Several things is very clear in watching "Carnal Knowledge again from start to finish. It is not the type of film that everybody will like equally. It has dated ideals and concepts about what men are like and what men like and what men expect. It has little respect for the two leading characters, Jack Nicholson and Art Garfunkel, who wouldn't be able to sustain a single relationship for more than a decade. Nicholson is the more amoral of the two, spending one key scene with a slide projector showing all of his lovers since childhood. It is an absurd scene not only because it removes any sympathy you may have gained for him, but how would he have pictures of all these people over the years let alone put them into a slideshow?

One definite detail is also clear from watching this film from start to finish. Garfunkel seems to age naturally, but Nicholson looks exactly the same from his college years (ridiculously so in those scenes) to his mid-to-late 30's in the early 1970's. Garfunkel definitely gained a bit more sympathy because his character seems to truly want a great woman, but after the first half, he seems to begin to emulate Nicholson's desire for girlfriend after girlfriend after girlfriend. None remain the same, and even though he ended up with the gorgeous Candice Bergen after the first half, her character completely disappears as the focus changes to Nicholson and Ann-Margret.

Both of these women are desirable and certainly looking for the right relationship that will sustain them for a lifetime. They want to be cherished and loved and to love back. We get to see the build-up of Garfunkel's relationship with Bergen (briefly interrupted by her fling with Nicholson which doesn't seem to bother Garfunkel),and then she's gone. Nicholson is wining and dining Ann-Margret and soon they are cohabitating together, discussing the rules of relationship that will not include marriage. As time goes by, they are revealed to be married with a daughter, and it is indeed evident that Nicholson never should have made any type of marital vow.

This is not necessarily a bad movie, just a depressing one. You are hoping throughout that Nicholson will grow up but he never seems to change at all other than to become angrier as he ages. Certainly, the performances are excellent, and as a character study, this is highly recommended. Bergen gets to be very subtle and she is greatly missed in the last half. Ann-Margret, who came out of this with the sole Oscar nomination, plays a character who is not only desirable physically but spiritually and emotionally as well and it is sad to watch her be destroyed by the self-centered Jack. It is very evident why she was singled out for the nomination, proving that her beauty isn't only physical but deep inside as well.

As for the others in the cast, there's a very quiet Carol Kane and a shocking cameo by Rita Moreno, coming on for the final scene and getting a monologue you won't soon forget. It is ironic that an earlier scene has Nicholson and Ann-Margret driving through times square past a "West Side Story" marquis. I couldn't determine whether this was supposed to be the movie or the original Broadway show, but I found it quite ironic. This film probably was considered groundbreaking upon its initial release, and some of the elements do hold true today, but watching this film from start to finish after a long hiatus from having seen it last, I felt like I was reliving the memory of having a sledgehammer bang down on my foot, and it's hard to lose a depression after seeing a film again when those memories resurface.

The plot begins with Jonathan (Jack Nicholson) and Sandy (Art Garfunkel) roommates in the university. Each one of them has a different behavior and experience with women: Jonathan is cynical, malicious, and selfish. He does not respect anybody (even his best friend is not respected) and just want to have sex. Women are objects for him. Sandy is almost the opposite of Jonathan and has a different approach with women: he is shy and respectful, he does not have much experience with women. These characteristics are presented in the film having Susan (the gorgeous Candice Bergen, the most beautiful actress of the 70's) as pivot. Then the story advances a few years and shows both of them successful in their professions and boring with their mates. The character of Susan (who married Sandy) is just occasionally mentioned and does not appear on the screen any more. Now, we see basically the relationship of Jonathan with Bobbie (the sexy Ann-Margret). Then, there is another jump in time and other relationship of Jonathan and Sandy are presented in this movie, since its essence is about relationship of men and woman having the focus mainly in Jonathan.

In 1971, I was too young to watch this movie and certainly I would not understand most of the story. Only a couple of days ago I had the chance of seeing it. It is amazing how this movie for adults has not aged. Further, it does not look like an American movie. The camera, the screenplay, it does look like European movie (maybe a little of 'Jules and Jim'). All the actors and actresses have outstanding performance, but certainly Jack Nicholson and Ann-Margret are superb. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Ânsia de Amar" ("Eagerness for Love")

Note: On 18 January 2014, I saw this movie again.

A talky, oddly stage-bound film (though it's not based on a stage play) that nevertheless exerts a kind of raw emotional tug on the viewer.

Jack Nicholson and Art Garfunkel (yes, you read that correctly) begin as college chums on a never-ending hunt for female tail, and end the film as stifled adults, still filling their lives with emotionally empty physical affairs that do nothing to fill the yawning void of their boring existences. Sound depressing? It is, but it's also rather fascinating, due to a sharp script and excellent acting.

This came out at a time when Jack Nicholson was actually playing characters in movies other than Jack Nicholson, and he does fine work here as the more virile and experienced of the two friends. Candice Bergen is also in fine form in a very dramatic role, a far cry from the comedic roles with which we've come to associate her. And Ann-Margret won a lot of acclaim (and the film's sole Oscar nomination) for her brief performance as the sex-pot basket case Bobbie, the target of Nicholson's emotional abuse.

"Carnal Knowledge" is entertaining as an intellectual exercise, but it may leave you cold on a deeper, more emotional level, as no one, not even the women, are especially likable or sympathetic. It came out at a time in our cultural history when "free love" was in vogue, and seemed to suggest that the price people payed for indulging that urge was high and that people turned to casual sex more as an excuse for avoiding significant human contact than as a way to more fully enjoy living. Certainly these emotionally stunted characters seem no better off for all of their care-free indulgence in pleasure.

In many ways, "Carnal Knowledge" seems to be the movie Mike Nichols' other 4-person relationship drama, "Closer," wanted to be, and he would have been wise to approach the material in "Closer" in a similar way as the material here. The staginess in "Carnal Knowledge" works. These people seem to exist in a plane of existence just a fraction removed from the one in which the rest of us live. It's like they live in a vacuum where they're the only people who matter, an airless atmosphere that serves as a fitting backdrop for their selfish behavior.

Probably not one of the more important films from this fertile period for film making, but worth checking out.

Grade: B+