found authentic and quirky about it. the whole texture of the movies seems saturated by that awful color scheme, as though the whole world is being invaded and lorded over by kitsch. another more base reason is the infinitely watchable natasha lyonne as the blossomed teenager coping with an increasingly unstable world. first her family life and now even her body seem to follow wild and unpredictable spurts. she is obviously quite attractive and i would say the best actor/actress to come out of the American pie bunch and thus not surprisingly the most overlooked. the characters all seem believable to the point that one has to understand that some biographical elements are playing heavily into the story. that said brings to mind the old adage that truth is often stranger than fiction, and in this case it also is more entertaining.

7 out of 10

This is a Jewish movie with the missing mom being a really key component. In the scene with Viv looking at the remote figure of the mom with two daughters as they leave to go shopping -- even (or especially) this mom who says big breasts are out of date, and who has provided her daughter with a nose job -- there is clear yearning for and respect for a mother. And in the responsibilities Viv is given and which she takes pretty courageously i'd say, she is a little mother to her family. Cousin Rita Abramovitz, on the other hand, is a female disaster, and Marisa Tomei's performance is spot on. Again, not comic. Human feeling and weakness showing through veneer of sexual energy. Our culture provides for sex first. Sex sells. There's a temporary sense of power, but this is not what people are. And Tomei gets that across. She disentigrates into illness. Elliott the pot dealer is drawn with accuracy and tenderness, recalling people i knew back then and illuminating them for me. The scene that was key for me in this motion picture is the father at his restaurant(with hair on his head in a lovely flashback)dealing with his cook. The meat. Could move the setting from Beverly Hills to the LaBrea tarpits . . . watching living creatures thrash and sink in the black goo of materialism.

This semi-autobiographical story follows a lower-middle-class teenager (Natasha Lyonne) and her neurotic family in 1976 Tinseltown.

I love that this had Alan Arkin, a small role for Mena Suvari and a key starring role for Marisa Tomei. They nailed the 1970s, at least what I picture the 1970s to be. Not sure this is a lost classic. Some are calling it a cult classic, but I was not quite impressed enough to recommend it to others.

Roger Ebert wrote, "Lyonne has the film's most important role, and is the key to the comedy. She does a good job of looking incredulous, and there's a lot in her life to be incredulous about. She also has a nice pragmatic approach to sexuality, as in a scene where she consults a plastic surgeon about on-the-spot breast reduction." Ebert was more impressed than I was, granting the film three stars.

Now, I am a middle aged male movie buff, and although I like and have watched lots of movies, and all kinds of movies, comedies are not that high on my list, generally speaking. When I read the tv guide, it said this movie was a comedy. So I tuned in, expecting to not be too excited about the movie.

I tuned in about 10 minutes after the start of the movie, and gave the movie my partial attention. But within 2 or 3 minutes, this movie had my full attention. I could see right away this one was something special. It comes as close to depicting a genuine species of lower middle class family life as I have ever seen. It is a real gem.

And it is not really a true comedy, although it is quite funny sometimes. It sort of defies definition or categorization. Sort of wry and humorous exploration of the dynamics of a typical struggling, lower-middle class family.

No fancy camera angles. Not a special effect in sight (and I have enjoyed many movies with fancy camera angles and special effects--I am no snob). But this movie is cinema stripped to its bare essence. Just pure script and acting. And what a script.

Marisa Tomei is incredible. She should have won the Oscar for this one.

See it!

BTW, I cannot believe the lady who scripted and directed this one has not gone on to do more directing or writing! What a waste of talent!

Bright performances are the reason to see Tamara Jenkins' Slums of Beverly Hills, since the situations offered up by the writing consist of the usual comedic complications writers call "quirky" and "zany." Following the nomadic existence of Murray Abramovitz (Alan Arkin), a 65-year-old wash-out father of two teenagers and their kid brother, the movie focuses on Vivian (Natasha Lyonne) the single-parent family's lone female. Vivian is exasperated by her newly sprouted breasts, and a significant measure of the film's comedy arises from this singular obsession. Most out of place is Marisa Tomei, who plays the flaky, pregnant, basket case of a cousin who comes to live with the family. Jenkins would have done well to leave out this completely unnecessary character and devote more time to the challenges faced by Vivian.

I had the opportunity to sit down and watch the 1998 comedy drama "Slums of Beverly Hills" here in 2021. I had not ever heard about the movie prior to sitting down to watch it.

