We watched this film in Communication Arts class in High School in the 70s...our teacher was very passionate about the honesty in the film as it was so unscripted and portrayed life well in those times...I felt very sad when I heard of my teachers passing a few yrs ago....
Loved it. Made me sad. Poor stupid young Peter. I love how there were no real lines. And Toronto was so beautifully different. I'll be tuning in for more of these. I remember in school as a child we watched a lot of film board short songs and stuff. Excellent memories
Julie is a total fashion plate: great, casual clothes and very chic purses and bags - I wish 18 year olds had this subdued class now. And kudos to Charmion King (wife of Gordon Pinsent) and Claude Rae - Peter's parents - whose semi-improvised scenes give these actors some nice realist/direct cinema meat to chew on.
Who else decided to watch this because they were bored but ended up watching the whole thing? I liked how each scene was improvised, even though some of the scenarios seemed unrealistic. This seemed like a writers jaded vision of what a troubled teen goes through
One of the better improvised-dialogue films that contributed to a realistic feel of the film. I'm sure the director had a sense of the overall story and explained it to the actors. The boy was clearly representative of so many idealistic but cocky kids who have this desire of being unique (don't we all) only to find out he has no choice but to experience life with the same challenges we all face, and mostly tied to survival. He wanted survival to be on his own terms but that only works if the rest of society plays along. Sadly, that's not how it works. And no matter what "wisdom" a parent tries to share based on experience, most youth have to go through experiences and not rely on the words of their parents to learn the hard way about how life works. Other than that, I truly believed in the love story. The music, camerawork and physicality of the boy and girl were very believable. I like the scene where the young children on the bridge watch as the boy cradles the girl's head in his arms and then they kiss.
This is dated - and that is the wonderful thing about. There are not many windows into what life was like back in the early 1960's in Canada. Funny, there is still an Esso and a Shell station at the corner of Bayview and Sheppard where Peter gets the ticket. You can also still see 68 Sir Williams Lane in Etobicoke. I believe the inside shots of Peter's home was actually done in that house too. There is a subtlety in Canadian society at this time. There were not the societal extremes that can be seen in the USA and Britain. What a joy for a Canadian and better, a Torontonian to watch this movie.
Again, in context: it would have been unthinkable in a mainstream American film of the time for a probation officer/counsellor to say the line 'Are you sleeping with her?' to a teenager (Frankie and Annette were still bounding on the beach even then), hence the 'fresh' honesty of this film that appealed to so many south of the border.
Cool. Love Charles St. West view at the 25:02 mark. Everything on the right was replaced in the late 60s and 70s by that apartment building with the little Dollarama mall inside and past that with the Manulife Centre.
Nice job. Film was improvised. Actor from "Rumple of the Bailey" was the landlord. And everyone knows John Vernon from Animal House and Dirty Harry. Cool views of Toronto and the TTC of the time.
We watched this in school around 1967 or 68. It was a very different world. They were so young and naive. Just like we were in those years. The difference is that he’s a hot headed child. She should have dropped him long ago instead of becoming a pregnant teenager. Auto theft was not a good way to start off. What ever happened to Peter Krastner. I saw him in a few other shows, then nothing. ❤️🇨🇦👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Do you know how many girls get pregnant by hot headed guys? It goes on to this very day , the poor stupid girls , when they are up the stump then , many girls come to their senses , when it is way too late.
No sure why the one commenter sees Peter as a 'loser': it was 1964...in a way Peter was slightly ahead of his time - he lacked a political ideology but he certainly didn't see himself becoming a bourgeois bore living in a suburban tract (or, to pick a more current connection, a young entrepreneur with 'lip-service' progressive social politics, conservative economic politics and a strong drive to become an influencer or a least trademark something). Within three years anyone under 24 in Etobicoke (and Mississauga and Don Mills and Westmount and North Vancouver and...would be schlepping down to Yorkville and St. Catherine's Street and West Fourth Avenue and...to get a piece of the hippie drop out coffee bar ban this and that action). As for the film itself, one has to understand it in context. It was something of a breakthrough (though initially it got Don Owen into trouble with the NFB because it was supposed to be a a documentary about juvenile delinquents...then it became a darling of film festival circuits...an antidote to the exact kind of film coming out of Hollywood that Peter loathed [i.e.: 'Cleopatra'] a kind of neo-neo-realism)...and it suggested that a feature film industry in Canada (long suppressed by economically colonial backroom deals fomented by Disney and the MPAA) could emerge.
Because Peter seems incredibly immature and the poster boy for "bad choices". He also seems like the kind of upper middle class twit who's never had to pay a bill in his life or take responsibility for anything.
