Hawmps!

I remember virtually nothing about this movie that I saw as a child in 76 or 77. But I thought I would share one of my funniest childhood memories that is associated with the film. I was living in Florida and my mother went up north to visit relatives for a week. My father undoubtedly thought that this would make a perfect time for some male bonding and decided to take me to a movie. I chose Hawmps and we came to a theatre that was packed ( I guess it had a solid opening weekend). We had arrived late (my father was perpetaully behind in time) and the movie was already playing. We walked down the rows and most were full, occasionally a row had a just one seat open, but never two. Finally my dad (who wore thick glasses and never could see too well in the dark) said "there's two seats", and pointed to the end of a row. As I made my way down I noticed that only one seat was vacant. I turned to my dad to try to explain but he said "keep going", so as a child I just figured my dad must know what he was doing, so I found a seat and sat down, noticing that beside me was a small boy, about 3 years old. Much to my shock my father proceeded to sit right on the kid! He let out a shreik that was audible throughout the theater and his father jumped up even faster than my embarassed dad did and asked him what he thought he was doing. My father quickly told me to remain in my seat and he'd meet me outside of the theater after the show. I laughed throughout the movie, but not at any of the gags--at the thought of my father nearly skwishing the kid next to me.

One of the funniest scenes is Bad Jack Cutter (Jack Elam) submitting his resume to Sergeant Tibbs. The premise of the movie is hilarious, and it's just very well done. it ain't Shakespeare, but it ain't supposed to be. Maybe I can relate to the movie because Lt. Clemmons' story is the story of my own life.

It would be difficult, I suggest, to say enough in praise of the genial and narrative positives of "HAWMPS". Its writers and director managed somehow to make the film engaging, easy to follow, ethical, and logical at the same time in my opinion, not always the expected qualities of a western "send up" . The writers, William Bickley, director Joe Camp and Michael Warren kept the dialog rather swift and on target, without engaging in too many long digressions, extraneous stories, etc. Director Camp also gave the film plenty of well-staged "slapstick" physical moments; but a study of these will reveals that virtually none were wasted--instead they all contributed to the fundamental storyline...The War Department's dispatching of James Hampton, about the only man who would accept the job, to assess the practicality of replacing horses in some jobs in the American West, with camels was. This attempt, which happened in history, is then staged for the audience step-by-hilarious-step. The veteran cavalry troop assigned to this experiment expected fine Arabian mounts; and their new Eastern leader, Hampton, couldn't bring himself to tell them that they were not getting new horses until it was too late. From this point in the story on, everything that happened, I suggest, revealed the Army's leaders' mental shortcomings. Hampton's seriousness about becoming the leader of men he really wanted to be and everyone else's inability to understand their own motives in regards to the camels complete the picture of the picture. The film's makers, I suggest, wasted almost no opportunity where they might reveal character and changing emotions by means of speech as well as action--no small asset to an action film. The cinematography by Don Reddy is always above average, and the original music by Euel Box sustains the moods evoked very well. Production designer Harlan Wright and Art Director Ned Parsons gave the film a dusty, western and believable look everywhere, in my judgment. In the cast, outstanding work was turned in by Jack Elam as Bad Jack Cutter, Slim Pickens as the leader of a rival cavalry troop, James Hampton and Chris Connelly as the leaders of the experiment, Denver Pyle as an artillery-happy commanding officer, Gino Conforti as the camels' imported caretaker and riding instructor, and everyone else concerned. One reason the characters are so memorable, I suggest, is that their motives are rendered so clear throughout the proceedings. I recommend the film for a number of scenes, including the original decision in Washington, the arrival of the camels, the first and second transits of a nearby town, the learning-to-ride sequence, the saloon fight refereed by veteran actor Herb Vigran, and the protracted contest that constitutes the final third of the film. I add my approval also to the way in which all details at the end are wrapped up logically, neatly and amusingly. This film is almost unique, I suggest, in its good-hearted approach to finding comedy in a realistic situation in the American West without demeaning the western genre. I found it to be unexpectedly likable, occasionally touching and enjoyable throughout. Recommended.

Hawmps is one of those films that exploits a little known morsel of history, and capitalizes on it a great deal.

Although designed as a "family" film the humor doesn't placate to children exclusively. It is a genuinely funny film, although the laughs are somewhat subtle (sometimes scaled down) in some of the gags. There aren't many large laughs in the movie (though there are a few), but there are a great deal of chuckles and smiles.

Anyone who lived through the 70's will recognize many a face in this film, giving the movie a bit of a TV movie feel. The film is scheduled to be on DVD in the fall of 2002 (Now, in fact), but has not been released as of this date.

April 28th, 2005 update; DVD Review

Well, I finally got a copy of the DVD from Goodtimes Entertainment, and I have to say that next to Platinum DVD's titles this is one of the worst DVD transfers I've ever seen.

Some history, in the early 90's I managed to find a copy of "Hawmps?" published by "Best Film & Video Corp." who put out a cheap EP VHS version that was barely watchable. I wrote a letter to Joe Camp Films to express my displeasure. The next thing I know Joe Camp is in litigation with the company that was marketing his films on VHS, and, some how, managed to get the rights back.

Fast forward again and I come across Joe Camp's "Benji" website. I call up their company, speak with one of his personal assistants, and am told that "Hawmps!" will be reissued on DVD, and that "they" (presumably the company and owners of the property) were, and I quote, "We're going back to the original negative..." Meaning a fresh, crystal clear, and remastered print of the film would be forever preserved via optical media.

Well, today I got a copy, and looking at the fuzzy picture, a large number of dirty frames (including some with editing marks on them), I can only assumed I was lied to, or, in some way, was misguided or otherwise misled. If not by Joe Camp films, then by proxy of Goodtimes DVD.

And it's a real shame too, because the film deserves better treatment. It's not the best film ever made, it's not the funniest, but it's got a certain charm and appeal that should've been better preserved. Years back, when Home Box Office aired this film, it was given a fresh color corrected print which they themselves processed before airing. It was a high quality, crystal-clear, print with sound to match. I only wish I had had sense enough to tape it when it aired all those years ago.

I'm not really sure who to blame for this fiasco, but I can no longer give my personal thumb of approval to this film, or its owners, until a better version (as was promised) hits the market.

In the meantime avoid this thing. Bad sound, bad visuals... I'll bet I could buy a bootleg off the street that's better than this crud.

Cute movie. I remember it from those days, when I was 11 and growing up in the US. Good family movie, safe for kids, and even has a bit of history in it to justify watching it, as this situation really happened in the US Cavalry (if not the actual people and events portrayed).

Now for the bad news: As others have already noted, the picture and sound are worse than terrible. Looks like they got an old 16mm copy, a school projector, and a portable screen, and used a digital camcorder to record it while it played. Then they slapped it on a DVD and called it digital.

Although the entire image is out of focus, the left side of the screen is even more so than the right. There is also some black banding that stutters down from the top of the frame periodically.

And, judging from the sound quality, it appears that the sound was also recorded directly from the same projector, perhaps using a cheap electret condenser mic. Mounted on a piece of plywood. Or maybe stuck in a drawer.

A company with this lousy of a work ethic should not be supported. Do not buy or rent this movie unless and until it gets a completely new version re-issued from the negatives. If we stop supporting these hacks, they will not be able to stay in business without increasing the quality of their titles. If you must see it, most larger metro US libraries will probably have it. The important thing is DON'T SPEND ANY MONEY ON THIS VERSION! Don't get me wrong; the movie itself is fine, and gets a 7 from me on its own. It's the terrible quality of the transfer that knocks it down to a 2.