But I must say that seeing the cast ensemble for the movie, I figured that I would be in for something possibly great. So of course I sat down to watch "Slums of Beverly Hills" from writer and director Tamara Jenkins.

And while "Slums of Beverly Hills" was watchable, the movie's storyline and odd characters just fell slightly short of proving to be overly entertaining for my liking. Sure, this was a watchable movie, but it was by no means a grand moment in cinematic history. Nor is it a movie that I will ever return to watch a second time.

"Slums of Beverly Hills" does have a rather good ensemble of actors and actresses on the cast list, with the likes of Natasha Lyonne, Alan Arkin, Marisa Tomei, Jessica Walter and Kevin Corrigan.

My rating of this 1998 movie lands on a very mediocre five out of ten stars.

The Slums of Beverly Hills is a coming-of-age story from the perspective of a young girl. Vivian, the protagonist, is the pubescent member of a roving band of urban gypsies in 1976 Beverly Hills. The band consists solely of her divorcee father, and two brothers; one older and one younger. They don't roam far, just in the confines of the Beverly Hills school district. They are joined by a rehab-fleeing, neurotic female cousin, who becomes a guide for the young Vivian, leading her through the sexual-emotional vicissitudes of teenagerdom. Very clever, and also very heartfelt, The Slums of Beverly Hills really connected with me. I felt for the family. The acting is top flight and this makes up for some grating story lapses. When in the mood for a comedy I highly recommend this movie.

Slums of Beverly Hills is about a teenage girl named Vivian Abromovitz(Natasha Lyonne). The Abromovitz family has this weird thing where they tend to move out every few months. Vivian can't seem to understand her family and is having a hard time growing up with her father and her two brothers. Suddenly vivian's gorgeous but crazy cousin Rita(Marisa Tomei) moves in with her. Rita's dad buys the Ambromovitz family a nice house because they are letting his daughter stay with them. Vivian finally thinks that she has found a home and that they won't be moving out into another dump hole like they did before. But due to some accidents, vivian's dream might not come true but make her realize that she doesn't need a nice place to live in order to be happy with her family. Slums of Beverly Hills was a nice little funny and original movie, besides the fact that they could have choosen someone else to play Vivian, because Natasha Lyonne looks like she's in her late twenties. I would give Slums of Beverly Hills 7.5/10

The cast and vignettes in "Slums of Beverly Hills" are better than the totality.

Natasha Lyonne is particularly good, switching from dead pan comedy to poignant and she is warm chemistry with Alan Arkin as her dad.

The ending trailed off.

As a person behind me pointed out, if they're staying in Beverly Hills for the school district, how come they're never in school?

If you're collecting coming of age movies (or Kevin Corrigan movies) it's worth seeing, like "Manny and Lo," another, better indie movie about virtually parentless teens and how they cope.

(originally written 9/12/1998)

This was a very pleasant surprise. It's hilarious and nostalgic (especially if you're a woman in her mid-thirties), but also really meaningful and moving. This movie is a highly original and often painfully accurate depiction of female adolescence -- from bras to blood stains.

The whole cast is wonderful. Natasha Lyonne is amazing -- I haven't been so captivated by an actress since I saw Emily Watson in "Breaking the Waves." Alan Arkin -- where has he been? -- is wonderful as her father, and Marisa Tomei is outrageous, but not over the top, as her sexy rehab-escapee cousin. Marisa and Natasha are particularly amusing in their scenes together, where they often speak a private language not unlike "ubby-dubby" (remember ZOOM?). The vibrator scene is not to be missed -- you'll never hear "We Got the Funk" the same way again!

I've been very disappointed with a lot of the highly-touted indies of the past few years, but "Slums of Beverly Hills" is the genuine article. I can 't wait to see Tamara Jenkins' next film!

It's a kind of movie that I can't say I enjoyed it a lot, but I recommend it anyway.

There's a lot of great things in it: the cast and their acting, the director, Natasha Lyonne delivers a sensational role, real human life with real struggles and battles without embellishing it, boobs, family union above all, society problems tackled without judgement, boobs.

There's something missing for me, the editing maybe or maybe it's because I've seen it just now instead of 1998, but I repeat: I recommend it.

I don't know where this film was going, and I don't know if it got there, this was a bizarre plot. Despite all that, I quite enjoyed the entertainment, there were some very funny moments that raised this above the average film. So long as you don't expect a beginning, a middle and an end, then you should enjoy this film. If you must have those three components in their logical order, look elsewhere.