I was engrossed by this NFB classic. I'd heard about it many times, but never got around to seeing it. Growing up in Etobicoke myself made it that much more interesting to me. I have never been disappointed by anything by the NFB -- so real and unforced. It's a mistake to write Peter off as obnoxious, though. He is to a degree, but he's a manifestation of the dissatisfaction zeitgeist of the time -- the disenchantment with affluence and ease. It's a shame a fine actor like Peter Kastner wasted his talents on such things as the inane (and mercifully short-lived) sitcom "The Ugliest Girl in Town." "NObody Waved Goodbye" was originally shown in a double bill with the superlative "Lonely Boy," also by the NFB. If you are reading this and haven't seen "Lonely Boy" (a cinema veritè documentary on Paul Anka), find it and see it. Then look for the British film "Privilege" and see how much they copied.
He doesn't even give her back her suitcase before he takes off at the end. Wonder how long she had to walk before she found a phone to call home - hope she didn't hitchhike.
Watched part of it. Could not understand the intent of the film makers, was the kid intended to be annoying and snarky, was that the character or just the actor? He has the most annoying face ever seen on the medium of film. He seems to have a great life, living in a mansion, riding some sort of Vespa, and hanging out with a nice looking gf. Why is he unsatisfied? Another thing I found amazing-this was filmed in 1963. What if it was filmed in 1973? The ten year difference in culture would have been astounding- he would have had shaggy unkempt hair, a tattered t shirt, and been boxed out on a bong and his parents would have considered that ordinary. And of course if he had lived a few miles south in New York State he would have been waiting to be drafted into the US army at that time and would have had a reason to run. I liked seeing Dean Wormer and the guy who asked Dr. Floyd questions. Only one missing is William Shatner
What a loser! Hard to feel sorry for him. What's so bad about working for a living? It's not ideal, but it is a means to an end. That end is retirement! Hopefully it comes sooner rather than later.
a somewhat typical '60s male teenager, not quite a roughneck nor a serious conforming student, his only identity rage and theft as futile self-destructive rebellion. here come the drugs. things they do look awful cold.
I love the great actors. The Toronto landscape. They are not staring at their phones. The innocence. The Simplicity.
We watched this film in Communication Arts class in High School in the 70s...our teacher was very passionate about the honesty in the film as it was so unscripted and portrayed life well in those times...I felt very sad when I heard of my teachers passing a few yrs ago....
Loved it. Made me sad. Poor stupid young Peter. I love how there were no real lines. And Toronto was so beautifully different. I'll be tuning in for more of these. I remember in school as a child we watched a lot of film board short songs and stuff. Excellent memories
Great film. Was so amazing to see the culture of the suburban parts of Toronto in the mid 60s.
Julie is a total fashion plate: great, casual clothes and very chic purses and bags - I wish 18 year olds had this subdued class now. And kudos to Charmion King (wife of Gordon Pinsent) and Claude Rae - Peter's parents - whose semi-improvised scenes give these actors some nice realist/direct cinema meat to chew on.
Who else decided to watch this because they were bored but ended up watching the whole thing? I liked how each scene was improvised, even though some of the scenarios seemed unrealistic. This seemed like a writers jaded vision of what a troubled teen goes through
One of the better improvised-dialogue films that contributed to a realistic feel of the film. I'm sure the director had a sense of the overall story and explained it to the actors. The boy was clearly representative of so many idealistic but cocky kids who have this desire of being unique (don't we all) only to find out he has no choice but to experience life with the same challenges we all face, and mostly tied to survival. He wanted survival to be on his own terms but that only works if the rest of society plays along. Sadly, that's not how it works. And no matter what "wisdom" a parent tries to share based on experience, most youth have to go through experiences and not rely on the words of their parents to learn the hard way about how life works. Other than that, I truly believed in the love story. The music, camerawork and physicality of the boy and girl were very believable. I like the scene where the young children on the bridge watch as the boy cradles the girl's head in his arms and then they kiss.
This is dated - and that is the wonderful thing about. There are not many windows into what life was like back in the early 1960's in Canada. Funny, there is still an Esso and a Shell station at the corner of Bayview and Sheppard where Peter gets the ticket. You can also still see 68 Sir Williams Lane in Etobicoke. I believe the inside shots of Peter's home was actually done in that house too.
There is a subtlety in Canadian society at this time. There were not the societal extremes that can be seen in the USA and Britain. What a joy for a Canadian and better, a Torontonian to watch this movie.
Again, in context: it would have been unthinkable in a mainstream American film of the time for a probation officer/counsellor to say the line 'Are you sleeping with her?' to a teenager (Frankie and Annette were still bounding on the beach even then), hence the 'fresh' honesty of this film that appealed to so many south of the border.
Cool. Love Charles St. West view at the 25:02 mark. Everything on the right was replaced in the late 60s and 70s by that apartment building with the little Dollarama mall inside and past that with the Manulife Centre.
Nice job. Film was improvised. Actor from "Rumple of the Bailey" was the landlord. And everyone knows John Vernon from Animal House and Dirty Harry. Cool views of Toronto and the TTC of the time.
And don’t forget Wojeck!