Natasha Lyonne stars as a teenage girl growing up in various slums in Beverley Hills, but her family cannot necessarily afford to live in them. After moving around for most of her life, her family's finally found a place to call home with help from her uncle's money. The catch is that they have to watch after their troubled daughter (Marisa Tomei) and make sure that she makes a transition from drugs to a career worthy of their name.

That's not spoiling so much, I don't think, because the movie has much more depth than that. This very original drama/comedy features a great, universal struggle of living without proper means and making life work. It's a coming-of-age film for Lyonne's character who sees the beginnings of her womanhood, struggles of relationships, and maintaining her family's name and reputation through whatever means possible.

It's really touching how the Abromowitzes handle themselves and make each others' experiences memorable. The aging father (Alan Arkin) is truly memorable in this film for his struggles in finding out an end to poverty and loneliness without his wife. A great film altogether, not very long (only about 1 hr. 30 min), and easy to watch all the way through. Definitely a buy on DVD (even if the special features aren't all that special). I gave it an 8/10.

SLUMS OF BEVERLY HILLS / (1998) **1/2

"Slums of Beverly Hills" portrays the lives of a poor, dysfunctional Beverly Hills family that nobody in the majority of an audience will care about. In his mid-sixties, wifeless father Murray (Alan Arkin), moves his family from apartment to apartment escaping rent but staying in the Bevery Hills school district for the high standard educational curriculum. His high school son Elliot (Kevin Corrigan), receptive preteen Rickey (Eli Marienthal), and sexually blossoming daughter Vivian (Natasha Lyonne) are in the habit of being awoke early in the morning to move into another low class living space before rental payment is due.

Tamara Jenkin's wacky comedy introduces this family inventively and comically; at first the characters appear to be original and interesting. Murray and his children create the kind of dysfunction family in the tradition of "American Beauty." These characters are mawkish, entertaining and well cast, a potentially effective combination within a farce. Natasha Lyonne, Alan Arkin, and Marisa Tomei perform with curiosity and sarcasm, building on a story that is inspiring.

I enjoyed the soundtrack of "Slums of Beverly Hills" a great deal; the title theme is stimulating and colorful, it conjoins the film's humorous tones. Some of the scenes also produce laughs, but the comic style is drowned in the serious themes dealing with drug use, aging, pot-merchandising, and adolescent confusion. Still, I liked the style of comedy here, probably intended to franchise a sitcom.

Even though "Slums of Beverly Hills" contains elements of an energetic comic expedition, its characters seem to wander from scene to scene, drifting from one outrageous situation into another with little purpose or motive. The audience has a hard time concerning themselves with such characters simply because the movie hinges them on puppet strings and glides them throughout the uncanny story. The only true revealing variable here is Vivian's sexual exploration, which causes more of a feeling of audacity than involvement. The material in "Slums of Beverly Hills" belongs in an inconclusive television sitcom, not in a feature full length motion picture that gives birth to more questions than answers.

For a long time, the depiction of the family unit in movies and on television was for the most part a sanitized, idealized representation, from movies like the Mickey Rooney `Andy Hardy' series and William Powell's `Life With Father,' to the totally stereotypical versions presented on TV in such shows as `Ozzie and Harriet' and `Father Knows Best,' which were entertaining, perhaps, but set standards that in reality were simply unattainable; a reflection of real life these movies/shows were not. There was the occasional film like `Rebel Without A Cause' or `The Young Savages,' which certainly explored conflicted individuals, but the focus was not on the `family unit' per se. Then gradually, all of that began to change; filmmakers evolved and the screen did begin to more accurately reflect the family dynamic in very real terms, for better or worse, and in 1998, `Slums of Beverly Hills,' written and directed by Tamara Jenkins hit the screen, with a depiction of the family unit that's about as honest as it gets.

Murray Abromowitz (Alan Arkin) is 65 years old, divorced and raising three kids on his own. A car salesman, Murray is currently in a `slump.' In point of fact, however, his whole life has been one long slump. But he's determined that his children, Ben (David Krumholtz), Vivian (Natasha Lyonne) and Rickey (Eli Marienthal), are going to get a good education, and that means keeping them in the best schools. And that means living in Beverly Hills. It's one of the most `upscale' communities in the world, but he doesn't have to be rich to take advantage of the educational opportunities; as long as they live within the city limits, the kids stay enrolled. It's all a matter of having the right zip code. But there's the rub; it's just not as easy as it sounds, because even living on the periphery of Beverly Hills cannot be successfully effected without `means,' and `assets' of any kind are decidedly not a part of Murray's personal resume.

Which means there has to be a plan. And Murray's plan is very simple: You stay one step ahead of the landlord and the monthly rent and you're home free. Which means moving. A lot. As in slipping out in the middle of the night with only as much as you can carry and moving on to the next `dingbat' apartment. And so is goes with the Abromowitz family, living a nomadic existence as part of a very real sub-culture in one of the richest areas on the planet. It's hard, but the kids are getting the education. Murray, however, suddenly has something else to deal with: Vivian, who is about to enter her freshman year at high school. And she is not a `little' girl anymore.

To tell her semi-autobiographical story, writer/director Jenkins has crafted and delivered a thoroughly engrossing film steeped in nuance and gritty realism. It's an incisive portrait of how a dysfunctional family can survive by establishing parameters which allow them to get from point A to point B on a daily basis, and what it takes to maintain the kind of internal support system that enables them to function and stay together, though individually their goals and aspirations may be pulling them in opposite directions. it goes far in disproving the idea that a family in perpetual crisis must necessarily disintegrate.

The story is told through the eyes of Vivian, which gives the film a decidedly personal resonance, as it is obvious that this is where Jenkins' heart resides. And it presents a mature perspective that effectively dispels the stereotypical characterization of the self-absorbed teen mired in the throes of paralyzing angst, which adds considerable credibility to this character driven comedy/drama. Jenkins also successfully captures an entirely genuine `sense' of the whole Abromowitz's environment; the look, texture and `feel' of the film is a reflection of reality, so much so that you can almost actually detect the scent of the apartments, the steaks cooking at Sizzler or that familiar clean/warm smell of the laundry room. An exceptionally insightful film, it sheds some light on the invisible threads that hold us together and keep the myriad facets of our society connected.

What really brings this one to life, though, is the performances Jenkins exacts from her exceptional cast of actors, beginning with Lyonne, who so perfectly embodies the character of Vivian. This is the pivotal part of the film, and with her `natural' presence Lyonne delivers a convincing portrayal through which she precisely conveys exactly what she's thinking and feeling with a combination of facial expressions, body language and simply the inflection of her voice.

As Murray, Arkin gives an extremely affecting and introspective performance, creating a character with whom many in the audience are going to be able to relate and identify on one level or another, as he taps into that sense of not quite being able to figure out how it all works, even after doing it day after day for sixty-five years. In Murray we see a very accurate reflection of the on-going process of sorting out `life'-- a process that, in reality, never ends. It's a performance that takes into account the inherent flaws of being human; it makes us realize that none of us are perfect, but that it's okay-- we just have to keep trying.

One of the finest character actors in the business, indy favorite Kevin Corrigan turns in an effective, understated and unassuming performance as Eliot, the guy with whom Vivian has a `building thing' relationship.

Also giving a memorable performance is Marisa Tomei, as Murray's niece, Rita, who is deliciously tacky and adds some real spice to the film. Her portrayal is earthy and utterly believable, and like Arkin's Murray, is an honest reflection of how most people grapple with the uncertainties of life.

`Slums of Beverly Hills' is a viable exploration of the human condition; a film that helps us understand who we are, and why.

Somehow this movie is worse than the sum of its parts. All the performances are good (especially Natashe Lyonne), but they don't all belong in the same movie. Alan Arkin is in a drama, the brothers and the dope-dealing neighbor are in a comedy, and NL is in one of those coming-of-age movies that has a lesson at the end of it. It just doesn't fit together for me, and I was rather disappointed. There is a funny scene where NL dances with her cousin and a vibrator, but I'd have to say that the movie is marginal. If you're in the right mood it will work, and if not, you won't hate it.

Upon my reactions to a few mixed reviews and these mostly-positive user comments, it is proven that SLUMS OF BEVERLY HILLS succeeds for one golden accomplishment: it's trashy. At least we've come to experience once again what living in the 70s was all about, and it's got some trendy replicas of all things that were psychedelic (like the dome-shaped "Pic N' Save" store). What else could you ask for? It's a triumphant journey of drive-in movie days that would have no place in the high-tech multiplexes of the present. The terrible direction, the sex jokes, the awfully bland dialogue, the tasteless quality, you name it! But ho-hum! Why does a movie have to be so bad? Like numerous movies of this age, they are designed to cash in on our love for the reincarnation of yesteryear. My words sound appropriate, but otherwise, the slums is where this movie belongs! It's hard to explain how something like this is so horrible that it's a barely passable job to produce. Stay away from this one if you can. As a matter of fact, I will! And why was Robert Redford involved?