We watched this in school around 1967 or 68. It was a very different world. They were so young and naive. Just like we were in those years. The difference is that he’s a hot headed child. She should have dropped him long ago instead of becoming a pregnant teenager. Auto theft was not a good way to start off. What ever happened to Peter Krastner. I saw him in a few other shows, then nothing. ❤️🇨🇦👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Do you know how many girls get pregnant by hot headed guys? It goes on to this very day , the poor stupid girls , when they are up the stump then , many girls come to their senses , when it is way too late.
The story of so many young girls, they learned too late , in their life.
Culture was about to change. He probably ended up as a hippie in Yorkville in a few years.
No sure why the one commenter sees Peter as a 'loser': it was 1964...in a way Peter was slightly ahead of his time - he lacked a political ideology but he certainly didn't see himself becoming a bourgeois bore living in a suburban tract (or, to pick a more current connection, a young entrepreneur with 'lip-service' progressive social politics, conservative economic politics and a strong drive to become an influencer or a least trademark something). Within three years anyone under 24 in Etobicoke (and Mississauga and Don Mills and Westmount and North Vancouver and...would be schlepping down to Yorkville and St. Catherine's Street and West Fourth Avenue and...to get a piece of the hippie drop out coffee bar ban this and that action).
As for the film itself, one has to understand it in context. It was something of a breakthrough (though initially it got Don Owen into trouble with the NFB because it was supposed to be a a documentary about juvenile delinquents...then it became a darling of film festival circuits...an antidote to the exact kind of film coming out of Hollywood that Peter loathed [i.e.: 'Cleopatra'] a kind of neo-neo-realism)...and it suggested that a feature film industry in Canada (long suppressed by economically colonial backroom deals fomented by Disney and the MPAA) could emerge.
Stealing cars and money from a cash register .
Because Peter seems incredibly immature and the poster boy for "bad choices". He also seems like the kind of upper middle class twit who's never had to pay a bill in his life or take responsibility for anything.
I was engrossed by this NFB classic. I'd heard about it many times, but never got around to seeing it. Growing up in Etobicoke myself made it that much more interesting to me. I have never been disappointed by anything by the NFB -- so real and unforced. It's a mistake to write Peter off as obnoxious, though. He is to a degree, but he's a manifestation of the dissatisfaction zeitgeist of the time -- the disenchantment with affluence and ease. It's a shame a fine actor like Peter Kastner wasted his talents on such things as the inane (and mercifully short-lived) sitcom "The Ugliest Girl in Town." "NObody Waved Goodbye" was originally shown in a double bill with the superlative "Lonely Boy," also by the NFB. If you are reading this and haven't seen "Lonely Boy" (a cinema veritè documentary on Paul Anka), find it and see it. Then look for the British film "Privilege" and see how much they copied.
John Vernon was wonderfully slimy as the parking lot owner.
I’m putting you on double secret probation
Great film❤ so amazing 👏
Thanks! Please upload the films with subtitles activated! It would be very useful for non-anglo speakers!
He doesn't even give her back her suitcase before he takes off at the end. Wonder how long she had to walk before she found a phone to call home - hope she didn't hitchhike.
Early John Vernon acting role before he went south and mostly played a heavy in the States.
Watched part of it. Could not understand the intent of the film makers, was the kid intended to be annoying and snarky, was that the character or just the actor? He has the most annoying face ever seen on the medium of film. He seems to have a great life, living in a mansion, riding some sort of Vespa, and hanging out with a nice looking gf. Why is he unsatisfied? Another thing I found amazing-this was filmed in 1963. What if it was filmed in 1973? The ten year difference in culture would have been astounding- he would have had shaggy unkempt hair, a tattered t shirt, and been boxed out on a bong and his parents would have considered that ordinary. And of course if he had lived a few miles south in New York State he would have been waiting to be drafted into the US army at that time and would have had a reason to run. I liked seeing Dean Wormer and the guy who asked Dr. Floyd questions. Only one missing is William Shatner
In 1973 , he would have been one of the last to be drafted .
What a loser! Hard to feel sorry for him. What's so bad about working for a living? It's not ideal, but it is a means to an end.
That end is retirement! Hopefully it comes sooner rather than later.
Peter's making so many mistakes. Pull your shit together Peter.
9:13
*curb your enthusiasm theme plays*
23:29
although you're not a good boy... you're a bad boy. why else would she have chosen you?
a somewhat typical '60s male teenager, not quite a roughneck nor a serious conforming student, his only identity rage and theft as futile self-destructive rebellion. here come the drugs. things they do look awful cold.
Oh my !!!
I'm not reading any book that was in his pants @ 23:45
some parts of this feel very Richard Linklater.. i wonder if he watched this
Love the title but what do you think it means?
Who's the guy singing and playing the guitar at 30:17?
The dad resembles Oilers coach Todd McClellan
The mother looks like Nina Hartley
Peter Kastner is a great actor, Peter the Character is an obnoxious jerk.
Une sous titre??
Cinematography John Spotton csc
Does he dress up like a woman in this?